Finally a P&S that isn't a piece of crap?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rich, Mar 7, 2008.

  1. Rich

    Rich Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. Rich

    Jufi Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This has possibilities.
    >
    > http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifications/index.html


    I've done some reading, and I think it will fail. First problem is the size
    and weight. I know it's a wide range zoom, and contains a bunch of features,
    but it's huge. Why bother? Why not just carry an SLR?

    Second item is the lens. Nice range, but the camera appears to have a
    significant purple fringing issue. I've seen a few samples and it's
    painfully obvious. the specs are really great, but the execution is flawed.
     
    Jufi, Mar 8, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rich

    Steve Guest

    On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:49:45 -0800 (PST), Rich <>
    wrote:

    >This has possibilities.
    >
    >http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifications/index.html


    Cameras like that make me curious where the term P&S (Point and Shoot)
    comes from and actually means. I mean, my D200 is also a P&S if you
    put it in the program mode and autofocus with autoselect focus sensor.
    And many P&S cameras have a wide range of manual selections that take
    them out of P&S mode.

    Maybe "compact" vs. "non-compact", or "SLR" vs. "non-SLR". I think
    the distinction most people make between the types is "fixed lens" vs.
    "interchangable lens".

    That FinePix S100FS is bigger and heavier than a Nikon D40x with the
    kit lens. So is the D40x more of a P&S camera than the S100FS?

    Steve
     
    Steve, Mar 8, 2008
    #3
  4. Rich

    sally Guest

    Rich <> wrote in
    news::

    > http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifi
    > cations/index.html


    The big problem with all those super-zoom P&S cameras is the tiny sensor.
    Small sensor = reduced sensitivity = lots of noise and poor color range
    If image quality is important to you, you are much better off with a P&S
    camera that has a bigger sensor and smaller zoom range. I think there are a
    few P&S cameras out there with the same size sensors as entry-level DSLRs.
     
    sally, Mar 8, 2008
    #4
  5. Rich

    Guest

    On Mar 8, 10:39 am, Steve <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:49:45 -0800 (PST), Rich <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >This has possibilities.

    >
    > >http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/spe...

    >
    > Cameras like that make me curious where the term P&S (Point and Shoot)
    > comes from and actually means. I mean, my D200 is also a P&S if you
    > put it in the program mode and autofocus with autoselect focus sensor.
    > And many P&S cameras have a wide range of manual selections that take
    > them out of P&S mode.
    >
    > Maybe "compact" vs. "non-compact", or "SLR" vs. "non-SLR". I think
    > the distinction most people make between the types is "fixed lens" vs.
    > "interchangable lens".
    >
    > That FinePix S100FS is bigger and heavier than a Nikon D40x with the
    > kit lens. So is the D40x more of a P&S camera than the S100FS?
    >
    > Steve


    So there is an overlap - why is that a problem? Superzooms, even the
    bad ones, seem to have a reasonable market - I'm one of the clients of
    this camera's ancestors (Fuji S9000).

    The new S100 has a lens range of 28-400, fully stabilised. So can you
    supply the pricing and weight for a D40x with an equivalent stabilised
    lens range? (O:

    Yes, you will get a bit better IQ and low-light performance from the
    larger sensor of the Nikon.

    But there are swings and roundabouts - 28-400 without changing lenses,
    completely silent shooting, no dust on the sensor, excellent video
    capability, flash synch at all speeds, and only one 'thing' to
    carry... It is also very interesting that it uses both sensor *and*
    optical stabilisation - does this mean it will be better than the two
    alternatives, I wonder?

    Those things may or may not be important to you, but they are to me.
    My old s9000 has a much smaller sensor than this new one, but it is
    still a very capable camera at ISO400, and ISO 1600 is noisy but still
    useful. It is rare that I lust for the low-noise of a DSLR, and it is
    *frequent* that the Fuji goes with me to places where I don't want to
    lug a camera bag and three lenses. And having used SLR's for many
    years in my earlier days - having a camera that does not require lens
    changes and that can be with me at all times, is very pleasant
    indeed. And on a few occasions it has meant I have captured a
    fleeting moment that I would have been lucky to get with the SLR...

    The newer superzooms are achieving very acceptable AF speeds, so that
    really just leaves sensor noise/IQ as the one remaining problem (oh,
    and also the lousy manual focus ability of most of these cameras...!)

    It's probably too good to be true, but I applaud Fuji for using a 2/3
    sensor without going overboard with resolution, and mating it to a
    decent lens with stabilisation. Sony failed with their R1 (larger
    sensor, smaller lens range, butt-ugly camera), maybe this one might be
    the better way to go.

    (But I still wish the lens designers would come up with a decent
    24-200. That is the sweetest range for me...(O:)
     
    , Mar 8, 2008
    #5
  6. Pete Stavrakoglou, Mar 8, 2008
    #6
  7. "sally" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns9A5AC766DDCC3s321@192.160.13.20...
    > Rich <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifi
    >> cations/index.html

    >
    > The big problem with all those super-zoom P&S cameras is the tiny sensor.
    > Small sensor = reduced sensitivity = lots of noise and poor color range
    > If image quality is important to you, you are much better off with a P&S
    > camera that has a bigger sensor and smaller zoom range. I think there are
    > a
    > few P&S cameras out there with the same size sensors as entry-level DSLRs.


    Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image
    stabilization, two very nice features that interest me. I'm not a follower
    of P&S cameras (and I don't consider this Fuji a P&S) but the only compact
    P&S with the same size sensor as a DSLR tht I'm aware of is the Sigma DP1
    which uses the same sendor as their SD14 DSLR.
     
    Pete Stavrakoglou, Mar 8, 2008
    #7
  8. Rich

    sally Guest

    "Pete Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    news:47d2167b$0$15202$:
    > Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image
    > stabilization, two very nice features that interest me.


    According to dpreview.com:
    Fuji s100fs sensor size: 8.8 x 6.6 mm =
    Nikon D40 (the cheapest DSLR on the market) sensor size: 23.7 x 15.5 mm
    The SLR sensor is almost 3 times as big in both directions. The Fuji may be
    a little better than other P&S cameras, but it is still a far cry from a SLR.

    Amazon.com sells the Fuji for $800 and the Nikon D40 for $500.
    The Fuji is also bigger and heavier than the Nikon.
    There may be a market for the Nikon, but I am not in it.
     
    sally, Mar 8, 2008
    #8
  9. Rich

    sally Guest

    "Pete Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in
    news:47d2167b$0$15202$:
    > Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image
    > stabilization, two very nice features that interest me.


    According to dpreview.com:
    Fuji s100fs sensor size: 8.8 x 6.6 mm =
    Nikon D40 (the cheapest DSLR on the market) sensor size: 23.7 x 15.5 mm
    The SLR sensor is almost 3 times as big in both directions. The Fuji may be
    a little better than other P&S cameras, but it is still a far cry from a SLR.

    Amazon.com sells the Fuji for $800 and the Nikon D40 for $500.
    The Fuji is also bigger and heavier than the Nikon.
    There may be a market for the Fuji, but I am not in it.
     
    sally, Mar 8, 2008
    #9
  10. Rich

    Steve Guest

    On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 20:04:18 -0800 (PST),
    wrote:

    >(But I still wish the lens designers would come up with a decent
    >24-200. That is the sweetest range for me...(O:)


    Sounds like you'd like a D40x with the 18-200 VR. You'd never have to
    take the lens off if you didn't want to. And looks about the same
    size as the S100FS but that's hard to tell without seeing them side by
    side. It would weigh less than 5oz more. You'd give up some bells
    and whistles like taking movies. But I think the picture quality
    would be better than that S100FS. And you *could* change lenses if
    you wanted to. But the price would be a few hundred more. But you
    could still use that lens on a different body if you want to upgrade
    in the future. With the S100FS, your upgrade path is nil. Get rid of
    the whole thing to get something new.

    Lot's of tradeoffs, tough decision. But personally, I don't like the
    S100FS. I'd rather have something better *and* something convenient
    at the same time and use the right tool for the job at hand instead of
    something that's trying to be too much. That means 2 cameras, a big
    full feature DSLR (Nikon D200) and a little, pocket size compact
    (Canon S400).

    Steve
     
    Steve, Mar 8, 2008
    #10
  11. Rich

    Rich Guest

    On Mar 7, 7:09 pm, "Jufi" <> wrote:
    > "Rich" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > > This has possibilities.

    >
    > >http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/spe...

    >
    > I've done some reading, and I think it will fail. First problem is the size
    > and weight. I know it's a wide range zoom, and contains a bunch of features,
    > but it's huge. Why bother? Why not just carry an SLR?
    >
    > Second item is the lens. Nice range, but the camera appears to have a
    > significant purple fringing issue. I've seen a few samples and it's
    > painfully obvious. the specs are really great, but the execution is flawed.


    Too bad. The 2/3" sensor re-introduction could have been good. But
    Fuji's oddball sensor is just not as good as the old 2/3 Kodak or Sony
    CCDs, the output at 400 ISO is like looking at an impressionist
    painting.
     
    Rich, Mar 8, 2008
    #11
  12. Rich

    Paul Furman Guest

    Steve wrote:
    > On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:49:45 -0800 (PST), Rich <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> This has possibilities.
    >>
    >> http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifications/index.html

    >
    > Cameras like that make me curious where the term P&S (Point and Shoot)
    > comes from and actually means. I mean, my D200 is also a P&S if you
    > put it in the program mode and autofocus with autoselect focus sensor.
    > And many P&S cameras have a wide range of manual selections that take
    > them out of P&S mode.
    >
    > Maybe "compact" vs. "non-compact", or "SLR" vs. "non-SLR". I think
    > the distinction most people make between the types is "fixed lens" vs.
    > "interchangable lens".


    Small sensor / fixed lens.

    > That FinePix S100FS is bigger and heavier than a Nikon D40x with the
    > kit lens. So is the D40x more of a P&S camera than the S100FS?
    >
    > Steve
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 8, 2008
    #12
  13. Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    > "Rich" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> This has possibilities.
    >>
    >> http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifications/index.html

    >
    > It's not a P&S.


    ... and it's not a DSLR, so it must be a ZLR (or bridge camera). <G>

    I must admit that, at first look, it seems to me that if you want the
    better image quality, a 2/3-inch sensor is not the way to go, and that the
    camera is, like the Sony R1, a size-monster. If you want portability, you
    may want a camera other than this. If you want good image quality, you
    should consider a DSLR. OK, this gives you movies, but it is not compact,
    and not highest image quality. The Panasonic FZ8 and FZ18 are about half
    the weight.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 8, 2008
    #13
  14. Rich

    dwight Guest

    "Steve" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 20:04:18 -0800 (PST),
    > wrote:
    >
    >>(But I still wish the lens designers would come up with a decent
    >>24-200. That is the sweetest range for me...(O:)

    >
    > Sounds like you'd like a D40x with the 18-200 VR. You'd never have to
    > take the lens off if you didn't want to. And looks about the same
    > size as the S100FS but that's hard to tell without seeing them side by
    > side. It would weigh less than 5oz more. You'd give up some bells
    > and whistles like taking movies. But I think the picture quality
    > would be better than that S100FS. And you *could* change lenses if
    > you wanted to. But the price would be a few hundred more. But you
    > could still use that lens on a different body if you want to upgrade
    > in the future. With the S100FS, your upgrade path is nil. Get rid of
    > the whole thing to get something new.
    >
    > Lot's of tradeoffs, tough decision. But personally, I don't like the
    > S100FS. I'd rather have something better *and* something convenient
    > at the same time and use the right tool for the job at hand instead of
    > something that's trying to be too much. That means 2 cameras, a big
    > full feature DSLR (Nikon D200) and a little, pocket size compact
    > (Canon S400).
    >
    > Steve


    I agree, and wouldn't be happy without both options - SLR and full-function
    point and shoot. (Rebel XT and Canon S3 IS, myself.)

    A quick look at Canon's own line-up of digital cameras seems to point to
    three categories - the digital SLRs, the pocket-sized point and shoots, and
    then these "hybrids". Certainlly, when someone tosses out the phrase "point
    and shoot," I don't normally think of something along the lines of the S3 or
    this new Fuji. I think of something like the Elphs.

    The hybrids answer a specific need. More than a pocket camera, but without
    the complications of interchangable lenses. The focus for the consumer,
    then, is not so much on the sensor, but on the lens - a lens that tries to
    anticipate all situations. (Equivalent to a 28-400mm?!?) We're not after
    great art here (how many times do you hear customers at BestBuy talking
    about purple fringing?), just a capable camera with much more flexibility
    than the standard 3X optical, keep-it-on-Auto pocket snapper.

    I know it's been a LONG time, but for folks who used to be casual
    photographers with film cameras, these hybrids are probably just right.

    dwight
     
    dwight, Mar 8, 2008
    #14
  15. Rich

    measekite Guest

    sally wrote:

    Rich &lt;&gt; wrote in news::



    http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_s100fs/specifi cations/index.html



    The big problem with all those super-zoom P&amp;S cameras is the tiny sensor. Small sensor = reduced sensitivity = lots of noise and poor color range If image quality is important to you, you are much better off with a P&amp;S camera that has a bigger sensor and smaller zoom range. I think there are a few P&amp;S cameras out there with the same size sensors as entry-level DSLRs.

    The Canon S5 IS can produce very good images up to 8.5x11 with controlled to little noise when under ISO200.&nbsp; The color is very good and the photo is very sharp.

    That said I would expect that any 6mp DSLR would do a better job on that size and up.
     
    measekite, Mar 8, 2008
    #15
  16. Olli M. Pousse, Mar 8, 2008
    #16
  17. Rich

    measekite Guest

    sally wrote:

    "Pete Stavrakoglou" &lt;&gt; wrote in news:47d2167b$0$15202$:



    Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image stabilization, two very nice features that interest me.



    According to dpreview.com: Fuji s100fs sensor size: 8.8 x 6.6 mm = Nikon D40 (the cheapest DSLR on the market) sensor size: 23.7 x 15.5 mm The SLR sensor is almost 3 times as big in both directions. The Fuji may be a little better than other P&amp;S cameras, but it is still a far cry from a SLR. Amazon.com sells the Fuji for $800 and the Nikon D40 for $500. The Fuji is also bigger and heavier than the Nikon. There may be a market for the Fuji, but I am not in it.


    You are missing the point of the EVR SuperZoom.&nbsp; One should really have 3 cameras.

    A DSLR when you want to do very serious shooting and you know you are going to enlargement up to 11x18 or so or even larger if you have an Epson 3800 or a Canon EFT5000.

    A SuperZoom is when you want to take good 8,5x11 or 5x7, want to travel light and maybe use on some trips&nbsp; or do some all around shooting.

    A camera like a Canon Digital Elph when you want to take 4x6t and 5x7 snapshots, vacation snaps or family pics when you really do not want to carry a camera at all.&nbsp; Just pull it out of your pocket.&nbsp; And under good lighting you can get a nice 8.5x11.
     
    measekite, Mar 8, 2008
    #17
  18. Rich

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Alfred Molon, Mar 8, 2008
    #18
  19. Rich

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <8ceb9128-f0b9-4ee1-941f-c475988b2508
    @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, says...
    > Sony failed with their R1 (larger
    > sensor, smaller lens range, butt-ugly camera),


    It's highly irrelevant if a camera is ugly or cute. You use it to take
    photos, not to seduce women.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
    http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
     
    Alfred Molon, Mar 8, 2008
    #19
  20. Rich

    Rich Guest

    On Mar 8, 2:31 pm, Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <8ceb9128-f0b9-4ee1-941f-c475988b2508
    > @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, says...
    >
    > > Sony failed with their R1 (larger
    > > sensor, smaller lens range, butt-ugly camera),

    >
    > It's highly irrelevant if a camera is ugly or cute. You use it to take
    > photos, not to seduce women.


    True, but since marketing depts run camera companies, we are stuck.
     
    Rich, Mar 8, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22=28Ctrl=A4+/Alt+=A4/Del=A4+=29=2

    Linux installed-Still a piece of crap

    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22=28Ctrl=A4+/Alt+=A4/Del=A4+=29=2, Mar 4, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    993
    Whiskers
    Mar 8, 2006
  2. Guest
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    732
    Peter
    Jan 23, 2007
  3. Guest
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    601
    Guest
    Jan 23, 2007
  4. Guest
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    452
  5. Rich

    First P&S that may "may" not be a piece of crap?

    Rich, Jul 23, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    814
    John Turco
    Aug 7, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page