fuji finepix s3000 or s5000?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a
couple of reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting
and more noise, but the s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it
seems. My question: how much does the fact that the iso
setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old
mirror reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I
even used as much as 3200 for low light and colour effects.
What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital
camera?

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Els wrote:

> I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a couple of
> reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting and more noise, but the
> s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it seems. My question: how much does the
> fact that the iso setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
> This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old mirror
> reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I even used as much as
> 3200 for low light and colour effects.
> What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital camera?

Additional question:
I'm also considering the Minolta Dimage Z1.
Does anyone know of a reason to choose the Finepix (3000 or
5000) over the Dimage Z1?

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:17:17 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
wrote:

>Els wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a couple of
>> reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting and more noise, but the
>> s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it seems. My question: how much does the
>> fact that the iso setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
>> This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old mirror
>> reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I even used as much as
>> 3200 for low light and colour effects.
>> What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital camera?
>
>Additional question:
>I'm also considering the Minolta Dimage Z1.
>Does anyone know of a reason to choose the Finepix (3000 or
>5000) over the Dimage Z1?

Yes. if you already own an xd card.
Meanwhile i continue to be very happy with my Z1 which uses SD cards,
which was a reason for buying it since i already owned a couple.
About the only negative of it is that i solely use the LCD screen at
the rear of the camera to frame my photos due to some doubt about the
sturdiness of the switch that changes between the eyepiece viewer and
the rear LCD viewer.
The pictures are good and very low noise, if the light is OK then the
autofocus is nice and quick, it's ready to use quickly after turning
on and battery life is pretty good.
Maybe it's the oddball shape that turns a lot of buyers away?

I have a webcam in the tropics
http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Jim Vatunz wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:17:17 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
> wrote:
>
>>Els wrote:
>>
>>>I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a couple of
>>>reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting and more noise, but the
>>>s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it seems. My question: how much does the
>>>fact that the iso setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
>>>This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old mirror
>>>reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I even used as much as
>>>3200 for low light and colour effects.
>>>What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital camera?
>>
>>Additional question:
>>I'm also considering the Minolta Dimage Z1.
>>Does anyone know of a reason to choose the Finepix (3000 or
>>5000) over the Dimage Z1?
>
> Yes. if you already own an xd card.
> Meanwhile i continue to be very happy with my Z1 which uses SD cards,
> which was a reason for buying it since i already owned a couple.
> About the only negative of it is that i solely use the LCD screen at
> the rear of the camera to frame my photos due to some doubt about the
> sturdiness of the switch that changes between the eyepiece viewer and
> the rear LCD viewer.

Yes, I've read quite a few reviews saying it broke pretty
quick after start of use. But I wonder which is better: not
using it so it doesn't break, or using it to make sure that
if it breaks, it will be before the warranty ends.

> The pictures are good and very low noise, if the light is OK then the
> autofocus is nice and quick, it's ready to use quickly after turning
> on and battery life is pretty good.
> Maybe it's the oddball shape that turns a lot of buyers away?

Oddball shape? hmmm... I liked the shape. Have to go to the
shop to see how it fits in my hand though. I did try the
Finepix S3000 the other day, and that just was perfect.
Reason enough to dismiss any Canon Powershot as a possible
purchase.

> I have a webcam in the tropics
> http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

Not sure what that has to do with my question or your
answer, unless you're using the z1 for it, but it's dark
there right now, I'll have another look (curiosity) tomorrow
morning.

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:58:50 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
wrote:

>Jim Vatunz wrote:
>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:17:17 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Els wrote:
>>>
>>>>I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a couple of
>>>>reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting and more noise, but the
>>>>s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it seems. My question: how much does the
>>>>fact that the iso setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
>>>>This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old mirror
>>>>reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I even used as much as
>>>>3200 for low light and colour effects.
>>>>What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital camera?
>>>
>>>Additional question:
>>>I'm also considering the Minolta Dimage Z1.
>>>Does anyone know of a reason to choose the Finepix (3000 or
>>>5000) over the Dimage Z1?
>>
>> Yes. if you already own an xd card.
>> Meanwhile i continue to be very happy with my Z1 which uses SD cards,
>> which was a reason for buying it since i already owned a couple.
>> About the only negative of it is that i solely use the LCD screen at
>> the rear of the camera to frame my photos due to some doubt about the
>> sturdiness of the switch that changes between the eyepiece viewer and
>> the rear LCD viewer.
>
>Yes, I've read quite a few reviews saying it broke pretty
>quick after start of use. But I wonder which is better: not
>using it so it doesn't break, or using it to make sure that
>if it breaks, it will be before the warranty ends.

It's way too much hassle for me to get fixed if something went wrong.
i think it's solid enough but should also be handled with care.
>
>> The pictures are good and very low noise, if the light is OK then the
>> autofocus is nice and quick, it's ready to use quickly after turning
>> on and battery life is pretty good.
>> Maybe it's the oddball shape that turns a lot of buyers away?
>
>Oddball shape? hmmm... I liked the shape. Have to go to the
>shop to see how it fits in my hand though. I did try the
>Finepix S3000 the other day, and that just was perfect.
>Reason enough to dismiss any Canon Powershot as a possible
>purchase.
>
>> I have a webcam in the tropics
>> http://ii.net/~farmerjim/
>
>Not sure what that has to do with my question or your
>answer, unless you're using the z1 for it, but it's dark
>there right now, I'll have another look (curiosity) tomorrow
>morning.

sorry it's just my sig. but there are some Z1 photos on my site from
late january onwards.

I have a webcam in the tropics
http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:26:07 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
wrote:

>I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a
>couple of reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting
>and more noise, but the s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it
>seems. My question: how much does the fact that the iso
>setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
>This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old
>mirror reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I
>even used as much as 3200 for low light and colour effects.
>What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital
>camera?

I've had both. My 2nd digital was a 3800 (which I think is now
the 3000). I had it for almost a year. Worked great, but it lacked
a couple of thing that I wanted. More functionality, and longer
optical zoom. I then bought the S5000, which I currently have.
I've had no problems with it. 10X optical, and one thing I really
like, all my filters that I used for my old 35mm film camera, work
on this camera. If there was one thing that I wished it had, would
be a hot shoe for an external flash. Other than that, it's been a
really good camera for my needs, and takes nice pictures in
low light. The noise isn't really an issue for me, it does have some,
but I use photoshop to edit anyway.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Jim Vatunz wrote:
>
>>Els wrote:
>>
>>I'm also considering the Minolta Dimage Z1.
>>Does anyone know of a reason to choose the Finepix (3000 or
>>5000) over the Dimage Z1?
>
> Yes. if you already own an xd card.
> Meanwhile i continue to be very happy with my Z1 which uses SD cards,
> which was a reason for buying it since i already owned a couple.
> About the only negative of it is that i solely use the LCD screen at
> the rear of the camera to frame my photos due to some doubt about the
> sturdiness of the switch that changes between the eyepiece viewer and
> the rear LCD viewer.
> The pictures are good and very low noise, if the light is OK then the
> autofocus is nice and quick, it's ready to use quickly after turning
> on and battery life is pretty good.
> Maybe it's the oddball shape that turns a lot of buyers away?

I bought it today, and I'm happy!
Very good quality pics and I wasn't even using the 'fine'
mode. As to using the switch, I find the LCD much easier to
look at than the eyepiece viewer, so I don't see why I
should use it. It's my first digital, and I'm so very
pleased with the results and also the fact that I can erase
any picture that didn't come out right, directly. (of
course, this is normal for digital camera's, but it's a
first for me, and I like it :-D)

Thanks for your comments, it helped making the decision

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:27:55 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
wrote:

>Jim Vatunz wrote:
>>
>>>Els wrote:
>>>
>>>I'm also considering the Minolta Dimage Z1.
>>>Does anyone know of a reason to choose the Finepix (3000 or
>>>5000) over the Dimage Z1?
>>
>> Yes. if you already own an xd card.
>> Meanwhile i continue to be very happy with my Z1 which uses SD cards,
>> which was a reason for buying it since i already owned a couple.
>> About the only negative of it is that i solely use the LCD screen at
>> the rear of the camera to frame my photos due to some doubt about the
>> sturdiness of the switch that changes between the eyepiece viewer and
>> the rear LCD viewer.
>> The pictures are good and very low noise, if the light is OK then the
>> autofocus is nice and quick, it's ready to use quickly after turning
>> on and battery life is pretty good.
>> Maybe it's the oddball shape that turns a lot of buyers away?
>
>I bought it today, and I'm happy!
>Very good quality pics and I wasn't even using the 'fine'
>mode. As to using the switch, I find the LCD much easier to
>look at than the eyepiece viewer, so I don't see why I
>should use it. It's my first digital, and I'm so very
>pleased with the results and also the fact that I can erase
>any picture that didn't come out right, directly. (of
>course, this is normal for digital camera's, but it's a
>first for me, and I like it :-D)
>
>Thanks for your comments, it helped making the decision

glad you're happy. i had the misfortune of picking my z1 up this
morning and dropping it and bouncing it across the room.
Happily it survived undamaged.

I have a webcam in the tropics
http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Jim Vatunz wrote:

[happy having bought Dimage Z1]

> glad you're happy. i had the misfortune of picking my z1 up this
> morning and dropping it and bouncing it across the room.

Ai!!
Bet your heart bounced a little too..

> Happily it survived undamaged.

Good to know it's sturdy ;-)

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:26:07 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I do NOT own either camera. I post sophist/IMO stuff only.

I have an Olympus C750. I decided on it over the Oly S602Z (an
"upgrade", that I question, from the S5000)

>I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a
>couple of reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting

**********************************************************************************
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In some of the pictures taken with S5000, I see a little vignette
effect on the top corners, just like in
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/FujifilmS5000/Samples/Vignetting/030809-
1443-10.jpg

Can anyone tell me when this occurs, since it is in some pictures and
in some it isn't found.
Logged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artur - FinePix S5000 Portal
My S5000 Gallery


Franck Alcidi
Moderator
Staff
Captain
"You looking at me?"
Gender:
Posts: 1206
Re: Vignette
« Reply #1 on: 11/07/03 at 15:32:47 » Quote Modify

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
on 11/07/03 at 08:03:40, Artur Gajewski wrote:In some of the pictures
taken with S5000, I see a little vignette effect on the top corners,
just like in
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/FujifilmS5000/Samples/Vignetting/030809-
1443-10.jpg

Can anyone tell me when this occurs, since it is in some pictures and
in some it isn't found.

It will occur mainly where there is sky. Many digital cams have this
problem. Some are more noticable then others. I tend to crop mine out
or clone the area during post processing.

**************************************************************************

I think I see this with my Oly C750...sometimes. It is manageable. You
can post-process this easily.

>and more noise, but the s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it
>seems.

>My question: how much does the fact that the iso
>setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?

OK. My OPINION!

Noise. They are both 3 Mpi cameras, with the same-sized sensor. So the
noise factor should not alter. Sensor size and noise are inter-related
AFAICS.

AND

With increased ISO rating comes noise. This is like "grain" on film
with faster film.......only worse.

IMO, the "increased noise" on the 5000 will be _directly_ related to
the fact that it allows higher ISO ratings. This is not all bad. I
shoot mainly at 100 ISO, but will go to 200-400 if I have to. Blur vs
noise. Noise can be reduced. Blur cannot.

ALSO.

The Fuji S602Z (which I looked at "in the flesh") will "noise reduce"
shots without user intervention, IMO. Maybe other models do as well.
Hand your shots over to the Fuji "lab"....they may be the best at it.
Who nose?

BTW. If somebody can tell me why the S602Z is better than the S5000,
please do.

Fuji seems strong on "image processing" as default in the machine.
This is just my impression. You may be able to overcome it as a canny
photographer. But when I was comparing cameras, the Fuji was sold for
its "colour brilliance", while the result looked fake to me. I am not
alone in that impression.

ISO 3200? Forget it at present. BUT. I do feel that digital cameras
are fairly tolerant of underexposure, if you are willing to spend some
free time in the digital darkroom.

If you want range, forget it. Digital cameras also suffer from
_severe_ noise if you use long exposures.

>This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old
>mirror reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I
>even used as much as 3200 for low light and colour effects.

At the present stage of progress, in your price range (or anything
like it) not expect ISO above 400 to be usable. Even 200 is noisy.
There are ways around this (Noise Ninja is one), but they take time
and are at the expense of image sharpness in many cases. More digital
darkroom.

>What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital
>camera?

Severe. Go for the 5000. You can reduce noise. You cannot ever get the
missed shot or reduce motion blur.

BTW. There are many other aspects, "features" and limitations you need
to look at.

Ask about them.
****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor.........sorry
.........no I'm not.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Old Nick wrote:

>>I'm trying to decide which one to buy, and I've read a
>>couple of reviews. The S5000 seems to have more vignetting
>
> I do NOT own either camera. I post sophist/IMO stuff only.
>
> I have an Olympus C750. I decided on it over the Oly S602Z (an
> "upgrade", that I question, from the S5000)
> **************************************************************************
>
> Can anyone tell me when this occurs, since it is in some pictures and
> in some it isn't found.
>
> It will occur mainly where there is sky. Many digital cams have this
> problem. Some are more noticable then others. I tend to crop mine out
> or clone the area during post processing.
>
> **************************************************************************
>
>>and more noise, but the s3000 lacks sensitivity, or so it
>>seems.
>
>>My question: how much does the fact that the iso
>>setting can't be changed and is always 100 matter?
>
> OK. My OPINION!
>
> Noise. They are both 3 Mpi cameras, with the same-sized sensor. So the
> noise factor should not alter. Sensor size and noise are inter-related
> AFAICS.
>
> AND
>
> With increased ISO rating comes noise. This is like "grain" on film
> with faster film.......only worse.
>
> IMO, the "increased noise" on the 5000 will be _directly_ related to
> the fact that it allows higher ISO ratings. This is not all bad. I
> shoot mainly at 100 ISO, but will go to 200-400 if I have to. Blur vs
> noise. Noise can be reduced. Blur cannot.
>
> ALSO.
>
> The Fuji S602Z (which I looked at "in the flesh") will "noise reduce"
> shots without user intervention, IMO. Maybe other models do as well.
> Hand your shots over to the Fuji "lab"....they may be the best at it.
> Who nose?
>
> BTW. If somebody can tell me why the S602Z is better than the S5000,
> please do.

I think it's better in some parts, while the S5000 is better
in others. Maybe this review will help to find the differences:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_s602-review/index.html

> Fuji seems strong on "image processing" as default in the machine.
> This is just my impression. You may be able to overcome it as a canny
> photographer. But when I was comparing cameras, the Fuji was sold for
> its "colour brilliance", while the result looked fake to me. I am not
> alone in that impression.
>
> ISO 3200? Forget it at present. BUT. I do feel that digital cameras
> are fairly tolerant of underexposure, if you are willing to spend some
> free time in the digital darkroom.
>
> If you want range, forget it. Digital cameras also suffer from
> _severe_ noise if you use long exposures.
>
>>This is going to be my first digital camera, and with my old
>>mirror reflex I used 400 iso quite a lot, and sometimes I
>>even used as much as 3200 for low light and colour effects.
>
> At the present stage of progress, in your price range (or anything
> like it) not expect ISO above 400 to be usable. Even 200 is noisy.
> There are ways around this (Noise Ninja is one), but they take time
> and are at the expense of image sharpness in many cases. More digital
> darkroom.
>
>>What are the limitations of having only iso 100 on a digital
>>camera?
>
> Severe. Go for the 5000. You can reduce noise. You cannot ever get the
> missed shot or reduce motion blur.
>
> BTW. There are many other aspects, "features" and limitations you need
> to look at.
>
> Ask about them.
> ****************************************************

Thanks for your reply, I've decided on a Minolta Dimage Z1
however, and bought it yesterday. No vignetting, ISO 100 -
400, very low noise, macro from 4cm distance, and very real
colours. My choice was mostly based on the reviews by
dcresource.com of four cameras:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix2800-review/index.html
(because of lack of review for the S3000)
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_s5000-review/index.shtml
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/kodak/dx6490-review/index.shtml
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/minolta/dimage_z1-review/index.shtml
While having all the reviews mixed up in my head, I read Jim
Vatunz' reply to my post, and it helped clear my head, so I
made (imo) the right choice and picked the Z1. I think it is
the best of these four camera's.

I did look at various Olympus cameras, and the one you have
seems to be quite good, from the review
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/c750uz-review/index.shtml
The reason for me to not buy an Olympus was simply the grip.
I held a Finepix S3000 and a Canon Powershot in the shop,
and the comfortable grip of the Finepix made me decide to
buy a camera with the same sort of grip
(battery-compartment). The Olympus doesn't have that.

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:39:51 +0200, Els <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl>
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Well....there you go.
>Thanks for your reply, I've decided on a Minolta Dimage Z1

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor.........sorry
.........no I'm not.