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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 29, 2010, 10:28 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 93
Default

S100fs..



HS 10...

sans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2010, 10:30 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 51
Default

Yes, the s100 shot has a turquoise look to the duck's head which seems wrong, and the HS-10 image looks perfect in this last series.

That is a good eagle shot, too. If someone doesn't think so, ask to their eagle shot
OnTheWeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 11:58 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 93
Default

HS 10.



S100.



HS 10.



S100.

sans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2010, 12:11 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 93
Default

HS 10.



S100.

sans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2010, 1:04 AM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 93
Default

I think I screwed up on the seal shots...ISO on the S100 was 800, and on the HS 10 is only 100...
sans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 5, 2010, 5:18 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 51
Default

I have a hard time comparing shots in this format. However, I notice a few differences.

Shadow area detail is definitely brighter on the S100. Look at the right hand shadow area of the boathouse, you can clearly see siding details in the s100 image that you can't see in the HS10 image.

The HS10 has a bit of keystone lens distortion, as in vertical lines of the building and the boat masts tend to be not as parallel from top to bottom. Must be due to the bigger zoom range. Easily fixed with PP, though.

The saturation seems higher on the HS10 as the sky is quite blue and the s100 appears more natural. Seems like the HS10 contrast is a bit higher, too, and maybe that's why shadow areas appear a bit brighter on the s100 (this could be the better dynamic range of the s100 sensor showing its advantage).

That said, its getting pretty nit-picky... most of these images are pretty decent and each camera has its trade offs.

Last edited by OnTheWeb; Oct 5, 2010 at 7:31 PM.
OnTheWeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 9, 2010, 9:54 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

The HS10 as stated by Gary in another thread is not just a regular "point and shoot" camera. Once you get your head wrapped around that you can appreciate what you can do with it. Much like but not like a dSLR. The images from the camera in default settings pale in comparison to a "point and shoot" built-in photoshop in a box type camera. Much of the "post processing" is done by a simple "point and shoot". Those willing to tweak and PP shots from an HS10 will get better results. This camera has some extreme range to it and to expect it to be the end all be all best is just not a resonable expectation.
I will go on to say I was hoping the HS10 had a "point and shoot" mentality but in reality does not for the most part. Learn to use it and PP as well.
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 9, 2010, 10:19 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vIZnquest View Post
The HS10 as stated by Gary in another thread is not just a regular "point and shoot" camera. Once you get your head wrapped around that you can appreciate what you can do with it. Much like but not like a dSLR. The images from the camera in default settings pale in comparison to a "point and shoot" built-in photoshop in a box type camera. Much of the "post processing" is done by a simple "point and shoot". Those willing to tweak and PP shots from an HS10 will get better results. This camera has some extreme range to it and to expect it to be the end all be all best is just not a resonable expectation.
I will go on to say I was hoping the HS10 had a "point and shoot" mentality but in reality does not for the most part. Learn to use it and PP as well.
I don't own the HS10, but from what I've seen a lot of gripe comes from the early adopters having paid about $500 - $600 US, and because of that their expectations were extremely high thinking of maybe getting a DSLR in a compact format.

At $400 or so, what it goes for now, it's a lot of camera for that price. Had it come in at the price out of the gate, I bet there would have been a lot less nit-picking.

I agree with what you said. I always hear the 'purists' argue that you shouldn't have to PP any image if the camera is 'good enough'. Hogwash. I don't consider autolevels, saturation and sharpening adjustments as 'PP', more just routine operations to make really good photos great. The computer is much more powerful than a camera ever can be and with software can just perform functions better than almost any camera can.
OnTheWeb 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 4:43 PM.