Reading mode: Light Dark

Fuji F10 better than the SD500?

Go to last post
B

Bluegrass

Senior Member
Messages
2,586
Reaction score
0
Location
38*N/84*W, KY, US
Simon Joinson writes:

"But after using the F10 for a couple of months I found myself reaching for it much more often than some of the other cameras I had on test at the same time - especially when going out in the evening, when the extra sensitivity really counted. And it may not be as slim and sexy as models such as the Canon SD500, but it handles a lot better and produces better results in most circumstances - most especially when light levels start to drop. I found the images a little lacking in punchiness, but boosting saturation produced very nice prints."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf10Zoom/
 
wait, anyone notice the shutter time is twice longer in Fuji ISO 400 than Canon ISO 800 at same aperture in DP review? In fact the Canon has a faster shutter time in ISO 400 than F10's ISO 800/1600 but the Fuji uses a smaller aperture. I don't think it is a fair conclusion to claim the Fuji will do better than the Canon for indoor shots, even though it may be true. I like to see how the F10 perform against the others in a fixed low F stop with similar shutter speed.
 
Now only if it didn't use xD cards...

Fuji, Olympus, and sony exclude themselves from my consideration for memory format reasons. SD is the future, and I already use CF and SD - All my familiy and friends use those two formats and have readers for them, so we can swap photos at will. I'm not about to add a third format until something much more widespread than xD or memory stick comes along. And companies like Canon, Nikon, and Kodak have to adopt it for it to be considered widespread.

sigh so close, yet so far. If it was fantastically better than everything else (had puch in the pictures like Simon mentions) then I'd still consider it.
--
MjN
 
to my earlier question in Fuji forum

in the iso 400 comparisons
AndyHWC said:
F10 chose 1/345 @ F4.3 and the canon was 1/635 @ F4

a big difference in shutter speed.I have seen many members accuse
the F10 of overstating the iso,yet you say it is similar to the
10D.Then how come the SD500 shutterspeed is so different.Is canon
understating their iso no's?

Sanjay
Click to expand...
It's slightly difficult to draw such conclusions from our test shots when using cameras without fine control. Yes the exposures given would indicate that there is around half to 3/4 of a stop's difference between the two cameras, and yes we generally find Canon Powershots to understate the ISO setting. However if you look at the histograms of the two images you'll see that the F10's image is a little overexposed compared to the Canon, and I'd estimate the difference is in fact less than half a stop (caused by the Canon actually being slightly over ISO 400). The F10 gave exactly the same reading as our handheld meter and the 10D (SLR ISO values are usually pretty accurate).

S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com

--

 
Mark N,

I am so with you on this-- I will not reward a manufacturer with these "alternate" formats. IMO, xD and memory stick offer no benefits as compared to SD or CF. I wasn't thrilled when I had to buy SD (had lots of CF cards), but I can accept this format for smaller digicams. But I will NOT buy a camera with xD or memory stick.
 
I guess for us typical shooters. We don't really care whether the ISO rating is accurate or not. We just want to know if we need to take a low-light indoor shot at shutter speed of 1/60 sec. Which camera will provide a better picture? It will be nice if someone can do that type of test with the F10 and other cameras.
 
I kept my sd500 and returned the f10. It was ok but overall pics were not at clear.
 
-- Bluegrass, why don't you buy both and let us know? Seems you are asking a silly question as I doubt anybody owns both and I think one has to have a camera for more than a couple of weeks to get the best out of it. Neither has raw which is my main concern but I still ordered the SD500 as I have slowly become a Canon loyal follower and want a tiny camera.
fredyr
 
If enough of us complain about this, maybe Olympus and Fuji will understand that they loose clients because of their memory cards (I have no hopes for Sony, and its other digital devices also use MS, so they're there to stay).

xD is supposed to be a bit faster (but that depends on the quality of your card, and Extreme, Ultra SD cards are faster) and MS has no advantage whatsoever. I don't understand why these formats exist at all (except that Sony never was happy with another brand's format... emotional, I guess) and I won't condone brands that work against standardization.
--
bdery

Québec city, Canada
Cool,pix S Q
http://community.webshots.com/user/beder12
 
I am still baffled how people will compare ISO400 to ISO400 on two different cameras without looking at the shutter speeds!! In the review the SD500 is nearly double the shutter speed. Of course the image is going to have extreme noise compared to the other at half the shutter! NOT GOOD COMPARISON! Lets see the two side by side with equal shutter. Like the low ISO comparison where I think the SD500 looked way better than the F10. (and almost equal shutter, and different ISO)
 
Shutter speed alone does not make any difference in these shots. It's the overall Exposure Value (EV) that needs to be considered. The ISO 400 shot from the SD500 has an EV of 11.3 vs. the 10.6 EV of the F10, making the F10 about 2/3 of a stop slower.

So it would seem logical to compare the ISO 800 shot from the F10 instead. Only problem is that the ISO 800 shot is EV 11.0 (or 12.0 if factored at ISO 400), which makes that shot about 2/3 of a stop faster than the SD500 image.

But if you do the ISO 800 vs. ISO 400 comparison anyway, I think you'll find the images fairly close. Some might even say the ISO 800 image from the F10 beats the SD500's ISO 400 shot.
--
BigWaveDave
 
I thought that slower/longer shutter speeds result in increased noise? Isn't this the reason why many cameras have auto noise reduction for slower shutter speeds?

Wouldn't this cause the opposite of what was said below?

Mike
luke said:
I am still baffled how people will compare ISO400 to ISO400 on two
different cameras without looking at the shutter speeds!! In the
review the SD500 is nearly double the shutter speed. Of course the
image is going to have extreme noise compared to the other at half
the shutter! NOT GOOD COMPARISON! Lets see the two side by side
with equal shutter. Like the low ISO comparison where I think the
SD500 looked way better than the F10. (and almost equal shutter,
and different ISO)
Click to expand...
--
http://mike7389.fotopic.net/
http://photobucket.com/albums/v648/mike682/

'Smooth seas do not make skillfull sailors'--African proverb
 
thanks, but all I care is the end result, both pics looks to have similar brightness to me. I agreed that the F10's ISO 800 has less visible nosie than SD500 ISO 400, unfortunately, it is taken with a different aperture settings. I cannot tell if F10 gives better DOP than SD500 as the aperture suggests. But again SD500's shutter speed is almost twice faster than the F10.
 
What I found when comparing a F10 to my S400 was that I could take the same shot at half the ISO of the F10 get the roughly the same shutter speed chosen by the camera, and in nearly every scenario I tried this (all low light) I got a better shot from the Canon (sharper, less noise, better exposure).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top