Fuji F10 / Canon SD300 (Another Dazed and Confused P&S Tyre Kicker)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by peter.cant@gmail.com, Jun 16, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Hi Everyone,

    Could any Fujifilm F10 user's clear up a couple of minor points
    regarding operation of this camera?

    I am considering purchasing this beast as most of the reviews I've read
    seem positive -- I guess you could summarise them as -- great
    capabilities for a P&S camera, but perhaps the occasional rough edge.

    In particular the review at
    http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=ht...jifilm-FinePix-F10-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
    seemed to say that if you used the camera in complete Auto mode, or
    even with ISO set to "Auto", the camera's pictures came out noisier
    than desirable, and that to take advantage of the camera's undoubted
    capabilities, you should be setting the ISO manually.

    Could anyone comment:
    (A) Is this fair comment for fully Auto mode?
    (B) Is this fair comment for ISO mode set to "Auto"?
    (C) how do you go about selecting appropriate ISO modes manually
    (should I say be carrying a light metre about, is it something that'll
    come instinctively after my first 10,000 shots, or am I overdramatising
    the difficulties of selecting the correct virtual film speed?)

    (D) At a more pedestrian level can you take a photo notice it's crap
    and delete it instantly, or do you have to enter the camera's picture
    review mode to see and delete the most recent photo?

    (E) Does it have a "stitch" mode to help you take multiple landscape
    shots and later stitch them together into one wide shot?

    My summarry of the camera's good and bad points (well the ones that
    mattered at all to me) came out like this:
    Pro: Good Lowlight setting
    Good MegaPixels
    Quick Shutter response
    Good flash
    USB2

    Con: Expensive XD Memory
    Fiddly connexion to power/computer
    Fiddly menus
    Fiddly buttons
    No View Finder

    (F) Any comments?

    Finally -- the one I'm most comparing it to is the Canon SD300 (AKA
    IXUS 40). Similar price and the reviews seem to imply that they're
    image quality is comparable (Fuji better resolution in Superfine mode,
    colours a little flatter and a tiny bit less true). I guess it would
    be a trade off of lowlight shooting, and higher megapixel's vs,
    convenience of smaller size.

    (G) Any comments on this comparison?

    Thanx for any help you can offer.

    --Peter
     
    , Jun 16, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ASAAR Guest

    On 15 Jun 2005 17:35:31 -0700, wrote:

    > (C) how do you go about selecting appropriate ISO modes manually
    > (should I say be carrying a light metre about, is it something that'll
    > come instinctively after my first 10,000 shots, or am I overdramatising
    > the difficulties of selecting the correct virtual film speed?)


    If the F10 is like other Fuji camera's I've seen, there's an easy
    to get to menu option that lets you choose between Auto and any of
    the other ISO values that camera allows. It should take less than 5
    seconds to change, and you'd not need a light meter to decide when
    the change it. You'd probably want to use a low ISO (such as 100)
    most of the time, only changing it to a higher ISO such as 400, 800
    or 1600 when there's very little light. The setting to use should
    become instinctive well before you take 10,000 shots. Probably much
    less than 50 shots. If you're uncertain, just put the camera in
    PLAY mode and look at the picture you took. If it's very dark, you
    need a higher ISO. If it's not dark, but possibly not sharp due to
    camera movement because a long shutter speed was needed (1/30th
    second or longer), again, use a higher ISO.
     
    ASAAR, Jun 16, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    Thanks for that -- I understand the principals behind when to pick fast
    and when to pick slow -- I just worry about my ability to pick the
    correct 'speed' from amoungst the five. But I'm reassured by your
    comment that I shoud be able to make intelligent selections fairly
    quickly.

    I suppose I'm also wondering if I'm silly to buy a camera which
    apparently has great ability but not the smarts to automatically
    deliver them (if that's the case).

    I'm also a little apprehensive about the ability of the LCD to show me
    whether I've got it right or not -- my experience with my old camera
    was that you could get what appeared to be a great looking picture on a
    1.5" LCD, but contained defects only apparent when viewed on a monitor
    or printed out.
     
    , Jun 16, 2005
    #3
  4. ASAAR Guest

    On 15 Jun 2005 22:51:56 -0700, wrote:

    > I suppose I'm also wondering if I'm silly to buy a camera which
    > apparently has great ability but not the smarts to automatically
    > deliver them (if that's the case).
    >
    > I'm also a little apprehensive about the ability of the LCD to show me
    > whether I've got it right or not -- my experience with my old camera
    > was that you could get what appeared to be a great looking picture on a
    > 1.5" LCD, but contained defects only apparent when viewed on a monitor
    > or printed out.


    The F10 is a very tempting camera due to it's low light
    capability, but I also don't care for any cameras that have no
    viewfinder. That doesn't mean that having only an LCD prevents
    cameras from being able to show whether objects are focused
    accurately or not, since some cameras not only have fairly high
    resolution displays but also allow the center portion of the display
    or electronic viewfinder to zoom in. I don't think the F10 does
    that. Also, whatever Fuji developed for the F10 is sure to be used
    in future cameras, and I'm sure that eventually, probably before the
    end of the year, other similarly sensitive cameras will be available
    that allow for greater manual control. The F10 is a bit too
    simpleminded for my taste, and I'm sure I'd regret getting one when
    a more capable sibling is released.

    About your last point - I also wouldn't want a camera that
    produces pictures whose defects (such as inaccurate focus) couldn't
    be detected until printed or viewed on a computer. But I wouldn't
    blame a 1.5" display for that. Even a 2.5" display probably
    wouldn't be good enough to prevent later disappointment. Much
    better would be to have a camera designed to focus reliably, both
    quickly and accurately. If it did that even a 1.5" display might be
    more than adequate.
     
    ASAAR, Jun 16, 2005
    #4
  5. Jane Guest

    On 15 Jun 2005 17:35:31 -0700, wrote:

    >Hi Everyone,
    >
    >Could any Fujifilm F10 user's clear up a couple of minor points
    >regarding operation of this camera?
    >
    >I am considering purchasing this beast as most of the reviews I've read
    >seem positive --


    me too, I'm considering the casio z750 also, for the size and mpeg4 video
    feature.

    >I guess you could summarise them as -- great
    >capabilities for a P&S camera, but perhaps the occasional rough edge.
    >
    >In particular the review at
    >http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=ht...jifilm-FinePix-F10-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
    > seemed to say that if you used the camera in complete Auto mode, or
    >even with ISO set to "Auto", the camera's pictures came out noisier
    >than desirable, and that to take advantage of the camera's undoubted
    >capabilities, you should be setting the ISO manually.


    the test photos at dpreview seem to show more resolution than even 7MP
    cameras. At ISO 1600 it seems to lose resolution though.
    >
    >Could anyone comment:
    > (A) Is this fair comment for fully Auto mode?
    > (B) Is this fair comment for ISO mode set to "Auto"?
    > (C) how do you go about selecting appropriate ISO modes manually
    >(should I say be carrying a light metre about, is it something that'll
    >come instinctively after my first 10,000 shots, or am I overdramatising
    >the difficulties of selecting the correct virtual film speed?)
    >

    I think you'd basically guess based on the prevailing light etc.
    I was interested in whether the low noise is really just due to some
    software processing that you could do in photoshop anyway, such that the
    camera really doesn't have any intrinsic low light capability?

    >(D) At a more pedestrian level can you take a photo notice it's crap
    >and delete it instantly, or do you have to enter the camera's picture
    >review mode to see and delete the most recent photo?
    >

    you can download the manual for it online about a 6mb pdf. you can do it
    on an old fuji mx1700.

    >(E) Does it have a "stitch" mode to help you take multiple landscape
    >shots and later stitch them together into one wide shot?
    >

    it would be much better to do that in a special purpose software app, which
    can take care of distortions, colour/exposure discrepancies etc. that would
    make the stitch obvious.

    >My summarry of the camera's good and bad points (well the ones that
    >mattered at all to me) came out like this:
    > Pro: Good Lowlight setting


    wish I knew if this was genuine advantage.

    > Good MegaPixels


    possibly highest resolution of any 6 or 7 mp p&s camera judging by the
    dpreview site.

    > Quick Shutter response


    similar to some other 7mp cameras

    > Good flash


    > USB2
    >
    > Con: Expensive XD Memory


    thought it was roughly comparable in price to other formats?

    > Fiddly connexion to power/computer
    > Fiddly menus
    > Fiddly buttons


    probably all small cameras somewhat fiddly?

    > No View Finder
    >
    >(F) Any comments?
    >
    >Finally -- the one I'm most comparing it to is the Canon SD300 (AKA
    >IXUS 40).


    possibly more comparable to sd500 - eg. similar video capability, and
    resolution.

    >Similar price and the reviews seem to imply that they're
    >image quality is comparable (Fuji better resolution in Superfine mode,
    >colours a little flatter and a tiny bit less true). I guess it would
    >be a trade off of lowlight shooting, and higher megapixel's vs,
    >convenience of smaller size.
    >
    >(G) Any comments on this comparison?
    >


    >Thanx for any help you can offer.
    >

    unfortunately for me the f10 is really quite ugly and naff looking compared
    to sd500, casio z750, and others.
    the f10 is cheaper in the uk than 7mp cameras, and even cheaper than the
    fuji 610, which I would think it is definitely better than.


    >--Peter
     
    Jane, Jun 16, 2005
    #5
  6. Jane Guest

    On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 02:58:56 -0400, ASAAR <> wrote:

    >On 15 Jun 2005 22:51:56 -0700, wrote:
    >
    >> I suppose I'm also wondering if I'm silly to buy a camera which
    >> apparently has great ability but not the smarts to automatically
    >> deliver them (if that's the case).
    >>
    >> I'm also a little apprehensive about the ability of the LCD to show me
    >> whether I've got it right or not -- my experience with my old camera
    >> was that you could get what appeared to be a great looking picture on a
    >> 1.5" LCD, but contained defects only apparent when viewed on a monitor
    >> or printed out.

    >
    > The F10 is a very tempting camera due to it's low light
    >capability, but I also don't care for any cameras that have no
    >viewfinder. That doesn't mean that having only an LCD prevents
    >cameras from being able to show whether objects are focused
    >accurately or not,


    the viewfinder can't either though, surely?

    >since some cameras not only have fairly high
    >resolution displays but also allow the center portion of the display
    >or electronic viewfinder to zoom in. I don't think the F10 does
    >that.


    I don't think so either. the casio z750 can, I think. and the f10 does not
    have spot focusing/metering iirc..

    >Also, whatever Fuji developed for the F10 is sure to be used
    >in future cameras, and I'm sure that eventually, probably before the
    >end of the year, other similarly sensitive cameras will be available
    >that allow for greater manual control. The F10 is a bit too
    >simpleminded for my taste, and I'm sure I'd regret getting one when
    >a more capable sibling is released.


    the f810 also has 6mp sensor, combining cells with two different
    sensitivities don't know whether the f10 or f810 has the most advanced
    sensor.
    >
    > About your last point - I also wouldn't want a camera that
    >produces pictures whose defects (such as inaccurate focus) couldn't
    >be detected until printed or viewed on a computer. But I wouldn't
    >blame a 1.5" display for that. Even a 2.5" display probably
    >wouldn't be good enough to prevent later disappointment. Much
    >better would be to have a camera designed to focus reliably, both
    >quickly and accurately. If it did that even a 1.5" display might be
    >more than adequate.
     
    Jane, Jun 16, 2005
    #6
  7. Guest

    Thanx for your comments Jane,

    snap - I was also tempted by the z750 but I decided I was succumbing to
    mission creep -- all I'm trying to is replace my (lost) 2MP Canon A60,
    which I loved -- perhaps I didn't know any better -- but with a decent
    movie mode. The Ixus 40 seemed to fit the bill, but given the F10
    seemed to cost pretty well the same & had the ISO 1600 it seemed insane
    not to consider it. But is it really ready for prime time?

    Just a few random points
    - by stitch mode, I mean a mode that helps you take the appropriate
    set of photos for later stitching together by showing you a bit of the
    one picture so you can align the subsequent one (umm, is that at all
    comprehensible?).
    - Whether the high ISO is done in hardware or software is probably
    immaterial -- my attitude is the camera is the appropriate place for it
    to be done. What's done instantly in the camera would take you 5
    minutes (say) in post processing -- multiply by a thousand photos...
    - It's probably just personal bias having owned a Canon, I find the
    Canon a whole lot less fiddly and more straightforward than the F10.

    Decisions, decisions...

    --Peter
     
    , Jun 16, 2005
    #7
  8. Jane Guest

    On 15 Jun 2005 17:35:31 -0700, wrote:

    >Hi Everyone,
    >
    >Could any Fujifilm F10 user's clear up a couple of minor points
    >regarding operation of this camera?
    >
    >I am considering purchasing this beast as most of the reviews I've read
    >seem positive -- I guess you could summarise them as -- great
    >capabilities for a P&S camera, but perhaps the occasional rough edge.
    >
    >In particular the review at
    >http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=ht...jifilm-FinePix-F10-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
    > seemed to say that if you used the camera in complete Auto mode, or
    >even with ISO set to "Auto", the camera's pictures came out noisier
    >than desirable, and that to take advantage of the camera's undoubted
    >capabilities, you should be setting the ISO manually.
    >

    I read that too, and was not quite sure I understood it. I guess it means
    the camera increased the ISO to a higher level than one would have chosen
    manually, otherwise it's hard for me to understand what is making the
    difference
     
    Jane, Jun 16, 2005
    #8
  9. ASAAR Guest

    On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:31:05 GMT, Jane wrote:

    > That doesn't mean that having only an LCD prevents
    > >cameras from being able to show whether objects are focused
    > >accurately or not,

    >
    > the viewfinder can't either though, surely?


    If it's an EVF it can. Some of them have far more pixels than the
    LCD display. I believe one example is Minolta's A2.


    > the f810 also has 6mp sensor, combining cells with two different
    > sensitivities don't know whether the f10 or f810 has the most advanced
    > sensor.


    Are you sure about that? I thought that it had Fuji's standard
    Super CCD sensor design that has been around for some time. This
    one interpolates its 6 megapixels into a 12mp image. I think that
    Fuji's slightly newer E550 (as well as the older S7000) uses the
    same sensor, although it doesn't have the F810's widescreen
    capability. In my opinion, the F10's sensor, whether more advanced
    or not, is more desirable, given its greater usable sensitivity, up
    to ISO 1600. And one F10 review I read (I don't recall where but
    I'm pretty sure it wasn't at dpreview.com) claimed to measure the
    pixels in the image, and concluded that the F10's 6mp sensor
    provided a bit more detail than that of several other manufacturer's
    7mp cameras.
     
    ASAAR, Jun 16, 2005
    #9
  10. Jane Guest

    On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:19:11 -0400, ASAAR <> wrote:

    >On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:31:05 GMT, Jane wrote:
    >


    >
    >> the f810 also has 6mp sensor, combining cells with two different
    >> sensitivities don't know whether the f10 or f810 has the most advanced
    >> sensor.

    >
    > Are you sure about that? I thought that it had Fuji's standard
    >Super CCD sensor design that has been around for some time. This
    >one interpolates its 6 megapixels into a 12mp image. I think that
    >Fuji's slightly newer E550 (as well as the older S7000) uses the
    >same sensor, although it doesn't have the F810's widescreen
    >capability.


    my mistake, I think you're quite right. It's the f700/710 that has it, but
    it's lower resolution. (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf810/
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf700/)

    >In my opinion, the F10's sensor, whether more advanced
    >or not, is more desirable, given its greater usable sensitivity, up
    >to ISO 1600. And one F10 review I read (I don't recall where but
    >I'm pretty sure it wasn't at dpreview.com) claimed to measure the
    >pixels in the image, and concluded that the F10's 6mp sensor
    >provided a bit more detail than that of several other manufacturer's
    >7mp cameras.


    I remember seeing that too and it seems to be backed up by dpreview.com's
    comparisons.
     
    Jane, Jun 16, 2005
    #10
  11. On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:19:11 -0400, ASAAR <> wrote:

    >capability. In my opinion, the F10's sensor, whether more advanced
    >or not, is more desirable, given its greater usable sensitivity, up
    >to ISO 1600. And one F10 review I read (I don't recall where but
    >I'm pretty sure it wasn't at dpreview.com) claimed to measure the
    >pixels in the image, and concluded that the F10's 6mp sensor
    >provided a bit more detail than that of several other manufacturer's
    >7mp cameras.


    I think you mean this review
    http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Fujifilm-FinePix-F10-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm

    --
    regards
    Vidar Grønvold
     
    Vidar Grønvold, Jun 17, 2005
    #11
  12. ASAAR Guest

    ASAAR, Jun 18, 2005
    #12
    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. Mark Peterson

    Dazed and Confused Flashback Edition

    Mark Peterson, Nov 11, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    560
    Mark Peterson
    Nov 12, 2004
  2. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    516
    DVD Verdict
    Dec 7, 2004
  3. Sid

    Dazed and Confused flashback

    Sid, Dec 14, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    523
    MFalc1
    Dec 20, 2004
  4. J Rusnak
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    638
    J Rusnak
    Dec 28, 2006
  5. revbiff

    Dazed and confused

    revbiff, Jan 22, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    740
    Richard Parkin
    Jan 23, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page