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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 25, 2006, 12:41 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Default

Hi again Bill

Yes my camera may be defective and I do need to find a chart to photograph.

I agree with your comments re the cameras specification, it has what most people want .

Are you able to tell me when you purchased your 9500 and the serial number?

My Serial number is 54Q 34629 Purchase in England Jan 2006

Will try the newspaper test. Thanks

Cameraman321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 12:49 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 68
Default

S9000 purchased July 2006, Canada, 54A01009, absolutely no problems.
bill soper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2006, 7:18 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 111
Default

You can download a PDF version of the ISO12233 test chart here:

http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~wes...res-chart.html


Wolverine@MSU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2006, 8:24 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks Wolverine

This is a great Forum
Cameraman321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2006, 9:41 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Default

Hi Bill

Have just discovered that Fuji have introduced the 9600 or 9100 in the US.

They claim that it has better sharpness. This seems to indicate to me that the earlier model was indeed lacking in the processing area and was inferior to the earlier 7000.. This was certainly my experience.



Judging by the number of the 9500/9000 models appearing on Ebay in England, It seems that people are getting out of their old models.

Cameraman321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2006, 12:32 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 68
Default

Hi Cameraman

Well I just finished shooting many shoots over the holiday here, a lot of close-ups etc, and I did notice the the Auto-focus is a very finicky thing. If care is taken to make sure that the camera/auto focus zone is moved to the area of interest, focused, and then move the camera back for the composition, all is well. The auto-focus doesn't always focus on what we want in focus so the above method is recommended.

Yes there has been some discussion here on the new 9100/9600 and again I think the increased sharpness is in-camera processing turned up to make the results more like a typical P and S. But honestly, I have looked very closely at the sharpness produced by the 9000/9500 and I really see no problem. At times I am amazed at the resolving power of this camera.

Again, take care with the auto focus mechanism.
bill soper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2006, 5:07 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Default

Hi Bill

Thanks for the tip. Will try this action.

Cameraamn321
Cameraman321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2006, 5:08 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 11
Default

Stranger a écrit:
Quote:
For a DSLR i'm seriously considering the Canon 400D, though the small size and grip are a bit off putting. Maybe the add on battery grip will suit my paws ? There's no official reviews yet so I'll probably hang on for a bit.



I Stranger,

I bought my S9500 in October 2005 and I resold it in December 2005.
(It was my first, and will be my last experiment with Fuji )

Since I bought a Canon 350D (XT) and somegood optical.

The resond: S9500 is really very bad in low light, whereas the 350D isexcellent
(You canselect 1600ISOwithout post processing, but you must havegood optical)

Like you "I've never been 100% happy with the results (of S9500)", except for
macro. I makea lot of portrait and when I look thereflection in the eyes, there
is no possible comparison

AG



aglaee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2006, 4:08 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 137
Default

aglaee wrote:
Quote:
Stranger a écrit:
Quote:
For a DSLR i'm seriously considering the Canon 400D, though the small size and grip are a bit off putting. Maybe the add on battery grip will suit my paws ? There's no official reviews yet so I'll probably hang on for a bit.



I Stranger,

I bought my S9500 in October 2005 and I resold it in December 2005.
(It was my first, and will be my last experiment with Fuji )

Since I bought a Canon 350D (XT) and somegood optical.

The resond: S9500 is really very bad in low light, whereas the 350D isexcellent
(You canselect 1600ISOwithout post processing, but you must havegood optical)

Like you "I've never been 100% happy with the results (of S9500)", except for
macro. I makea lot of portrait and when I look thereflection in the eyes, there
is no possible comparison

AG



Gee, why am I not amazed that the 350D "outperforms" your S9500?? Most any dslr will outperform a "digicam" all in one. I don't own and have never used an S9500, but many of the pics I have seen posted by others have looked excellent. I continue to use my S7000 as I'm not ready to upgrade just yet.

Clyde
Clyde Atkinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2006, 4:16 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 137
Default

Cameraman321 wrote:
Quote:
Hi Bill

Have just discovered that Fuji have introduced the 9600 or 9100 in the US.

They claim that it has better sharpness. This seems to indicate to me that the earlier model was indeed lacking in the processing area and was inferior to the earlier 7000.. This was certainly my experience.



Judging by the number of the 9500/9000 models appearing on Ebay in England, It seems that people are getting out of their old models.

The real experience I've heard from many S9500 users was that the pics were a little "softer" out of camera than the S7000, not a fault by any means but leaving the options in your hands rather than the cameras. And most of the pics I've seen posted from S9500s were excellent. I think the S9600 will likely do more sharpening in camera thus closer to the S7000 results out of camera, but in the end users will suffer because the choice has been taken out of their hands and given to the camera. And those "soft" results thatsome complain about are mostly on the computer monitor and not in prints done on a quality photo printer. I continue to use the slightly over sharpened results from my S7000 as I'm not ready to upgrade just yet.

Clyde
Clyde Atkinson 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 1:40 AM.