I've done some reading, and I think it will fail. First problem is the size
and weight. I know it's a wide range zoom, and contains a bunch of features,
but it's huge. Why bother? Why not just carry an SLR?
Second item is the lens. Nice range, but the camera appears to have a
significant purple fringing issue. I've seen a few samples and it's
painfully obvious. the specs are really great, but the execution is flawed.
Cameras like that make me curious where the term P&S (Point and Shoot)
comes from and actually means. I mean, my D200 is also a P&S if you
put it in the program mode and autofocus with autoselect focus sensor.
And many P&S cameras have a wide range of manual selections that take
them out of P&S mode.
Maybe "compact" vs. "non-compact", or "SLR" vs. "non-SLR". I think
the distinction most people make between the types is "fixed lens" vs.
"interchangable lens".
That FinePix S100FS is bigger and heavier than a Nikon D40x with the
kit lens. So is the D40x more of a P&S camera than the S100FS?
The big problem with all those super-zoom P&S cameras is the tiny sensor.
Small sensor = reduced sensitivity = lots of noise and poor color range
If image quality is important to you, you are much better off with a P&S
camera that has a bigger sensor and smaller zoom range. I think there are a
few P&S cameras out there with the same size sensors as entry-level DSLRs.
On Mar 8, 10:39 am, Steve <st...@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:49:45 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >This has possibilities.
>
> >http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...pix_s100fs/spe...
>
> Cameras like that make me curious where the term P&S (Point and Shoot)
> comes from and actually means. I mean, my D200 is also a P&S if you
> put it in the program mode and autofocus with autoselect focus sensor.
> And many P&S cameras have a wide range of manual selections that take
> them out of P&S mode.
>
> Maybe "compact" vs. "non-compact", or "SLR" vs. "non-SLR". I think
> the distinction most people make between the types is "fixed lens" vs.
> "interchangable lens".
>
> That FinePix S100FS is bigger and heavier than a Nikon D40x with the
> kit lens. So is the D40x more of a P&S camera than the S100FS?
>
> Steve
So there is an overlap - why is that a problem? Superzooms, even the
bad ones, seem to have a reasonable market - I'm one of the clients of
this camera's ancestors (Fuji S9000).
The new S100 has a lens range of 28-400, fully stabilised. So can you
supply the pricing and weight for a D40x with an equivalent stabilised
lens range? (O:
Yes, you will get a bit better IQ and low-light performance from the
larger sensor of the Nikon.
But there are swings and roundabouts - 28-400 without changing lenses,
completely silent shooting, no dust on the sensor, excellent video
capability, flash synch at all speeds, and only one 'thing' to
carry... It is also very interesting that it uses both sensor *and*
optical stabilisation - does this mean it will be better than the two
alternatives, I wonder?
Those things may or may not be important to you, but they are to me.
My old s9000 has a much smaller sensor than this new one, but it is
still a very capable camera at ISO400, and ISO 1600 is noisy but still
useful. It is rare that I lust for the low-noise of a DSLR, and it is
*frequent* that the Fuji goes with me to places where I don't want to
lug a camera bag and three lenses. And having used SLR's for many
years in my earlier days - having a camera that does not require lens
changes and that can be with me at all times, is very pleasant
indeed. And on a few occasions it has meant I have captured a
fleeting moment that I would have been lucky to get with the SLR...
The newer superzooms are achieving very acceptable AF speeds, so that
really just leaves sensor noise/IQ as the one remaining problem (oh,
and also the lousy manual focus ability of most of these cameras...!)
It's probably too good to be true, but I applaud Fuji for using a 2/3
sensor without going overboard with resolution, and mating it to a
decent lens with stabilisation. Sony failed with their R1 (larger
sensor, smaller lens range, butt-ugly camera), maybe this one might be
the better way to go.
(But I still wish the lens designers would come up with a decent
24-200. That is the sweetest range for me...(O
"sally" <sally@sally.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A5AC766DDCC3s321@192.160.13.20...
> Rich <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:36709301-0c1c-4c13-a235-d1fc2deec1cb@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
>> http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...s100fs/specifi
>> cations/index.html
>
> The big problem with all those super-zoom P&S cameras is the tiny sensor.
> Small sensor = reduced sensitivity = lots of noise and poor color range
> If image quality is important to you, you are much better off with a P&S
> camera that has a bigger sensor and smaller zoom range. I think there are
> a
> few P&S cameras out there with the same size sensors as entry-level DSLRs.
Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image
stabilization, two very nice features that interest me. I'm not a follower
of P&S cameras (and I don't consider this Fuji a P&S) but the only compact
P&S with the same size sensor as a DSLR tht I'm aware of is the Sigma DP1
which uses the same sendor as their SD14 DSLR.
"Pete Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in
news:47d2167b$0$15202$607ed4bc@cv.net:
> Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image
> stabilization, two very nice features that interest me.
According to dpreview.com:
Fuji s100fs sensor size: 8.8 x 6.6 mm =
Nikon D40 (the cheapest DSLR on the market) sensor size: 23.7 x 15.5 mm
The SLR sensor is almost 3 times as big in both directions. The Fuji may be
a little better than other P&S cameras, but it is still a far cry from a SLR.
Amazon.com sells the Fuji for $800 and the Nikon D40 for $500.
The Fuji is also bigger and heavier than the Nikon.
There may be a market for the Nikon, but I am not in it.
"Pete Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in
news:47d2167b$0$15202$607ed4bc@cv.net:
> Fuji did increase the size of the sensor in this one and added image
> stabilization, two very nice features that interest me.
According to dpreview.com:
Fuji s100fs sensor size: 8.8 x 6.6 mm =
Nikon D40 (the cheapest DSLR on the market) sensor size: 23.7 x 15.5 mm
The SLR sensor is almost 3 times as big in both directions. The Fuji may be
a little better than other P&S cameras, but it is still a far cry from a SLR.
Amazon.com sells the Fuji for $800 and the Nikon D40 for $500.
The Fuji is also bigger and heavier than the Nikon.
There may be a market for the Fuji, but I am not in it.
>(But I still wish the lens designers would come up with a decent
>24-200. That is the sweetest range for me...(O
Sounds like you'd like a D40x with the 18-200 VR. You'd never have to
take the lens off if you didn't want to. And looks about the same
size as the S100FS but that's hard to tell without seeing them side by
side. It would weigh less than 5oz more. You'd give up some bells
and whistles like taking movies. But I think the picture quality
would be better than that S100FS. And you *could* change lenses if
you wanted to. But the price would be a few hundred more. But you
could still use that lens on a different body if you want to upgrade
in the future. With the S100FS, your upgrade path is nil. Get rid of
the whole thing to get something new.
Lot's of tradeoffs, tough decision. But personally, I don't like the
S100FS. I'd rather have something better *and* something convenient
at the same time and use the right tool for the job at hand instead of
something that's trying to be too much. That means 2 cameras, a big
full feature DSLR (Nikon D200) and a little, pocket size compact
(Canon S400).
Finally a P&S that isn't a piece of crap? 
Linear Mode
