Fuji's DSLR killer

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Alfred Molon, Jan 24, 2008.

  1. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Alfred Molon, Jan 24, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Alfred Molon

    Dave Cohen Guest

    Alfred Molon wrote:
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    >
    > 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight


    Apart from the compulsion to engage in the mp race, this looks like a
    very promising alternative to a dslr for at least some of us.
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Jan 24, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Jan 24, 8:27 am, Dave Cohen <> wrote:
    > Alfred Molon wrote:
    > >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp

    >
    > > 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight

    >
    > Apart from the compulsion to engage in the mp race, this looks like a
    > very promising alternative to a dslr for at least some of us.
    > Dave Cohen


    Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?
     
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Jan 24, 2008
    #3
  4. On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 06:40:24 -0800 (PST), Don Stauffer in Minnesota <> wrote:
    > On Jan 24, 8:27 am, Dave Cohen <> wrote:
    >> Alfred Molon wrote:
    >> >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp

    >>
    >> > 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight

    >>
    >> Apart from the compulsion to engage in the mp race, this looks like a
    >> very promising alternative to a dslr for at least some of us.
    >> Dave Cohen

    >
    > Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?


    There's a viewfinder, but looking through the spec sheet at that URL, it
    appears to be electronic, not optical. That's not too surprising; pretty
    much all of the superzooms that have viewfinders have electronic ones.

    -dms
     
    Daniel Silevitch, Jan 24, 2008
    #4
  5. Daniel Silevitch wrote:
    > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 06:40:24 -0800 (PST), Don Stauffer in Minnesota <> wrote:
    >> On Jan 24, 8:27 am, Dave Cohen <> wrote:
    >>> Alfred Molon wrote:
    >>>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    >>>> 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight
    >>> Apart from the compulsion to engage in the mp race, this looks like a
    >>> very promising alternative to a dslr for at least some of us.
    >>> Dave Cohen

    >> Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?

    >
    > There's a viewfinder, but looking through the spec sheet at that URL, it
    > appears to be electronic, not optical. That's not too surprising; pretty
    > much all of the superzooms that have viewfinders have electronic ones.


    IAE, it's not a "DSLR killer". Nor is Canon killing Nikon, nor the reverse.

    Is there any hope for de-escalating comparison creep? A way to express
    oneself without hyperbole? (Rita excluded)

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Jan 24, 2008
    #5
  6. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <66be55f6-720d-4fab-addf-cf175bc795b3
    @s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Don Stauffer in Minnesota says...

    > Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?


    Of course not - how could a non-SLR camera with a 28-400mm lens have an
    optical viewfinder?
    --

    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, Jan 24, 2008
    #6
  7. Alfred Molon

    irwell Guest

    On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:05:45 +0100, Alfred Molon
    <> wrote:

    >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    >
    >2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight



    The swivelling LCD is attractive, lightweight? Not at 2lbs.
    Nor compact at ::
    Weight (no batt) Approx 918g/32.4 oz
    Dimensions 133.4(W)×93.6(H)×150.4(D) mm / 5.3(W)× 3.7(H)× 5.9(D)
    (DP reviews specs)

    Like carrying the Oxford Concise Dictionary about.
     
    irwell, Jan 24, 2008
    #7
  8. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>, irwell says...

    > The swivelling LCD is attractive, lightweight? Not at 2lbs.
    > Nor compact at ::
    > Weight (no batt) Approx 918g/32.4 oz
    > Dimensions 133.4(W)×93.6(H)×150.4(D) mm / 5.3(W)× 3.7(H)× 5.9(D)
    > (DP reviews specs)
    >
    > Like carrying the Oxford Concise Dictionary about.


    Let's say it's more compact and light than a DSLR with a 28-400 lens.
    --

    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, Jan 24, 2008
    #8
  9. Alfred Molon

    JimKramer Guest

    On Jan 24, 1:28 pm, Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <66be55f6-720d-4fab-addf-cf175bc795b3
    > @s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Don Stauffer in Minnesota says...
    >
    > > Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?

    >
    > Of course not - how could a non-SLR camera with a 28-400mm lens have an
    > optical viewfinder?
    > --
    >
    > Alfred Molon
    > ------------------------------
    > Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photo sharing site


    Split prism? Partial mirror? One path to the sensor, one path to the
    optical view finder. It is doable, but not an attractive solution,
    the viewfinder would be dim.
     
    JimKramer, Jan 25, 2008
    #9
  10. Alfred Molon

    dj_nme Guest

    JimKramer wrote:
    > On Jan 24, 1:28 pm, Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >
    >>In article <66be55f6-720d-4fab-addf-cf175bc795b3
    >>@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Don Stauffer in Minnesota says...
    >>
    >>
    >>>Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?

    >>
    >>Of course not - how could a non-SLR camera with a 28-400mm lens have an
    >>optical viewfinder?
    >>--
    >>
    >>Alfred Molon
    >>------------------------------
    >>Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photo sharing site

    >
    >
    > Split prism? Partial mirror? One path to the sensor, one path to the
    > optical view finder. It is doable, but not an attractive solution,
    > the viewfinder would be dim.


    The viewfinder on the Olympus E-10 and E-20 seemed to be fine, in those
    digicams there is a beamsplitter prism.
    It does add to the retail price of the digicam though, as it has two
    extra precision ground glass optical elements (beamsplitter and
    pentaprism) rather than just simply a miniature LCD (which is what's
    inside an EVF).

    Considering that Fuji also has a DSLR camera on offering, I wouldn't be
    terribly surprised if parts of the Fuji S100FS are built down to a price
    (such as a low-res EVF, plastic gear-trains in the focus and zoom
    mechanisms, etc) rather than up to a quality (such as a high-res [KM A2
    styled 300k pixel] EVF, metal chasis, etc).
     
    dj_nme, Jan 25, 2008
    #10
  11. Alfred Molon

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Daniel Silevitch wrote:
    >> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 06:40:24 -0800 (PST), Don Stauffer in Minnesota
    >> <> wrote:
    >>> On Jan 24, 8:27 am, Dave Cohen <> wrote:
    >>>> Alfred Molon wrote:
    >>>>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    >>>>> 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight
    >>>> Apart from the compulsion to engage in the mp race, this looks like a
    >>>> very promising alternative to a dslr for at least some of us.
    >>>> Dave Cohen
    >>> Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?

    >>
    >> There's a viewfinder, but looking through the spec sheet at that URL, it
    >> appears to be electronic, not optical. That's not too surprising; pretty
    >> much all of the superzooms that have viewfinders have electronic ones.

    >
    > IAE, it's not a "DSLR killer". Nor is Canon killing Nikon, nor the
    > reverse.
    >
    > Is there any hope for de-escalating comparison creep? A way to express
    > oneself without hyperbole? (Rita excluded)


    Hmm..... Creep and Rita in the same paragrah? Coincidence?

    Anyway, I agree that comparisons are sometimes silly, but they are
    inevitable. When I look at a camera like the new Fuji, the question is
    simple: "what needs could it fill?" If you have the needs that match the
    camera, fine. If not, get something else. Comparing this to any SLR is a
    waste of time. Just get the best tool for the job.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Jan 25, 2008
    #11
  12. Alfred Molon

    irwell Guest

    On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:29:46 +1100, dj_nme <>
    wrote:

    >JimKramer wrote:
    >> On Jan 24, 1:28 pm, Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>In article <66be55f6-720d-4fab-addf-cf175bc795b3
    >>>@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Don Stauffer in Minnesota says...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Does it have optical TTL viewfinding?
    >>>
    >>>Of course not - how could a non-SLR camera with a 28-400mm lens have an
    >>>optical viewfinder?
    >>>--
    >>>
    >>>Alfred Molon
    >>>------------------------------
    >>>Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photo sharing site

    >>
    >>
    >> Split prism? Partial mirror? One path to the sensor, one path to the
    >> optical view finder. It is doable, but not an attractive solution,
    >> the viewfinder would be dim.

    >
    >The viewfinder on the Olympus E-10 and E-20 seemed to be fine, in those
    >digicams there is a beamsplitter prism.
    >It does add to the retail price of the digicam though, as it has two
    >extra precision ground glass optical elements (beamsplitter and
    >pentaprism) rather than just simply a miniature LCD (which is what's
    >inside an EVF).
    >
    >Considering that Fuji also has a DSLR camera on offering, I wouldn't be
    >terribly surprised if parts of the Fuji S100FS are built down to a price
    >(such as a low-res EVF, plastic gear-trains in the focus and zoom
    >mechanisms, etc) rather than up to a quality (such as a high-res [KM A2
    >styled 300k pixel] EVF, metal chasis, etc).


    Well, they do have to sell their product.
    The $40 Casio plastic time piece does all that the $15000 Cartier
    watch does.
     
    irwell, Jan 25, 2008
    #12
  13. Alfred Molon

    AKT Guest

    Alfred Molon <> wrote:

    : http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    : 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight

    Very interesting indeed. I hope it will lead to a competitive reply
    form Panasonic et al. Its weight is a negative. I would withhold any
    judgment until they announce the price.
     
    AKT, Jan 25, 2008
    #13
  14. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <>, irwell
    > says...
    >
    >> The swivelling LCD is attractive, lightweight? Not at 2lbs.
    >> Nor compact at ::
    >> Weight (no batt) Approx 918g/32.4 oz
    >> Dimensions 133.4(W)×93.6(H)×150.4(D) mm / 5.3(W)× 3.7(H)× 5.9(D)
    >> (DP reviews specs)
    >>
    >> Like carrying the Oxford Concise Dictionary about.

    >
    > Let's say it's more compact and light than a DSLR with a 28-400 lens.


    ... but if you need 28 - 400mm, there are even more compact and lighter
    cameras.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 25, 2008
    #14
  15. Alfred Molon

    bugbear Guest

    irwell wrote:
    >
    > Well, they do have to sell their product.
    > The $40 Casio plastic time piece does all that the $15000 Cartier
    > watch does.


    Rubbish! The Casio is more accurate.

    Of course, the actual purpose of wearing the Cartier
    is to tell people how rich you are.

    When you want to know the time, you'd ask your valet.

    BugBear
     
    bugbear, Jan 25, 2008
    #15
  16. Alfred Molon

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:00:02 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    >> Let's say it's more compact and light than a DSLR with a 28-400 lens.

    >
    > .. but if you need 28 - 400mm, there are even more compact and
    > lighter cameras.


    If you don't mind their smaller sensors. It looks like an
    interesting camera, and in addition, doesn't use those little
    cylindrical batteries that you so abhor! :)
     
    ASAAR, Jan 25, 2008
    #16
  17. bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
    > irwell wrote:
    >>
    >> Well, they do have to sell their product.
    >> The $40 Casio plastic time piece does all that the $15000 Cartier
    >> watch does.


    > Rubbish! The Casio is more accurate.


    > Of course, the actual purpose of wearing the Cartier
    > is to tell people how rich you are.


    > When you want to know the time, you'd ask your valet.


    Reminds me of a nice cartoon on an old aristocratic gent slumped in
    armchair with a butler hovering over him.

    "You rang sir?"

    "Yes, Smithers. Shake my hand. My watch has stopped."

    Going back to the Casio, not only will the Casio be more accurate, but
    if you get one of their specially ruggedised models, it will also be
    tougher, more waterproof, and so on. For all practical timekeeping
    purposes it's a much better watch. The one area where it simply cannot
    compete with the Cartier is in looking expensive.

    --
    Chris Malcolm DoD #205
    IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
    [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 25, 2008
    #17
  18. AKT wrote:
    > Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >
    > : http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    > : 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight
    >
    > Very interesting indeed. I hope it will lead to a competitive reply
    > form Panasonic et al. Its weight is a negative. I would withhold any
    > judgment until they announce the price.

    I am currently dreaming of an bridge camera with a *very high
    resolution* (at least 2,5 mpix) electronic oled viewfinder.
    This one could be b/w, it would not hurt.
    It should also have a Leica compatible lens mount.
    Make it affordable and it is THE hit.

    Laszlo
     
    Laszlo Lebrun, Jan 25, 2008
    #18
  19. Alfred Molon

    dj_nme Guest

    Laszlo Lebrun wrote:
    > AKT wrote:
    >
    >> Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >>
    >> : http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp
    >> : 2/3" sensor, 11MP, IS, 28-400mm zoom, compact and lightweight
    >>
    >> Very interesting indeed. I hope it will lead to a competitive reply
    >> form Panasonic et al. Its weight is a negative. I would withhold any
    >> judgment until they announce the price.

    >
    > I am currently dreaming of an bridge camera with a *very high
    > resolution* (at least 2,5 mpix) electronic oled viewfinder.
    > This one could be b/w, it would not hurt.
    > It should also have a Leica compatible lens mount.
    > Make it affordable and it is THE hit.
    >
    > Laszlo


    Leica R (SLR) or Leica M (RF) or Leica m39 (RF)?
    Leica RF lenses I feel may be impractical for an EVIL (electronic
    viewfinder interchangable lens) camera, as they are always stopped down
    to taking apeture and could make the image on the sensor too dark for
    contrast detection focusing and an EVF a bit dark or rather noisey (as
    the image signal may need to be amplified for viewing).
    Leica R mount would be do-able, it's just that the mount-to-sensor
    distance is about 45mm (about 1 3/4"), so it couldn't be that much more
    compact than (for example) Pentax *ist-DS or K100D or Nikon D40 or D40x
    DSRL cameras.
    A shame really, but a new lensmount and lenses might need to be designed
    from scratch to make a compact EVIL camera.
    The result may be similar to the Leica M mount (bayonet &
    mount-to-sensor distance), except with electrical contacts (like Pentax
    KA) and my not be really compatible at all with Leica M lenses.

    I've been pondering this idea on and off for a few years now.
    Also, on the dpreview.com forums a member by the name of "chuxter" has
    an "evil camera design project" thread running and a website at
    <http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/>.
     
    dj_nme, Jan 25, 2008
    #19
  20. dj_nme wrote:

    > Leica R (SLR) or Leica M (RF) or Leica m39 (RF)?
    > Leica RF lenses I feel may be impractical for an EVIL (electronic
    > viewfinder interchangable lens) camera, as they are always stopped down
    > to taking apeture and could make the image on the sensor too dark for
    > contrast detection focusing and an EVF a bit dark or rather noisey (as
    > the image signal may need to be amplified for viewing).

    IMHO it should be based on Leica M to be able to use the available
    lenses. Taking aperture is not a critical aspect, since if you have not
    enough light to operate the viewer, you would probably have not have
    enough light for the picture either. The signal at continuous view is
    significantly better than on an instant picture.
    The sensors are quite sensible, up to night view...

    Regarding contrast detection focusing, autofocus and all those new
    features, one could be able to find a contact field keeping the
    compatibility with old Leica lenses without the modern gimmicks and
    enable AF, VR and more...

    A 10 Mpix sensor, 2,5 Mpix B/W viewer with 1:1 center field upon
    activation, whouaw! That would have been an "evil" camera to bring the
    heaven to more than only me, isn't it?

    Laszlo
     
    Laszlo Lebrun, Jan 25, 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. JB

    Advice please: DSLR or DSLR-style?

    JB, Oct 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    625
    Siddhartha Jain
    Oct 21, 2004
  2. Guest
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    1,480
    Patrick Boch
    Mar 18, 2005
  3. Alan Browne

    [DSLR] rpd.slr-systems is _the_ place for DSLR discussion

    Alan Browne, Apr 7, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    41
    Views:
    994
    David J Taylor
    Apr 14, 2005
  4. RED
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    931
  5. RED
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    884
Loading...

Share This Page