Reading mode: Light Dark

So why is the S5 still 1.5 fps?

Go to last post
P

pattir7

Active member
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Location
IL, US
Ok,

For lack of technical background on this... why, when the nikon D200 has a 5 fps frame rate is the S5 so slow? Is the Fuji sensor simply incapable of writing at the faster speeds? Is the buffer smaller? The CPU slower? Also, is the focusing (specifically the camera's ability to focus on a moving target) any better on the S5 than the S2?

Honestly, I am quite happy with my S2...but the slow fps rate and slow continuous focus does make me long for the D200. I had hoped the S5 would offer the best of both worlds... the unsurpassed Fuji sensor coupled with the speed and agility of the D200 body....in which case, I would have upgraded... but since this is not the case, the S5 isn't compelling enough to warrant the $$ as the images from the S2 are quite amazing themselves. I just can't do action photography with it... or, the S5 for that matter....which I find rather disappointing...

Patti
 
the d200 has 4 parallel channels to give it 5 fps.
the d80 has 2 to give it 3fps
the S5 has 2 to give it 3fps when std dr is set (6.17mp of data)
the S5 has 2 to give it 1.6 when wide DR is turned on (12.34mp of data)
it has been tested at 1.8fps. so twice the mps or data, half the speed.
--
Photographs and memories
Christmas cards you sent to me
All that I have are these
To remember you
 
Everybody knows Red is hotter (faster) than black.





--
.....Gary ,ø¤º°'°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°'°º¤ø¸,¸,



Photography http://www.garymayo.com ø°'°ø Body Arts http://www.guns2roses.com

Equipment List Located In Profile ø¤º°'°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°'°º¤ø¸,¸,,ø¤º°'°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°'°º¤ø

Anyone Seen A Really Big Brown Truck Anywhere?
 
Does this means that at std DR mode, info from R pixels is not recorded? And the 12Mp file is interpolated purely from 6.17Mp S pixels? I hope this is not the case.
Bad Pic kev said:
the d200 has 4 parallel channels to give it 5 fps.
the d80 has 2 to give it 3fps
the S5 has 2 to give it 3fps when std dr is set (6.17mp of data)
the S5 has 2 to give it 1.6 when wide DR is turned on (12.34mp of
data)
it has been tested at 1.8fps. so twice the mps or data, half the
speed.
--
Photographs and memories
Christmas cards you sent to me
All that I have are these
To remember you
Click to expand...
 
I'm now confused...

I thought there's some algorithm between S & R pixels to obtain near 12Mp resolution from these pixels totalled to 12Mp in any mode. I've heard many times both these pixels were used to obtain resolution above 6.17Mp.

If it's only 6M S-pixels in this mode, it shouldn't have resolution near 10Mp. Or say it the other way, if this is true then Nikon or we can interpolate D200's 10M pixel to obtain more details (which is impossible).

Am I missing something?
Radu Grozescu said:
Photobug said:
Does this means that at std DR mode, info from R pixels is not
recorded?
Click to expand...
Right.
Member said:
And the 12Mp file is interpolated purely from 6.17Mp S
pixels? I hope this is not the case.
Click to expand...
But it is. Exactly like in the S2. Actually, this is the S2 mode on
the S5, you trade DR for twice the fps and half size RAW files -
the jpegs remain the same.

--
Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography
Click to expand...
 
Photobug said:
If it's only 6M S-pixels in this mode, it shouldn't have resolution
near 10Mp. Or say it the other way, if this is true then Nikon or
we can interpolate D200's 10M pixel to obtain more details (which
is impossible).

Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
Yes, you miss the diagonal array of the Fuji pixels. There are some very good explanation in the threads runnning right now.

I have one in my site too, at:
http://www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/fuji-superccdinterpolation.html

--
Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography
 
Radu Grozescu said:
Photobug said:
If it's only 6M S-pixels in this mode, it shouldn't have resolution
near 10Mp. Or say it the other way, if this is true then Nikon or
we can interpolate D200's 10M pixel to obtain more details (which
is impossible).

Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
Yes, you miss the diagonal array of the Fuji pixels. There are some
very good explanation in the threads runnning right now.

I have one in my site too, at:
http://www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/fuji-superccdinterpolation.html
Click to expand...
And here is one with the original drawing of the sensor:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/

--
Osku
 
Osku said:
Osku said:
I have one in my site too, at:
http://www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/fuji-superccdinterpolation.html
Click to expand...
And here is one with the original drawing of the sensor:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/
Click to expand...
But I did not enter the subtilities of the 12 million sensors in the S3, just the increased perceived resolution from an S2 diagonal type sensor.

I am really happy you pointed to the S3 sensor drawing, this should stop the questions on how can Silkypix and/or other software get more resolution from the S3, S5 sensor - fact is that there are 12 million discrete sensors with their own microlenses.

--
Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography
 
Yes I did miss this. Now I've read your site, looks to me due to diagonal arrangements, Fuji can create one extra pixel out of 4 surrounding it (above, left, right, below). With large amount of pixels the ratiio between original and "created" pixels are about 1:1 (not 4:1 because each original pixel is used 4 times in calculation).

Very smart but since new pixels are "created", the real resolution is not 2x but 1.4x like many claimed.

Now I also understand that R pixels don't help in increasing resolution at all- it's only for DR. So in std DR mode, I do have 50% smaller RAW file right?

Thanks for the insights.

Photobug
Radu Grozescu said:
Photobug said:
If it's only 6M S-pixels in this mode, it shouldn't have resolution
near 10Mp. Or say it the other way, if this is true then Nikon or
we can interpolate D200's 10M pixel to obtain more details (which
is impossible).

Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
Yes, you miss the diagonal array of the Fuji pixels. There are some
very good explanation in the threads runnning right now.

I have one in my site too, at:
http://www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/fuji-superccdinterpolation.html

--
Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography
Click to expand...
 
Ok Radu you raised one thing I've been curious about...

So far I haven't seen any indication that S and R pixels have their own microlens. Actually until S3, both S & R are under the same microlens. See drawing there:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0301/03012202fujisuperccdsr.asp

Unless S5 has drastically revised microlenses, I'm guessing they still share the same microlens.
Radu Grozescu said:
I am really happy you pointed to the S3 sensor drawing, this should
stop the questions on how can Silkypix and/or other software get
more resolution from the S3, S5 sensor - fact is that there are 12
million discrete sensors with their own microlenses.

--
Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography
Click to expand...
 
Forgive my ignorance... what is a channel? Why can the D200 have 4 and the S5 only have two?

What would it take for Fuji to match the D200 in fps?

Patti
 
Probably because Nikon said to Fuji,

"look, we'll give you our D200 body, but with only 50% of the channels,
because we don't want the Fuji sensor in a Nikon D200 body which has
exactly the same capabilities as the D200 itself " . . .

--

Not a word was spoken, the church bells all were broken . . .
 
Keith,

That's exactly what Nikon said to Fuji.

The last thing Nikon wants is to hear somebody say is "yeah, I bought the S5 because it has the D200 body BUT comes with the FUJI sensor". And it's for this reason that Fuji has to build their own bodies or just sell their sensors to other camera manufacturers. They'll never catch up, Nikon will make sure they're always lacking something. In another thread, just a week or so ago, it was determined that when using manual AIS lenses the S5's AWB doesn't perform. That's huge as far as I'm concerned, particularly when you have Zeiss releasing new lenses with a Nikon mount.

I still think that Nikon set a release date for the S5 in the US to coincide with the release of an upgrade to the D200 at PMA. The price on a D200 is now down below $1,400, and it's already been on the market over a year. My guess is that they have something up their sleeve, which will make things even more difficult for Fuji.

Regards,

Mark
 
I don't see the need to assume that Nikon did any of the things you suggest when Fujifilm is apparently quite capable of making all these mistakes themselves, from not having more channels on the sensor to not having the firmware right for white balancing to the U.S. release date (which is before PMA and is apparently this week).

Anthony
Mark Carr said:
Keith,

That's exactly what Nikon said to Fuji.

The last thing Nikon wants is to hear somebody say is "yeah, I
bought the S5 because it has the D200 body BUT comes with the FUJI
sensor". And it's for this reason that Fuji has to build their own
bodies or just sell their sensors to other camera manufacturers.
They'll never catch up, Nikon will make sure they're always lacking
something. In another thread, just a week or so ago, it was
determined that when using manual AIS lenses the S5's AWB doesn't
perform. That's huge as far as I'm concerned, particularly when you
have Zeiss releasing new lenses with a Nikon mount.

I still think that Nikon set a release date for the S5 in the US to
coincide with the release of an upgrade to the D200 at PMA. The
price on a D200 is now down below $1,400, and it's already been on
the market over a year. My guess is that they have something up
their sleeve, which will make things even more difficult for Fuji.

Regards,

Mark
Click to expand...
--
check out my blog at http://anthonyonphotography.blogspot.com
 
Hello Anthony,

My comments were based on what was written, not having any knowledge of the inner workings of the S5 or any other DSLR. Personally, I do not know if the number of channels are a function of the sensor or camera. Same is true for the AWB issue.

Most of the comments on that thread lead me to believe that Fuji's slower fps were a direct result of limitations imposed by Nikon, and were beyond Fuji's control. If, in fact, the problem is on Fuji's end, I stand corrected.

Regards,

Mark
 
Anthony

My key word was "probably" - you are right, there may have been
other more Fuji-internal, or technical reasons for the differences in fps
in the same body.

Somehow Fuji and Nikon are resisting an all-out collaboration on
models and sensors, maybe because they each wish to protect
indivdual brand identity for as long as possible, or maybe because
the current CEOs don't get along, whatever ;-)

Future logic really points to Nikon bodies and Fuji sensors against
Canon everything, but we'll see . . .

Keith

--

Not a word was spoken, the church bells all were broken . . .
 
Keith Aitken said:
Probably because Nikon said to Fuji,

"look, we'll give you our D200 body, but with only 50% of the
channels,
because we don't want the Fuji sensor in a Nikon D200 body which has
exactly the same capabilities as the D200 itself " . . .
Click to expand...
AFAIK, the number of readout channels is sensor-specific, not body-specific. It could just be that Fuji, for economical or technical reasons, just did not add more readout channels to its sensor (room on the chip, cost of making such a design and setting up a fab to make them... Don't forget Fuji DSLRSs are a niche market, so large investments take probably much longer to pay off).

Unless you have sources for this Nikon/Fuji treaty on the number of channels?

Wepwawet
 
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