What Fuji has done

Walter S Matthews

Senior Member
Messages
3,311
Reaction score
4
Location
US
In the semoconductor world the the three magic words are bigger, faster and cheaper but in the photo detector realm, the economic rules have changed. If semiconductor manufacturing giant X delivers you a memory with twice the number of memory elements in a chip, that operate at almost twice the speed but which is the same size as the one they delivered two years ago you are happy and you will buy the chip. However much memory you have, you are happier with twice that amount and the free market has shown almost unlimited appetite for more and more memory.

In photography more mega pixels meant better image quality and in the infancy of the business the race was simply about how many mega pixels were available. However, more than 96% of the images that are being made today are 4x6 prints and I don't believe anyone can tell from the print at 4x6, whether there were 3 MP, 4MP 5MP, 6MP, 7MP or 8MP on the detector. Perhaps some people might want to make an enlargement from the images and in that case there really is a difference but for almost all photography, it really doesn't matter as long as you pass the minimum threshold which is the point where you eye cannot see pixels any more.

So what has fuji done? Well, they have produced a detector that many of the most spohisticated critics in the world acknowledge delivers something that is not available anywhere else, from any other camera system. I for example, believe I can almost match the DR of the S3 with RAW images from my Kodak 14n. But I have to work at the image in PS to get it. But, fuji didn't deliver that detector in a state of the art SLR camera body and the hue and cry from this forum has been, "are they stupid, don't they understand what we need?" For those of you who feel that way, you need to look at who sells the most cameras, in total numbers and in total dollars and you will find that Fuji is doing very well indeed. Moreover, they now have an edge over every other camera maker because they have an exclusive and monstorously well protected by patent law detector that does in fact deliver something that no other detector maker can deliver. Moreover that detector has been put in front of the worlds most meticulos and detailed analystists-professional and serious amature photographers in the form of the S3 and although the camera actually sucks-compared to the Canon 20D or the Nikon D2X, the images, in JPG, as they come out of the camera are second to none and they are visually better than anything you can get anywhere else other than from a film camera.

Maybe Fuji will make us a bedtter camera body and maybe they will not, however, my bet is that they are now going to redo all their consumer camera line and advertise to the people who never get more than a 4x6, just how much better their pictures will be if they use the Fuji extended DR camera rather than whatever they are currently using. Moreover, a 4x6 print from a 3mp Fuji with the same detector technology that is in the S3 will be better than that same print from any of the high end consumer point and shoot jobs that will cost more than twice as much.

Fuji now has a real advantage, it is something that will become more and more obvious with time. I predict that they will now concentrate that advantage into the consumer point and shoot arena, advertise the difference and for almost all amature shots, it will make a real and obvious difference. The most difference will be shown in the pictures of the worst photographer. The less a person knows about photography, the more the fuji detector will help. Flash shots where the flash is just too close, shots into the sun, people standing in bright sunlight half in and half out of the shade. We may not be happy with the S3 camera body but for the primary market of Fuji corporation, we have been and many of us will continue to test and to show that even for high end photographers that do not make dumb amateur mistakes, the Fuji detector really does improve images.

Fuji is in the business of selling systems that make 4x6 prints and for that market they now have a real breakthrough that has been tested by the best and most critical group of people in the world. Us.
 
The Fuji S2 has always been the better imager, with some more resolution compared to the Nikon D100 based at the same body. Since there is already a not so bad D20, i think Nikon will built a great D100 successor. There are hard times comming for the S3 in 2005, and the reason for most photographers to update their old S2 or D100 will in most cases not only more DR. Most have waitet at least a year for a better body ( F100 like), and i think they will not get disapointed with the D100 successor. So sorry Fuji, i like the S2, but i will not by the S3, just for more DR, i want more.
In the semoconductor world the the three magic words are bigger,
faster and cheaper but in the photo detector realm, the economic
rules have changed. If semiconductor manufacturing giant X
delivers you a memory with twice the number of memory elements in a
chip, that operate at almost twice the speed but which is the same
size as the one they delivered two years ago you are happy and you
will buy the chip. However much memory you have, you are happier
with twice that amount and the free market has shown almost
unlimited appetite for more and more memory.

In photography more mega pixels meant better image quality and in
the infancy of the business the race was simply about how many mega
pixels were available. However, more than 96% of the images that
are being made today are 4x6 prints and I don't believe anyone can
tell from the print at 4x6, whether there were 3 MP, 4MP 5MP, 6MP,
7MP or 8MP on the detector. Perhaps some people might want to make
an enlargement from the images and in that case there really is a
difference but for almost all photography, it really doesn't matter
as long as you pass the minimum threshold which is the point where
you eye cannot see pixels any more.

So what has fuji done? Well, they have produced a detector that
many of the most spohisticated critics in the world acknowledge
delivers something that is not available anywhere else, from any
other camera system. I for example, believe I can almost match the
DR of the S3 with RAW images from my Kodak 14n. But I have to work
at the image in PS to get it. But, fuji didn't deliver that
detector in a state of the art SLR camera body and the hue and cry
from this forum has been, "are they stupid, don't they understand
what we need?" For those of you who feel that way, you need to look
at who sells the most cameras, in total numbers and in total
dollars and you will find that Fuji is doing very well indeed.
Moreover, they now have an edge over every other camera maker
because they have an exclusive and monstorously well protected by
patent law detector that does in fact deliver something that no
other detector maker can deliver. Moreover that detector has been
put in front of the worlds most meticulos and detailed
analystists-professional and serious amature photographers in the
form of the S3 and although the camera actually sucks-compared to
the Canon 20D or the Nikon D2X, the images, in JPG, as they come
out of the camera are second to none and they are visually better
than anything you can get anywhere else other than from a film
camera.

Maybe Fuji will make us a bedtter camera body and maybe they will
not, however, my bet is that they are now going to redo all their
consumer camera line and advertise to the people who never get more
than a 4x6, just how much better their pictures will be if they use
the Fuji extended DR camera rather than whatever they are currently
using. Moreover, a 4x6 print from a 3mp Fuji with the same
detector technology that is in the S3 will be better than that same
print from any of the high end consumer point and shoot jobs that
will cost more than twice as much.

Fuji now has a real advantage, it is something that will become
more and more obvious with time. I predict that they will now
concentrate that advantage into the consumer point and shoot arena,
advertise the difference and for almost all amature shots, it will
make a real and obvious difference. The most difference will be
shown in the pictures of the worst photographer. The less a person
knows about photography, the more the fuji detector will help.
Flash shots where the flash is just too close, shots into the sun,
people standing in bright sunlight half in and half out of the
shade. We may not be happy with the S3 camera body but for the
primary market of Fuji corporation, we have been and many of us
will continue to test and to show that even for high end
photographers that do not make dumb amateur mistakes, the Fuji
detector really does improve images.

Fuji is in the business of selling systems that make 4x6 prints and
for that market they now have a real breakthrough that has been
tested by the best and most critical group of people in the world.
Us.
 
Walter,

Thanks for all that creative effort, I am still absorbing your comments :-)
I tend to print large images ( rather than 4 x 6 ), so higher MP numbers
are more important to me.

My S2 has served me well in large print quality . . .

Thanks,
Keith
 
Excellent comments! Understand that I was one of those critics and was even certain I would return the camera after it would surely fail my tests.

I still have it and even with the so called stinky body ( mind you, its not like any N80 body I have played with, much nicer even if it uses the same control protocol)

I will likely write my midterm impressions tonight. Expect favorable comments. I know many will be critical of the camera and there are things to certainly pick on. At the end of the day though, this camera has something very special to offer to the users that are looking for new revolutionary DSLR technology.

--
Thanks!
Mark
My Gallery
http://www.radphotos.net
 
Pretty good essay...but did you buy the S3?

Anthony
In the semoconductor world the the three magic words are bigger,
faster and cheaper but in the photo detector realm, the economic
rules have changed. If semiconductor manufacturing giant X
delivers you a memory with twice the number of memory elements in a
chip, that operate at almost twice the speed but which is the same
size as the one they delivered two years ago you are happy and you
will buy the chip. However much memory you have, you are happier
with twice that amount and the free market has shown almost
unlimited appetite for more and more memory.

In photography more mega pixels meant better image quality and in
the infancy of the business the race was simply about how many mega
pixels were available. However, more than 96% of the images that
are being made today are 4x6 prints and I don't believe anyone can
tell from the print at 4x6, whether there were 3 MP, 4MP 5MP, 6MP,
7MP or 8MP on the detector. Perhaps some people might want to make
an enlargement from the images and in that case there really is a
difference but for almost all photography, it really doesn't matter
as long as you pass the minimum threshold which is the point where
you eye cannot see pixels any more.

So what has fuji done? Well, they have produced a detector that
many of the most spohisticated critics in the world acknowledge
delivers something that is not available anywhere else, from any
other camera system. I for example, believe I can almost match the
DR of the S3 with RAW images from my Kodak 14n. But I have to work
at the image in PS to get it. But, fuji didn't deliver that
detector in a state of the art SLR camera body and the hue and cry
from this forum has been, "are they stupid, don't they understand
what we need?" For those of you who feel that way, you need to look
at who sells the most cameras, in total numbers and in total
dollars and you will find that Fuji is doing very well indeed.
Moreover, they now have an edge over every other camera maker
because they have an exclusive and monstorously well protected by
patent law detector that does in fact deliver something that no
other detector maker can deliver. Moreover that detector has been
put in front of the worlds most meticulos and detailed
analystists-professional and serious amature photographers in the
form of the S3 and although the camera actually sucks-compared to
the Canon 20D or the Nikon D2X, the images, in JPG, as they come
out of the camera are second to none and they are visually better
than anything you can get anywhere else other than from a film
camera.

Maybe Fuji will make us a bedtter camera body and maybe they will
not, however, my bet is that they are now going to redo all their
consumer camera line and advertise to the people who never get more
than a 4x6, just how much better their pictures will be if they use
the Fuji extended DR camera rather than whatever they are currently
using. Moreover, a 4x6 print from a 3mp Fuji with the same
detector technology that is in the S3 will be better than that same
print from any of the high end consumer point and shoot jobs that
will cost more than twice as much.

Fuji now has a real advantage, it is something that will become
more and more obvious with time. I predict that they will now
concentrate that advantage into the consumer point and shoot arena,
advertise the difference and for almost all amature shots, it will
make a real and obvious difference. The most difference will be
shown in the pictures of the worst photographer. The less a person
knows about photography, the more the fuji detector will help.
Flash shots where the flash is just too close, shots into the sun,
people standing in bright sunlight half in and half out of the
shade. We may not be happy with the S3 camera body but for the
primary market of Fuji corporation, we have been and many of us
will continue to test and to show that even for high end
photographers that do not make dumb amateur mistakes, the Fuji
detector really does improve images.

Fuji is in the business of selling systems that make 4x6 prints and
for that market they now have a real breakthrough that has been
tested by the best and most critical group of people in the world.
Us.
 
Excellent comments! Understand that I was one of those critics and
was even certain I would return the camera after it would surely
fail my tests.

I still have it and even with the so called stinky body ( mind you,
its not like any N80 body I have played with, much nicer even if it
uses the same control protocol)

I will likely write my midterm impressions tonight. Expect
favorable comments. I know many will be critical of the camera and
there are things to certainly pick on. At the end of the day
though, this camera has something very special to offer to the
users that are looking for new revolutionary DSLR technology.

--
Thanks!
Mark
My Gallery
http://www.radphotos.net
Thanks for your gallery photographs!

I bought the S1 shortly before the S2 came out and thought it was great. Last month I got the S3 and am still learning what it will do. Did your use the S3 for any photogtaphs in your gallery or were they all with the D70? Thanks again!
jb
 
Maybe Fuji will make us a bedtter camera body and maybe they will
not, however, my bet is that they are now going to redo all their
consumer camera line and advertise to the people who never get more
than a 4x6, just how much better their pictures will be if they use
the Fuji extended DR camera rather than whatever they are currently
using. Moreover, a 4x6 print from a 3mp Fuji with the same
detector technology that is in the S3 will be better than that same
print from any of the high end consumer point and shoot jobs that
will cost more than twice as much.
You may have overlooked that the consumer range already has had the little brother of the s3 sensor for over a year and it has hardly made an impression ( albiet with a slightly different configuration). I suspect the fact that in the 3mp s20 iteration where it shares the body of the 6mp s7000 the megapixel race plus it's initial higher cost coupled with poor software and in camera options have buried it's dr benefits.

To leverage its possibilities fuji need to address these issues before your bet would be worth putting money on !

Mike Bee

http://www.fujimugs.com/mugshots/show_member.php?member=79
 
Fuji is in the business of selling systems that make 4x6 prints and
for that market they now have a real breakthrough that has been
tested by the best and most critical group of people in the world.
Us.
Fuji's DSLR bodies sell in tiny numbers relative to other manufacturers. The S3 exists to give Fuji's consumer digital camera lineup technical credibility. The S3 sensor does that job to an extent if you use the S2's sensor for comparison. Looking at S3 images compared to those from the Canon 1Ds and 1D MK2, the "breakthrough" Fuji sensor doesn't amount to much. The achievement of delivering nice jpegs might please the folks looking for minimum post processing work, but the mediocre camera body, limited buffering and write speed compromises the camera's utility for those same shooters. The really critical folks look at the the poor raw capture performance and massive file size and wonder if two steps back and one step forward is real progress.

What Fuji has done is to offer up a DSLR that's less competitive and impressive compared to the field than the S2 was at its introduction. Then Fuji's poor communications/marketing for the S3 compromises the product's flagship role. There are a handful of Fuji folks who are rhapsodic over the S3, but I wouldn't describe them as the most critical people in the world.

--
BJN
 
I always enjoy your thoughtful posts & I knew you would see the light
Fuji now has a real advantage, it is something that will become
more and more obvious with time. I predict that they will now
concentrate that advantage into the consumer point and shoot arena,
advertise the difference and for almost all amature shots, it will
make a real and obvious difference. The most difference will be
shown in the pictures of the worst photographer. The less a person
knows about photography, the more the fuji detector will help.
Flash shots where the flash is just too close, shots into the sun,
people standing in bright sunlight half in and half out of the
shade. We may not be happy with the S3 camera body but for the
primary market of Fuji corporation, we have been and many of us
will continue to test and to show that even for high end
photographers that do not make dumb amateur mistakes, the Fuji
detector really does improve images.

Fuji is in the business of selling systems that make 4x6 prints and
for that market they now have a real breakthrough that has been
tested by the best and most critical group of people in the world.
Us.
these forums are an excellent way to learn about cameras

one of the reasons the new DSLR "official" reviews are so slow to post is the scrutiny to which they will be held ...particularly cogent is the notion that MP are not everything when it comes to IQ & the advantages the new sensor design has for everyday shooters

the unknowable is how long it will take for Fuji to ramp up production on the S3's sensor and whether QC will suffer as a consequence

I really believe there may be an advantage in getting one from the early production run as these will be most carefully manufactured and evaluated in the factory ...I wouldn't be surprised if the S3's price holds very solid or even goes up a bit (as it did with the S2)
--
pbase & dpreview supporter
Fuji SLRT forum member since 5/2001
http://www.pbase.com/artichoke
 
Before mom and pop dole out $400 or $800 for a camera, they're going to look to their Best Buy rep for advice and find they can get a range of other features (including more MPs) for less money. Right or wrong, just like the phrase, Money talks: BS walks.

I appreciate, Walter, that you mention sophisticated critics. When it comes time to spend hard-earned money, however, unless Fuji somehow become synomymous with Ferrari, Cartier and the like, the market where the real money is found isn't quite so sophisticated. Beer outsells wiine; hamburger outsells fillet mignon. I would suspect that in terms of total net profits worldwide, beer and hamburger are also more profitable.

The S3 brings definite improvements at the thin end of the wedge, so to speak, but the general sentiment, as you point out, is that the masses were/are leaning in a somewhat different direction. Perhaps time will change those sentiments. Regardless, I wish for nothing but success to Fuji and those who find the S3 to their liking. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's bad.
 
Comparing the capabilities of the S3 sensor to the S20 is a bit misleading. The smaller pixels on the S3 have a very different positioning than those in the S20. Same theory, but different sensors. Not to mention the difference in size!
Maybe Fuji will make us a bedtter camera body and maybe they will
not, however, my bet is that they are now going to redo all their
consumer camera line and advertise to the people who never get more
than a 4x6, just how much better their pictures will be if they use
the Fuji extended DR camera rather than whatever they are currently
using. Moreover, a 4x6 print from a 3mp Fuji with the same
detector technology that is in the S3 will be better than that same
print from any of the high end consumer point and shoot jobs that
will cost more than twice as much.
You may have overlooked that the consumer range already has had
the little brother of the s3 sensor for over a year and it has
hardly made an impression ( albiet with a slightly different
configuration). I suspect the fact that in the 3mp s20 iteration
where it shares the body of the 6mp s7000 the megapixel race plus
it's initial higher cost coupled with poor software and in camera
options have buried it's dr benefits.

To leverage its possibilities fuji need to address these issues
before your bet would be worth putting money on !

Mike Bee

http://www.fujimugs.com/mugshots/show_member.php?member=79
--
Member PPA, NAPP, WPPI
 
to understand.

Think about the inital reviews we have seen already. Totally missed what the S3 could do. If you measure this camera against tradditional standards it will not look like much. If you measure it for the ground it breaks and you want to compare that against others cameras, its more difficult since you have to add or change benchmarks.

Imagine that, you have to add new benchmarks because of the S3. What does that tell you?

--
Thanks!
Mark
My Gallery
http://www.radphotos.net
 
Fuji is in the business of selling systems that make 4x6 prints and
for that market they now have a real breakthrough that has been
tested by the best and most critical group of people in the world.
Us.
Fuji's DSLR bodies sell in tiny numbers relative to other
manufacturers. The S3 exists to give Fuji's consumer digital camera
lineup technical credibility. The S3 sensor does that job to an
extent if you use the S2's sensor for comparison. Looking at S3
images compared to those from the Canon 1Ds and 1D MK2, the
"breakthrough" Fuji sensor doesn't amount to much.
Well, if you put the sensor from the 1Ds or the 1DMK2 into an inexpensive point and shoot and compare the images to a shot made from a 3 mp consumer grade detector, no one, I repeat, no one, could tell the difference at 4x6.

However, the S3 detector in that same camera body would make a difference in many pictures. Dynamic range improvement at constant resolution will make a difference and at 4x6 that is exactly what you have. I owned, for a while, the previous incarnation of Fuji's attempt to make an improved DR, the F700 and I tested the S20 relatively extensively and found that there was a little bit of difference but not enough to matter much. The difference in DR in the S3 is measurably more and it makes a difference on many, many images. It is particularly apparent on close flash shots where bright areas tend to get blown and with the S3 these blown spots tend to hold detail.

The point of my essay, is that I don't believe Fuji really cares that much whether or not we like the camera. I would imagine that they do want to recoup the investment and I suspect they will do that but, they do care about the detector improvement and it appears that they have made a breakthrough. They are either number one in the consumer area or close to it and this detector will allow them to make a sweep in that market.

Based on images I got from the F700 and from the S20, I believe it would be difficult indeed to gain much if any market advantage. The new detector in the S3 will make a difference and when they put that detector technology in a consumer size detector and can leverage the dramatically lower costs into consumer cameras, they will get the payback for the detector research.

To answer another question, no I will not be buying an S3. It does not give me anything I cannot already get with my collection of cameras and the body is just not up to what I need. I'll wait till the market shakes out some more. Remember Foveon has been silent now for a long time and if they were to pop out with a 6MP detector that might just top all of them.

Like GMD I plan to get the new Mamiya because I need the resolution so I'll wait out this round and perhaps a few more tiill the industry is a bit mroe mature.
 
Looking at S3
images compared to those from the Canon 1Ds and 1D MK2, the
"breakthrough" Fuji sensor doesn't amount to much. The achievement
of delivering nice jpegs might please the folks looking for minimum
post processing work, but the mediocre camera body, limited
buffering and write speed compromises the camera's utility for
those same shooters. The really critical folks look at the the poor
raw capture performance and massive file size and wonder if two
steps back and one step forward is real progress.
I think the RAW capture abilities of the S3 has been under reported because the jpg quality of its output is so extraordinarily fine & its RAW files are so large

I don't know that anyone has looked at the RAW file with DR off (about the same size file as the S2's, btw) or at the RAW compressor built into the new software (don't want to mess with that yet)

from what I have seen, the RAW files out of the S3 allow for greater flexibility that those from the S2, though the improvement in IQ may not seem as great (it is there however) due to the fine job Fuji did with their jpg alogrithms

regarding RAW-RAW comparisons of the EOS 1DS II to the S3 ...well I think its at least a toss up between the two for IQ and I think the S3 produces a consistently more pleasing file ...those extra pixels just don't add up to much in resolution that I can see & the inherent problems that the EOS 1DS II has at its edges and blooming and 12 bit vs 14 bit color make it seem woefully over priced when IQ is the prime concern ...and the S3 has a lovely ergonomic design, while the EOS 1DS II is such a hulking beast
I know some folks just love converting Canon's RAW files ...what fun!

the S3's RAWs are very, very deep and the converter allows for lots more options (you can tune the mix of S & R sensors or load different gamuts or film emulaitons, for instance) and seems to be just about as fast in processing as for the S2
your statement about RAW capture performance for the S3 is plain wrong
--
pbase & dpreview supporter
Fuji SLRT forum member since 5/2001
http://www.pbase.com/artichoke
 
New benchmarks because of the S3? That's grasping at straws, Mark. Fuji hasn't proved that their sensor can capture more dynamic range than all other DSLR sensors out there. All they've done is marketed that it is capable of wider DR -- relative to what? -- through the use of two sizes of pixels.

While I haven't seen all of GMD's images, I believe he is showing that Fuji is on to something... but it's not light years ahead of all DSLRs and, for all its benefits, there is a distinct set of offsetting liabilities. From Manny-Winnipeg's posts, we learned it's ahead of badly captured D70/D100 images and we can place whatever value we want on Gary Fong's demonstrations... but as I have mentioned more than once, there is more than one way to address the DR obstacles the S3 is marketed (by Fuji) as a solution for. Where fill-flash isn't an option (oh yes, I know: some people don't like fill flash but perhaps they should take their flashes off-camera, use diffusers, bounce, etc.), the S3 holds an edge. Where 14 bit color accuracy is concerned, the S3 holds an edge... but at $2500 we're really squeezing the grapes to get that last drop of grape juice.

I suspect this thread will become rather heated. I hold no malice toward you or others who see merit in the S3. From a pure cost/benefit perspective, however, when the offsetting liabilities and alternative capture techniques are considered, the hype exceeds the reality in my very humble opinion. Best regards!
 
Looking at S3
images compared to those from the Canon 1Ds and 1D MK2, the
"breakthrough" Fuji sensor doesn't amount to much. The achievement
of delivering nice jpegs might please the folks looking for minimum
post processing work, but the mediocre camera body, limited
buffering and write speed compromises the camera's utility for
those same shooters.
I'm glad to hear that you're such a "critical" person that you would hammer a $2500 camera for not living up to what an $8000 camera produces. This comparison is constantly made in the most dunderheaded fashion by so called "critical" people, and for what reason? I would be disappointed in the state of the industry if a camera at a substantially higher price point DIDN'T demonstrate some sort of superiority in its imager and overall package.

The really critical folks look at the the poor
raw capture performance and massive file size and wonder if two
steps back and one step forward is real progress.

What Fuji has done is to offer up a DSLR that's less competitive
and impressive compared to the field than the S2 was at its
introduction. Then Fuji's poor communications/marketing for the S3
compromises the product's flagship role.
I actually think there are some reasonable criticisms embedded in your tirade. Still, a fair number of folks will decide biting the bullet is worth it to get the advantages, even if the upgrade isn't as cost-effective as the previous one was. "Really critical" folks (at least by my definition) also look at the actual image quality, and not just at features and functions and the quality of corporate communications in the context of the current market.

But it seems you define "really critical" people as those who employ your cost-benefit criteria, and slam anyone who goes in a different direction.

I grant Fuji a pass to some degree here because they're stuck with licensing bodies, like Kodak, though their pricing puts them in an awkward "grey area" in the current market. I'm mainly disappointed that their software skills haven't yet caught up to their knowledge of imaging, though the RAW processing software, along with the actual image quality, has improved notably enough to make me (mostly) pleased with the upgrade.

There are a handful of
Fuji folks who are rhapsodic over the S3, but I wouldn't describe
them as the most critical people in the world.
If you actually bothered to read any of my comments regarding my early impressions with the S3, you would see that I'm enthusiastic about certain aspects of the camera and disappointed with others, but I can justify the upgrade and be reasonably enthusiastic about the camera regardless. I think others here feel similarly, and are even more demonstrably enthusiastic about what the camera is capable of, and have tried to describe their experience with the camera and its images in considerable detail.

I'd put more stock in the intelligence and critical faculties of these folks than anything you've said to date. It's your right to be disappointed with the S3 and to prefer the alternatives. It would be nice if you could actually employ some balance and coherent logic while bashing the camera and the people who use it.

Robert
 
agree 100%. The general public don't care about the difference between the S3 and any other digicam. Most non-photographers don't even notice blown whites or shadow noise IMHO. When they go to Best Buy with their $300 all they want to know is "how much zoom does it have" and "how many megapixels". Those are simple ideas for them to grasp, and its what sells unfortunately. The next step up are people who want interchangeable lenses..:) Most consumers don't buy one P&S because it has a lens designed by zeiss or whoever..they buy based on if the camera physically meets their requirements (can it fit in her purse) and how many megapixels.
Before mom and pop dole out $400 or $800 for a camera, they're
going to look to their Best Buy rep for advice and find they can
get a range of other features (including more MPs) for less money.
Right or wrong, just like the phrase, Money talks: BS walks.

I appreciate, Walter, that you mention sophisticated critics. When
it comes time to spend hard-earned money, however, unless Fuji
somehow become synomymous with Ferrari, Cartier and the like, the
market where the real money is found isn't quite so sophisticated.
Beer outsells wiine; hamburger outsells fillet mignon. I would
suspect that in terms of total net profits worldwide, beer and
hamburger are also more profitable.

The S3 brings definite improvements at the thin end of the wedge,
so to speak, but the general sentiment, as you point out, is that
the masses were/are leaning in a somewhat different direction.
Perhaps time will change those sentiments. Regardless, I wish for
nothing but success to Fuji and those who find the S3 to their
liking. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's bad.
 
New benchmarks because of the S3? That's grasping at straws, Mark.
Fuji hasn't proved that their sensor can capture more dynamic range
than all other DSLR sensors out there. All they've done is
marketed that it is capable of wider DR -- relative to what? --
through the use of two sizes of pixels.

While I haven't seen all of GMD's images, I believe he is showing
that Fuji is on to something... but it's not light years ahead of
all DSLRs and, for all its benefits, there is a distinct set of
offsetting liabilities. From Manny-Winnipeg's posts, we learned
it's ahead of badly captured D70/D100 images and we can place
whatever value we want on Gary Fong's demonstrations... but as I
have mentioned more than once, there is more than one way to
address the DR obstacles the S3 is marketed (by Fuji) as a solution
for. Where fill-flash isn't an option (oh yes, I know: some people
don't like fill flash but perhaps they should take their flashes
off-camera, use diffusers, bounce, etc.), the S3 holds an edge.
Where 14 bit color accuracy is concerned, the S3 holds an edge...
but at $2500 we're really squeezing the grapes to get that last
drop of grape juice.

I suspect this thread will become rather heated. I hold no malice
toward you or others who see merit in the S3. From a pure
cost/benefit perspective, however, when the offsetting liabilities
and alternative capture techniques are considered, the hype exceeds
the reality in my very humble opinion. Best regards!
Its all relative.

I would say that Fuji places the camera where it should be from a business stand point

For wedding and portrait work this camera is wonderful. I had sent a recent wedding to my lab for proofing that was shot with the S3. I told the owner to tell me what differences, if any,they see in the files because I have a new camera. That is all I said and when they were finshed proofing they said they noticed right off that there was more detail in the highlights and less saturation. In general the files looked much better than the S2 files they have ben seeing fom me in almost 3 years. Not very scientific but good enough for me. Is it a 1Ds11 or D2X?

No. But I could never justify spending that kind of money for my line of work. I am not one who needs the latest and greatest just so I can say I own it.
If anyone feels the need for speed then I suppose they need to look elsewhere.
 
I think one has to view the Ver. 2 chip redesign not so much as a highlight of how much better the S3's pixel layout is versus the S20's chip but rather as symptomatic of the shortcomings of the Ver. 1 Gen IV chip... and that the Ver. 1 chip, while fully developed and an easy fit/cheap solution for the S3, wasn't significantly better than the Gen III sensor for a variety of reasons that may have more to do with noise than dynamic range... but we'll never know the real reasons.

Regardless, I think citing the earlier cameras is a fair testimony to the success (or failure) of the concept as it is the concept that's being argued here. Actual non-conceptual results can be empirically tested and, at some point in time, I hope we will see comprehensible results from those tests. To date, however, we have a smorgasbord of results that can be interpreted in a variety of ways and a feature set that some view as not acceptable. For others, if the S3's feature set is acceptable and it delivers important image qualities that cannot be achieved any other way -- or at the very least allows workflow to be streamlined (which is arguable) -- then so be it. Either way, concerning Walter's initial post, I think a glance in the rear view mirror is appropriate.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top