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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 11, 2005, 7:39 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 70
Default

can anyone comment on the image quality of fuji camera compared to nikon ones like Fuji Finepix5500/5100 compared to nikon 4600/5600?

thanks
archish is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 11, 2005, 10:45 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

There are Web sites where it is possible to compare images from different cameras, and I have done that. With comparable images, the difference in quality between the different cameras is negligible and probably something that would be very difficult to quantify. It doesn't matter, in my opinion, what brand of camera you purchase. I think with any camera manufacturer you will find that some models perform better than others. I think the Fuji 5100/5500 has been one of their most successful cameras. Mine performs very well, and I would put the pictures up against any comparable camera. The challenge becomes a personal one in that you need to experiment and learn what it takes for you to get the results you are looking for. Sometimes it becomes all too easy to blame photographic failures on the camera when in fact the photographer needs to polish his skills.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 12:16 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

From a strictly 'bright sunny day, outdoor barbecue snapshot in the back yard' scenario, JP is right...there probably isn't much difference between the image quality between the 4600 and the S5100. But after that, there is no camparison...the 4600 only has a 3x zoom, no AF assist lamp, an extremely slow flash recharge time, and aninaccurate optical viewfinder. There's more to a camera than simply comparing sample photos taken under ideal conditions.

the Hun


rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 12:28 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

I don't know anything about the Nikon models in question. The problems you have pointed out are not necessarily "image quality" problems, and that was the point of the original question. Sometimes the problems you have alluded to can be tolerated if the overall image quality meets your demands.

Like I said previously, some people find it convenient to blame any camera for their own inadequacies as a photographer.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 12:37 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 70
Default

someone told me that S5500 has a rather slowing focusing system and also its 72dpi which makes it really poor while taking prints
archish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 12:53 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

There is a little bit of a delay in the shutter if you don't press the button half way down to set the focus. But as far as focusing speed goes, I think the camera is fine.

As far as the camera shooting at 72 PPI, that is a common misunderstanding. Any digital camera, regardless of brand or quality, takes pictures that are so many pixels wide and so many pixels high. A 6 MP camera will produce an image that is higher and wider than a 4 MP camera, but the pixels will not be any closer together or further apart in either camera. The 72 PPI is a resolution that the company has chosen to report in order to provide an actual physical dimension to the picture. Fuji and many other companies report at this resolution. Some Canon models report at 180 PPI. My brother has a Nikon, that reports at 300 PPI. Actually, the 5100/5500 reports RAW images at 240 PPI, but the dimensions are smaller than what they would be at 72 PPI. What you have to do is learn how to Resize your images to give them sufficient resolution for how they're going to be used.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 1:52 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 70
Default

jphess wrote:
Quote:
As far as the camera shooting at 72 PPI, that is a common misunderstanding. Any digital camera, regardless of brand or quality, takes pictures that are so many pixels wide and so many pixels high. A 6 MP camera will produce an image that is higher and wider than a 4 MP camera, but the pixels will not be any closer together or further apart in either camera. The 72 PPI is a resolution that the company has chosen to report in order to provide an actual physical dimension to the picture. Fuji and many other companies report at this resolution. Some Canon models report at 180 PPI. My brother has a Nikon, that reports at 300 PPI. Actually, the 5100/5500 reports RAW images at 240 PPI, but the dimensions are smaller than what they would be at 72 PPI. What you have to do is learn how to Resize your images to give them sufficient resolution for how they're going to be used.
does the dpi in any way affect the print quality and also what is the maximum print size of the image taken at 4MP at Fine quality mode, nikon 4600 says the maximum print size is11x17 inches, i want to know the print size of this camera.
I am still confused and i think that 300dpi prints of a 4MP camera will be better than a 72 dpi one. What i am confused is that if i take the image for printing will the quality be lower then the 300 dpi one? Assuming that i do not do any resizing and no editing just shoot and print
archish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 3:32 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

a 4 meg camera will give you (approximately) an acceptable photo 8x10 print at240 dpi

{(8x240) x (10x240)} = 4,600,000 pixels



at 72 dpi it would be almost wall sized



at 300 dpi it would be a lab quality 5x7



all from THE SAME 4 meg file



(you need 200-240 dpi to get a 'good' photo print)



bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 3:50 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

You are correct in your understanding that a 300 PPI picture will print much more clearly than will a 72 PPI picture. But determining the pixels per inch is not the function of ANY digital camera. There is no "print size" for ANY digital camera. The Fuji 5100/5500 produces images that are 2272x1704 pixels. If you multiply that out, it totals 3,871,488, or close to 4 megapixels. Those pixels are arranged in adjacent positions to each other. I don't know how big a pixel is, but that doesn't matter. The camera companies choose a resolution to use to report picture dimensions. As I said in my last message, Fuji and some other camera companies have chosen 72 PPI, while other companies have chosen other resolutions. This information is simply put in the header of the image file to enable the different software applications to report the dimensions of a photograph. For instance, if I open a JPEG image in Photoshop, it will be reported at 72 PPI and the dimensions will be something like 36x27 inches (those dimensions may not be exact, but the concept is what we are concerned about). Now, using the same camera, if I take a RAW picture, Fuji has decided to report the resolution of RAW images at 240 PPI, and that means that the pixels are "squeezed" closer together, so the size of the picture is reported as roughly 8.5x11 inches. There are no more or less pixels, it's just that the resolution that is used to calculate the total number of pixels affects the size of the print.

If you send or take your digital images to a commercial photo processor, their software will make the resolution compensation necessary to make the picture print and look good. Some of these online photo labs indicate that they can print images as large as 20x30 inches from the pictures I take with my camera. I can tell you that I have had a few photo books printed for me by mypublisher.com. Some of the pictures in the albums that I have created have been 9x12 inch, full-page, full bleed photographs. And they have turned out extremely well. If you are going to print your pictures at home you need some software that will allow you to Resize your pictures and change the resolution, and you need to understand how to use it properly. I use Photoshop. There are several other programs that people enjoy using.

Perhaps someone else will be able to give you some references you can go to to help you understand what I'm talking about. But I suggest that you put some effort into understanding more about resolution and how it really works in digital cameras. Sorry that I cannot be more succinct.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2005, 5:25 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

archish

Forget about the dpi or ppi numbers, the actual resolution is 2272x1704 pixels, the Nikon should be somewhere about the same (I haven't looked it up). The display resolution of 72 dpi is totally arbitrary, it has absolutely nothing to do with print size or quality. Printing systems will typically use 240 to 300 dpi and has nothing at all to do with the display resolution.

As others have already pointed out, 72DPI would produce a print the size of a large poster. Please forget about this number, it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual printed image (unless you actually want 36"X27")

Personally I would get the Fuji for its better zoom range and handling features.

Ira
Monza76 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 11:07 AM.