Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fuji S2 review  (Read 2972 times)
Guest
« on: April 23, 2003, 06:20:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I didn't talk about the supposed higher resolution because I simply don't see it. Marketing specs as far as I can see.

The S2's colour is indeed saturated, though it's easy enough to go either way once in Photoshop with, with any camera.

I wasn't aware of the AA battery option on the D100 grip. Very nice.

Michael
Logged
EitanWaks
Guest
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2003, 06:14:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Michael,
Could you please comment on the differences in image quality between the Fuji S2 Pro and the Kodak 14n.  I realize the differences between two cameras, that one is six megapixel and other 14, that the sensor sizes are different.  I think however that a comparison is due, following the negative reviews that the latter camera constantly receives on the Internet.

Thank you
Logged
Quentin
Guest
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2003, 07:36:00 AM »
ReplyReply

On resolution, BJL does, I think, have it right.  You won't see much of a difference between the S2's 6 and 12 mp output because the 6mp output is downsized from the reconstructed 12mp output - and thus has most of the super CCD benefit built it.

I thought some of the other comments were a bit picky, such as the number of exposed screw heads.  I have honestly not noticed them, and in a list of 100 key points, I'd rank it at 101  ::

On menu systems etc, if you come from a Canon, you might get confused, but honestly, I think that the S2 has about the best in the business, very easy to use.

Overall, I think this was a resonable review, but one that, to (probably mis-)quote Alexander Pope, damned with faint praise on occasions.  But then I am biased, as I own a S2  Cheesy

Quentin (reg member, but "out to lunch", as it were...)
Logged
Guest
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2003, 01:40:21 PM »
ReplyReply

The screw heads issue is not, of course, relevant to the camera's ability to take photographs. But for me it does speak to the issue of build integrety. This is a valid topic because it relates to how well integrated the various components are, how easy (or not) the device may be to service, etc etc.

Michael
Logged
jdemott
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 434


« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2003, 06:03:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for a very interesting review of the Fuji S2, Michael. Other users of the S2 have commented on its very pleasing color palette, which seemed evident in the three samples accompanying the review. As you were reviewing the S2 at the same time as the 10D, did you have any opportunity to form an opinion on how the two cameras compare in handling color? The samples seem to show a relatively saturated image for what I would think was a not very saturated scene (but of course it is difficult for me to tell, not having been there).

Fuji highly promotes the unique sensor design of the S2 and claims that its firmware will output an effective 12 million pixels from a 6 megapixel sensor.  I've always been skeptical that interpolating a 6 megapixel RAW file in camera could achieve anything materially better than interpolating a 6 megapixel file in Photoshop or Genuine Fractals, for example.  Since you didn't mention resolution specifically in the review, I'm assuming your impression was that the S2's files are competitive with other 6 megapixel cameras such as the 10D, but not noticeably better in resolution?

I agree that the ability to use AA batteries can be a useful feature; constant monitoring of battery life is one of the negatives of converting to digital. When comparing competitive cameras, it is worth noting that the Nikon D100, when equipped with the optional MB-D100 grip/battery pack, will accept either rechargeable Nikon batteries or standard AA batteries, a feature that by itself makes the battery pack a worthwhile purchase.
Logged

John DeMott
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2003, 08:59:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Fuji highly promotes the unique sensor design of the S2 and claims that its firmware will output an effective 12 million pixels from a 6 megapixel sensor.
In partial defense of Fuji, (a) their marketing division does seem to have backed off lately from implying 12MP resolution, and ( Fuji does not interpolate just in order to have a big MP number to advertise: the interpolation is the minimum needed to put the information from their diagonally aligned array of octagonal sensors into the "square" alignment of pixels required by standard file formats like JPEG and TIFF. (Think of the sensors as being centered on each of the white squares only of a chess board, but bulging out to cover a fair chunk of each adjoining black square as well: the output file formats need values filled in for the black squares as well.)
Logged
Guest
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2003, 07:23:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Eitan,

I deliberately avoided such a comparison for several reasons. Firstly, the price differential is huge. Secondly, the Kodak 14n is so limited in its imaging capabilties that by doing such a compariosn I'd simply be adding fuel to an already fast burning fire.

The S2 is capable of shooting in a wide variety of situations, and all of its shutter speeds and ISO settings are usable. The 14n is only usable in bright light, moderate to high shutter speeds and very low ISO settings.

Under these cirrcumstances the 14n produces admirable images, but frankly I can't remember the last time I did any serious shooting under these conditions.

Michael
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2003, 10:03:08 AM »
ReplyReply

One other area where I always found the S2 to shine, is the higher ISOs.  My S2 at 400 was as clear as 100 and its 800 was very useable.  

I realize that Michael's experience with the 1ds at the higher ISO's is different than mine as I find the 1ds at 400 is about my max use and its really most often very full of noise.  

Others seem to either get the same noise issue as myself, or get the excellent results of Michael's 1ds.  

I made many great images with the S2 at 400.  You still held all the detail and good saturation.

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

Ad
Ad
Ad