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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 10, 2007, 2:00 AM   #21
cpe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8
Default

Eagle2: I think the 9MB 2/3 setting has the same compression as the 5MB setting (results in a file half the size of the 9MB Fine setting). So the jpg compression plus noise suppression should be comparable to the 5MB setting. The colors are a bit different in the 5MB shot (caused by reduction of 9MB pixels to 5MB pixels?). I can see little difference between the three, perhaps the 2/3 setting is a bit sharper (edge of chair)?
I do not really like the gritty character of s9600 noise, especially when viewed on screen in 100%, but once printed that all magically disappears and shots (even 800 iso) look great.
cpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2007, 12:21 PM   #22
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

CPE: I definitely feel that the five megapixel shot has less noise. But that's just me and my monitor. Others may see it different.

I am curious enough about this issue that I can assure you that once I get my camera I will be checking this out quite thoroughly. The ability for a photographer to be able to utilize higher ISO settings can come in very, very handy. It can make the difference between getting the picture you want and not getting it.

There is another web site that has an excellent side-by-side comparison of pictures taking by two different cameras at all the ISO settings. I utilize this web site a lot and I have found that the Fuji S6000 has excellent high ISO low noise characteristics.I just wish the 9100 had the sixth generation electronics in it. My guess is that due to the nine megapixels Fuji is going to have to do some reworking of their algorithms in order to bring this same excellent level of low noise, high ISO settings to the next model change(9200?).

I compared the Fuji S. 6000 to the newest and greatest Canon DSLR model III. I was amazed at how well the Fuji performed next to this very expensive and sophisticated Canon at ISO settings up to 800. Now I'm not saying it's as good, but looking at the comparison shots at 100 percent resolution is truly, for me at least, simply amazing.

So I have very high hopes that the next version of Fuji's flagship EVF will be a true world beater!

I am looking forward to trying out my new camera and after I have thoroughly check it out I will report back here with all the relevant information I have been able to gather.
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2007, 1:18 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

eagle2,

I think if you start testing thoroughly as you say you are going to do, you are just going to drive yourself crazy. The camera will do a good job. Just enjoy it. I think you are expecting far too much and are deliberating over trivial issues. But have fun with whatever camera you decide to get.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2007, 2:47 PM   #24
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

jpjphess wrote:
Quote:
eagle2,

I think if you start testing thoroughly as you say you are going to do, you are just going to drive yourself crazy. The camera will do a good job. Just enjoy it. I think you are expecting far too much and are deliberating over trivial issues. But have fun with whatever camera you decide to get.
jp: You very well may be right, and I may be, "deliberating over trivial issues."

But time will tell, and in the end, it really is all about what "Winds Your Clock"

And thank you, I do intend to have fun as the camera was purchased yesterday, as I stated, and I should have it by the middle to the latter part of next week.
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2007, 4:31 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

Well, what "winds my clock" is being able to open a photo album in a few years and look back on memories. Places we have gone and things we have done together. And somehow it just doesn't matter whether an image has a little noise in it. We all strive for absolute perfection, I know. I do it too. But I have also decided that, at least for me, it doesn't matter whether my pictures have the least noise, the least CA, or whatever. And I can also understand that need to strive for perfection and getting the absolute most out of the camera. Somehow it really gives us a sense of accomplishment.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2007, 6:32 PM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

jp: I could not agree with you more. In the end it is (or should be) about the the images that matter to you that you are able to capture.

I have hanging on my wall a picture of my daughter when she was approximately three years old. She is now a grandmother herself and approaching 50 years of age. (I got married very young.) I took this picture, in my more serious photographic past, with my first real camera a Pentax SLR screw mount model SV, using a Pentax 105 mm f2.8 lens. It was captured by the light of one 150 watt light bulb.

I always loved natural light photography and had my own darkroom. I shot this picture using Kodak Tri-X ASA 400 speed black and white film. I developed it in Kodak Microdol 3 to 1. Thus the grain was low and allowed an 8X10 photograph that I'm quite proud of. It was one of those magical moments as she was playing some game and looked directly into the camera and I happily captured the image.

So, I am still quite interested in natural light photography and grain free, or in the case of digital, noise free photographs. Thus my interests in this subject posted in this thread.

I appreciate your thoughts on this important matter.

eagle2
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2007, 7:39 AM   #27
cpe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8
Default

Though the memory-function of pictures is self-evident (if misleading at best and false in the worst case) , I beg to -slightly- differ from Eagle 2 and jphess: shooting pictures can also be 'painting' with light, and when you go in that direction you need to be able to know and manipulate your 'painting' instruments in search for pictures that display exactly what you want and how you want it. I am with Eagle2 on the subject of studying noise: You understand your instrument better and learn something more about noise to boot.
Eagle2: can you specify more precisely why you think the 5MB noise is better? I look at the border between the blue chair and the grey background. Also at the thin purple lines in the wallpaper design.
cpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2007, 2:28 PM   #28
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

cpe: I have to agree with you too when it comes to the philosophical perspective of how a camera is supposed to be utilized by a photographer.

The beautiful thing about this medium is that the photographer can choose, without reservation, what he/she wishes to photograph and why.

To answer your question about the noise in the sample picture you posted.

I use IrfanView to view my images.By zooming in to 3728X1076 I see more noise along the top edges of the Blue Chair in the 9 megapixel shot. I also see more noise on the rest of the chair back, it is just more noticeable on the edge. The one disturbing thing about the five megapixel picture is the degree of color shift that is obvious compared to the nine megapixel sample.

As I stated earlier I will do some extensive tests once I get my camera and have a chance to become fully oriented with it.

I want to thank you again for posting this information.
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2007, 6:27 AM   #29
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1
Default

After many reviews redon the internet , I bought s6000 .

Before purchasing it , I performed a little experiment :

I downloaded two identical test images shot with s6000 and s9100 ( found www.imaging-resource.com, Still Life sample image).

I opened them in Photoshop : I resampled s6000 image ( 2848x2136 pixels) up to the size of s9100 ( 3488-2616 ) and I made a comparison , even cutting and pasting side by side pieces of both images ;

s6000 seems to me to deliver far better resultsin terms of sharpness ;

s9100 only produces a more huge file ( 4,4 Mb vs 2,9 Mb ) without any quality improvement .

I repeated with other images and the result doesn't change !


lightloom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2007, 11:47 AM   #30
cpe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8
Default

Wich reminds me: Eagle2: done any testing?
cpe 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 2:40 AM.