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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 6, 2007, 4:49 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

I don't believe the difference between a 5th generation and a 6th generation is any kind of an issue. As far as that goes, comparing images side-by-side from the two cameras would make it difficult to tell which came from which camera. And is low light photography something to really be concerned about? I have the 9000. Some critics have spoken harshly about this camera. But I have taken existing light pictures that have turned out very well. If you get one that is a little noisy, there is software that can help clear that up. If you're afraid of getting a little noise occasionally, then you don't want a digital camera.

I think you should simply make your choice based on which camera provides the most features that you want. Enjoy that camera for a couple of years or more and wait and see if anything truly revolutionary develops. I think the changes in the these Fuji models are relatively insignificant. Either camera will produce excellent images. You, the photographer, just need to learn how to use whichever one you choose.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2007, 5:40 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

I admit that it is quite difficult to properly compare "apples to apples" when looking at pictures done by testers on various web sites for the 9100 and the 6000.

But having said that it definitely appears to me that the sixth generation electronics is a considerable improvement on noise levels at ISO 800 and 1600 over the fifth generation electronics.

I had an interesting thought about the 9100 using 5 megapixels as opposed to the six megapixel 6000. So I called Fuji and talked to one of their representatives. I ask him if I were to to reduce the resolution from 9 megapixels to 5 megapixels(this being the closest resolution to the 6000 allowable) if this would then create comparable noise profile in the 9100 at the upper ISO settings to those attainable with the 6000? He said, "Yes it would". It would be an interesting experiment if Steve would conduct such a test. However given the tremendous workload that Steve has on this board I doubt that he will be doing this since neither he, nor several other prominent review boards, have even tested the S9100 yet.
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2007, 8:45 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 70
Default

eagle2 wrote:
Quote:
I admit that it is quite difficult to properly compare "apples to apples" when looking at pictures done by testers on various web sites for the 9100 and the 6000.

But having said that it definitely appears to me that the sixth generation electronics is a considerable improvement on noise levels at ISO 800 and 1600 over the fifth generation electronics.

I had an interesting thought about the 9100 using 5 megapixels as opposed to the six megapixel 6000. So I called Fuji and talked to one of their representatives. I ask him if I were to to reduce the resolution from 9 megapixels to 5 megapixels(this being the closest resolution to the 6000 allowable) if this would then create comparable noise profile in the 9100 at the upper ISO settings to those attainable with the 6000? He said, "Yes it would". It would be an interesting experiment if Steve would conduct such a test. However given the tremendous workload that Steve has on this board I doubt that he will be doing this since neither he, nor several other prominent review boards, have even tested the S9100 yet.
Now that is an interesting thought. I like my 9100 but like everyone else we want the finest image quality we can get. When I get out to do some low light images I'll try the reduced resolution myself.
madecov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 5:10 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 172
Default

that's an interesting thought... from what I understood though, the noise isn't from the number of pixels (6.3 vs 9) but from how close they are together on the chip.... more of a physical attribute rather than something you can alter by lowering the resolution. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I'm pretty sure that's correct. The camera always takes a 9mp photo but it's internal processing can reduce the size down after. So the original raw image, would always be 9 mp.

I can't say how the 9100 is, but since I have the 6000, I do know I've gotten many nice clean shots at iso 800 both indoors and out.



eagle2 wrote:
Quote:
I admit that it is quite difficult to properly compare "apples to apples" when looking at pictures done by testers on various web sites for the 9100 and the 6000.

But having said that it definitely appears to me that the sixth generation electronics is a considerable improvement on noise levels at ISO 800 and 1600 over the fifth generation electronics.

I had an interesting thought about the 9100 using 5 megapixels as opposed to the six megapixel 6000. So I called Fuji and talked to one of their representatives. I ask him if I were to to reduce the resolution from 9 megapixels to 5 megapixels(this being the closest resolution to the 6000 allowable) if this would then create comparable noise profile in the 9100 at the upper ISO settings to those attainable with the 6000? He said, "Yes it would". It would be an interesting experiment if Steve would conduct such a test. However given the tremendous workload that Steve has on this board I doubt that he will be doing this since neither he, nor several other prominent review boards, have even tested the S9100 yet.
Highway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 9:57 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

Highway: From everything I have been able to witness by looking on all the camera evaluation web sites I can find, the S6000fd, with its sixth generation electronics, is superior to the S. 9100 with its fifth generation electronics at the higher ISO settings(800 up).

The thought I had about reducing the resolution to five megapixels may have some merit on the S9100. I have been doing some research on this and the reason that it might help in those situations where the owner of a 9100 needed to take a natural light shot requiring a faster shutter speed at the wide open f-stop position and wanted to go to 800 or 1600 ISO, this reduction in megapixels might possibly render better results.

I don't know that this is true, and I will not know until I have purchased my 9100 and given it a try, but if it does work it very well may be that Fuji is using a technique called Pixel Binning. This is where the electronics in the camera connect several pixels together making one larger pixel at a lower resolution. Thus reducing noise.

Even if Fuji does use pixel binning in a situation like this, one thing that might interfere is the fact that on the 9100 when you reduce the resolution from nine megapixels to five megapixels you also increase the JPEG compression ratio. The 9100 does not have any selection for this, you have to accept the "Normal" compression which is twice as strong as the fine compression that is the default position at nine megapixels. Fuji's fine compression is 6 to1 and their normal compression is 12 to 1.So possibly this increased compression could produce compression artifacts and negate the reduced noise.

.In any event I will just have to give it a try once I get my camera. I will report back here and lets you know what I find out.

I do not plan to order the camera till next week so it may be sometime before I am able to post my experiences.

Best regards.

eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2007, 10:14 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 172
Default

Hey Eagle2,



That is the same info. I found too. Now from my own actual use, 800 is the max iso I can use. 1600 shows obvious noise. But most other cameras get noisy at above 200 so I'm very impressed with this.

I do wonder about the reduction, the thing is , is the sensor still has the pixels very close together. Now the pixel binning you speak of would reduce the actual raw images pixel count, but if since the sensor is packed tighter, it seems like there would still be noise.

From what I've read, when you increase the iso and it alters the voltages to the sensor, making it more sensitive, what your getting is a scenario where it only takes a tiny glimmer of light to trip them. Even output from other pixels that are in close physical proximity can trip them, and produce noise.

Cool, I will look very foward to hearing how this goes, best wishes on that,

Take care,

Ron



eagle2 wrote:
Quote:
Highway: From everything I have been able to witness by looking on all the camera evaluation web sites I can find, the S6000fd, with its sixth generation electronics, is superior to the S. 9100 with its fifth generation electronics at the higher ISO settings(800 up).

The thought I had about reducing the resolution to five megapixels may have some merit on the S9100. I have been doing some research on this and the reason that it might help in those situations where the owner of a 9100 needed to take a natural light shot requiring a faster shutter speed at the wide open f-stop position and wanted to go to 800 or 1600 ISO, this reduction in megapixels might possibly render better results.

I don't know that this is true, and I will not know until I have purchased my 9100 and given it a try, but if it does work it very well may be that Fuji is using a technique called Pixel Binning. This is where the electronics in the camera connect several pixels together making one larger pixel at a lower resolution. Thus reducing noise.

Even if Fuji does use pixel binning in a situation like this, one thing that might interfere is the fact that on the 9100 when you reduce the resolution from nine megapixels to five megapixels you also increase the JPEG compression ratio. The 9100 does not have any selection for this, you have to accept the "Normal" compression which is twice as strong as the fine compression that is the default position at nine megapixels. Fuji's fine compression is 6 to1 and their normal compression is 12 to 1.So possibly this increased compression could produce compression artifacts and negate the reduced noise.

.In any event I will just have to give it a try once I get my camera. I will report back here and lets you know what I find out.

I do not plan to order the camera till next week so it may be sometime before I am able to post my experiences.

Best regards.
Highway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2007, 5:20 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

Ron: If my understanding is correct "Pixel Binning" is a methodology whereby the electronics within the camera will tie several of the smaller pixels together into a larger pixel, thus reducing the resolution but also the noise at higher ISO settings.

For instance they use figures such as 1+1 2+2 and 4+4. 1+1 is a normal configuration where no Pixel Benning takes effect. 2+2 would die two pixels to two other pixels thus creating a larger pixel. And so on. The more pixels you tie together into one large pixel reduces the resolution further, but also should reduce the noise at higher ISO settings.

As I stated before, once I get my new S9100 I will perform several tests and report my experiences back here.
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2007, 5:48 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 172
Default

Ok, thats what I was thinking you meant by binning. I think I didn't word the part I was wondering about properly though (I know we will know for sure once you get your camera) but just for the sake of theorizing here....

One thing I have read, is the noise comes from how close the pixels are together, not how many there are. So even if you group them together, the groups would still be very close to each other so that's why I was thinking it might still be noisy.

I may be wrong though but that's just how I was thinking about it.
Highway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2007, 2:30 PM   #19
cpe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8
Default

Here is a comparison of three shots with my s9100. 5MB, 9MB fine and 9MB 2/3.
Attached Images
 
cpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2007, 6:47 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

cpe wrote:
Quote:
Here is a comparison of three shots with my s9100. 5MB, 9MB fine and 9MB 2/3.
CPE: What do you think? It seems to me the 5 MP shot has somewhat less noise.

I just ordered my new S9100 so hope to have it my late next week. I will shoot some 9 MP and 5 MP shots at 800 ISO and compare them.

We need to remember that the 5MP setting has a harsher compression formula of 12 to 1 as opposed to 6 to 1 with the fine setting at 9 MP, so compression artifacts may nagate the lower noise of the 5MP setting.

I will post back when I have my findings.
eagle2 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 7:24 PM.