Which camera?

smokycity · Nov 29, 2004

Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150 different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera, I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Thanks for your input in advance.

Flat Out · Nov 29, 2004

Hi smokycity

I'm not so good at the technical stuff but if I got it right so if you have one photo taken in 12mp and then crop it by three times you got 6X3=18 zoom and you still have a 4mp image left to play with. With this way to see it you got 8 times more zoom out of the S7000 than the S5100 at same resolution, but at higher cost. I hope someone else here can confirm it or I have to think over it again ; )

smokycity said:
Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Thanks for your input in advance.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ingvar H (Sweden) Allways trying to learn something new.
FujiFilm S7000
My gallery's are here...
http://www.finepixphoto.com

Mattp6200 · Nov 29, 2004

The s7000 is a great camera for the price!!

Robotnik123 · Nov 29, 2004

The s7000 is a better camera. Don't worry about the slightly less optical zoom, it hardly matters 95% of the time. Later on, you can always get a teleconverter like the Olympus TCON-17 1.7x tele-lens for your s7000, which will give it equivalent reach.

smokycity said:
Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Thanks for your input in advance.

morris · Nov 29, 2004

While you can crop and your math is not correct but the theory of what you saying is somewhat sound, you are not taking into account lens resolution. Even though you get the same pixels, when you crop, you louse lines per inch of lens resolution which means that detail is lost and the photo may not appear as sharp.

Morris

Flat Out said:
smokycity said:

Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Thanks for your input in advance.

Click to expand...

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ingvar H (Sweden) Allways trying to learn something new.
FujiFilm S7000
My gallery's are here...
http://www.finepixphoto.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

http://qcpages.qc.edu/~morris/POD

morris · Nov 29, 2004

Yes, but how much reach did you have on your 35mm equipment and were you satisfied? Use the 35mm equivalent as your glide. You can also add a TCON-17 to the S5100, but in general the S7000 is probably a better camera.

Morris

Robotnik123 said:
smokycity said:

Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Thanks for your input in advance.

Click to expand...

--

http://qcpages.qc.edu/~morris/POD

Mister Mantis · Nov 29, 2004

smokycity said:
Greetings all,

This is my first post here.

WELCOME.

smokycity said:
I am considering buying my first
digital camera.

I was in the same boat, not too long ago...

smokycity said:
I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one.

You should only buy ONE.

smokycity said:
After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

$150, yup.

smokycity said:
My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

My viewpoint is this:
Are you printing large pictures?
If you are, you will appreciate the S7000.
You want to save some cash and get a little more zoom?
The S5100 is the way to go.
I have the S5100, and a Canon i860 printer, and I can make
calender-quality 8x10 prints.
Mostly, I just post my pictures on my website.
They end up around 1000x700 res.
SO...
I don't really need the extra MP's or expense of the S7000.
The S7000 is probably a little better than the S5100 in many
situations, but the S5100 is a killer camera for the price.
( I seen the S5100 going for $280 on the net, from a reputable
distributor! )

smokycity said:
I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me.

I was totally new to photography in general, before I bought an
S5000.
I liked the S5000, but the image quality was not quite where I
wanted it to be.
I sold the 5000 and bought the 5100 shortly after it's release.
I have been happy ever since.

smokycity said:
I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos.

That sounds like a professional photographer to me!
( Excluding paparrazi, of course... )

smokycity said:
I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

No gaurantees in the tech market.
You are on your own with THAT one.

~ Mr. Mantis ~
Finepix S5100

kayners · Nov 29, 2004

smokycity said:
...I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

The 5100 is a newer model.

I'm not sure which industry standards you refer to. Storage media?

You might also take a look at the Panasonic FZ20. It's got a nice bright image-stabilized 12x zoom lens. Lots of people like that one, a lot! Not as much resolution as the S7000. I'd get one myself, but I want more than 5MP resolution.

Steve.

David Gosden · Nov 30, 2004

The general rule is 'Buy as many pixels as you can afford'

I have a S7000 and can say it's a fine camera, well worth the money at £292 here in England, UK.

David Gosden
Channel Tunnel Rail Link Photographic Project
http://www.ctrlphoto.freeuk.com

Phil Loughran · Nov 30, 2004

I would go for the bigger chip.

I have just returned from Thailand...and I bought an S20Pro, because I was taking shots with high contrast lighting conditions, and after previous experience I didn't need more megapixels...I needed better exposure control to stop the highlights burning out.
Smaller CCD cameras I have used in the past really burnt out the highlights.

I have to say this camera performed very well. I was alsop taking pictures in night markets, and wanted to use available light...and the 800 iso rating was very useful...and in many shots perfectly acceptable for small prints and webpages.

I managed to buy the refurbished S20 from Fuji UK for 230 UKP....but the website hasn't got any now by the looks of it....

S20 Firewire is good too...

I know the camera is close to the S7000...so I would go for that.
I think this camera body is a modern day classic....I loved using it.

David Gosden said:
The general rule is 'Buy as many pixels as you can afford'

I have a S7000 and can say it's a fine camera, well worth the money
at £292 here in England, UK.

David Gosden
Channel Tunnel Rail Link Photographic Project
http://www.ctrlphoto.freeuk.com

MazG · Dec 1, 2004

Hi Smokycity

I'm suprised the price difference is that great. In Canada there is only a $90 CDN price difference ($549 vs. $639 CDN). Price on the 7000 just dropped 2 weeks ago here by a huge amount whereas the 5100 is new so the price hasn't dropped yet.

I ended up returning the S20 I bought (for $749 CDN) to get the 7000 as I think the pictures are sharper and more detailed.

Just my 2 cents.

smokycity said:
Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Thanks for your input in advance.

--
MazG

David Gosden · Dec 2, 2004

I usually underexpose by 1/3 of a stop to improve highlight detail. A recent test of a white golf ball type radar station at normal then - 1/3rd stop proved the point that this is the way to go with the S7k.

I also have a Minolta Dimage7UG which performs almost identically with slight under exposure.

Hope this helps!

--
David Gosden
Channel Tunnel Rail Link Photographic Project
http://www.ctrlphoto.freeuk.com

marty1 · Dec 2, 2004

smokycity said:
Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

First, you might want to read the review in dcresource.com for the 5100/5500. Compared to the 7000, the 5100 has a max shutter speed of 1/2000 & the 7000 has 1/10,000. If you do hand held macro photography, the speeds above 1/2500 can come in handy. The 5100 has a 3 frame burst (first 3 or last 3) where the 7000 has a 5 frame burst. If you are going to do action shots, the 7000 is the better camera. The 7000 has 2 macro modes, but if you get a set of close up lenses, it is a non issue. The 5100 comes with a lens adapter, where, with the 7000, it is an add on. The 5100 uses only the xD card, where the 7000 can use either xD or compact flash. Neither camera will be obsolete in 2 years, but there will be improvements, and perhaps by then, a better standard sensor. The 5100 has a standard CCD sensor, where the 7000 uses the super CCD. I believe that the noise levels are about the same in both cameras. The full res picture from the 7000 allows a hefty crop. I have taken a 30% piece of the original photo and have printed a good 8 x 10. I have obtained a very good 4 x 6 with a 25% piece of the original. This assumes that you start off with a good picture to play with.

As always, my advice is to borrow an xD card from somebody you know, and go to the store and try the cameras. Check out the picture quality at home, then make a final decision.

Also, when you eventually make a decision, learn to use manual mode as fast as possible, and you will get better results. If you shoot in auto, for important shots, use the exposure bracket at + - 1/3 or 2/3.

markerf16 · Dec 4, 2004

Hello everyone,,,,

I have owned the s7000 for about 2 months now and have taken about 300 photos. For 449.00 at cosco, this buy could not be beat. Also it helps that I can return it a year from now if I have any issues!!! I was reluctant to get this camera cause I owned the s602 version before and hated the camera. Grainy pics and soft/out of focused pics ruined all the fancy features that camera had to offer. With the s7000 I have only had maybe 8 pics out of 300 be out of focus and half of these were the conditions not the camera. feel free to see some photos here at my web site http://phoenixwebs.org/pictures.htm hated the s602 but Fuji got it right this time with the s7000. I personaly like the bigger feel of the s7000 over the s5100. Please note that Fuji tends to be picky about the CF flash you use. I am using sandisk with no problems and the fast cards tend to be just as good as the XD cards,, recemend Lexar, Sandisk, Kingston High speed and PDQ (bargain and very fast) for best results. Either camera well make you happy and it seems that fuji fixed all the issues with the prev models. One note Pics tend to be better at the native 6mp than 12mp. So I consider the 12 a waste in most cases. Pro reviews agree with this as well.

marty1 said:
smokycity said:

Greetings all,

This is my first post here. I am considering buying my first
digital camera. I had been looking at the S5100, until I was shown
the S7000. Now I am looking at both, but can only buy one. After
shopping around I have found that they are about $100-$150
different in price.

My question is this: Is it worth the extra $100-$150 to get the
extra megapixels and upgraded CCD, or should I go with the standard
CCD and lower megapixels, but get 4x more optical zoom.

I am a 35mm SLR person and this is a new thing for me. I am by no
means a professional photographer, but when I play with the camera,
I like to be creative and take decent photos. This is a way for me
to supplement my 35mm stuff. I also want a camera that will not be
obsolete in a year or two as industry standards change.

Click to expand...

First, you might want to read the review in dcresource.com for the
5100/5500. Compared to the 7000, the 5100 has a max shutter speed
of 1/2000 & the 7000 has 1/10,000. If you do hand held macro
photography, the speeds above 1/2500 can come in handy. The 5100
has a 3 frame burst (first 3 or last 3) where the 7000 has a 5
frame burst. If you are going to do action shots, the 7000 is the
better camera. The 7000 has 2 macro modes, but if you get a set of
close up lenses, it is a non issue. The 5100 comes with a lens
adapter, where, with the 7000, it is an add on. The 5100 uses only
the xD card, where the 7000 can use either xD or compact flash.
Neither camera will be obsolete in 2 years, but there will be
improvements, and perhaps by then, a better standard sensor. The
5100 has a standard CCD sensor, where the 7000 uses the super CCD.
I believe that the noise levels are about the same in both cameras.
The full res picture from the 7000 allows a hefty crop. I have
taken a 30% piece of the original photo and have printed a good 8 x
10. I have obtained a very good 4 x 6 with a 25% piece of the
original. This assumes that you start off with a good picture to
play with.

As always, my advice is to borrow an xD card from somebody you
know, and go to the store and try the cameras. Check out the
picture quality at home, then make a final decision.

Also, when you eventually make a decision, learn to use manual mode
as fast as possible, and you will get better results. If you shoot
in auto, for important shots, use the exposure bracket at + - 1/3
or 2/3.

--
A picture is a memory for the soul!

kayners · Dec 4, 2004

markerf16 said:
...Pics tend to be better at the native 6mp than 12mp. So I consider
the 12 a waste in most cases. Pro reviews agree with this as well.

As I understand it, the camera always interpolates to 12MP, then downsizes to 6 and applies compression. I've read that the compression at 6MP is higher (more artifacts) than at 12MP, so unless you're just trying to save storage space, it makes little sense to shoot at 6MP.

Does anyone know if RAW is always 12MP interpolated? Or can you get 6MP native RAW. It wouldn't seem so, as there are 12 million sensors. They'd have to ignore half of them to get 6MP native.

Steve.

Search

Which camera?

smokycity

New member

Flat Out

Well-known member

Mattp6200

Well-known member

Robotnik123

Leading Member

morris

Guest

morris

Guest

Mister Mantis

Veteran Member

kayners

Leading Member

David Gosden

Well-known member

Phil Loughran

Veteran Member

MazG

Forum Enthusiast

David Gosden

Well-known member

marty1

Forum Enthusiast

markerf16

New member

kayners

Leading Member

Keyboard shortcuts