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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 11, 2005, 9:18 AM   #481
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 48
Default

From an engineering standpoint I can see the reluctance in adding on a lense, however with the large zoom already presented in this camera I could see getting a zoom adapter to use occasionally. I had a tele and wideadapter for my s7000 that I maybe used a handful of times. If they test out ok and are usable I may get something similar for the s9x00 as well. I would only use them for a handful of shots and therefore the risks of damaging the lense would be minimal in my eyes.
djgiron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 9:58 AM   #482
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23
Default

Hello all,

Just to make some things clear about Raynox DCR 2020 Pro 2.2 teleconverter
(and anyother converter lens as well):

9mp lenstypicallymeasures more than 700 lines/mm at the center.
As DCR 2020 is 260 lines/mm only, it'll effectively decrease S9000's lens resolution
to about 4mp. This kind of extender can only be used at full telephoto position (300 mm) of s9000, thus resulting in 660mmfocal lengthonly - no intermediate focal length is possible between 300-660mm. Other side effects arestrong vignetting at the corners and very soft image ( given the 4mp resolution it won'treveal much details in post-processing). Last, but not least -the shutter speed should beabout 1/600 sec. or higher - meaning the extender can only be usedunder excellent lighting conditions and low ISO sensitivity to get a reasonable image.
Tripod, of course, is a must.

=))








x7497 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 10:19 AM   #483
Senior Member
 
SteveDak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,471
Default

Thanks 7497, that is really informative - seems from what you say that this lens has limited application for the 9500. I noted that Raynox state on their "riders" that the lens can only be used at maximum zoom. From a pure practical perspective, I've been trying to imagineholding the 9500 with a 123mm long lens attachment of 85mm diameter & weighing 275 grams bearing downon the end of thecamera lens at max zoom. One hand to hold the camera body and one hand on manual focus ring leaves a substantialunsupported relative load on the camera zoom barrel. At best I can see the zoom movementbecoming sloppy with time and focus problems developing.

Do you have any similar input on the Fuji 1.5x Tele-con which I've been using with my 5500 for a while now and have foundquite useful?
SteveDak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 11:14 AM   #484
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23
Default

Hi SteveDak, =)

I guess you're talking about Fuji TL-FX9 1.5 teleconverter whichI've been using too.
It's a nice piece of glass, only slightly less sharp than excellent TCON extenders from Olympus (albeit they are huge and heavy). It gives you the same 4+mp resolution as the S5500 lens, so there is no resolution drop here. It also mounts onexternal plastic sleeve, without damaging zoom motor.However, as with all teleconverter lenses, it doesincreasecorner vignetting and in my experience -chromatic aberrations are also more pronounced.

x7497 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 11:56 AM   #485
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 31
Default

1)about the resolution part of the tele adapter:
we all know that the 28mm lens of s9500 is much more sharp than the 300mm one
so the resolution of the 300mm is surely much less than the 28mm
you can see resolution charts shot at the 28 and at 300 and there is no comparison
so the reduced resolution of the extender may not be that bad since the 300mm of the camera is also bad and you should compare the converted 660mm to the resolution of the 300mm and not to the theoretical max of the 9mp sensor

2)in any case i think that 300mm and 9mp is a nice tele and a big resolution to offer crop when a more tele lens is needed

3)and i also belive that if 300mm is not enough you should buy a panasonic fz30 with a much more sharp 420 mm lens and with image stabalisation

4)and if you want video with a 660mm lens then the result will be silly without image stabalisation or a tripod

5)in any case i am very angry with fuji that although its sensor is clearly less noisy so it gains 1-2 stops by raising the iso it finnaly looses this advantage since
a)its lens is darker (f:2,8 and 5,6 at tele instead of a constant 2,8 or a 2,8-3,5)
b)it offers no image stabalisation
So if we compare the panasonic fz30 and the fuji we should not compare same iso at both, since panasonic has a more bright lens and has image stabalisation so if at tele fuji would need 1600 iso panasonic would need 200-400 iso due to the more bright lens and image stabalisation.
so go on and compare 1600 fuji and 200-400 panasonic

I am no panasonic fan. No way, I just wait for fuji to put a brighter lens and image stabalisation so as to KEEP THE ADVANTAGE IT HAS AT HIGHER ISO.Because now its wasted by the lack of image stabalisation and a bright lens
akaloith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 12:17 PM   #486
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23
Default

akaloith,

Sharpness and resolution are different things. S9000's lens does not have less resolution at various focal lengths, it does exhibit moresoftness, however, at the 300mm end.


x7497 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 12:24 PM   #487
Senior Member
 
SteveDak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,471
Default

Thanks 7497 for the Fuji TL-FX9 . I've used it a lot & find that it just gives that little bit extra when you need it (at least it does on the 5500). Have used it quite a lot on large sunsets as below
Attached Images
 
SteveDak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 12:28 PM   #488
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 31
Default

1)more soft image has less resolution
so if you dont like soft and sharp check the resolution charts at 28 and 300 to see for yourself that 300mm is softer AND has less resolution (less detail is being captured).
anyway thats not really my point. Let's see a full resolution sample and decide. Some will like it some will not. Really dont care a lot about the extenders

2)in any case i think that 300mm and 9mp is a nice tele and a big resolution to offer crop when a more tele lens is needed

3)and i also belive that if 300mm is not enough you should buy a panasonic fz30 with a much more sharp 420 mm lens and with image stabalisation

4)and if you want video with a 660mm lens then the result will be silly without image stabalisation or a tripod

5)in any case i am very angry with fuji that although its sensor is clearly less noisy so it gains 1-2 stops by raising the iso it finnaly looses this advantage since
a)its lens is darker (f:2,8 and 5,6 at tele instead of a constant 2,8 or a 2,8-3,5)
b)it offers no image stabalisation
So if we compare the panasonic fz30 and the fuji we should not compare same iso at both, since panasonic has a more bright lens and has image stabalisation so if at tele fuji would need 1600 iso panasonic would need 200-400 iso due to the more bright lens and image stabalisation.
so go on and compare 1600 fuji and 200-400 panasonic because in real life where fuji would have to use 1600 asa so as not to blur by camera movement due to low light panasonic would have to use 200-400

I am no panasonic fan. No way, I just wait for fuji to put a brighter lens and image stabalisation so as to KEEP THE ADVANTAGE IT HAS AT HIGHER ISO.Because now its wasted by the lack of image stabalisation and a bright lens
akaloith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 2:25 PM   #489
Senior Member
 
proton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 211
Default

I tried out the 2x digital zoom together with 300mm zoom today. (600mm equiv.)

My experiences and findings:

- it IS possible to shoot 600mm out of hand WITHOUT a tripod! 1/300 sec is no problem! And I was using iso100 (it was today bright and sunny, low sun though, it was after 5pm). With support of a fence, even shorter is possible, i have a photo made at 1/120 sec.

- noise at iso100 is higher as normal , logical as the picture is interpolated back to 9mp. noise at iso100 can be compared with a iso200 or iso400 photo without digital zoom (my guess).

- with a tripod better images at iso80 (with less noise) should be quite possible. (nice idea to try out coming weekend :-) )

- don't expect very sharp images, after all, it's an interpolated photo :-) I printed a crop from a seagull on 10x15cm photopaper, the noise is visible, the image is not very sharp, but this (more than 1/3) crop could be compared with a photo made with a 2000mm lens (yes, 2000). So the result is not too bad I think :-)

- I made 2 pics from the same object today (a streetlight), 1 with and 1 without digital zoom, after zooming both on screen to such a size that the streetlight was full screen it was very clear that the 2x digital zoom photo had much more detail.

photo WITHOUT digital zoom, cropped and resized to 640 x 431 pixels


photo WITH 2x digital zoom, 100% crop 638x478


I bought this camera to have more ways of making photo's, more ways to experiment. The teleconverter will only be used by me when I plan to make large zoomed-in pix. I do not plan to carry it around all the time.
If I wanted specific high quality large zoomed-in pictures I would have choosen a DSLR with a 200 or 300mm lens and a teleconverter. After all, they have much less noise. But that's not with I want! And thats not possible with my budget. (read: wife :-))
The converter is only to experiment once in a while. I don't know what you want of a camera, but I like to try out anything possible with a photocamera, after all, it's a hobby and expanding possibilities of a camera is fun! For me at least :-) I used to make sometimes photo's with my old SLR using a 2nd hand 3x converter and 300mm lens, giving 900mm total. The photoquality was cr*p, but it was fun to do!!

I choose the Fuji S9500 for it's various functions, there are camera's with more zoom, but they lack things which the Fuji has.

As soon as the converter arrives (tomorrow I hope, it's on it's way in the post at this moment) I'll compare the 2x Digital Zoom pix with photo's without DZ, but with the converter. And I'll post any discoveries in quality here again ofcourse :-)


proton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2005, 3:03 PM   #490
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23
Default

SteveDak, very nice photo indeed. :-)

...

I do own Fuji s9500. Not "angry at Fuji" at all, on the contrary - I like this camera very much, despite quite an awkward UI and luck of image stabilization. Image quality, photography features and great useability of s9000/s9500 compensate forall other quirks.

Deep insidecamera'smenu system, there's an option formultipleexposure of the same frame. What it's good for? Just for about anything imaginable - going from creating a frame with much wider dynamic range (without special software), to creating special effects and optical illusions.

Here's an example of what you can do without photoshop tricks,
just for fun (click on thumbnail for larger image):



=))
x7497 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 10:18 PM.