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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 9, 2007, 12:27 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Hmm....I have been usong an old Fuji S602pro with great effect, although sadly coming to the end of its life/ The reviews and view exchnages on the 9100 and 6000 all look good, although, I have to say I am curious to know why they never appeaer in Steve's 'Best Camera' lists....any ideas for a chap out here in the UK perchnace?




beltandbraces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2007, 2:48 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 172
Default

The S6000 is on the list here..

http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html
Highway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2007, 5:10 PM   #33
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

CPE: Sorry for not getting back to you on the Fuji S9100 5mg Vs. 9mg issue.

I tried several tests on this matter. I could not see any difference once the 5mg file was inlarged to the same size of the 9mg file.

Nice thought, but it does not seem to me to be worth it to down size for noise purposes. If a person needed the smaller file for other reasons, fine, the image is still a good one, but noise reduction does not seem worth it to me.

I must say that I really enjoy the 9100. Its feel and function is quite good, I believe. Lots of zoom, and other features, along with great pictures. I am glad I bought it!
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2007, 5:49 AM   #34
cpe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8
Default

Last weekend I looked through the viewfinder of a Nikon D200 and I knew one day I would want a DSLR again if only for the incredible crispness of the live image in the viewfinder, especially when zooming. But the weight and price of such a contraption makes 2007-2009 a bad period for one. But the road ahead for people with low light and zoom wishes is now clear as far as I'm concerned: camera designers must go back to the old DSLR's in terms of weight and price with a nice 2.8 18-200 lens. This will take a few years, and the sensor will also be better then.
This also solves the electronic viewfinder issue: the S9100 has double the resolution of the S6000 and so comes closer to an optical viewfinder.
In the meanwhile I've taken 7800 pictures with my S9600 in 4 months (thrown 6000 away) and will hesitate no more between S9600 and a DSLR for at least 2 years.
cpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2007, 2:35 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

And by that time everything will have changed so dramatically anyway. I agree that the optical viewfinder in the digital SLR is a superior viewfinder. And there are a lot of other definite pluses. But every time I get tempted to go purchase one I start thinking about what I am using my camera for right now, and I realize that I really cannot justify getting one. I have the old (in digital camera terms) S9000. I have had it for about 16 months now and have only taken about 4000 pictures. The pictures are very good, and are high enough quality to satisfy my needs. I would definitely like to get a digital SLR. I borrowed one from my son-in-law a while back and took a few pictures. There is definitely a difference in the handling of the cameras. But the pictures still had my look or style about them, which is something that I criticize quite often. I have some bad habits that I can't seem to break. My 9000 produces high enough quality of images that I have just decided to satisfied with what I have for a while.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2007, 7:04 PM   #36
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

JP said: "But the pictures still had my look or style about them, which is something that I criticize quite often. I have some bad habits that I can't seem to break."

Why don't you share with us JP what you feel are your bad photographic habits? Possably some of us have the same habits and possably some folks have found the answer. Sharing our problems and successes are what these boards are all about it seems to me.

I am loving my 9100. It sure is not a DSLR, but then again, I have a very good camera that takes great pictures while giving me the feel of a SLR that has a 28mm to 300mm lens at a price I can afford. I am glad I bought it!

This way I can work my way back into phoptography. Find out if I really am that serious about taking good pictures, and if I am, I can always buy a DSLR latter. One thing for sure. The DSLR market will just get better and better, for less and less money. I can afford to wait now that I have a really good camera.
eagle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2007, 6:03 AM   #37
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3
Default

This topic helped me a lot on which of the S6500fd/s9600(europe models for S6000fd/S9100) to buy. Since I allready owned the F31fd for about a month I was very impressed with the out of the box results from such a super compact camera.
(Samples of the F31fd here: http://picasaweb.google.com/foivoslo...ixF31fdSamples )
So I fell in the dilemma, which one the S6500fd or the s9600...
After reading, possibly, all the reviews on the net, I wanted that "body" with the large, sharp and bright lens and since I had the "soul" of the S6500fd in the F31fd I decided to buy the S9600.
(first sample shots here: http://picasaweb.google.com/foivosloxias/S9600Samples )

The factors that counted on this decision were
1st. the better EV (235k/S9600 vs 115/S6500fd)
2nd. The flash hotshoe
3rd. The CF support, not limiting me on the 2GB Xd plus the huge difference on read/write speeds.
4th. the tilting lcd
5th. the 4 top(S9600) vs 3 top(s6500fd) on continuous mode.I found that sometimes that extra frame can make the difference, eg. a face expression or something messing the background.
update: 6th the L2 setting AE-lock!!! Located perfectly for quick use.
Of course the feeling of shooting and handling this camera does not compare with the F31fd, but I noticed (from the first shots), that the two CCDs handled noise very differently. Most of my friends were easier impressed with the results of the F31fd 6th generation CCD(the same on the S6500fd). It looks a lot more cleaner on the laptop screen.
I have tried to "simulate" the F31fd results so I did the trick of setting the camera on 5mp and I don't think its up to my photograph quality standards (maybe it is the high compression -as I have read on this forum). But it does resemble the F31fd photos. I have also tried reducing the image size from 9mp to 6.29mp using the free ware Fast-Stone image viewer, and the results were even more "impressive" when I compared the two images side by side. The reduced photograph resembled a lot the F31fd images. What I want to end up to is that I will -always- prefer the 9 mp image of the S9600, which I can make it look like 6mp of the 6th generation CCD, instead of a 6mp image which looks sharp clean and noiseless. Of course I will wait a few days in order to take side by side shots with the S9600 and S6500fd and will post the results.
Another thing I must say for the tiny F31fd is that the macro capabilities seem -at least to me- to produce better and easier results than the super lens and super macro mode on the S9600.


@ntonios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2007, 8:29 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

Thank you, @ntonios for a very informative post. I have one question, however regarding your 3rd factor for selecting the S9100...

"...The CF support, not limiting me on the 2GB Xd plus the huge difference on read/write speeds."

Are you saying that the CF is faster than the xD in your camera? In the only professional review that I could find a direct comparison between CF and xD performance in the same camera (that being the S9000), the xD was faster is every respect...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms9000/page5.asp

I would be interested in knowing if this changed in the S9100, because I thought the two cams shared the same processor.

And just a note...when set to the 'final 3' option on the S6000, you can keep taking pics @2.2 fps for as long as you hold down the shutter release, saving only the last three when released. The S9100 can only take 4 frames @ 1.7 fps, then it locks up (for 10-15 seconds, depending on media format) to store the pics. Therefore, if you pull the trigger prematurely on the S9100, it will be a while before you can try again.

In any event, I'm looking forward to your next comparison.

the Hun


rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2007, 11:16 AM   #39
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3
Default

Thanks for your comments Hun,

Using Picasa for downloading pictures from the CF and XD cards with a hama card reader i get the following speeds:
XD (Olympus 2GB M) up to 4mb/s
CF (2GB SanDisk Extreme III) up to 15mb/s
Believe me it makes a HUGE difference when I download a full 2GB card.
I have not timed the writing from the camera to memory card but it seems at least 20% faster on the CF card, especially when it writes those 4frames and returns to "ready to shoot".
Regarding the continuous mode, I found that the top 4 suits me better. I have had the top 3 on the F31fd and as I said that extra frame can make the difference on those candid shots when something unexpected flashes in the for/back-ground.

I tried the contrast-sharpening & saturation settings on the S9600 (N/A on the S6500fd) and I got some very interesting results, there's a lot of fine tuning that you can achieve, depending on the subject, when taking a shot.I set all three (contrast-sharpening & saturation) to maximum and got impressive results when i stumbled into a "classic car rally" in my hometown today.Later on in the day (different light) I reduced all settings to minimum and the shots turned out very subtle with delicate afternoon colors.
Samples here:
http://picasaweb.google.com/foivosloxias/S9600Samples

@ntonios


@ntonios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2007, 3:20 PM   #40
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20
Default

ntonios: I appreciate your informative post about the 9100 and also enjoyed looking at your pictures.

Strangely enough one of the things that I have enjoyed on my 9100 is the flip up LCD. By employing this feature I am able to use the camera at waist level. It is also helpful when kneeling down to take macro pictures of flowers.

I really enjoy the way the camera handles and all of the features that it has. In fact, from all the reading I have done about the new Pentax K10D(which I have thought about purchasing), I would have to say that feature wise, for my usage, my 9100 actually suits me better. I do not have to purchase several lenses to cover the focal length that comes native to the 9100. I have movie taking capabilities and shot preview that the K10D does not have. Needless to say the Pentax has a much superior sensor and electronics however.

I also own a Fuji F31fd and enjoy it very much. And you are right, it definitely has superior electronics. But there had to be a good reason that Fuji decided to keep the fifth generation electronics for the nine megapixel 9100.

It will not surprise me if the next generation of the 9100/9600 has image stabilization built into the camera. I honestly feel that if Fuji wanted to they could make the 9000 series EVF camera quite competitive with the lower end digital SLR cameras. They have most of the features in place and only need to improve the sensor by increasing it in size and improving the electronics. As I just stated I believe they will incorporate image stabilization into their cameras since this is what people seem to want and their competitors are doing. But I do not believe they will improve the 9000 series cameras to the place where they are truly competitive with entry-level digital SLR's as this would tread on the toes of the other camera manufactures and the multiple lens sales capabilities they now enjoy with their digital SLR's.

I am also interested to know how you like using Google's picture viewing web site? I have been thinking about PBase.com but they are a charge site although it is fairly low priced. $26.00 per year U.S., I believe.
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 8:46 AM.