Fuji or Sony?

For 1 year I've played around with Finepix4700, to get the digital look-feel. For real (amateur) photography I stil use my Nikon 801s with databack, 28-300 zoomlenses and Mets 34 flash.
Now I'm confronted with 2 options:

1: exchange my Finepix4700 for a 6900 and get a bit deeper into the digital world
2: exchange my whole outfit (Nikon + lenses & flashes + Fuji) for a Sony707.

In both cases, i'd invest + or - 750 Euro, ans in both cases I'd want at least additional tele in my digicam.

I've read the forum about resolution and comparisons between 35 mm and digital, andI'm leaning towards Fuji, but don't know what to do.

Also. I'd like to know about experiences with the Raynox 1,8x tele for Fuji.

Any wise suggestions?

Thanks--bobcom

do you post to the Fuji forum for asking opinion about Fuji vs Sony?
Reconsider if you want objective answers! ;-)

What are your selection criteria?

I am deciding between the 6900, 707, and D30

I've had the 6900 for four weeks (photos at http://www.pbase.com/beauceron ) and am now trying the 707.

I liked the sharper pictures I saw on peoples sites with the 707.

BUT the 6900 is lighter, more compact, and has fantastic colors.

All the best,

Mark

bobitaly said:

For 1 year I've played around with Finepix4700, to get the digital
look-feel. For real (amateur) photography I stil use my Nikon 801s
with databack, 28-300 zoomlenses and Mets 34 flash.
Now I'm confronted with 2 options:
1: exchange my Finepix4700 for a 6900 and get a bit deeper into the
digital world
2: exchange my whole outfit (Nikon + lenses & flashes + Fuji) for a
Sony707.

In both cases, i'd invest + or - 750 Euro, ans in both cases I'd
want at least additional tele in my digicam.
I've read the forum about resolution and comparisons between 35 mm
and digital, andI'm leaning towards Fuji, but don't know what to do.

Also. I'd like to know about experiences with the Raynox 1,8x tele
for Fuji.

Any wise suggestions?

Thanks
--
bobcom

Click to expand...

Dr_Michael said:

do you post to the Fuji forum for asking opinion about Fuji vs
Sony?
Reconsider if you want objective answers! ;-)

Click to expand...

Sorry, i should've told you that i have posted the same message (minus the Raynox info request) on the Sony forum. I'm not looking for objectivity, just for convincing subjectivity!

You can find many threads about this same question through the forum. It's a common question. My 2 cents is that if you are used to Fuji color, you will be happier with Fuji than Sony.

Good luck and let us know what you decide,

Dan

bobitaly said:

For 1 year I've played around with Finepix4700, to get the digital
look-feel. For real (amateur) photography I stil use my Nikon 801s
with databack, 28-300 zoomlenses and Mets 34 flash.
Now I'm confronted with 2 options:
1: exchange my Finepix4700 for a 6900 and get a bit deeper into the
digital world
2: exchange my whole outfit (Nikon + lenses & flashes + Fuji) for a
Sony707.

In both cases, i'd invest + or - 750 Euro, ans in both cases I'd
want at least additional tele in my digicam.
I've read the forum about resolution and comparisons between 35 mm
and digital, andI'm leaning towards Fuji, but don't know what to do.

Also. I'd like to know about experiences with the Raynox 1,8x tele
for Fuji.

Any wise suggestions?

Thanks
--
bobcom

Click to expand...

bobcom/bobitaly,

You need to decide what you want from the camera first.

You're happy with the 4700 - which probably means you'll like the 6900 colours. It's also reasonable compact and has good burst mord.

The 707 has better absolute resolution and performs better in low light. It's also a slightly faster camera to use. But it's more expensive.

Which is better for you? The answer is simple: Decide what is important for you, then compare the features on both cameras. For a "real" quality test, download samples from dpreview and print at the format you will most commonly use: 5x7, 8x10, etc.

AlanS

In English this time:

AlanS said:

You're happy with the 4700 - which probably means you'll like the
6900 colours. It's also reasonably compact and has good burst mode.

Click to expand...

Alan,

I am trying to get an answer for the same question and plan to spend the rest of November to make a choice between these two.

I did downloaded 707 and 6900 images with bottles from dpreview and printed them as 8x10. The 6900 had a purple overccast (on the print and on a monitor as well), which I could not completely remove in Photoshop - cleared in the middle but some peripheral stayed. Removed the peripheral purple then the center colors suffered. The 707 was almost perfect and sharper. Today I've tried 707 and 505V in the store (Good Guys) and was very impressed with both of these cameras, The 505V is $599 at CompUSA and you get what you pay (not in the image quality - both are excellent but in functionality). Both are very low noise cameras - very clean images even when I set the 707 to 400ASA. I will continue the test for Sony and then will be 6900 test.
Leo

AlanS said:

bobcom/bobitaly,

You need to decide what you want from the camera first.

You're happy with the 4700 - which probably means you'll like the
6900 colours. It's also reasonable compact and has good burst mord.

The 707 has better absolute resolution and performs better in low
light. It's also a slightly faster camera to use. But it's more
expensive.

Which is better for you? The answer is simple: Decide what is
important for you, then compare the features on both cameras. For a
"real" quality test, download samples from dpreview and print at
the format you will most commonly use: 5x7, 8x10, etc.

AlanS

Click to expand...

Leo,

I'm surprised about the purple cast with the 6900 - I've not heard that mentioned before. Was it just a single picture?

If you are interested, I have owned both. You can see examples at

http://www.pbase.com/misteralan/

There are more 707 pics than 6900 pics because I no longer have the 6900. For me, the low light capability of the 707 was the big attraction.

For others who do not have such exacting requirements for low light/long exposure photography and who do not need the extra resolution, the 6900 could be a big cost saving over the 707.

My online 6900 samples are at 3MP. A lot of 6900 owners shoot using 3MP instead of the interpolated 6MP because the pictures onscreen are crisper. 6MP images may print out better than 3MP images, but some people have said they don't notice the difference.

Also - beware that some current 707s (including mine) have a flash problem. Look in the sony forum for BFS messages.

Feel free to mail me direct,

Alan

Leo said:

Alan,
I am trying to get an answer for the same question and plan to
spend the rest of November to make a choice between these two.
I did downloaded 707 and 6900 images with bottles from dpreview and
printed them as 8x10. The 6900 had a purple overccast (on the print
and on a monitor as well), which I could not completely remove in
Photoshop - cleared in the middle but some peripheral stayed.
Removed the peripheral purple then the center colors suffered. The
707 was almost perfect and sharper. Today I've tried 707 and 505V
in the store (Good Guys) and was very impressed with both of these
cameras, The 505V is $599 at CompUSA and you get what you pay (not
in the image quality - both are excellent but in functionality).
Both are very low noise cameras - very clean images even when I set
the 707 to 400ASA. I will continue the test for Sony and then will
be 6900 test.
Leo

Click to expand...

The Purple color is a surprise to me but I have heard that photoshop comes with a filter turned on that causes a reddish cast for many people.
I use Paint shop Pro and it is not there.

Is the cast there if you open in another viewer?? The fact it was there on the print is logical if your monitor and printer are reasonably balanced.

Perhaps some one with PS can help.