Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Fujifilm

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 11, 2006, 8:55 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Hello again. I thought my PF problem -severe with the first S5200 - would be a thing of the past with the second S5200 Sears gave me in exchange. Things are the same and* even worst I think. I roamed the Net in search of answers and I came to the conclusion after all the reviews I read and the appreciation of users that Fuji cameras are plagued with PF and there's not much one can do. I read many reviews statint that it has been asked Fuji to address the issue. So I'm puzzled and a bit bitter. I wonder if it's worth talking about this here, or any other place for that matter. I would only like to know if Fuji or other S5200 users will admit the S5200 has a very severe PF problem. I have to take a decision. There are 10 days left to take it back again and...doing nothing. Please Fuji users that have much more experience than me with Fuji cameras, tell me if* the amount of PF in my photos is acceptable and I'm wrong and I should put up and shut up. To me it seems that if I want to keep the S5200, I must forget about taking outdoor pictures where the sky is bright and branches flow freely over it. Meaning: flash photography only inside. Then, the photos are quite astonishing. Following: 5 examples. Germain.*[img]/forums/images/emoticons/bash.gif[/img]
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 11, 2006, 8:55 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Photo two
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 8:56 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Photo three
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 8:56 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Photo four
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 8:57 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Last but not least. All photos have been taking mid-zoom to full zoom.
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 9:24 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Friends go there*http://www.pbase.com/gtfsnow/image/50679188 and look carefully at the picture. It has been taking in the same conditions that I took mine. Could it be the buncch of S5200 at Sears are all defective. This photo doesn't seem to have been defringed in PShop or else. Germain
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2006, 10:19 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2
Default

Hi Karmin,

Sorry to hear about your continuing purple fringing problems. I agree that your new camera is probably not any different from the old one. I had already reached that conclusion from close examination of your old and new test images in earlier postings.

I just purchased a S5600 in the UK (S5200 in the US), and I get similar pronouced purple fringing in some of my images, in the region of 5 to 10 pixels.

Since mine was bought in the UK, I doubt it came from the same batch as yours from Sears. This means that it's less likely to be a manufacturing fault. (If it is a fault, it is very widespread, which is unlikely, but not unprecedented).

I don't get fringing on all high contrast images - only on those with high contrasts AND exposure settings resulting in a saturated light sources. This makes me think it might be a feature of the sensor, like a response to saturated light conditions (blooming?), or possibly high infra-red sensitivity (because contrasts with normal "cool" white light don't seem to cause a problem).

However, I've also noticed how patchy the purple fringing effect is across an image. This suggestes it might be a result of the internal post processing done by the camera (lens aberration would be more evenly distributed). This possibility is also supported by the fact that I wasn't able to reduce the fringing by reducing the apperture size (normally helps on large zoom lenses).

Evidence of this purple fringing on S5200/S5600 is widespread. There are many example photos on the web, even amongst sample photos in reviews. Examples:

Sample images on the DigiCamReview website:
Left edge of top of tower:
http://www.digicamreview.com/photos/...SCF0185?full=1
Top left branches and berries:
http://www.digicamreview.com/photos/...SCF0228?full=1

Sample image on the Steve'sDigicam Review:
Tree branches on right (and left):
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_...s/dscf0094.jpg

Also, the pbase.com example you listed (the berries and branches) is OK, but in the same gallery, images with silhouettes against skyline do show some purple fringing.

I think it's probably a feature of the camera. Those who say they don't get it are probably just not taking photos under the same conditions (I too often don't get fringing when I would expect to).

I think I'll try some of the many available software utilities for removing purple fringing in post processing. I might also get a filter, but I'm not sure whether to try just UV, or a combined UV + IR filter (expensive).

Apart from this problem, the S5200/S5600 is a very good camera. Excellent value for money, particularly in th UK now, where the price has just crashed.

Incidentally, I've noticed very similar purple fringing on S9000/S9500 sample images, such as on StevesDigicams:
Branches on the top right:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_...s/DSCF0965.JPG
Interestingly, it is also 5 to 10 pixels in range. Is this similar image processing?
(Similar sample images in Steve'sDigicams reviews for the Panasonic FZ30 and the Sony R1 show much less purple fringing, and it's much more evenly distributed, which suggests it's down to lens performance).

Hope this helps.

schal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2006, 7:29 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 33
Default

Have you tried the CAFREE and PFREE plugins for PhotoShop or PaintShop Pro?

http://www.sd3.info/pf828/CAfree/CAfree0-1.html

PFREE seems to be effective on the few images from my S9500 where this has been a problem.
programmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 8:31 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 493
Default

Karmin,

I know I'm a 5100 user and thus can't really compare. But if you are anything like me, if something is wrong with a product or if a product has a disadvantage that I feel is major then I have a hard time living with it. My suggestion to you is to:

1) Return the Fuji to sears and buy another one elsewhere.

2) As much as I like fuji cameras, ditch the 5200 all together and go with a panasonic
(if you want raw) or if raw doesn't matter go with a Sony or Canon superzoom. Again, I would usggest staying away from most Kodak superzooms as there IQ isn't as good IMO.

3) If not in a hurry wait for the Fuji S6500 as it has the potential to be a really nice camera

I agree though, that the amount of PF you have is severe in both copies of the camera you have tried. I personally wouldn't be okay with living with it.

However, I will caution you that you will not be able to get a P&S (even if a superzoom with raw) that will have near-perfect image quality like a dSLR. To me the best image quality currently on the P&S market is the Fuji F10/F30, but these can have a hard time in outdoor lighting (blowing highlights and such, and I don't remember if they have PF problems or not). But the S6500 will be using the same sensor as these and it could have better results than the F30 model.

Any camera you choose will be a compromise. You need to determine which ones you can live and which compromises you can't.

nelmr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 10:48 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Hello again friends of this list, thanks a lot for the good information. I'm now able to take a decision about this little beast. With all the information gathered here and on the Net, I can now say that S5200 and 9000 Fuji cams are plagued with high levels of purple fringing. This is their downside and maybe their demise cause some people in fact won't live with this. I could be one of these person. PF is an aberration that cause me more concern than vignetting. But the S5200 is also a very good camera when it comes to the other qualities that muts have photos. They come out sharp when you know how to use the camera and you're in control of the settings. I found that S5200 delivers much when used in Manual mode and you know that the cam has a tendancy to overexpose. Bottom line, as you so said it nelmr, "put up or shut up". I'm attaching a photo taken in what I find almost ideal lighting (to my taste) late afternoon sun. No post processing here, only resizing. No PF in that situation. So the camera is a keep if you accept its abnormal PF amount and trade this with a 10x zoom, RAW possibility and superb handling. Over a, lets's say, Sony DSCW30 or Canon A620. What do you think of my conclusion friends. Germain.
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:08 AM.