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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 31, 2003, 10:47 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 178
Default

I still love the standard "canned" response:
"this is the first we heard about that"!

Guess they don't read any of the reviews, all of which have complained about the excessive compression!
videobruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2003, 1:58 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

voxmagna - you stated that you found JPEG compression to be excessive on the s602. Please provde an example. In my analysis, I could find not sign of signficant compression artifacts when using the FINE 6MP settting compared to TIFF HIGH setting. Only artifacts were so low in level, it required analyis at consirable magnification and having a TIFF control shot to compare directly.

-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2004, 4:21 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Hi Chris,

I shot some landscape 'arbor' pics. Lots of trees, grass, detail and plain blue sky at 6Mpix fine, soft sharpening. I was looking at 200%, which I thought was fair to allow room for cropping. The sky showed some jpeg 'puddling' and edge transitions showed the tell tale signs of JPEG halo at this magnification. The output file sizes were about 2.3 Mb, and I'd have happily accepted 4-5Mb to have a cleaner image. I'm sure the 602's lens is not the limiting factor.

I'd agree that for sensible print sizes, 300dpi, at reasonably viewing distance the distortion may be hardly visible. I'd just like the choice to use less compression than that on offer and spend a bit more on memory. I see compression artefacts, even in everyday magazine publications where others don't, I'm just tuned in to them and prefer they weren't there. VOX
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2004, 11:00 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

I am very sensitive to any distortions, as well. However, I have done several tests in order to determine visibility of JPEG artifacts on the s602. Here is one of the later ones, shot with locked focus, manual mode, soft, in 6M Fine and 6M High. Scene was chosen due to high level of detail:

1:1 crops of random places in the images(TIFF):

http://www.linaeum.com/productinfo/d...omp_sample.tif

Here is the oringal, full size, untouched source files for reference:

JPEG 6MP SOFT
http://www.linaeum.com/productinfo/d...s/6mp_soft.jpg

TIFF 6MP SOFT
http://www.linaeum.com/productinfo/d...s/6mp_soft.tif

While i can identify artifacts, i could never consider them signficant, at least in the simple tests I have performed so far. Do you consider this level of artifacting demonstrated here as significant? It is true that their are no skies visible in this image, but i have not found them to be a problem in prior analysis of the s602. I just did not keep that file set in my archive. Again, i make no claims of 'no artifacting' in the sky... but nothing that i would ever consider signficant, since it takes magnified view inspection, and specifically looking for the artifact in order to identify it.

Note that while these images were taken within seconds of each other, that these are outside picture samples and are subject to the variables that nature will inflict(lighting, wind, etc.).

The 6MP Fine JPEG file size for this scene is approximately the same as if you save it in Adobe Photoshop 7.0 at JPEG quality 11.

I note your comment about the lens not being the limiting facotr on the s602, well, this is almost true. I have measured the specific resolving power of the lens through every focal length and aperature. THe lens does reduce resolution to approx. 1375 l/pph at full telephoto, compred to 1525 l/pph at wideangle. It remains farily constant up to approx. F6--F7, where at F8 and beyond, degradation of resoluiton occurs, as well as signficant contrast loss and a color cast(though only slightly visible in this particular sample) starts to occur, apparently due to diffracton limits. Please refer to my old thread at DPREVIEW( http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=5713079 )

I will be measuring the s7000 when i purchase one hopefully later this month; i suspect severe limitation of the lens-----and if they recycled the s602 lens? Well, I fear that at telephoto this thing will not be resolving more than a standard 6MP bayer sensor alignment. Thereby negating the SCCD format. However, this is just speculation at this point. :-)

-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2004, 5:31 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Chris - why is it that manufacturers can put excellent features and performance into a camera like the S602, which has undoubtedly been successful, then bring out new models which might lower the aspirations for satisfied users of the previous models?

Logically you'd have thought they had learned and gained from a previously successful product - even read Steve's and Dpreview Forums as well! Perhaps, it's costs and a bit of 'downspecing' needed to address a bigger market. VOX
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2004, 11:43 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

Vox - I would have been very happy if Fuji had left the 3MP SCCD, and worked on lower noise levels, improved the corner lens sharpness a bit, refined AF and lag, provided an ISO 50, added TTL Nikon flash support, added RAW format and put a higher resolution EVF on the unit.

Is that really asking for too much? :-)

-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2004, 6:04 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Sounds like we need an affordable dslr then, since we're probably in the top 1% of discerning buyers- and anything else is a stop gap until we get it! Unfortunately the Mpix label on the front is the benchmark for most buyers, even if they're only printing up to 6X4! PS next time they'll add synthetic ISO50 which is gain reduction and built in NeatImage - just to keep us talking! Cheers, VOX
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2004, 8:41 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

I have considered DSLRs, but I am not willing to put up with large/bulky lenses and optical veiwfinders, at least not anymore. Some people hate EVFs... i can see why.... but I love them(accurate feedback on the fly without having to take eye off of finder, abilityto use the live video out to a monitor or video glasses( in certain situations). When DSLRs have EVF(though this technically would make then non-SLR) or at least live feed ability, I will gladly reconsider. It's not like it's impossible to provide a high resolution (say XGA) screen of the appropriate size(think of the lcd or dlp chips used in projectors), it's just the inability to stream a live feed at high refresh rates of appropriate resolutino from the CCD/CMOS. Maybe in 5-10 years? My fingers are crossed. It should be obvious that I don't have a specifc NEED for properties only found on DSLRs(high ISO with low noise, rapid AF, etc.). I only state this, as to cover myself in case in the future i do 'require' these features before EVF and/or live video feed is possible from DSLR class units. Hey, photography is only a recreatinoal activity for me! :-)

-Chris
WmAx 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 5:39 PM.