|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
|
![]()
Fourquestions:
1. Do you use the "Natural/Flash" double photo setting? If so, how do you like it? 2. What percentage of photos that you take when fully zoomed, blurry? 3. Aside from normal 3x to zero zoom shooting, do you wish you had bought a long zoom camera that has optical image stabilization? 4. I think Fujifilm has to come up with a version with some sort of image stabilization in 2007, other than just increasing the ISO, to keep up with Sony, Canon, Panasonic and others. Heard any rumors? I don't mind waiting till Christmas if there's a chance that a S6x00 with real image stabilization will be released even if it does cost more. |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
|
![]()
1. No.
2. Next to none. 3. No. 4. I think Sony, Canon and Panasonic need to come up with a sensor/image processor combination that can produce decent low light pictures without noise to compete with Fuji. I haven't heard any rumors to this effect. the Hun |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
|
![]()
rinniethehun wrote:
Quote:
Thanks |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 49
|
![]()
I agree with The Hun!!!
PS.. Why wait you are missing opportunies everyday for a great shot.. imho :| |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
|
![]()
zoomdaddy wrote:
Quote:
I have a 7.1 mp Canon camera to tide me over until Christmas so I don't mind waiting. I wouldn't mind buying either a S6x00 or a S9x00 if either incorporates true image stabilization. I actually would like to buy a S9x00 if it would add face detection,image stabilization and Natural/Flash if it doesn't already have that feature, since theS9x00has thehot shoe and flash sync connector. Thanks. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
|
![]()
"Are you and the Hun not using it because itwould use twice the memory orfor another reason?"
I haven't really felt a need to use the feature. Once you know what your camera can do, it's relatively easy to choose which photographic technique you need to use to achieve the desired results. Memory useage is irrelevant. You appear to be convinced that IS is a 'must have' feature...and that's fine - a lot of people share your feelings. If IS is that important to you, why don't you just go out and buy a camera that has that feature? You seem to be expecting Fuji to come out with a complete line of cameras that have IS before Christmas. Maybe you know something we don't...maybe you don't. Eventually they might equip all of their cameras with IS, but what year? I would think that Fuji will continue their trend of developing larger sensors and advanced processing algorithms to further their pursuit of refining low light photography in their next generation of cameras. Their next camera is just liable to have ISO capability of 6400, with a larger sensor and a faster lens than anything they have released previously...and you will still be waiting for the Fuji with IS...good luck. the Hun |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 12
|
![]()
I'm in agreement with the Hun here also. I have used the 2 shot setting, and wasn't thrilled about it. There are a lot of things on this camera that help a new photographer get better images without a lot of experience, but if you learn technic and understand light, you will benefit much more. Here is a shot at maximum zoom and 2x digital zoom handheld. I was leaning against a rail at the top of the arena with the 6000.
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w...n/DSCF1879.jpg This gives you an idea how far away I was. http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w...n/DSCF1904.jpg |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
|
![]()
Soundman,
VERY impressive hand held full zoom shot, indoors yet! My hat is off to your steady hand holding shooting ability. I read elsewhere, (just in general and not in regard to any fugifilm camera), that long zooms without optical orsimilar image stabilization would normally require shooting outdoors in sunlight to be reliably sharp. Your photo has gone a long way to dispelling that idea. Nice shot, Skylark |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
|
![]()
I agree - an impressive shot, Soundman.
Answer questions: 1. Nope. No point to it, imo. 2. Decreasing in number as I have grown more accustomed to the camera and also improved my technique. 3. I would have really like optical image stabilization, but the other ultrazooms with true IS didn't have the feature set I was looking for. 4. I agree, but not if it means abandoning the super-ccd sensor. In fact, if I was told I could have just one feature added to the S6000fd, I would elect a faster lens - f4.9 at the 300mm zoom is weak when compared with other superzooms that are around f4 or faster at over 400mm. My fear is that Fuji will abandon the 1/1.7" super-ccd and use a slightly smaller 1/1.8" with high mp, which will most likely increase the imager noise. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
|
![]() Quote:
Soundman, could you share what percentage of your 300mm zooms atthat graduationwere as sharp? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Not if they have any common sense at all. The super-ccd is Fuji's claim to fame. That plus the live histogram (and, (very meekly), the natural/flash mode) are why I'm willing to wait for Fuji to incorporate "true" image stabilization instead of buying another brand of bridge camera now. Thanks, Skylark |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|