Fuji S2 users...waiting for the S3?
By Lizzy - usenet poster
In my ongoing search for the best camera that (my) money can buyI now
come to the Fujis. There is a new S3 coming soon. From my first reading of
the specs it seems to be a much different camera than the S2. Am I right
that the honeycomb sensor is gone now in favor of a 2 sized effect. I don't
know how to describe it as its very different from anything else out there.
What other cameras have used this? How well does it work?
The image size is impressive...and I will buy on the basis of image
quality...and price. Tell me morelikewhere is it?
--
Thanks,
Gene Palmiter
freebridge design group
freebridge magazine
Solution #1
posted on Aug 02, 2007
Powe33 - usenet poster
Rank:
Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
...
The D2H is an extremely well designed photographic tool. Professional grade
in virtually all handling and design aspects, and, although I really liked
my S2 Pro, it's body, ergonomic, and subsystems really suffer by comparison
to the D2H. Not surprising considering that the Fuji is based on the
consumer-grade N80 body and the D2H is professional all the way. If you get
a chance to handle one side by side with the S2 Pro, I am confident you will
be impressed with the difference.
I have made a few 20x30 size prints from JPEGs sent to Ofoto and the
sharpness, contrast, and saturation are excellent. With 8x10 prints, I
simply cannot tell the difference between uncropped S2 photos I've taken and
the D2H shots. I typically shoot NEF, open them in Nikon Capture 4.01 for
exposure and white balance adjustment if necessary. I send them from NC to
Photoshop 7.01 as TIFFs for cropping and resizing. It's rare that I add any
USM, but if I do, I do so in PS. It's worth noting that Nikon Capture is a
VASTLY superior tool for RAW. I found RAW EX for the Fuji to be one of the
clunkiest pieces of photographic software I've ever used and it made working
with RAW files cumbersome, to say the least.
The D2H has a larger pixel pitch than the S2 Pro, or other 6mp cameras which
offsets the difference in total megapixels. The place where the 4mp sensor
is limiting is that you have to be a little more judicious in cropping the
D2H images. You don't have as much latitude. Noise at ISOs up to 800 has not
been a problem for me. At ISOs 800 and above, you have to be more careful
about exposure than with the S2 Pro because if you underexpose, you'll get
noticeable noise in the darker shadows.
The real difference, for my photographic purposes, is in the focusing and
metering. The S2 Pro does fine if you're shooting landscapes, wedding or
doing studio work, ie...posed shots without any action, and you have time to
fiddle with the setup. The D2H AF system is unbelievably fast, and (unlike
the Fuji) the dynamic autofocus modes actually work. If you're shooting
sports, or even action shots like your 2 year-old toddling toward you, the
D2H works great. You don't have to fiddle, the operation of the camera is
intuitive and fast. The D2H relieves you of having to think about working
the camera...you can think more about the shot. Yes, someone here mentioned
that a REAL photographer would have no trouble with the S2 Pro. I agree with
that. For me, I prefer the accurate focus and exposure, and very flexible
menus of the D2H so that I don't have to fiddle. I can absolutely say that
the number of in-focus, well exposed shots for me has gone WAY up with the
D2H. The S2 Pro just couldn't uniformly hack the kind of photography I
wanted to do. It is far easier to get good shots with the D2H, in my
experience.
So far, the limitations of the D2H have not intruded on my photography
nearly as much as the S2 Pro's limitations affected me. I haven't felt
handicapped by the 4 megapixel limit so far. If and when I do, I'll switch
up to the D2X when it's available, assuming it uses the same body and
subsystems as the D2H, and has reasonable frame rates.
The are MANY focus issues reported on the S2 Pro, easily found on DP Review
in the Fuji SLR forum. Likewise a review of the D100/D1/D2 forum on DP
Review will provide many insights into the practical limitations of the D2H,
along with many, many stunning photographs. Go see for yourself.
HMc
The D2H is an extremely well designed photographic tool. Professional grade
in virtually all handling and design aspects, and, although I really liked
my S2 Pro, it's body, ergonomic, and subsystems really suffer by comparison
to the D2H. Not surprising considering that the Fuji is based on the
consumer-grade N80 body and the D2H is professional all the way. If you get
a chance to handle one side by side with the S2 Pro, I am confident you will
be impressed with the difference.
I have made a few 20x30 size prints from JPEGs sent to Ofoto and the
sharpness, contrast, and saturation are excellent. With 8x10 prints, I
simply cannot tell the difference between uncropped S2 photos I've taken and
the D2H shots. I typically shoot NEF, open them in Nikon Capture 4.01 for
exposure and white balance adjustment if necessary. I send them from NC to
Photoshop 7.01 as TIFFs for cropping and resizing. It's rare that I add any
USM, but if I do, I do so in PS. It's worth noting that Nikon Capture is a
VASTLY superior tool for RAW. I found RAW EX for the Fuji to be one of the
clunkiest pieces of photographic software I've ever used and it made working
with RAW files cumbersome, to say the least.
The D2H has a larger pixel pitch than the S2 Pro, or other 6mp cameras which
offsets the difference in total megapixels. The place where the 4mp sensor
is limiting is that you have to be a little more judicious in cropping the
D2H images. You don't have as much latitude. Noise at ISOs up to 800 has not
been a problem for me. At ISOs 800 and above, you have to be more careful
about exposure than with the S2 Pro because if you underexpose, you'll get
noticeable noise in the darker shadows.
The real difference, for my photographic purposes, is in the focusing and
metering. The S2 Pro does fine if you're shooting landscapes, wedding or
doing studio work, ie...posed shots without any action, and you have time to
fiddle with the setup. The D2H AF system is unbelievably fast, and (unlike
the Fuji) the dynamic autofocus modes actually work. If you're shooting
sports, or even action shots like your 2 year-old toddling toward you, the
D2H works great. You don't have to fiddle, the operation of the camera is
intuitive and fast. The D2H relieves you of having to think about working
the camera...you can think more about the shot. Yes, someone here mentioned
that a REAL photographer would have no trouble with the S2 Pro. I agree with
that. For me, I prefer the accurate focus and exposure, and very flexible
menus of the D2H so that I don't have to fiddle. I can absolutely say that
the number of in-focus, well exposed shots for me has gone WAY up with the
D2H. The S2 Pro just couldn't uniformly hack the kind of photography I
wanted to do. It is far easier to get good shots with the D2H, in my
experience.
So far, the limitations of the D2H have not intruded on my photography
nearly as much as the S2 Pro's limitations affected me. I haven't felt
handicapped by the 4 megapixel limit so far. If and when I do, I'll switch
up to the D2X when it's available, assuming it uses the same body and
subsystems as the D2H, and has reasonable frame rates.
The are MANY focus issues reported on the S2 Pro, easily found on DP Review
in the Fuji SLR forum. Likewise a review of the D100/D1/D2 forum on DP
Review will provide many insights into the practical limitations of the D2H,
along with many, many stunning photographs. Go see for yourself.
HMc
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #2
posted on Aug 02, 2007
paulrmc - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
I think I qualify! When I got my E-10 some years ago the manual went to bed
with me for a week along with the camera and my fingers learned where every
button was positioned and I knew what every feature of every menu did. As a
kid I had a camera in my hand every chance I gotand its been that way
for over 40 years. My skills are rather decent.
We have a local art/commercial photographer named Larry Fink. He has a farm
where a group of mostly girls do his printing. They are all very much under
his influence. They had discussed amongst themselves about how digital would
never be good enough to beat filmand then they saw what I was creating.
I know it doesn't match film...my cam is only 4mp...but it was far better
than they had convinced themselves was possible...and that was a few years
ago. I expect that my next camera will put out work that matches their
medium formatin fact I insist upon it! That is why I am doing the
research. I think I will need at least 12 mpand there are only a few
cameras out there that will do it. Kodak is having image quality problems,
the Canon is way over priced, the Sigma puts out a large file...but it's
only as good as a 6 mp so it's out. Now I am checking out the Fuji S3. The
numbers are goodhow it gets there doesn't matter as long as I end up
with a quality image. I also like the extended range they are trying for. If
the S3 is everything Fuji hopes it to be it might well be my next camera. It
looks promising.
As for digital being better than film some daydigital will never beat
filmbecause you can always get a bigger piece of film. But, digital
already beats 110some, the 6 mps beat 35 mm, 12-14 mp should match
medium format. Maybe someday digital will match 4x5 sheet film. I cannot
imagine there will ever be a digital that will match a contact print from a
well done 20x24 camerabut if there is it won't take a truck to move it
like for the 20x24 film cameras. And that is where digital has already
wonit's more convenient to shoot and process. I work for a monthly arts
newspaper...it has taken a couple of years to bring them around, but now
they prefer digital over filmyou just get where you need to be faster.
Now people with film cameras for their own use have digitals for work.
So...in that way digital has beaten filmits good enough to get that job
done. The better cameras (12-14 mp) can do most studio work.
with me for a week along with the camera and my fingers learned where every
button was positioned and I knew what every feature of every menu did. As a
kid I had a camera in my hand every chance I gotand its been that way
for over 40 years. My skills are rather decent.
We have a local art/commercial photographer named Larry Fink. He has a farm
where a group of mostly girls do his printing. They are all very much under
his influence. They had discussed amongst themselves about how digital would
never be good enough to beat filmand then they saw what I was creating.
I know it doesn't match film...my cam is only 4mp...but it was far better
than they had convinced themselves was possible...and that was a few years
ago. I expect that my next camera will put out work that matches their
medium formatin fact I insist upon it! That is why I am doing the
research. I think I will need at least 12 mpand there are only a few
cameras out there that will do it. Kodak is having image quality problems,
the Canon is way over priced, the Sigma puts out a large file...but it's
only as good as a 6 mp so it's out. Now I am checking out the Fuji S3. The
numbers are goodhow it gets there doesn't matter as long as I end up
with a quality image. I also like the extended range they are trying for. If
the S3 is everything Fuji hopes it to be it might well be my next camera. It
looks promising.
As for digital being better than film some daydigital will never beat
filmbecause you can always get a bigger piece of film. But, digital
already beats 110some, the 6 mps beat 35 mm, 12-14 mp should match
medium format. Maybe someday digital will match 4x5 sheet film. I cannot
imagine there will ever be a digital that will match a contact print from a
well done 20x24 camerabut if there is it won't take a truck to move it
like for the 20x24 film cameras. And that is where digital has already
wonit's more convenient to shoot and process. I work for a monthly arts
newspaper...it has taken a couple of years to bring them around, but now
they prefer digital over filmyou just get where you need to be faster.
Now people with film cameras for their own use have digitals for work.
So...in that way digital has beaten filmits good enough to get that job
done. The better cameras (12-14 mp) can do most studio work.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #3
posted on Aug 02, 2007
Phoebe - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
I've used the D100 and D70 most recently, and neither can come close
to my S2. If you read the manual and know your camera and have basic
photography skills the S2 is a real dream. I've had people who think
they can tell the differance between film and digital photo's pick my
photo's believing they were produced using film.
to my S2. If you read the manual and know your camera and have basic
photography skills the S2 is a real dream. I've had people who think
they can tell the differance between film and digital photo's pick my
photo's believing they were produced using film.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #4
posted on Aug 02, 2007
Pasty - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Maybe I should keep my my E-10 around for wetter conditions! But, I am
looking for better results. Your D2H is still 4mp...so
I have read the forums for Fuji...no mention of focus problems...and the
review for the S2 has lots of good things to say...and few negatives.
Lets see what others have to sayso far its your negative review against
dpreview's positive review.
looking for better results. Your D2H is still 4mp...so
I have read the forums for Fuji...no mention of focus problems...and the
review for the S2 has lots of good things to say...and few negatives.
Lets see what others have to sayso far its your negative review against
dpreview's positive review.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #5
posted on Aug 02, 2007
Riddle - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
...
The Fuji S20 uses a version of this Super CCD-R sensor. Look for reviews at
DP Reviews and Steve's digicams for more info. In that camera, the sensor is
not exactly getting rave reviews.
I used to have an S2 Pro. It was a good camera when used for relatively
static shots, but I found that the N80 body's limitation especially in
autofocus, metering was a real handicap for my (amateur) photography. Also,
I found the lack of ruggedness and weatheproofing problematic on occasion.
I was very interested in the Fuji S3 when I thought that Fuji might be
planning to put it into a pro-level body with better autofocus and metering,
but they're not. They are still reportedly using an N80 based body. I
elected to pass on the S3 and got a Nikon D2H. Wow! I didn't know what I was
missing by using a consumer-level dSLR like the S2 Pro, and like the S3 is
going to be. I don't care how good the Fuji Super CCD-R sensor is, if you
put it into a camera that has slow, hit-or-miss autofocus, 2 fps shot rate
and questionable metering accuracy, you will only like that camera for a
relatively narrow range of photographic opportunities.
HMc
The Fuji S20 uses a version of this Super CCD-R sensor. Look for reviews at
DP Reviews and Steve's digicams for more info. In that camera, the sensor is
not exactly getting rave reviews.
I used to have an S2 Pro. It was a good camera when used for relatively
static shots, but I found that the N80 body's limitation especially in
autofocus, metering was a real handicap for my (amateur) photography. Also,
I found the lack of ruggedness and weatheproofing problematic on occasion.
I was very interested in the Fuji S3 when I thought that Fuji might be
planning to put it into a pro-level body with better autofocus and metering,
but they're not. They are still reportedly using an N80 based body. I
elected to pass on the S3 and got a Nikon D2H. Wow! I didn't know what I was
missing by using a consumer-level dSLR like the S2 Pro, and like the S3 is
going to be. I don't care how good the Fuji Super CCD-R sensor is, if you
put it into a camera that has slow, hit-or-miss autofocus, 2 fps shot rate
and questionable metering accuracy, you will only like that camera for a
relatively narrow range of photographic opportunities.
HMc
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #6
posted on Aug 02, 2007
Mini Me - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
...
No body knows so don't expect many replies . . . . the "new" CCD has already
been used by Fuji in the S20 or S7000 . . . . the S3 is supposed to be
12Mpixels (interpolated) same as the S2 . . . but the RAW file size is twice
that of the S2 because of the extra photosites . . .
cheers, SimonG
No body knows so don't expect many replies . . . . the "new" CCD has already
been used by Fuji in the S20 or S7000 . . . . the S3 is supposed to be
12Mpixels (interpolated) same as the S2 . . . but the RAW file size is twice
that of the S2 because of the extra photosites . . .
cheers, SimonG
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Suggest a new solution for this problem
Post a New problem for Fuji 24024120 Professional-Grade VHS
Email this problem
Post a New problem for Fuji 24024120 Professional-Grade VHS
Email this problem
Can you Help with these Audio and Video Media problems?
Repair Service
Find Audio and Vid. Repairman Near You:
FixYa does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any information provided through its proposed solutions,
posts, or Expert Assistance Sessions. By entering this site you declare you read and agreed to its Terms.
You may NOT copy or distribute the content that appears on this site without written
permission from FixYa Inc.
About | News
| Contact
| Find Products
| Find Cars
| Terms
| Privacy Policy
| FAQ
Tags | Blog | Repair Directory | Extended Warranty | Partners | Jobs |
Tags | Blog | Repair Directory | Extended Warranty | Partners | Jobs |