s9000 vs NikonD70: stabization, schmabilization!

Does this look like a deliberate jab to the s9000 to you?

"We also need to be aware of the increasing use of marketing speak, image stabilization that isn't (it just increases sensitivity) and high ISO on compacts which is unusable, use of the word RAW where there isn't any. "
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/

Just in case it is, I'll answer: Fuji never claimed to have IS!

They have "anti-shake" mode and they explain openly that it works by raising ISO and shutter speed. And by the way, it also reduces motion blur from the subject, which IS does not!

My s9000 doesn't have IS... so frickin' what?? Neither does my NikonD70s. I don't need it because both cameras can shoot at high ISO and fast speed!

Here's a comparison: I took both this shots this morning with no tripod, no IS. I was standing up honding in my hand one camera, then the other. Almost max zoom (250mm) on the s9000 and full zoom (70mm) on the Nikon



Fuji s9000
ISO 200
shutter speed 1/200
aperture f8
Mode A



Nikon D70s
ISO 200
shutter speed 1/150
aperture f10
Mode A

Notice some pixelization in the s9000. This is my fault, since I shot at 2MP (I forgot to change it from yesterday). But as far as color, sharpness and lack of blur, the s9000 holds its own. Not to shabby for a camera without the "almighty image stabilization"

--

Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

s9000



D70s

Please read the previous post for an explanation on these pics

--

Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

I've spent an ungodly amount of time trying to upload this pics at the same size to photobucket, and they finally are, but now the fuji has been scaled down for no apparent reason.

--
Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

They did not compare the D70s against the S9500 ... if they had, it would have been a slaughter and you know it. In low light and in any situation where fast focus response is critical there is no contest. With a decent lense on it, the D70s will be sharper. And you can buy VR lenses for the D70s that stabilize the image better than the Panny system can. Add that stabilization to the excellent high ISO and there is no contest.

But you pay triple to quadruple the cost for that privilege ... so there is actually no real comparison there. The S9000 is a superb camera for the money. Full stop. The S5200 might be even better for the money while it is on sale so cheap ($234 USD right now.)

As for their comments, they openly state that the F10 is their current compact benchmark ... so that means that the high ISO in compacts statement is likely pointed at those that are about to release mediocre high ISO or worse (they're coming and they will be disappointing I would bet.)

The IS comment is legit. Fuji has muddied the waters there ... I like the technique in the F10 and F11 because 1600ISO is pretty clean there (and even then, not nearly as clean as on the Nikon dSLRs) .... but on the S-series cams, 800 is as high as you can go unless you are truly desperate. So they are not stretching the truth at all.

One more thing ... your links do not work. And even if they did, why would you bother posting an image shot at 2mp against an image from the Nikon? The main advantage the Fuji might have is the extra mp ....

--
My gallery: http://letkeman.net/Photos

Mot sure why you posted these in support of your arguments. The Nikon shot is noticeably sharper here ... the two tall lights in the distance on the left are clearly visible in the Nikon shot and smudged out of existence on the Fuji. The texture of the gravel is fairly clear on the Nikon and pretty blurry on the Fuji.

The S9500 can produce excellent images that can compete with the Nikon in bright sunlight. But not straight from the cam ...

And there is no EXIF info in these images ... how can the comparison be judged fairly?

--
My gallery: http://letkeman.net/Photos

At first, when I cropped the Nikon to 800x600 and the s9000 to 800x600 also, they both looked excellent on my screen.

Unfortunately, photobucket resized the fuji shot and not the nikon shot, so the comparison is useless, as you said. I can see that now, but I can't delete the post.

So I will have to do it again. and I know the D70 certainly beats the s9000 hands down, but for the price the s9000 does a pretty good job without the need for IS, which was my point.

And I don't know if the "marketspeak" comment was directed at the s9000 for sure, but it sure sounds like it. I hate to see people accuse a manufacturer of making claims it never made.

--
Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

Grafight said:

Does this look like a deliberate jab to the s9000 to you?
Just in case it is, I'll answer: Fuji never claimed to have IS!
They have "anti-shake" mode and they explain openly that it works
by raising ISO and shutter speed. And by the way, it also reduces
motion blur from the subject, which IS does not!

Click to expand...

You don't think so!....then could you explain how I managed the below speed boat shot, possibly travelling at 30/40 mph with IS. Taken with my D50 on my 18-200 (27mm-300mm)VR lens. It was shot at 1/60s at 300mm at ISO1600. And I could have shot with this lens down to 1/15s no problem at 300mm! Try holding your Fuji at that shutter speed hand held at 300mm and more than likely you will have a blurred noisy mess at ISO1600. Don't get me wrong, the S9000/9500 are great cams and a bargain buy, but you are also comparing IS to high ISO's and I'm just pointing out in my samples that putting IS on a decent high ISO camera would open up even more possibilities for the fuji like in the church photo below as well.

Grafight said:

My s9000 doesn't have IS... so frickin' what?? Neither does my
NikonD70s. I don't need it because both cameras can shoot at high
ISO and fast speed!

Click to expand...

...True but both your fuji and D70 would find it hard to achieve the below photo at 300mm focal lenght at ISO1600 hand held with no bracing at the shutter speed I took it with (1/60s) without the aid of IS. And I could have gone to a slower shutter speed right down to 1/15s. Although you are propably comparing the fuji to the panny, to me your also comparing high ISO's to IS. When they can work in harmony you got even more flexibility and that's why I spent the big bucks on a quality Nikkor lens with IS and a zoom range of 27-300 without having to carry around loads of lenses, but with the ability to shoot with less limitations, but still having a choice of using different lenses when ever I choose. If I had a choice of a s9000/9500 without IS, or with IS for a few bucks more, I know what I would go for! They are times where ISO1600 alone won't bail you out of trouble in certain shooting situations. So that's my point, it would be nice to have both.




Packy
------------------------------------------
Nikon D50; Fuji F10; Fuji E900
http://homepage.eircom.net/~vmax ; for my pic stuff

I tend to agree with the DP Review sentiment, that marketing speak is intended to mislead; although the marketing men will always claim that they are just putting the best interpretation on something. They think that being economical with the truth is legitimate because they have a mindset that is actually based on caveat emptor (let the buyer beware).

That's capitalist folks! But would we have s9500s and D70s without it? Ah ha!

If marketing men and their rhetoric is the reality of the world today, then it's easy enough to learn to see through their spiel. You then automatically do a transaltion in your head of their various phrases.

Like it or not, we must currently translate Fuji's anti-shake claims into a realisation that we are getting fast shutter speeds + (noisy) high ISO, not mechanical iimage stabilisation. But as Packy says, so what? Pays yer money, take yer choice; then make the most of what you bought.

On the other hand, many prosumer cameras have mechanical image stabilisation without this seeming to bump up their cost too much. Perhaps mechanical image stabilisation is simply one technical area in which Fuji lags?

It would be a pity if Fuji never develop such image stabilisation (because they have listened to their own marketing spiel and now believe that their anti-shake approach is all that's needed). Personally I would sometimes like the ability to take unshaky shots in lower light with ISO 80 rather than 800. Evening landscapes with large areas of dark and/or single colours come to mind. Any noise shows up straight away in such shots. Currently I lug a tripod about to enable this but it would be nice to have a virtual tripod in the camera instead.

Since I have an S9500 I will make do and enjoy the many other excellent aspects of its performance. But Mr Fuji should note that I feel no brand loyalty, as I have decided to act in the true spirit of capitalism. I will buy my next camera, in a year or two, based on the price/function quotient, not on shiny advertising blurb containing obsfucating sales speak. My future purchase may or may not be a Fuji, but one factor to sway me would be the inclusion of mechanical image stabilisation.

Hurrah!

In reality, I think the only people who really care about this comparison of Fuji to Nikon are the Fuji owners who are convinced that they are getting as good of pictures as they would get with a Nikon. The rest of the world doesn't even care because they know that Fuji is the lemon company of the digital camera world. They will never allow Fuji to gain any respect. But I don't care. I have a Fuji S9000 and I'm having a lot of fun with it.

It seems that anymore it isn't a question of whether or not the photograph is interesting or valuable simply because of its subject content. It's pretty difficult to share a picture based on what the picture is taken of. Instead, if I try to share a photo that I'm happy with I have to go through the process of answering what camera, how many megapixels, how powerful is the zoom, was it shot in RAW, how much postprocessing, how big is the file, etc., etc., etc.. Then, after all the questions have been answered, they ask, "have you considered getting a Nikon dSLR?" After all, they are only a few hundred dollars more. And you have so many more options available to you. Why did you ever waste your money on such a camera. Don't you know that there are much better options available out there?

My point here is that these big Techno debates are killing the fun of photography. Why do we have to worry about whether or not a review is slamming Fuji? Why can't we all just enjoy taking pictures? This whole thing has gotten ridiculously complex and out of hand, IN MY OPINION.

Gotta go with Kim on this one, his points are accurate and reflect my experience as well. Your claim that no IS was needed is specious at best. To get the most out of an IS (OS, VR, whatever name you pin on it) lens you need to do that same test at 200mm - 400mm. To see the real use of stabilized images try a shot at 300mm with a shutter speed of 1/60 sec on a camera with a stabilized lens and one without, you will see the difference. Resizing an image to 800 x 600 just makes it that much harder to see what you are trying to see, maybe crop the image to that size but show at 100%, you will see a difference.

I have seen ISO images at 1600 from an S9000 and a D70 and there is a big difference, now ISO 1600 from a D70 and an F11 are actually closer in noise levels with the S9000 falling distantly back, if you dont see any difference between your D70 at 1600 ISO and the Fuji S9000 at the same, you must be doing something wrong. I think 99 out of 100 other people can see the difference.
Take care, Ted

I agree totally with Jim. I have gotten to the stage of not telling people what sort of camera I use when I give them prints etc. When they say, "boy you must have a good camera I've never seen a digital photo as good as that before". I just smile and say yes I have, I'm very lucky and leave it at that.

--
Sel ................
s9500, E550
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/%7Eselorme/photos.html

Jim Hess said:

In reality, I think the only people who really care about this
comparison of Fuji to Nikon are the Fuji owners who are convinced
that they are getting as good of pictures as they would get with a
Nikon.

Click to expand...

Well, this IS a Fuji forum. In this forum we discuss the many aspects of photography. We all agree that it doesn't just "happen". You have to have some basic knowledge, and people keep flowing in here new asking the same questions over and over again, so the subject keeps coming up.

Jim Hess said:

It seems that anymore it isn't a question of whether or not the
photograph is interesting or valuable simply because of its subject
content.

Click to expand...

Not true. There are plenty of threads where subject is the main topic.

It's pretty difficult to share a picture based on what

Jim Hess said:

the picture is taken of. Instead, if I try to share a photo that
I'm happy with I have to go through the process of answering what
camera, how many megapixels, how powerful is the zoom, was it shot
in RAW, how much postprocessing, how big is the file, etc., etc.,
etc..

Click to expand...

So, we admire your work and want to learn the technical parts of it (since creativity can't really be taught). Sue us!

Then, after all the questions have been answered, they ask,

Jim Hess said:

"have you considered getting a Nikon dSLR?" After all, they are
only a few hundred dollars more. And you have so many more options
available to you. Why did you ever waste your money on such a
camera. Don't you know that there are much better options
available out there?

Click to expand...

I agree!! These people are the ones I'm exposing here as not being useful to new photographers.

Jim Hess said:

My point here is that these big Techno debates are killing the fun
of photography. Why do we have to worry about whether or not a
review is slamming Fuji? Why can't we all just enjoy taking
pictures? This whole thing has gotten ridiculously complex and out
of hand, IN MY OPINION.

Click to expand...

You would have a hard time as a schoolteacher. There are always new people, learning the same things over and over. First you learn the basics, then you have fun with it.

To enjoy a car ride down the coast first you need to know how to shift gears, use the clutch and brakes, the rules of traffic. Only when those have become second nature can you focus on the fun part of it. Otherwise is frustrating.

Now if you are tired of discussing this subject, avoid these threads, but It's not out of hand. New people want to know the difference between buying a camera with IS and not. They are told that a camera without IS practically useless, and that's an outright lie (talk about marketspeak).

I don't appreciate lies and try to clear them up when I can for the benefit of those trying to decide how to get the most of their hard-earned cash.

--
Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

They all went right (IS), so Fuji is going left (Real Photo Tech). If everyone else is developing advanced mechanics for stabalization, then what is so bad about Fuji trying a different approach to achieve similar results. From the company standpoint, they have to create something new and innovative or else the would be just imitating other companies. So far, I think the high ISO performance from Fuji has been applauded here in the forums. I don't think the Fuji execs sat down and said, "Hey, let's develop our sensors and market it as IS so as to confuse everyone!" They've taken a big risk by not opening exploring the IS like other companies. My point, then, is that although we don't have IS as other cameras do, we can enjoy better ISO performance than those with other cameras. And I'm sure that most of you reading this agree that we should be happy for what we have...even if we dream and hope for better! Happy shooting!

--
http://www.natemetz.com

Jim is right to point out that the outcome of all the technical camera stuff should be good photos. In truth, if I could buy a magic box that read my mind and automatically produced photos when I mentally said, "record this scene as I wish it to be viewed for all time", I would buy that box (as long as it wasn't more than £399.99 of course). But, as Grafight persuasively argues, there is no such box and we have to learn to drive the picture taking boxes that Fuji et al are able to manufacture just now.

In truth, many of us like instruments and tools such as cameras to require a bit of knowledge and skill on our part, as it is our human nature to enjoy not just the result but also the process of learning how to get there. For example, I find it much more exciting to do digital darkroom things than it was posting a film off to the developer, despite the fact that sitting hunched in front of CS2 for hours is not doing my back any good. It's the anorak in us.

Of course, sometimes that magic mind-reading camera would be useful, as when you see a Leading Politician fall down the aeroplane steps or an archbishop doing something he oughtn't. One wouldn't want to be fiddling with the controls just then. One would want an instant and perfect recording of the event as one's single and only imperative!

As to bridge jumping: I did once jump from a high viaduct, making amusing noises and faces (from the observers' point of view, that is) as I fell; I found the whole experience very exciting and now I often jump from high places. Of course, I am tied to a rope and never jump when impressionable children might be looking. Personally I think Mr Fuji might try a bridge jump too, of the IS kind, just to see if he likes it. If he does, we might be able to buy an S10500 next year that has not just good performance at higher ISOs but also IS (and perhaps a 24-300mm lens, faster RAW, etc.,etc).

Or perhaps Mr Sony will bring one out first and include in-camera Neatimage whilst he's at it. I might buy one of those, assuming it wasn't all just marketing hype.

Of course I would always be attempting to produce even better photos than before with such a new toy. And still dreaming of how the toy might be improved even more.

Grafight, I would agree with you that the forum is for sharing any and all information about photography be it technical camera details, artistic impressions or simply sharing pictures. If the subject matter doesn't apeal to someone then they simply can click on the next thread.

I read your original post and perhaps misunderstood the meaning, I thought you were stating a case that IS had no use or was overrated. IS, (VR in Nikon speak) has a great affect on images taken on less than ideal light and at long focal lengths. This is a 100% crop of an image taken with an 80-400 VR at 400mm, shutter speed was 1/200 which isnt slow, but is not ideal for 400mm lens, there is still plenty of detail even though this is 100%:



You would have to admit that Fuji was "implying" the camera had some sort of stabilization by calling the feature "anti-shake", granted thay never came out and said "we have stabilized cameras" but when the average guy walking around Best Buy sees a Fuji cam in a shiny box with the words anti-shake on the side, they assume that it is doing just that.

I'll agree that the direction Fuji went with it can accomplish similar goals in that you can get the shutter speed up to compensate for low light. Why did Fuji's marketing dept. choose to call it anti-shake and not something more accurate like "increased ISO" or something that didn't sound like a derivative of everyone elses stabilization?

As you no doubt have seen, many people using the F10 and F11 are getting great results using Fuji's high ISO abilities and are getting great shots at ridiculously low shutter speeds. I have seen some nice clean crisp shots with those cams handheld down to 1/4 sec exposure, I can't do that with a D70, certainly not hand held. But, when you get out over 200mm and do not have the light for a good shutter IS, VR, OS can all be the exact tool you need.
Take care, Ted
Anyway

tdkd13 said:

Grafight, I would agree with you that the forum is for sharing any
and all information about photography be it technical camera
details, artistic impressions or simply sharing pictures. If the
subject matter doesn't apeal to someone then they simply can click
on the next thread.
I read your original post and perhaps misunderstood the meaning, I
thought you were stating a case that IS had no use or was
overrated. IS, (VR in Nikon speak) has a great affect on images
taken on less than ideal light and at long focal lengths. This is a
100% crop of an image taken with an 80-400 VR at 400mm, shutter
speed was 1/200 which isnt slow, but is not ideal for 400mm lens,
there is still plenty of detail even though this is 100%:



You would have to admit that Fuji was "implying" the camera had
some sort of stabilization by calling the feature "anti-shake",
granted thay never came out and said "we have stabilized cameras"
but when the average guy walking around Best Buy sees a Fuji cam in
a shiny box with the words anti-shake on the side, they assume that
it is doing just that.
I'll agree that the direction Fuji went with it can accomplish
similar goals in that you can get the shutter speed up to
compensate for low light. Why did Fuji's marketing dept. choose to
call it anti-shake and not something more accurate like "increased
ISO" or something that didn't sound like a derivative of everyone
elses stabilization?
As you no doubt have seen, many people using the F10 and F11 are
getting great results using Fuji's high ISO abilities and are
getting great shots at ridiculously low shutter speeds. I have seen
some nice clean crisp shots with those cams handheld down to 1/4
sec exposure, I can't do that with a D70, certainly not hand held.
But, when you get out over 200mm and do not have the light for a
good shutter IS, VR, OS can all be the exact tool you need.
Take care, Ted
Anyway

Click to expand...

And I agree with most everything you say. IS is a great technology. So is the Fuji high ISO sensor.

I just don't think is all that misleading to call a feature destined to fight camera shake "anti-shake mode".

If it were "Picture Stabilizator", or "Image Stabilizer" then it would be derivative, and purposedly misleading.

But the term "camera shake" has existed long before IS came along. Just saying "High ISO" would be meaningless to most people.

Just my opinion.

Cheers,

--
Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

Gosh, Graf, I didn't realize it was such a crime to say something that you didn't like. I guess I had better keep my opinions AND my photos to myself.

Can someone show me an example of Fuji using the term "anti-shake" for the products that are being discussed here? I have seen them use "anti-blur," but not anti-shake.

I am not saying that have not used that term, but I have not seen it.

Lee

Jim Hess said:

Gosh, Graf, I didn't realize it was such a crime to say something
that you didn't like. I guess I had better keep my opinions AND my
photos to myself.

Click to expand...

Neverneverneverneverrrr would I or did I say it was a crime to say ANYTHING at all.

The title was a bit of a joke to indicate that if you are tired of this topic you are welcome to skip it and it won't hurt my feelings. But if you choose to participate, you're obviously not so tired of it.

Pleasepleaseplease lets agree to disagree if we must, but do NOT keep your pics to yourself. I love seeing your pix. As I mentioned in my last post, I know we can get annoying asking you constantly how you did this or that, but we armire your work!!

Please accept my apologies if I gave the impression that I don't like to hear your opinions, for or against.

--
Graf
----
Enjoying my s9000 and Nikon D70s

I guess I put the wrong people on the defensive with my remarks. I wasn't, ending about the questions that are asked in this forum. That is what this forum is all about. I was thinking more of when I sometimes just pull out a few pictures to share with people in the group. That is where I would like to just show the pictures and not have to do all the explaining.