S6500FD/S6000FD owners report

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by kinga202NOSPAM@hotmail.com, Jun 13, 2007.

  1. Guest

    For what its worth, i purchased this on Sat., and it will be going
    back to the store for a refund, i purchased it on the sales-term
    condition of having 14 day trial period.

    Its NOT very good, to much noise in the low light photos, to many out
    of focus pictures at full zoom.Needs OIS badly.The A/F hunts badly.

    I tried a few different S6*00FD and already noticed instore that they
    where all like that, not a 1 off issue/faulty unit.

    Way to heavy and large, silly at 600g++, and massive -v- others

    If this is the *best* superzoom on the market the others must be real
    crap

    It does take great photos if you experiment, but no, not if using it
    as a point-shoot mode, if i am going to have to spend 5mins. per shot
    i might as well get a DSLR

    My other Fuji F20 is brilliant compared to this.

    It really is a pretend DSLR

    FAIL

    Cheers

    Kinga 202
     
    , Jun 13, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guest

    On Jun 13, 11:14 am, "" <>
    wrote:
    > For what its worth, i purchased this on Sat., and it will be going
    > back to the store for a refund, i purchased it on the sales-term
    > condition of having 14 day trial period.
    >
    > Its NOT very good, to much noise in the low light photos, to many out
    > of focus pictures at full zoom.Needs OIS badly.The A/F hunts badly.
    >
    > I tried a few different S6*00FD and already noticed instore that they
    > where all like that, not a 1 off issue/faulty unit.
    >
    > Way to heavy and large, silly at 600g++, and massive -v- others
    >
    > If this is the *best* superzoom on the market the others must be real
    > crap
    >
    > It does take great photos if you experiment, but no, not if using it
    > as a point-shoot mode, if i am going to have to spend 5mins. per shot
    > i might as well get a DSLR
    >
    > My other Fuji F20 is brilliant compared to this.
    >
    > It really is a pretend DSLR
    >
    > FAIL
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    > Kinga 202


    More.....

    Just got some photos back from the Lab, 90% have noise and focus
    issues.

    The F20 is much much better and nice and compact

    Its going back, going to get a Panna FZ8 instead

    Cheers

    Kinga 202
     
    , Jun 14, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 20:45:16 -0700, Michael.Pasturi aka kinga wrote:

    > Just got some photos back from the Lab, 90% have noise and focus
    > issues.
    >
    > The F20 is much much better and nice and compact
    >
    > Its going back, going to get a Panna FZ8 instead


    You've been on a perpetual camera opinion see-saw with just about
    every camera you've ever commented upon. I wonder how long it'll
    take for you to grow disenchanted with the FZ8's noise? At least
    the FZ8 uses proprietary, more expensive battery packs, just like
    the F20. Don't forget to pick up a few. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jun 14, 2007
    #3
  4. Guest

    On Jun 14, 2:33 pm, ASAAR <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 20:45:16 -0700, Michael.Pasturi aka kinga wrote:
    > > Just got some photos back from the Lab, 90% have noise and focus
    > > issues.

    >
    > > The F20 is much much better and nice and compact

    >
    > > Its going back, going to get a Panna FZ8 instead

    >
    > You've been on a perpetual camera opinion see-saw with just about
    > every camera you've ever commented upon. I wonder how long it'll
    > take for you to grow disenchanted with the FZ8's noise? At least
    > the FZ8 uses proprietary, more expensive battery packs, just like
    > the F20. Don't forget to pick up a few. :)


    Thanks as always for your fine words.

    In 4 months of F20 ownership have charged it only four times and taken
    1000+ *quality* photos very very impressed with its performance[unlike
    the S6*00SD which is a dud] its also very very frugal on
    batteries.Never required or will purchase a spare battery for the F20,
    no need for it.

    Taken about 150 photos with this new S6*00SD and already been through
    3 sets of 4x AA alk. batteries, it guzzles them.

    Have 2 seperate cell phones and never considered to buy a spare
    battery for either, wont be buying a spare battery for the FZ8, no
    need not going to take 250+ photos in a day!

    Cheers

    M/P
     
    , Jun 14, 2007
    #4
  5. ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:45:29 -0700, wrote:

    >> You've been on a perpetual camera opinion see-saw with just about
    >> every camera you've ever commented upon. I wonder how long it'll
    >> take for you to grow disenchanted with the FZ8's noise? At least
    >> the FZ8 uses proprietary, more expensive battery packs, just like
    >> the F20. Don't forget to pick up a few. :)

    >
    > Thanks as always for your fine words.


    If you don't like the fine words, consider the ridiculous, fanboy
    posts you used to make. Perhaps you're a more serious poster when
    you sign with your name instead of kinga? Based on your S6500 post,
    I think not.


    > In 4 months of F20 ownership have charged it only four times and taken
    > 1000+ *quality* photos very very impressed with its performance[unlike
    > the S6*00SD which is a dud] its also very very frugal on
    > batteries.Never required or will purchase a spare battery for the F20,
    > no need for it.


    The suggestion to "pick up a few" was made 'tongue-in-cheek', and
    was for the FZ8, not the F20. In this I agree with you, that a
    spare Li-Ion battery is often an unecessary relatively expensive
    luxury. Most people to buy on spare though, or so it would seem
    from reading messages here.


    > Taken about 150 photos with this new S6*00SD and already been through
    > 3 sets of 4x AA alk. batteries, it guzzles them.


    It only guzzles them at that rate if you've got a defective
    camera, or you're using it in a manner that would have *any* camera
    guzzling batteries. FWIW, I've compared the CIPA claims in Fuji
    manuals for several of their cameras with the actual battery
    performance, and found the manual to be very accurate. The
    S6000/S6500 is rated to get 200 shots from fresh alkaline batteries
    and 400 shots from NiMH AA cells. This is what the S5100's manual
    claims and when I duplicated the CIPA test I got about 220 shots
    from alkalines. If you got only 50 shots per set of fresh alkaline
    batteries, as I said, you either had a defective camera or you did
    something abnormal such as prefocusing and zooming for 5 minutes for
    every shot you took. BTW, if the S6500 is at all close to the
    S5100/S5500 in battery performance, if you just take outdoor
    pictures with the S6500 and don't use the flash, you'd probably get
    about 800 shots from a set of alkaline batteries.

    Let's see what DPReview found.

    > JPEGs are sharp and punchy and exposure is very reliable., and if
    > you don't like Fuji's approach to image processing you do at least
    > have the option of shooting in CCD-raw mode, though this does of
    > course slow things down. Compared to the F30 we found far less
    > evidence of purple fringing, and far less of a tendency towards
    > exposure errors.


    > As we saw with the F30 the noise advantage of the S6000fd is
    > greatest in the middle of the ISO range. Few cameras have a
    > significant noise problem at 'base' ISO (the lowest setting), and
    > the differences between all most of them is minimal. But most
    > small CCD cameras start to suffer from the problems of noise -
    > and more importantly the destructive effect of noise reduction -
    > once you get to ISO 200 or 400. Here the latest incarnation of
    > Fuji's Super CCD sensor really shines, with ISO 400 and 800 -
    > though still showing evidence of strong noise reduction -
    > considerably better than any conventional CCD competitor.


    and when comparing the Fuji S6000/S6500 with Canon's S3 IS and
    Sony's DSC-H2 for low contrast detail, found :

    > It's only when you look at these 'real world' crops that the real
    > advantage of the Super CCD sensor used in the S6000fd is obvious.
    > With all small CCD compacts we see serious smearing of low
    > contrast detail at ISO 200 (sometimes even lower), but the S6000fd
    > manages to keep plenty of texture at ISO 400, and even ISO 800
    > and 1600 haven't smeared it all away (in fact the noise reduction at
    > 800 and 1600 appears to be very similar; you just get more noise at 1600).


    and then in the studio scene comparisions :

    > Again, the S6000fd's output at ISO 400 isn't that 'clean' - there are
    > visible artefacts, but it is significantly better than the conventional
    > CCD-based H2, which has visible noise and has lost a lot of fine
    > detail to noise reduction. For the average user producing prints the
    > S6000fd's ISO 400 output remains perfectly usable - and compared
    > to most (if not all) of its competitors it's nothing short of amazing.


    and then at ISO 800 :

    > More of the same really; the S6500fd's output is starting to show signs
    > of breaking down, but compared to the H2 it looks clean, clear and
    > detailed. Just like the F30, the S6500fd's output at ISO 800 is
    > considerably better than most of its competitors manage at ISO 400
    > - and some at ISO 200. To have a small-sensor camera capable of
    > producing results that are perfectly usable at ISO 800 is a luxury we have
    > rarely seen before, and something for which Fuji must be congratulated.


    Then comes the resolution test, and you might find this
    interesting since although it doesn't include the Panasonic FZ8, it
    includes the FZ7, along with Canon's S3 IS and Sony's H2. Fuji's
    S6500 produced the best results. Horizontal and Vertical LPH were
    measured at 1,600 and 1,550 vs 1,400 and 1,500 for the FZ7.
    Extinction resolution was 2,050 and 2,100 for the S6500 vs 1,800 and
    1,850 for the FZ7.

    > Although the JPEGs are a bit over-sharpened, and they don't quite
    > match the F30, the S6500fd sets a new standard for resolution in a
    > 6MP 'super zoom' camera, and out-performs cameras with one or
    > even two million more pixels. There's little, if any moiré and only the
    > merest hint of jagginess on 45 degree diagonals, and overall you can't
    > fail to be impressed with a camera that really does squeeze the maximum
    > detail out of 6 million pixels, across the frame.


    Now to the Conclusions page :

    > # Excellent resolution & sharpness
    > # Very good results up to ISO 400, ISO 800 perfectly usable
    > # Class-leading high ISO performance; might not be fantastic, but
    > it's the best you'll get
    > # Very low shutter lag
    > # Comprehensive photographic controls
    > # Excellent battery life


    Huh? I thought that you said that it "guzzles" batteries? But
    then DPReview didn't notice the "noise and focus issues" that you
    complained about either. The conclusions continued with :

    > The demise of Konica Minolta's camera division has left Fuji as the
    > only option for the buyer wanting a fully-featured big-zoom 'bridge'
    > camera with a true wideangle lens. For this reason alone the S6000fd
    > will be on many shortlists; throw in the fact that it shares the universally
    > acclaimed 6.3MP Super CCD sensor found in the F30 and you have a
    > very compelling proposition indeed.
    >
    > And in many ways the S6000fd doesn't disappoint; the resolution is
    > excellent, and at lower ISO settings it puts many of the more popular
    > 'super zoom' models to shame. At ISO 400 and 800 it is quite literally
    > in a class of its own. The high ISO output might not worry the SLR
    > manufacturers (the sheer scale of the difference in sensor sizes puts
    > paid to that), but it is better than most competitors by a fairly wide
    > margin. It's also actually a very nice camera to use, and comes about
    > as near to SLR-handling as any fixed-lens camera ever has - though
    > the user interface could do with a little more work.


    So much for DPReview's evaluation. Now should I believe them, or
    believe you? Hmm. I'll think about it. In the meantime, here's
    some of what DPReview had to say about the FZ8 :

    > Here we see two different cameras with two different sensors but one
    > problem in common; what to do about noise. The Sony approach here
    > is to use fairly light noise reduction, meaning there is visible noise but
    > the color fidelity is still fairly high. Panasonic has done a fine job of
    > removing all the chroma noise, and produced a very clean-looking
    > result, but the color bleeding and overall desaturation is the price paid.
    > It's partly a matter of taste, as neither camera is producing results at
    > ISO 400 you'd want to use for any serious photographic work.


    Ok, it sound like the FZ8 might produce acceptable results if you
    don't push it above ISO 200. And then for a few conclusions :

    > * Some areas of performance actually worse than predecessor
    > * Noise is, as usual, a bit of a problem at lower ISO settings
    > * ISO 400+ noise reduction produces color bleeding and loss of low
    > contrast detail
    > * Default noise reduction too high at all ISO settings (use low NR setting)
    > * Limited dynamic range, highlight clipping in JPEGs
    > * Default contrast a bit on the high side
    > * Occasional (mild) fringing
    > * Occasional focus hunting at long end of zoom in low light and in
    > macro mode
    > * Slight video lag in live preview makes very short shutter lag rather
    > pointless


    But don't worry, it's not all negative, as the conclusions end
    with :

    > If you accept that the size and convenience of this type of product
    > means a certain level of compromise you won't be disappointed.
    > Viewed on-screen at 100% the output often leaves a little to be
    > desired, but for 'normal' use (standard sized prints, full screen
    > viewing) the excellent lens and reliable focus/exposure systems
    > cannot fail to impress. On this basis I think it's safe to say that the
    > FZ8 just about offers enough to earn a qualified Highly
    > Recommended, but I'd urge you to check out the sample images -
    > and decide if you're prepared to shoot raw when it matters and to
    > stick to ISO 100 whenever possible - before deciding.




    > Have 2 seperate cell phones and never considered to buy a spare
    > battery for either, wont be buying a spare battery for the FZ8, no
    > need not going to take 250+ photos in a day!


    Good for you. I don't buy spare batteries for my cell phones
    either. At $40 and $50 they're too expensive. I do the spare
    batteries by buying spare cell phones. The last two spares I bought
    that way ran me only $15 per phone, which naturally included a new
    battery with each phone. They also included a spare charger at no
    extra cost. I don't expect that to work with cameras though. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jun 14, 2007
    #5
  6. wrote:
    []
    > Have 2 seperate cell phones and never considered to buy a spare
    > battery for either, wont be buying a spare battery for the FZ8, no
    > need not going to take 250+ photos in a day!
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    > M/P


    Probably worth getting a spare just in case. I found that (for a
    different Panasonic camera) the spares were widely available and, being a
    relatively standard type, not that high a price.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 14, 2007
    #6
  7. Guest

    On Jun 14, 4:33 pm, ASAAR <> wrote

    Thanks for the detailed reply, and copy of camera tests.

    I only take min. interest in report/review/test on it, i formulate my
    own opinion and run with it.

    I purchased the S6*000FD for the simple reason i have been very happy
    with the F20,& now have a good idea how all the features and settings
    work for this brand, and of course have a 1GB XD card for it.

    Anyway it has turned pear shape, while some reviewers and others are
    satisfied with it i am not, i have it for another week but i cannot
    see it improving, so she is going back.Had another go today, most
    photos are rubbish [a few good ones i admit] so its history for this
    camera with me.

    The FZ8 may/maynot be better, so i *may* forget all about these
    SuperZooms and get a Nikon gray D40x instead, although i would like a
    little play with the Kodak Z712is first.

    The S6*000SD is also WAY to big and heavy, it dwarfs the new breed of
    DSLR's

    Thanks agin!

    M/P
     
    , Jun 15, 2007
    #7
  8. ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 03:26:35 -0700, wrote:

    > Anyway it has turned pear shape, while some reviewers and others
    > are satisfied with it i am not, i have it for another week but i cannot
    > see it improving, so she is going back.Had another go today, most
    > photos are rubbish [a few good ones i admit] so its history for this
    > camera with me.


    If its high ISO noise compares unfavorably with your F20 and
    that's what you're objecting to, the reviews I've seen have noted
    that the S6500's noise processing isn't quite up to the little F##
    models but that loss (and more) is gained back if you shoot RAW.
    But both of them do far better at high ISO than other non-DSLRs.


    > The FZ8 may/maynot be better, so i *may* forget all about these
    > SuperZooms and get a Nikon gray D40x instead, although i would like a
    > little play with the Kodak Z712is first.


    For those who prefer stabilized cameras, the D40x can take
    advantage of Nikon's new 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX, which is
    their first reasonably priced VR lens. At $249 it's 1/3 the price
    of Nikon's other VR DX lens, and complements the 18-55mm kit lens
    very nicely. The non-DX 70-300mm VR lens is only $470 but at 745g
    is more than twice the weight of the 55-200mm's 335grams. What most
    impresses me is how quickly the D50 focuses (the D40x should be the
    same), compared with every P&S I've used. For comparing the FZ8,
    the Z712is and the D40x, I think it might be better to try the D40x
    first, rather than last, and even better to have them all at the
    same time for testing. But I realize that that may not be practical.


    > The S6*000SD is also WAY to big and heavy, it dwarfs the new breed
    > of DSLR's


    It may be way too big compared with many other P&S cameras, but
    it's only slightly heavier than the small DSLRs, and only then when
    they've got very lightweight kit lenses attached. Mount the light
    55-200mm VR on the D40x and it's going to exceed the weight of the
    S6500. At 255g, the non-VR version of the 55-200mm lens would
    probably put the D40x and S6500 on an equal weight basis. Maybe you
    should consider instead the diminutive Olympus E-410? :)


    > Thanks agin!


    You're welcome. Good luck!
     
    ASAAR, Jun 15, 2007
    #8
  9. AAvK Guest

    'Man alive'... I just bought the s6000fd and I am addicted to it! What an awesome
    camera, as well for the money. Of course I am weening myself off the old Nikon
    950 from 1999, and it's 2mp of bad quality... but still, the raw files, any file, from
    the Fuji has been completely perfect, way beyond my expectations.

    --
    }<)))*> Giant_Alex
    cravdraa_at-yahoo_dot-com
    not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/
     
    AAvK, Jun 17, 2007
    #9
  10. Guest

    On Jun 17, 5:12 pm, "AAvK" <> wrote:
    > 'Man alive'... I just bought the s6000fd and I am addicted to it! What an awesome
    > camera, as well for the money. Of course I am weening myself off the old Nikon
    > 950 from 1999, and it's 2mp of bad quality... but still, the raw files, any file, from
    > the Fuji has been completely perfect, way beyond my expectations.
    >
    > --}<)))*> Giant_Alex
    >
    > cravdraa_at-yahoo_dot-com
    > not my site:http://www.e-sword.net/


    I am glad your happy with yours.

    I am [was] NOT with mine, its going back by weeks end, to big, to
    heavy, no OIS, to many blur photos, noise, XD card is slow [no super
    high speed ones] focus hunt , capture rate is slow too, just plain
    junk.

    I am going to get a earlier model Nikon DSLR [D40] with the std.
    supplied lens.

    Currently in Oz they have D40's on a 21 day try_b4_you buy, as a way
    to run them out.

    Failing that go get what i wanted all along, the FZ8 Pana [keeping the
    ISO low] or a Sigma DP1

    AUS
     
    , Jun 18, 2007
    #10
  11. John Turco Guest

    "" wrote:
    >
    > For what its worth, i purchased this on Sat., and it will be going
    > back to the store for a refund, i purchased it on the sales-term
    > condition of having 14 day trial period.
    >
    > Its NOT very good, to much noise in the low light photos, to many out
    > of focus pictures at full zoom.Needs OIS badly.The A/F hunts badly.
    >
    > I tried a few different S6*00FD and already noticed instore that they
    > where all like that, not a 1 off issue/faulty unit.
    >
    > Way to heavy and large, silly at 600g++, and massive -v- others
    >
    > If this is the *best* superzoom on the market the others must be real
    > crap
    >
    > It does take great photos if you experiment, but no, not if using it
    > as a point-shoot mode, if i am going to have to spend 5mins. per shot
    > i might as well get a DSLR
    >
    > My other Fuji F20 is brilliant compared to this.
    >
    > It really is a pretend DSLR
    >
    > FAIL
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    > Kinga 202



    Hello, Michael:

    Get a horse...err, I mean, get a Kodak! :-J


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Jun 22, 2007
    #11
  12. Guest

    On Jun 22, 5:45 pm, John Turco <> wrote:
    > "" wrote:
    >
    > > For what its worth, i purchased this on Sat., and it will be going
    > > back to the store for a refund, i purchased it on the sales-term
    > > condition of having 14 day trial period.

    >
    > > Its NOT very good, to much noise in the low light photos, to many out
    > > of focus pictures at full zoom.Needs OIS badly.The A/F hunts badly.

    >
    > > I tried a few different S6*00FD and already noticed instore that they
    > > where all like that, not a 1 off issue/faulty unit.

    >
    > > Way to heavy and large, silly at 600g++, and massive -v- others

    >
    > > If this is the *best* superzoom on the market the others must be real
    > > crap

    >
    > > It does take great photos if you experiment, but no, not if using it
    > > as a point-shoot mode, if i am going to have to spend 5mins. per shot
    > > i might as well get a DSLR

    >
    > > My other Fuji F20 is brilliant compared to this.

    >
    > > It really is a pretend DSLR

    >
    > > FAIL

    >
    > > Cheers

    >
    > > Kinga 202

    >
    > Hello, Michael:
    >
    > Get a horse...err, I mean, get a Kodak! :-J
    >
    > Cordially,
    > John Turco <>- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Hi J

    I will be gappy to buy a Kodak product, as soon as they make something
    decent.

    The new sensor looks interesting

    Regards

    M/P
     
    , Jun 22, 2007
    #12
  13. John Turco Guest

    wrote:

    <edited, for brevity>

    > > Hello, Michael:
    > >
    > > Get a horse...err, I mean, get a Kodak! :-J
    > >
    > > Cordially,
    > > John Turco <>- Hide quoted text -
    > >
    > > - Show quoted text -

    >
    > Hi J
    >
    > I will be gappy to buy a Kodak product, as soon as they make something
    > decent.
    >
    > The new sensor looks interesting
    >
    > Regards
    >
    > M/P



    Hello, Michael:

    Kodak sells plenty of "decent" digicams, and some of them are far
    better than that. My own P850 and V603 cameras both fall within
    the latter category, for your information.

    C'mon, man, don't be so negative!


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>


    PS: Is "gappy" Australianese, for "happy?" :-D
     
    John Turco, Jun 24, 2007
    #13
    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. Andi Buchner

    Olympus SP550 and Fuji S6500fd samples from ISO 50-5000

    Andi Buchner, Mar 7, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    578
    ASAAR
    Mar 8, 2007
  2. AAvK

    FujiFilm s6000fd, hacking it's OS?

    AAvK, Jun 10, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    424
  3. Ken
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    675
  4. Reetah

    fuji s6000fd/s6500fd -> IR conversion

    Reetah, Dec 29, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,264
    Beladi Nasrallah
    Dec 30, 2007
  5. Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer

    Government Report Faults US Gun Owners for Mexico's Violence

    Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer, Jun 22, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    798
    Bucky Breeder
    Jun 24, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page