I was lucky enough to get one of the first X100s outside of Japan in early March.
I was very excited when a few weeks later ACR support was added for the camera. Except, as a long time LR user and having shot nothing but RAW with my Canons for the last 7 years - I don't shoot RAW with the Fuji.
The JPG engine with Auto-DR + Auto-ISO switched on is doing something remarkable. I think it is doing exactly what the engineers here are discussing behind the scenes.
I cannot generally even get close to the JPG performance of the Fuji engine when I shoot RAW and process in LR. Or rather lets say, with a fair amount of work on each image I can get equivalent results 50% of the time. 49% I cannot get it as good and maybe 1% I can improve on the JPG by shooting in RAW, usually it's a WB issue. That's why there is a RAW button on the X100, because they had the A-team on the JPG engine and the B-team on the menus.
In auto-DR you never see clipping in the JPG if you are using A-priority or Program mode. Extensive use of the fill light slider is mandatory in the high-DR modes, but there is so little noise in the shadows it's barely believable, this with the NR switched right down in camera.
Hence my suspicion that it's slightly ironic that Michael has used Fuji X100 images in this article because I reckon Fuji has done exactly what he is berating camera manufacturers for not having done all these years. Never a clipped highlight and tons of shadow detail.
[As an aside, there is a significant benefit to shooting in JPG with the X100, which is that the camera never slows down or becomes unresponsive when writing the JPG files to the card, but writing RAW files is slow, even with a fast 45Mb/s card. It's like a different camera really.]
I have a fair number of sample X100 photos on my blog pages. Probably over-processed for the general tastes of this website, and I'm much more an admirer of Bill Brandt than Ansel Adams, but original files available if anyone wants them. Just PM me.