Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Advice on Fujifilm FinePix S7000

Reply
Thread Tools

Advice on Fujifilm FinePix S7000

 
 
al
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-18-2005
I'm looking for a new digital camera around the 300 mark. I want to get a
dSLR, but not for a few years yet (when I have some more cash and when the
quality is more on a par with film SLR!). So this camera should be a nice
and capable stopgap one to last me until then!

Looking around at reviews, the Fujifilm FinePix S7000 comes up quite often
as it now retails for just 307 on Amazon. Many things attract me to it -
the high resolution, the macro ability, the 30fps 640x480 video & sound.
Other things put me off - mainly the fact that RAW images apparently cannot
be directly manipulated and in "normal" resolution modes (ie. not
interpolated), it only allows you to convert to JPEG with one compression
setting that most reviewers say it too aggressive. Also that only ISO 200
and 400 can be used at full resolution, ISO 800 at 3MP only and apparently
without great quality. No firewire either.

Now bearing in mind that this camera cost almost double when it first came
out, I would like to know how it compares overall picture quality wise to
newer cameras at the same (300) price mark now?


Any feedback would be much appreciated.





al


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ben Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-18-2005
al wrote:

> I'm looking for a new digital camera around the 300 mark. I want to get a
> dSLR, but not for a few years yet (when I have some more cash and when the
> quality is more on a par with film SLR!). So this camera should be a nice
> and capable stopgap one to last me until then!
>
> Looking around at reviews, the Fujifilm FinePix S7000 comes up quite often
> as it now retails for just 307 on Amazon. Many things attract me to it -
> the high resolution, the macro ability, the 30fps 640x480 video & sound.
> Other things put me off - mainly the fact that RAW images apparently cannot
> be directly manipulated and in "normal" resolution modes (ie. not
> interpolated), it only allows you to convert to JPEG with one compression
> setting that most reviewers say it too aggressive. Also that only ISO 200
> and 400 can be used at full resolution, ISO 800 at 3MP only and apparently
> without great quality. No firewire either.
>
> Now bearing in mind that this camera cost almost double when it first came
> out, I would like to know how it compares overall picture quality wise to
> newer cameras at the same (300) price mark now?
>
>
> Any feedback would be much appreciated.


Is that the 6MP Fuji that has a 3MP sensor and they use interpolation to create
the 6MP image?

If so, reviews I read when it first came out stated that the 6MP images did not
have noticably more detail than the 3MP images.

The ISO restrictions are to be expected with a non-DSLR because the sensors are
very small and when the sensitivity is turned up to higher levels there is so
much noise that there's no point in saving the images at the full resolution.

www.dpreview.com has a very handy comparison tool that lets you search for
cameras the fit your needs.


--
--
Ben Thomas - Melbourne, Australia
The essentials: Kodak DX6490, Nikon D70, Canon i9950, Pioneer DVR-109,
Hitachi W37-PD2100, DGTEC 2000A, Harmon/Kardon AVR4500, Denon DVD-2800,
Whatmough Synergy, Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm LifeDrive.

Disclaimer:
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
al
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-18-2005
"Ben Thomas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> Is that the 6MP Fuji that has a 3MP sensor and they use interpolation to
> create the 6MP image?
>
> If so, reviews I read when it first came out stated that the 6MP images
> did not have noticably more detail than the 3MP images.
>
> The ISO restrictions are to be expected with a non-DSLR because the
> sensors are very small and when the sensitivity is turned up to higher
> levels there is so much noise that there's no point in saving the images
> at the full resolution.
>


Same principle, different model. It's 6MP with interpolation up to 12MP.
Images at 6 or 12 look pretty much the same. However, the only time you can
choose anything regarding the JPEG compression from RAW is when using 12MP
prints - they can then use the "fine" filter. Otherwise, one compression
only which is apparently quite aggressive.

Having said that, the sample pictures that I've seen on a few web sites
actually look pretty good.




a


 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Lynch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-18-2005
In article <u97Ne.3661$(E-Mail Removed)>,
[ask_me_first]@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Ben Thomas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > Is that the 6MP Fuji that has a 3MP sensor and they use interpolation to
> > create the 6MP image?
> >
> > If so, reviews I read when it first came out stated that the 6MP images
> > did not have noticably more detail than the 3MP images.
> >
> > The ISO restrictions are to be expected with a non-DSLR because the
> > sensors are very small and when the sensitivity is turned up to higher
> > levels there is so much noise that there's no point in saving the images
> > at the full resolution.
> >

>
> Same principle, different model. It's 6MP with interpolation up to 12MP.
> Images at 6 or 12 look pretty much the same. However, the only time you can
> choose anything regarding the JPEG compression from RAW is when using 12MP
> prints - they can then use the "fine" filter. Otherwise, one compression
> only which is apparently quite aggressive.
>
> Having said that, the sample pictures that I've seen on a few web sites
> actually look pretty good.
>
>
>
>
> a
>
>

The S7000 does a terrific jb, does Macro very well, produces a sharp
photo and has a distinctive FUJI look to photos shot using the "chrome"
setting in the menu.

All that being said, it is a 6mp camera, and using RAW mode and loading
the pictures through CS2 they can be defaulted to NOT interpolate to the
space-wasting 12mp mode.

Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct
 
Reply With Quote
 
ASAAR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2005
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:21:29 GMT, "al"
<[ask_me_first]@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> This is taking a lot more time than I thought! Hard to pick a
> clear winner. I think I'm likely to go for the S7000, but would like to see
> the Cannon still. The Sony had great features, but just a bit too fiddly.
> Sigh ... life's all about compromise eh!!


If you can wait a bit longer (and presumably are able to pay a
little more) you might prefer Fuji's replacement for the S7000, the
S9000. It's one of three new Fuji cameras, announced but not yet
available. Its new sensor promises to be a big advance over not
just the one in the S7000, but over sensors in almost all previous
P&S cameras. Much more sensitive (usable at higher ISOs) and 9mp.
More information is available at dpreview.com. The two other
cameras are the S5200 (upgrade of the S5100) and the E900, which
appears to be an upgraded E550.

 
Reply With Quote
 
al
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2005
"Larry Lynch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) .net...
> The S7000 does a terrific jb, does Macro very well, produces a sharp
> photo and has a distinctive FUJI look to photos shot using the "chrome"
> setting in the menu.
>
> All that being said, it is a 6mp camera, and using RAW mode and loading
> the pictures through CS2 they can be defaulted to NOT interpolate to the
> space-wasting 12mp mode.
>


And can you see any difference between a 6MP RAW image, manipulated through
CS's RAW filter vs. 12MP fine JPEG with the camera's own internal filtering
done?

The more I read about cameras at this price bracket, the more confused I
get! None of them are perfect - but they're all good in subtly different
ways! Here's some more I've been looking at if anyone has any comments on
them:

Sony DSC-H1
Fujifilm Finepix S7000
Canon PowerShot S2 IS
Konica Minolta Dimage A200
Nikon CoolPix 8400
Fujifilm Finepix S9500
Sony Cybershot DSC F828




a


 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Lynch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2005
In article <xUoNe.1641$(E-Mail Removed)>,
[ask_me_first]@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> And can you see any difference between a 6MP RAW image, manipulated through
> CS's RAW filter vs. 12MP fine JPEG with the camera's own internal filtering
> done?
>


I am convinced that the results are better.. There is an odd look to the
shots that are interpolated to 12mp in camera.. It only shows up if you
are a pixel peeper, but Im better satisfied with a "clean" 6mp frame
than with an interpolated 12mp frame.

I must admit I dont use the S7000 as much as I did last year, but I
still find it to be a good camera for the money.
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
 
Reply With Quote
 
al
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2005
"Larry Lynch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) .net...
> I am convinced that the results are better.. There is an odd look to the
> shots that are interpolated to 12mp in camera.. It only shows up if you
> are a pixel peeper, but Im better satisfied with a "clean" 6mp frame
> than with an interpolated 12mp frame.
>
> I must admit I dont use the S7000 as much as I did last year, but I
> still find it to be a good camera for the money.
> --


Well I think for it's original cost (high 500's) it would not stand up in
today's market. It does seem quite good value for 306 though, even against
some of the newer competition.

I'd also be very interested in seeing some low light shots without flash and
some indoor/dark shots with flash. Also some shots showing what telescopic
ability it has, as the main emphasis seems to be on macro performance (ie. I
want to know how much distance shots suffer as a result and how well it
zooms on far away objects).

I know it's asking a lot, but if you had some examples of any such images,
I'd be very grateful. Can either give email address or temporary FTP access
(former is easier!).



al


 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Lynch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2005
In article <psrNe.2059$(E-Mail Removed)>,
[ask_me_first]@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Larry Lynch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) .net...
> > I am convinced that the results are better.. There is an odd look to the
> > shots that are interpolated to 12mp in camera.. It only shows up if you
> > are a pixel peeper, but Im better satisfied with a "clean" 6mp frame
> > than with an interpolated 12mp frame.
> >
> > I must admit I dont use the S7000 as much as I did last year, but I
> > still find it to be a good camera for the money.
> > --

>
> Well I think for it's original cost (high 500's) it would not stand up in
> today's market. It does seem quite good value for 306 though, even against
> some of the newer competition.
>
> I'd also be very interested in seeing some low light shots without flash and
> some indoor/dark shots with flash. Also some shots showing what telescopic
> ability it has, as the main emphasis seems to be on macro performance (ie.. I
> want to know how much distance shots suffer as a result and how well it
> zooms on far away objects).
>
> I know it's asking a lot, but if you had some examples of any such images,
> I'd be very grateful. Can either give email address or temporary FTP access
> (former is easier!).
>
>
>
> al
>
>
>

I know I did some Macro work with it last spring, and some wildlife
around May or so.. I'll look in the archives on my other 'puter when I
get it up and running tommorrow (down for parts replacement).

I might even have some on this 'puter I'll go look right now.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Lynch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2005
In article <psrNe.2059$(E-Mail Removed)>,
[ask_me_first]@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Larry Lynch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) .net...
> > I am convinced that the results are better.. There is an odd look to the
> > shots that are interpolated to 12mp in camera.. It only shows up if you
> > are a pixel peeper, but Im better satisfied with a "clean" 6mp frame
> > than with an interpolated 12mp frame.
> >
> > I must admit I dont use the S7000 as much as I did last year, but I
> > still find it to be a good camera for the money.
> > --

>
> Well I think for it's original cost (high 500's) it would not stand up in
> today's market. It does seem quite good value for 306 though, even against
> some of the newer competition.
>
> I'd also be very interested in seeing some low light shots without flash and
> some indoor/dark shots with flash. Also some shots showing what telescopic
> ability it has, as the main emphasis seems to be on macro performance (ie.. I
> want to know how much distance shots suffer as a result and how well it
> zooms on far away objects).
>
> I know it's asking a lot, but if you had some examples of any such images,
> I'd be very grateful. Can either give email address or temporary FTP access
> (former is easier!).
>
>
>
> al
>
>
>

http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)et

remove the dot.
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fujifilm FinePix S7000 Mike Engles Digital Photography 6 04-22-2005 01:23 AM
Fujifilm FinePix S7000 Opinions? tzipple Digital Photography 10 02-26-2005 09:49 AM
Fujifilm FinePix S7000 a battery killer? Steve Digital Photography 3 09-22-2004 07:14 PM
Fujifilm FinePix S7000 comments? whyme@nowhere.com Digital Photography 1 04-11-2004 08:51 PM
Fuji FinePix S602Z vs Fujifilm FinePix S7000 Kevin Digital Photography 11 12-21-2003 08:03 PM



Advertisments