Steve'sDigicams

nickphoto123 · Oct 4, 2005, 9:25 PM

Hello All,

This morningdownload two images, #2 and #4, from the following site.

I selected #2 due to a person in the doorway of a high contrast backlit scene.

#4 to check on the resolution of the columned structure in the far background.

I opened them into PS CS direct from the download. I immediately saved each image as a Tiff. I then cropped each to 8x10 at 300 DPI, and immediately printed each on my Canon IP6000d on Photo Paper Glossy, sRGB, other printer settings at default.

As a result of examining these two prints, today, I decided against the S9000 for the following reason: PF. Yes, PF far worse than I would ever have with my F-828.

I am very disappointed.

I did not bother to evaluateresolution, color, etc., after seeing all the PF. The PF made other considerations moot, at least to me.

Even if the PF was due to using other than optimum settings on the S9000, that would only place me in the same, or worse, position that I am now with my F-828.

Has anyone contrary information regarding this S9000 PF??

If so, Please respond with your findings.

The link is: http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/dle...pg&.src=ph

Regards, Disappointed Nicholas

Railfire · Oct 5, 2005, 12:47 AM

I have not read any positive reviews on this camera. I was thinking of buying one to carry along with me in my bag with my 300D & 4 lenses, but it is out of the question now.

DH

wwwim · Oct 5, 2005, 5:50 PM

Railfire, I'm very interested in the reviews you have seen. I have done some reading myself about this camera and came to exactly the opposite conclusion. I have the s9500 and I'm very pleased wit it.

nickphoto123 · Oct 5, 2005, 6:29 PM

To: wwwim,

Have you read my above post?

Can you provide your expierience so far with your S9500?

What about all the PF I reported on the two full size S9500 images noted above?

Regards, Nicholas

wwwim · Oct 6, 2005, 1:39 AM

Hi Nick,to make sure, we are talking about 'purple fringing', aren't we?I have had no prints made of the pictures you are talking about, but on the prints of my s9500the results regarding PF arealright in my book. But maybeI'mnotcritical enough on that point.

Are thereother owners/users of the s9500 who have the same disappointingresults as nickhpoto123 got, do you feel you have to remove it or so?

malinstreak · Oct 6, 2005, 4:58 AM

I have found that it isn'tany better or worse than any other digital camera. I have only had the camera 2 weeks and have many photos without PF and a few with it.

IMHO it is down to the level of contrast, burnout, direction of lightetc.

I am on my 3rd digitial camera and they have all shown PF in the right (wrong) conditions. And most reviews I have read ofother cameras mention a level of PF.

I think that part of it is that as the number of pixels increases, it is easier to see on a monitor. What was 2-3 pixels wide on a 2MP camera is now 6-8 pixels wide on a 9MP camera. However when printed out it is much less obvious.

nymano · Oct 6, 2005, 5:25 AM

malinstreak wrote:

Quote:

I have found that it isn'tany better or worse than any other digital camera.

Check out the Sony R1 reviews. Purple fringing doesn't seem to be an issue there (due to short back focus). However, falls short zoom-wise 'cos of big sensor.

nymano,

nickphoto123 · Oct 6, 2005, 6:19 AM

Thank you all for your PF feedback.

Regards, Nicholas

malinstreak · Oct 7, 2005, 11:15 AM

Veering slightly off Fuji but relating to the PF problem, I have just tried out the automatic purple fringe removal tool in PaintshopPro X and I was very impressed. It is just a single click action and I have attached a crop from the top corner of one of the pictures listed at the start of this thread. One before and one after.

What do you think?

Arnold1896 · Oct 7, 2005, 3:44 PM

Oops, sorry its my photos that started this thread.

I am some what puzzled about this camera and the many critical comparisons being made. Images do seem soft but the technology of CCD differs and with higher resolution is it not inevitable that variations between colours will be less pronounced. Or is the firmware not able to differenciate the marked changes. Or am i being an ass and the problem is the finger on the end of the shutter.

My other camera Olympus C5050 gave sharp pics, though there is a degree of PF present on occasions. C5050 umm 18 months Mode Selector broke (oly repaired free thught out of waranty) now Oly tell me CCD is faulty (after 24 months).

The photo being discussed was take on a breezy day and sun was to the left of the image, may explain PF location (reflective flair?).

Just tested camera with resolution test chart ISO 12233 to check for left hand out focus problem, seems ok. Others have suggested top left hand corner has focus problem.

Malinstreak, that tool in PSP X seem good. Looks like I may need it.

Oct 7, 2005, 11:15 AM	#9
malinstreak Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Lichfield, UK Posts: 149	Veering slightly off Fuji but relating to the PF problem, I have just tried out the automatic purple fringe removal tool in PaintshopPro X and I was very impressed. It is just a single click action and I have attached a crop from the top corner of one of the pictures listed at the start of this thread. One before and one after. What do you think? Attached Images

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Oct 4, 2005, 9:25 PM	#1
nickphoto123 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 1,356	Hello All, This morningdownload two images, #2 and #4, from the following site. I selected #2 due to a person in the doorway of a high contrast backlit scene. #4 to check on the resolution of the columned structure in the far background. I opened them into PS CS direct from the download. I immediately saved each image as a Tiff. I then cropped each to 8x10 at 300 DPI, and immediately printed each on my Canon IP6000d on Photo Paper Glossy, sRGB, other printer settings at default. As a result of examining these two prints, today, I decided against the S9000 for the following reason: PF. Yes, PF far worse than I would ever have with my F-828. I am very disappointed. I did not bother to evaluateresolution, color, etc., after seeing all the PF. The PF made other considerations moot, at least to me. Even if the PF was due to using other than optimum settings on the S9000, that would only place me in the same, or worse, position that I am now with my F-828. Has anyone contrary information regarding this S9000 PF?? If so, Please respond with your findings. The link is: http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/dle...pg&.src=ph Regards, Disappointed Nicholas

Oct 5, 2005, 12:47 AM	#2
Railfire Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 239	I have not read any positive reviews on this camera. I was thinking of buying one to carry along with me in my bag with my 300D & 4 lenses, but it is out of the question now. DH

Oct 5, 2005, 5:50 PM	#3
wwwim Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 28	Railfire, I'm very interested in the reviews you have seen. I have done some reading myself about this camera and came to exactly the opposite conclusion. I have the s9500 and I'm very pleased wit it.

Oct 5, 2005, 6:29 PM	#4
nickphoto123 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 1,356	To: wwwim, Have you read my above post? Can you provide your expierience so far with your S9500? What about all the PF I reported on the two full size S9500 images noted above? Regards, Nicholas

Oct 6, 2005, 1:39 AM	#5
wwwim Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 28	Hi Nick,to make sure, we are talking about 'purple fringing', aren't we?I have had no prints made of the pictures you are talking about, but on the prints of my s9500the results regarding PF arealright in my book. But maybeI'mnotcritical enough on that point. Are thereother owners/users of the s9500 who have the same disappointingresults as nickhpoto123 got, do you feel you have to remove it or so?

Oct 6, 2005, 4:58 AM	#6
malinstreak Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Lichfield, UK Posts: 149	I have found that it isn'tany better or worse than any other digital camera. I have only had the camera 2 weeks and have many photos without PF and a few with it. IMHO it is down to the level of contrast, burnout, direction of lightetc. I am on my 3rd digitial camera and they have all shown PF in the right (wrong) conditions. And most reviews I have read ofother cameras mention a level of PF. I think that part of it is that as the number of pixels increases, it is easier to see on a monitor. What was 2-3 pixels wide on a 2MP camera is now 6-8 pixels wide on a 9MP camera. However when printed out it is much less obvious.

Oct 6, 2005, 6:19 AM	#8
nickphoto123 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 1,356	Thank you all for your PF feedback. Regards, Nicholas

Oct 7, 2005, 3:44 PM	#10
Arnold1896 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 18	Oops, sorry its my photos that started this thread. I am some what puzzled about this camera and the many critical comparisons being made. Images do seem soft but the technology of CCD differs and with higher resolution is it not inevitable that variations between colours will be less pronounced. Or is the firmware not able to differenciate the marked changes. Or am i being an ass and the problem is the finger on the end of the shutter. My other camera Olympus C5050 gave sharp pics, though there is a degree of PF present on occasions. C5050 umm 18 months Mode Selector broke (oly repaired free thught out of waranty) now Oly tell me CCD is faulty (after 24 months). The photo being discussed was take on a breezy day and sun was to the left of the image, may explain PF location (reflective flair?). Just tested camera with resolution test chart ISO 12233 to check for left hand out focus problem, seems ok. Others have suggested top left hand corner has focus problem. Malinstreak, that tool in PSP X seem good. Looks like I may need it.