Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 15, 2005, 4:44 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

I`m looking to buy a new camera and i would have liked to know more about the Fuji S5200,i don`t see any reviews anywhere about it....

How about picture samples to show the effectiveness of it`s "AntiBlur" feature ?

Can anyone help ? is this camera worth considering ?
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 15, 2005, 7:00 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 283
Default

There probably won't be any reviews on this camera since it is eclipsed by the S9000.

I have an S5200 with me right now for testing. My verdict? It is a toy DSLR. A capable camera, but definitely a toy. The good thing about it is its extremely fast response time, but the bad is the noise. Above ISO200 it gets bad and at ISO1600 it's absolutely unusable, at least for the enthusiast concerned with image fidelity, which pretty much negates the purpose of this camera. This would be a good camera for someone who needs to get a shot in any situation but isn't concerned with having the utmost image quality and being able to make large prints. If you are looking for a photographic tool, keep looking.

Here is one review I have found.

Here is an excellent set of test done by one of our members that demontrates the noise issue.

There's always PBase, which allows you to categorize thousands of pictures by camera model. The link I provided is the search results for the S5200.
David French is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2005, 2:22 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

LOL, the other guy was comparing a $300 camera to a dSLR.

Here's a consolidated thread on all S5200 reviews availalble, good luck!

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=16100764


curtis
curtisfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2005, 6:49 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 283
Default

I hope you're not talking about me, becuase I never made any such comparison, as anyone who can read will see.
David French is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 12:23 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Yes David, I was referring to you, read your post again, if the target audience are "enthusiast", would they spend only $300 for a camera? It sounds like you are comparing the noise level and "image fidelity" of the S5200 based on dSLR standard, otherwise, if you compare the noise level of iso200-800 with other ultrazoom in its class, it's vastly superior, there is no contest. Try to shoot in RAW using the S5200, noise is still very low at iso400, at iso800 it picks up some, but it iso800 is better than ultrazoom in its class at iso400. At iso1600 the noise level is similar to what you get from other similarly priced ultrazoom's iso400, however, if you shoot in jpeg mode, the image is smudged quite a bit and it is pretty much unusable, the only option is to shoot in RAW and post-process it yourself, you will get a much cleaner and usable image.

I've done quite a bit of indepth testing myself, you can check them out yourself:

http://curtisfun.myphotoalbum.com/vi...umName=album11

You mentioned this camera is not able to produce large prints, but at what iso setting are you referring to? In jpeg mode, at iso64-100, you can make as big a print poster size via interpolation, which even 9MP camera needs to do anyway. At iso200, you are limited to 11x17, at iso400 - 11x14, iso800-8x10, iso1600-4x6, now if you shoot in RAW, you can print up to 11x14 at iso800 and 8x10 at iso1600.

Forgot to comment on the Anti-blur feature. S5200's implementation is Fuji's method of avoiding camera shake, it does a fairly good job by raising the iso sensitvity to achieve a fast enough shutterspeed at the different zoom levels. It does not really freeze fast action, to freeze action, you are better off shooting in shutter-priority mode. I don't use it very often because you cannot set the in-camera sharpening to the lowest value.



curtis
curtisfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 11:13 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 283
Default

I contend that calling the camera a toy DSLR is not comparing it to a DSRL. The reason I was taken aback by your comment is that this is a foolish comparison, which wold make me a fool. Also, 'enthusiast' doesn't mean 'rich'. Some people don't have the money for a DSLR but are still serious about photography.

Also, if you didn't notice, I linked the original poster to your tests, and even called them 'excellent', then you come back and laugh at me.
David French is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 11:24 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Hello David:

Perhaps we have to disagree on the noise, I don't see much of any noise at iso400 except in the shadows, and you are saying it gets really bad after iso200, compare to what? For $300, of course you should compare to other similarly priced ultrazoom cameras, that would be the Panasonic FZ5, the Kodak P850, for a $100 more, you will include in the list the Canon S2IS and Sony H1. Look at iso400 pics from this camera and you'll see the S5200 performance is excellent relative to other ultrazoom in its class.

And yes, I saw the link you provided to my site, we are seeing the same images, but the conclusion we draw from it is very different because noise is a subjective thing, and you must have extremely low tolerance of noise.

At least for me, the definition for an enthusiast is equivalent to an audiophile, audiophile do not get $300 receivers and amps, their gears go into the thousands. Another example is automobile enthusiasts, will any of them consider buying a sub$10000 car?

curtis



curtisfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 12:14 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
toshi43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vernon BC Canada
Posts: 1,618
Default

David French wrote:
Quote:
There probably won't be any reviews on this camera since it is eclipsed by the S9000.

I have an S5200 with me right now for testing. My verdict? It is a toy DSLR. A capable camera, but definitely a toy. The good thing about it is its extremely fast response time, but the bad is the noise. Above ISO200 it gets bad and at ISO1600 it's absolutely unusable, at least for the enthusiast concerned with image fidelity, which pretty much negates the purpose of this camera.
Toatally. totally wrong! My S5200's performance atISO speeds up to 400 is excellent, with little if any visible noise. At ISO 800, noise isbettercontrolled than in many more expensive cameras,but theS5200's noise-reduction does cause a noticeable 'watercolor' effect with loss of detailin some shots Yes, thisbecomes more noticeable at ISO 1600, butyou can get acceptable pictures in situations where other cameras DON'T WORK AT ALL.

What David French doesn't mention is the fact thatthe images of EVERY digicam at the S5200's price pointdegrade severelyat ISO 400, and most have far more visible noise at ISO 200 than the S5200 does.

I get VERY GOOD results with my S5200 and I object to it being calleda 'toy'. By inference, I guess that means I don't care about photography.Sounds like more DSLR snobbery to me.

I also object tosome peopleapplying theterm 'enthusiast' only to those who can afford the 'best' equipment. I'd love to buy into a DSLR system, but I can't afford it.Does that make me less enthusiastic or less serious about the pictures I take?


PS - Here's a shot I took at ISO 400. I'd like to see another 'toy' camera do that.


Attached Images
 
toshi43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 1:00 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 283
Default

I think we're at the point where we simply have to agree to disagree. I don't like the noise on the S5200 that is with me now. Perhaps it's not up to snuff. Whatever the reason, I find it to be a strange looking, 'furry' noise that doesn't take NR well. When I say that it's noisy, i'm not comparing the camera to any other camera, rather, I'm just saying that I don't like the look of the high ISO images.

Never meant to be a snob or put anyone else down. I hope none of you feel that way.
David French is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 3:46 PM   #10
jss
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 11
Default

Just to throw in my 2 cents I just bought the Fuji S5200. You can see my post in this very same forum, titled Fuji S5200 vs Olympus Sp500uz. And the responses from that plus a lot of customer reviews lead me to purchase the S5200. Though my post did not draw nearly the excitement as this one, it provided me with lots of good info. Also the definition of enthusiast is person deeply involved in something:somebody who is enthusiastic about something, especially a hobby
Says nothing about being rich or having to spend lots of $$. But often one who is a enthusiast will get the best stuff out there, but not always. I could probaly buy a DSLR but I think they are still way to much $, $600-$1000 plus how much more for lenses, and no movie mode. And David maybe you were not comparing it to a DSLR but you still called it a toy and that to some people implies its a cheap camera. But it seems to hold its weight with every camera out there in its class. The only way maybe it could be called a toy is if you indeed did compare it to a DSLR, and perhaps that's why Curtisfun posted what he did. Well any way I justordered the 5200 and hope I enjoy my new toy,:G I meen digital camera as much as many others have. Perhaps you are right David that the model you have for some reason is just not up to stuff.Well hope nobody is offened by this.
jss 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 2:21 PM.