Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fuji S5 wowes....  (Read 7638 times)
indianavince
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« on: October 11, 2006, 02:49:19 PM »
ReplyReply

I have been holding onto my Nikon gear and mostly happy with the Fuji S2 and S3 I have used (heavily) for some 4.5 years.  I was really banking that Fuji would come out with a "larger chip" if not a full frame chip.  I am 40 and looking though the "small" viewfinders is getting harder each year.  I pine to use a Digital F100... but the "Nikon" mount camp does not get it.

I ordered a Aptus 17 refurb for my Hasselblad to take it easy on my eyes... but I am still waiting for that, and am wonding now that the Fuji S5 specs. are on the table if I should just switch to Full Frame Canons CMOS and all.

I do mostly commercial work and very high quality portraits... some of it still on film when it really matters. Have an Imacon scanner to scan film.

Advice or thoughts???
Logged
bob mccarthy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 372


WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2006, 03:30:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Nikon made a major improvement in the viewfinder starting with the D2x and continuing on with the D200 and D80. Fuji still uses the old body with the S2 and S3. I believe the S5 is based upon the newer d200 frame. You should be much happier with the new camera if you're a Fuji fan.

I have a D2x, a D70 and F5's in Nikon. I refuse to use the D70 and hand it off when someone wants to borrow a camera. Tunnel vision, whether Nikon, Canon or other is a real detriment to good composure. It actually bothers my eyes to look through the tunnel. Far worse than looking through the Leica with the reduced size frameline for longer lenses.

75% of my work is with a 4x5 with Linhof Right angle viewer with fresnel. Now that's what i call a finder screen.

bob
« Last Edit: October 11, 2006, 03:37:36 PM by bob mccarthy » Logged
indianavince
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2006, 08:37:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks I'll take another look at the D200 viewer.  I still offer it is nothing compared to the  old F100 I have collecting dust.  It would have been an absolute coup if Fuji had made a larger chip (80-90% 35mm or just went full frame.  I wouldn't have cared if it were only a 12MP chip for even $3000.  They blew it!  I WANT A BIG FULL FRAME CHIP!!! IN A NIKON MOUNT>>> ANYONE LISTENING?

I want the larger view so much I am still paitently waiting for my LEAF Aptus 17!
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5162


« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2006, 11:55:09 AM »
ReplyReply

The D200 VF magnification is 0.94x at 50mm, a lot better than in the previous Fuji DSLR's. Allowing for the  format factor of 1.5x, the VF image should be about as big as with 0.62x in 35mm format. Comparing that to the 0.72x of all current 35mm format DSLR's (i.e., Canon's two models), and you get a VF image of about 14% less height and width.

Fuji's sensor is actually a bit smaller than Nikon's sensors, so the situation is slightly worse: the Nikon D200 and various Pentax models like the K10D (0.95x mag.) lead the pack for VF image size in sub-35mm DSLR formats.
Logged
indianavince
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2006, 04:33:41 PM »
ReplyReply

You are right... the D200 is a better finder.  Now I will wait for the S5 version with the "fuji film" supply!

P.S.  Regarding my post in the Medium Format side... I got the call just moments ago from Helix in Chicago that my Leaf Aptus 17 is IN! I am excited to use the Hasselblad again, lens conversion or not!
Logged
Hidalgo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2006, 01:56:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello Folks,,New member here. I was reading and looking for new places to post about photography and found this neat site.
I will jump into my first post.

I am a proud owner of the Fuji S2. It's superb. I ditched my D1X years ago the moment I tried the Fuji S2. I even prefer the Fuji S2 over the D200 and D2X at times, but not all the time.
I currently use a D2X and D200.  I opted not to get tyhe S3 since many reviews made it sound like slightly better than the S2. Many other reasons why I purchased the D200 instead of the S3, but a BIG factor for me is compressed raw files. I love the color and image quality of the S2, but if I am to consider a new S5, I would require raw file compression. I don't think it's practical to be shooting a wedding with 6 2-gig cards and then having to upload them into a computer and convert them. That's a great deal of space taken and with the average computer.(in my case Mac OSX with two gigs of ram and 80 gig hard drive)
Does anybody else feel like raw compression is important? Any word if Fuji will have this choice.

Best Regards to all.

Gil
Logged
graphicjoe
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2006, 07:52:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Hidalgo,

If an image file is compressed, it's no longer a raw file. If some kind of processing has been done, you don't have a raw file any more.

You could help things a bit by using 4 GIG memory cards. Once the image files are in your computer you could do whatever conversion you like by using a script, applet, or droplet.

I don't know how many pictures you take when doing a wedding, but, would it be possible to have enough cards to leave all of your images on cards until you can put them on your computer at home.

If you do much wedding work you may want to get some more storage capacity for your computer. As a matter of fact, I would want to have a RAID array with shadowing of drives. Being a cautious sort of a fellow, I would also want a backup system running all of the time. Just imagine how you would feel if that 80 GIG HD died. Imagine calling your customers to let them know that you won't have any pictures of their wedding. And for your last bit of imagining, picture yourself writing checks to refund the deposits you had collected from your customers.

Good luck,

Joe S
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2006, 08:18:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If an image file is compressed, it's no longer a raw file. If some kind of processing has been done, you don't have a raw file any more.

Compression doesn't necessarily change the data and thus a RAW file can be compressed. Canon uses lossless compression in their RAW files. Nikon even uses lossy compression in their NEFs.
Logged

graphicjoe
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2006, 10:49:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Feppe,
Of course you are right; I don't know what I was thinking. However, your comments re Canon and Nikon are revealing and to my mind provide a strong argument for using Adobe Digital Negative format. I am surprised at Nikon using a lossy form of image compression.

Sometimes standardization is a good thing, depending on whose scheme is used and how well other vendors buy into it. Having been burned several times over the years has made me cautious. I always keep a copy of all raw files, no matter what is done to/with the image. I can always return to square one if need be.

Storage has become less and less expensive, so it is not expensive to be conservative and cautious in protecting ones work. Because storage is reasonable in cost and time is increasingly valuable, I do not compress anything.

Happy New Year To All,

Joe
Logged
Craig Murphy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 312


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2007, 04:45:31 PM »
ReplyReply

The 'problem' with the S3 is the time it takes to write a Raw file.  12-15 seconds.  Has anyone timed the S5 for Raw files?  Does it write faster?  I know it has a larger buffer.  Thats not my question however.
Logged

CMurph
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2220


WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2007, 02:16:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I WANT A BIG FULL FRAME CHIP!!! IN A NIKON MOUNT

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80215\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Absolutely right - have a look through an FM2 even

The current range is rubbish

I am so close to going to a 5d - the prices drop every week

If your aptus is V mount you could get a Horseman Digiflex that will enable use of nikkor lenses on that

Dont forget that there are S/H SLRns knocking around now - CS2 noise reduction and CA reducer have made that camera much better than the software at launch it is still stymied in many situations by 200ISO and 125 flash and noise abobe the base 200 ISO

My current thought is maybe to get a 5d and a 20 or 24 and a 501.8 and a nikkor adapter so I can sneak on lenses like my nikkor 14 where requried

The D200 is pretty cool with lenses like the 300 2.8 I must say

So Ill end up shooting fast moving features with a 14 on SLRn (no flash), 5d and 20 2.8, a hassy and 80 and a D200 and 300 2.8 - post production nightmare !

A QUESTION - what is the current state of nikkor to eos adapters

SMM
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Marsupilami
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2007, 03:08:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am so close to going to a 5d - the prices drop every week

So Ill end up shooting fast moving features with a 14 on SLRn (no flash), 5d and 20 2.8, a hassy and 80 and a D200 and 300 2.8 - post production nightmare !

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108021\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Look through the 5D viewfinder before you buy one, I think while the 5D is overall a very good camera, the screen and the viewfinder are politely said not very good.
And post production is certainly hard with such different equipment. For outdoor stuff DXO is a must with Canon, for people, weddings and the like DPP or Capture one, even Adobe Camera Raw will be good.

Christian
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad