F50fd or not....look and compare again - for most consumers

[David Chien]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhMULTIW.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hMULTIW.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhMULTIT.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hMULTIT.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhSL0100.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hSLI0100.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhSL0400.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hSLI0400.HTM

---

I was in the same boat many are with the 'silly' comparison between the F30/F31 series vs. the F50. I realized that's simply not a 'good' comparison because the design goals were different - the F30/F31 series are designed for great low-light, high ISO photography, whereas the F50 is designed to deliver high-resolution and image quality at low ISO

Let's start with a camera that many will call a very good camera:
The Sony DSC-N2 10MP digicam released about a year ago.
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-N2/sample.html

Back then, it was pretty leading edge, and Sony threw in all they had into a P&S, even a touch-screen, a decently (by Sony P&S standards) sharp lens, a big CCD, and heavy firepower in image processing. Today, it still will run with the latest 8MP digicams that are so popular on the market, and the lens performance alone beats Sony's latest W200 12MP model! (check corners!)

Look through the Sony samples, and you'll see that it's pretty darn sharp, has good color, and does a great job in daylight. Exactly what it's been designed for - great daylight, low ISO photography!

Now, go through the pairs of images linked above, and notice that photo-by-photo, the F50fd outperforms the N2 in image resolution, lens quality (esp. edges), resolving power and detail (fabrics, bottle labels), etc. while maintaining similar parity at ISO 100 and ISO 400 (ie. very good image quality).

(Image 'saturation' aside - keep in mind the Fuji tries to keep things more realistic looking, but you can easily get punchy colors using the F-Chrome mode to match the N2. In fact, the N2 blows out the colors - see the red-colored threads on the upper right of the test images - reds simply are blown out and have no real detail vs. the F50fd.)

It's simply doing just as good at ISO 400 as the N2, and that's a very good performance overall (print both out at Letter on your photo printer and try to find much better). Sure, the F30/F31 can do better, but again, a different design goal here -- better low light performance in exchange for lower resolution.

The excellent resolution has been confirmed by numerous review websites and is the highest resolving 12MP P&S camera out there today (even this site shows the F50fd to do a little better than the Canon 12MP). Excellent corner sharpness performance is another plus as well (look at the other 12MP and notice how soft the corners are, how sharp the F50fd is). You can't get an excellent image by starting with a poor lens. (or why bother paying $$$ for a camera to buy a poor lens?)

---

Realistically? Great prints? Of course!

I've run my way through the 40i, F401, F450, Sony P150, P200, and T9, and have been able to get nice shots with all of them. Once i entered the 6+ MP arena with the P150-T9 series, I'm able to take very nice pictures that print well Letter size all day long. Nothing wrong with the prints, they come out sharp (of course, never super-sharp as a dSLR, but sharp enough that everyone looking at them says they are - and nobody is going to try and read 1-3pt microprint off the signs in my photos on a letter-size print either....), colorful, saturated, and exactly what I wanted.

The F50fd? It'll only do better than all of these prior cameras that are representative of what most consumers own, and have enough megapixels to really make larger blowups without an issue.

So for most consumers reading and trying to figure out if they should dig up an ol F30/F31fd out of the ebay bin, I'd start by asking yourself have you ever used one? If not, the F50fd will likely do better than what you've used and will be the sharpest performing 12MP P&S available at a decent price today. Enough manual features to keep most happy, and a decently fast performer to keep the shots going for the usual - daytime shots of the beach and for travel, the usual lot of indoor snaps of friends, and random shots of this and that.

Now, spend about $250 on a new 12MP or a used/old/refurb'd F30/F31 for more? Just keep the points above in mind and it'll be easy for you. Just keep in mind that even the F30/F31 samples at 800/1600+ ISO look 'grainy' (just download them and see), and if you honestly want light-grabbing, low-light performance and take the 'majority' of your photos indoors or in low-light start saving up for the new Nikon D3 dSLR with 25600 ISO performance.

Otherwise, I think I'll be saving up for a new F50fd soon for this Xmas =)

 

[tom sugnet]

I don't agree with your 'justification'
F30fd has really nice ISO800.
F50fd does not have it, even resized to 6 megapixels.

I don't need Nikon D3, I will get the Canon 5d replacement,
16 megapixels and low noise, yeah

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhMULTIW.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hMULTIW.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhMULTIT.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hMULTIT.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhSL0100.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hSLI0100.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhSL0400.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hSLI0400.HTM

---

I was in the same boat many are with the 'silly' comparison between
the F30/F31 series vs. the F50. I realized that's simply not a
'good' comparison because the design goals were different - the
F30/F31 series are designed for great low-light, high ISO
photography, whereas the F50 is designed to deliver high-resolution
and image quality at low ISO

Let's start with a camera that many will call a very good camera:
The Sony DSC-N2 10MP digicam released about a year ago.
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-N2/sample.html

Back then, it was pretty leading edge, and Sony threw in all they had
into a P&S, even a touch-screen, a decently (by Sony P&S standards)
sharp lens, a big CCD, and heavy firepower in image processing.
Today, it still will run with the latest 8MP digicams that are so
popular on the market, and the lens performance alone beats Sony's
latest W200 12MP model! (check corners!)

Look through the Sony samples, and you'll see that it's pretty darn
sharp, has good color, and does a great job in daylight. Exactly
what it's been designed for - great daylight, low ISO photography!

Now, go through the pairs of images linked above, and notice that
photo-by-photo, the F50fd outperforms the N2 in image resolution,
lens quality (esp. edges), resolving power and detail (fabrics,
bottle labels), etc. while maintaining similar parity at ISO 100 and
ISO 400 (ie. very good image quality).
(Image 'saturation' aside - keep in mind the Fuji tries to keep
things more realistic looking, but you can easily get punchy colors
using the F-Chrome mode to match the N2. In fact, the N2 blows out
the colors - see the red-colored threads on the upper right of the
test images - reds simply are blown out and have no real detail vs.
the F50fd.)

It's simply doing just as good at ISO 400 as the N2, and that's a
very good performance overall (print both out at Letter on your photo
printer and try to find much better). Sure, the F30/F31 can do
better, but again, a different design goal here -- better low light
performance in exchange for lower resolution.

The excellent resolution has been confirmed by numerous review
websites and is the highest resolving 12MP P&S camera out there today
(even this site shows the F50fd to do a little better than the Canon
12MP). Excellent corner sharpness performance is another plus as
well (look at the other 12MP and notice how soft the corners are, how
sharp the F50fd is). You can't get an excellent image by starting
with a poor lens. (or why bother paying $$$ for a camera to buy a
poor lens?)

---

Realistically? Great prints? Of course!

I've run my way through the 40i, F401, F450, Sony P150, P200, and T9,
and have been able to get nice shots with all of them. Once i
entered the 6+ MP arena with the P150-T9 series, I'm able to take
very nice pictures that print well Letter size all day long. Nothing
wrong with the prints, they come out sharp (of course, never
super-sharp as a dSLR, but sharp enough that everyone looking at them
says they are - and nobody is going to try and read 1-3pt microprint
off the signs in my photos on a letter-size print either....),
colorful, saturated, and exactly what I wanted.

The F50fd? It'll only do better than all of these prior cameras that
are representative of what most consumers own, and have enough
megapixels to really make larger blowups without an issue.

So for most consumers reading and trying to figure out if they should
dig up an ol F30/F31fd out of the ebay bin, I'd start by asking
yourself have you ever used one? If not, the F50fd will likely do
better than what you've used and will be the sharpest performing 12MP
P&S available at a decent price today. Enough manual features to
keep most happy, and a decently fast performer to keep the shots
going for the usual - daytime shots of the beach and for travel, the
usual lot of indoor snaps of friends, and random shots of this and
that.

Now, spend about $250 on a new 12MP or a used/old/refurb'd F30/F31
for more? Just keep the points above in mind and it'll be easy for
you. Just keep in mind that even the F30/F31 samples at 800/1600+
ISO look 'grainy' (just download them and see), and if you honestly
want light-grabbing, low-light performance and take the 'majority' of
your photos indoors or in low-light start saving up for the new Nikon
D3 dSLR with 25600 ISO performance.

Otherwise, I think I'll be saving up for a new F50fd soon for this
Xmas =)

--



Feel free to visit my photosites: http://tom.st or
http://pixel-peeping-tom.deviantart.com

 

[swede76]

Why would you want the F50 over the F40? I thought it was much smaller, but then i saw it and its basicly the same size, but more expensive and lower IQ... Or am i missing something?

 

[Chazchop]

The OP wasn't making it a F30 vs F50 debate.

He was bringing attention to the fact that there's a lot of unwarranted negativity surrounding the F50 where in fact compared to other 12MP camera's, it's not doing too bad. So the F50 is actually quite a good camera, for the purpose it was designed for.

We all know the potential and achievements of the F30/31 (I've got a F31), but it's simply not available on the market any more. So I think it's time to stop recommending it to people buying NEW camera's.

 

[Chazchop]

More options to play with on the F50, SP and AP modes, can choose Auto ISO800 in more modes.

More resolution detail so more to crop and play with, newbie's (general market) love that

Better lens

IS, which does help, just not as good as Canon or Panasonic's OIS.

Basically, only thing F40 has over the F50 is one stop advantage in ISO. So ISO1600 on F50 is ISO800 on F40. Just depends if that's important to you.

 

[Keith Allen]

So for most consumers reading and trying to figure out if they should
dig up an ol F30/F31fd out of the ebay bin, I'd start by asking
yourself have you ever used one? If not, the F50fd will likely do
better than what you've used and will be the sharpest performing 12MP
P&S available at a decent price today. Enough manual features to
keep most happy, and a decently fast performer to keep the shots
going for the usual - daytime shots of the beach and for travel, the
usual lot of indoor snaps of friends, and random shots of this and
that.

For most people just about ANY P&S will produce decent photos at low ISO's, that you couldn't tell apart unless you were a pixel-peeper. Why bother with an F50fd when you can buy other cameras with longer/wider lenses?

I didn't buy my F31fd for ISO 100 shots. I bought mine for low light situations, where I can use ISO 800 and get images that are not spoiled by excessive noise.

Now, spend about $250 on a new 12MP or a used/old/refurb'd F30/F31
for more? Just keep the points above in mind and it'll be easy for
you. Just keep in mind that even the F30/F31 samples at 800/1600+
ISO look 'grainy' (just download them and see>

ISO 800 shots with the Fuji F30/F31 do not look grainy to me. Mine certainly don't.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/62268904@N00/1923456948/in/set-72157603015827502/

The F50fd ISO 800 shots look much better than those with most other cameras, but I still don't see why anyone would want one if they could get their hands on a F30/F31fd, unless they really needed 12 MP to play with.

-------------------------------------------

Owner of a Fuji F31fd and Panasonic TZ3

 

[richs10]

Thanks, David.

and good points about today's market forces. As for me, I didn't consider the F40 since, as I understand it, it only has one image stabilization mode whereas the F50 uses IS as a general setting. As I'm getting older, I'm getting shakier, I guess! I understand that there are better cameras out there, but I just want a good little camera that I'm able to slip it in my pocket when not in use. It's a trade off.

Rich

 

[Chazchop]

The F50fd ISO 800 shots look much better than those with most other
cameras, but I still don't see why anyone would want one if they
could get their hands on a F30/F31fd.

Well.. that's the problem now. It's almost impossible to get a F30/31 at a decent price.

 

[tom sugnet]

I wouldn't use ISO800 (with flash) + ISO3200 (no flash) option with F50fd

--



Feel free to visit my photosites: http://tom.st or
http://pixel-peeping-tom.deviantart.com

 

[Photofreak7]

ISO800:



ISO1600:



... one can draw their own conclusion on how the F50 stacks up jpg to jpg to Canon's top P&S (G9) (...but shooting in RAW the G9 may win)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhMULTIW.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hMULTIW.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhMULTIT.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hMULTIT.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhSL0100.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hSLI0100.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F50FD/F50FDhSL0400.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/N2/N2hSLI0400.HTM

---

I was in the same boat many are with the 'silly' comparison between
the F30/F31 series vs. the F50. I realized that's simply not a
'good' comparison because the design goals were different - the
F30/F31 series are designed for great low-light, high ISO
photography, whereas the F50 is designed to deliver high-resolution
and image quality at low ISO

Let's start with a camera that many will call a very good camera:
The Sony DSC-N2 10MP digicam released about a year ago.
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-N2/sample.html

Back then, it was pretty leading edge, and Sony threw in all they had
into a P&S, even a touch-screen, a decently (by Sony P&S standards)
sharp lens, a big CCD, and heavy firepower in image processing.
Today, it still will run with the latest 8MP digicams that are so
popular on the market, and the lens performance alone beats Sony's
latest W200 12MP model! (check corners!)

Look through the Sony samples, and you'll see that it's pretty darn
sharp, has good color, and does a great job in daylight. Exactly
what it's been designed for - great daylight, low ISO photography!

Now, go through the pairs of images linked above, and notice that
photo-by-photo, the F50fd outperforms the N2 in image resolution,
lens quality (esp. edges), resolving power and detail (fabrics,
bottle labels), etc. while maintaining similar parity at ISO 100 and
ISO 400 (ie. very good image quality).
(Image 'saturation' aside - keep in mind the Fuji tries to keep
things more realistic looking, but you can easily get punchy colors
using the F-Chrome mode to match the N2. In fact, the N2 blows out
the colors - see the red-colored threads on the upper right of the
test images - reds simply are blown out and have no real detail vs.
the F50fd.)

It's simply doing just as good at ISO 400 as the N2, and that's a
very good performance overall (print both out at Letter on your photo
printer and try to find much better). Sure, the F30/F31 can do
better, but again, a different design goal here -- better low light
performance in exchange for lower resolution.

The excellent resolution has been confirmed by numerous review
websites and is the highest resolving 12MP P&S camera out there today
(even this site shows the F50fd to do a little better than the Canon
12MP). Excellent corner sharpness performance is another plus as
well (look at the other 12MP and notice how soft the corners are, how
sharp the F50fd is). You can't get an excellent image by starting
with a poor lens. (or why bother paying $$$ for a camera to buy a
poor lens?)

---

Realistically? Great prints? Of course!

I've run my way through the 40i, F401, F450, Sony P150, P200, and T9,
and have been able to get nice shots with all of them. Once i
entered the 6+ MP arena with the P150-T9 series, I'm able to take
very nice pictures that print well Letter size all day long. Nothing
wrong with the prints, they come out sharp (of course, never
super-sharp as a dSLR, but sharp enough that everyone looking at them
says they are - and nobody is going to try and read 1-3pt microprint
off the signs in my photos on a letter-size print either....),
colorful, saturated, and exactly what I wanted.

The F50fd? It'll only do better than all of these prior cameras that
are representative of what most consumers own, and have enough
megapixels to really make larger blowups without an issue.

So for most consumers reading and trying to figure out if they should
dig up an ol F30/F31fd out of the ebay bin, I'd start by asking
yourself have you ever used one? If not, the F50fd will likely do
better than what you've used and will be the sharpest performing 12MP
P&S available at a decent price today. Enough manual features to
keep most happy, and a decently fast performer to keep the shots
going for the usual - daytime shots of the beach and for travel, the
usual lot of indoor snaps of friends, and random shots of this and
that.

Now, spend about $250 on a new 12MP or a used/old/refurb'd F30/F31
for more? Just keep the points above in mind and it'll be easy for
you. Just keep in mind that even the F30/F31 samples at 800/1600+
ISO look 'grainy' (just download them and see), and if you honestly
want light-grabbing, low-light performance and take the 'majority' of
your photos indoors or in low-light start saving up for the new Nikon
D3 dSLR with 25600 ISO performance.

Otherwise, I think I'll be saving up for a new F50fd soon for this
Xmas =)

 

[Photofreak7]

We already know the F50 is a step behind (pun intended) the F20/30/31 -but- compared to other 12MP cameras the Fuji CCD sensor is still superior IMO (see the comparisons here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM )
Matt, PA, U.S.
Canon S5IS, G7, Panasonic TZ3, Canon SX100, (Fuji F40 on the way)
(Note: Camera's subject to change without notice)

http://www.pbase.com/photofreak777

"Exposure to the Son can keep us from being burned"

 

[Language Lab]

Well, yes, the F50 is no slouch compared to other brands at high ISO. The review at DP Review shows the F50 to have the highest resolving power of P&S cameras. This, to me at least, is good news as Fuji does have a good sensor (though not for high ISO compared to the F31).

I have the F31 and like it a lot - its high ISO performance and edge-to-edge sharpness of its lens. I am willing to trade off the high ISO performance but I was somewhat disappointed that Fuji could not keep the same level of quality in the F50 lens compared to the F31. I would have bought the F50 as a companion camera just for the 12MP resolution that I would like to use in bright conditions (at ISO 100 and 200) for large group shots so that the people standing near the edges would not look blurred.

So, I'm holding back and waiting for the next generation, perhaps an F51fd with 12MP and a higher quality lens. For low-light conditions, I would turn to the F31fd.

If Fuji would put this 12MP sensor in the next generation S9100 / S9600 it would be great. The S8000 disappoints in that it does not have the manual capabilities of the S9100 whose manual zoom ring is great to use.

It's frustrating how Fuji keeps crippling their newer models. I believe that Fuji has been looking at other manufacturers and how they are outselling Fuji with stylish, auto, no-manual capability cameras.

It's the MG sports car / Mini story all over again. Years later, Fuji might regret what they have done and go back to what made them stand out from the crowd instead of concentrating on the buck$ and watering down their products. I have a feeling that the people in engineering in Fuji may just be as frustrated as we are with what they may feel is the lack of vision in the upper echelons in their company hierarchy when it comes to developing quality cameras.

 

[booggerg]

Compared to the G9, at 800 ISO the F50's image has noticeable less detail due to excessive noise smoothing.

 

[Photofreak7]

I'm sorry I don't see this extra detail - can you tell me where you see it? It still looks like the F50 to me (even with more NR) - still keeps details just as well as the G9. Although I will admit that the F50 has more NR artifacts than the G9's more light handed approach to NR.

Compared to the G9, at 800 ISO the F50's image has noticeable less
detail due to excessive noise smoothing.

 

[Topcat]

I wouldn't use ISO800 (with flash) + ISO3200 (no flash) option with
F50fd

Do you actually own a F50. I do. I also own a F31 and a F11 and the camera I use the most is the F50. Unless you make a habit of shooting in poorly lit conditions or you are doing a documentary on the local bar scene, the F50 with it's better ergonomics, faster and more precise focusing and it's higher resolution will produce the better picture.

In all this discussion (and blasting) of the F50 what always seems to be lost here is proper composition and what kind of pictures do you take. The lowlight quality of my F11 and F31 are nice but unless I'm using it for a specific reason, the quality does not come close to ANY camera shooting at ISO 200 or less.

--



Feel free to visit my photosites: http://tom.st or
http://pixel-peeping-tom.deviantart.com

 

[booggerg]

iso 800

 

[richs10]

iso 800

Well, I see the exact opposite result. To me, the F50 pic looks significantly sharper than the G9.

 

[Photofreak7]

First I'd say I don't really want to debate this issue with you because it's not fair the OP. But to me it's close (with obvious contrast and sensitivity differences) but I'm sorry I still don't see the G9 having more detail here - in fact the G9 colors are losing saturation (paintbrush handle), there's little (if any) more detail and the noise levels are higher - I think it would be difficult to get a decent 4x6 out of the G9 above ISO400 to be honest - unless shooting RAW, in good light or NR/PP were done. I will admit that with RAW the G9 may surpass the F50 -but- at jpg level there is still a 'slight' advantage to the F50 - even on your sample. And resolution wise the F50 has more than the G9. -However- the G9 is doing well here though - I must admit - and it offers a heck of alot more camera (but at a higher cost and size) than the F50 - and the G9's IS is MUCH more useful (giving a 2-3 stop advantage vs. Fuji's 1-1 1/2 stops)
Matt, PA, U.S.
Canon S5IS, G7, Panasonic TZ3, Canon SX100, (Fuji F40 on the way)
(Note: Camera's subject to change without notice)

http://www.pbase.com/photofreak777

"Exposure to the Son can keep us from being burned"

iso 800

 

[Photofreak7]

... the colors and sharpness are better on the F50. With PP the G9 would do better but OOC jpg to jpg the Fuji still has a slight advantage (not huge but it's there)
Matt, PA, U.S.
Canon S5IS, G7, Panasonic TZ3, Canon SX100, (Fuji F40 on the way)
(Note: Camera's subject to change without notice)

http://www.pbase.com/photofreak777

"Exposure to the Son can keep us from being burned"

iso 800

Well, I see the exact opposite result. To me, the F50 pic looks
significantly sharper than the G9.

 

[booggerg]

The G9 pic shows much more detail in the brush head.