Reading mode: Light Dark

S5pro is very tempting...

Go to last post
P

photoforfun

Veteran Member
Messages
6,084
Reaction score
1
Location
FR
I have a D200 since dec15th 2005 and I'm very happy with it, but the S5pro looks very tempting... I can easily live with 3fps against 5fps, I could use my Nikon glass, I get the same low noise as the 5D, and I have the exceptional DR possibility...

Underneath two crops of pics @800 iso posted by "summicron" in the fuji forum as a noise comparison between S5pro and D2X http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1020&message=22470614





--
Kindest regards,
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
 
dayv said:
this shows how S5 is very good at high iso's but actually it's around 1.5fps if you shoot raw at 400% dr...
cheers, dave
Click to expand...
400% DR have nothing to do with low noise @ high iso. It has 3fps in normal use. For shots where i need the benefit of the 400% DR I have mostly plenty of time...(sunsets etc...)

--
Kindest regards,
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
 
Yes but the S5 picture was developed by the Fuji software which automatically adds noise reduction so it's not quite a fair comparison.
 
Wow. I have never had noise anywhere near that bad with ISO 800. That picture is a very poor example...
I am sure the S5 does a great job, but this comparison is ridiculous.
--
Scott A.
 
TrekSF6 said:
Scot A. wrote:
Click to expand...
Wow. I have never had noise anywhere near that bad with ISO 800. That picture is a very poor example...

Neither did I with my D200, the D2X sample looks like what my D200 gives @1250iso or over that...
But,... the S5pro shot looks VERY clean and all details are still there...
--
Kindest regards,
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
 
photoforfun said:
I have a D200 since dec15th 2005 and I'm very happy with it, but
the S5pro looks very tempting... I can easily live with 3fps
against 5fps, I could use my Nikon glass, I get the same low noise
as the 5D, and I have the exceptional DR possibility...
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
Click to expand...
If you want good high ISO a D40 is a cheaper alternative (but with the AF-S limitation of course).
http://www.pbase.com/interactive/d40-highiso

--
Small D200 gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/interactive/d200_12
Small D40 gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/interactive/d40_12
http://www.pbase.com/interactive
 
I'm not tempted to swap but if I was starting from scratch I'd probably go for the S5. That's got nothing to do with high ISO noise, it's purely for wider dynamic range.
 
photoforfun said:
photoforfun said:
Scot A. wrote:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Wow. I have never had noise anywhere near that bad with ISO 800. That picture is a very poor example...
photoforfun said:
Neither did I with my D200, the D2X sample looks like what my D200
gives @1250iso or over that...
But,... the S5pro shot looks VERY clean and all details are still
there...
--
Kindest regards,
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
Click to expand...
A few questions & concerns

1 Is it really a 12mp camera ? Will it crop like a 12mp ?

2. 1.5fps at @ 400% DR ?! Ok, not needed for every situation but you have to dig into the menu to switch every time ?

3 .Whats the raw buffer size ?

4. Does above standard sharpening levels introduce artifacts ?
 
photoforfun said:
400% DR have nothing to do with low noise @ high iso. It has 3fps
in normal use. For shots where i need the benefit of the 400% DR I
have mostly plenty of time...(sunsets etc...)
Click to expand...
oh, extended DR stops above iso 1000? does this mean above iso1000, even at auto DR, the body will shoot at 3fps? just wondering. :)
photoforfun said:
--
Kindest regards,
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
Click to expand...
--
cheers,
dave
http://imageEvent.com/dayv

(equipment on profile)
 
Kerry Pierce said:
photoforfun said:
Kerry Pierce said:
If you want good high ISO a D40 is a cheaper alternative (but with the AF-S limitation of course).
Click to expand...
I like my 50mm F1.8 and some other non-afs's a lot, I couldn't use
them anymore on a D40...
Click to expand...
When I look at the dpr noise graphs for the d40 and d200, I don't
see any significant difference. What am I missing?
Click to expand...
I have them both. There is a big difference - shows that graphs doesnt say so much...
Kerry Pierce said:
--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root
Click to expand...
--
Small D200 gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/interactive/d200_12
Small D40 gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/interactive/d40_12
http://www.pbase.com/interactive
 
kruger said:
1 Is it really a 12mp camera ? Will it crop like a 12mp ?
Click to expand...
no.

it's quite amazing, from what i've seen, at 6mp. but the 12mp just looks like up-rez-ing to me. maybe others can't see it, but i can.

but due to fuji's oddly shaped photosites, and their arrangement, people are rating it around 8mp.
kruger said:
2. 1.5fps at @ 400% DR ?! Ok, not needed for every situation but
you have to dig into the menu to switch every time ?
Click to expand...
the dr can be set on "auto." don't know anything about how to set it, etc.
 
slimandy said:
I'm not tempted to swap but if I was starting from scratch I'd
probably go for the S5. That's got nothing to do with high ISO
noise, it's purely for wider dynamic range.
Click to expand...
that's probably the main thing. i'm just not convinced about the high-iso. i've seen samples, and i've seen crops. it looks like noise-reduction to me. at BEST it's a trade off for the lost detail when compared to the d200. at worst, it's simply a software trick.

but the dynamic range and color ARE both very impressive. if i had it to do over again, i can't say for certain i would still go with the d200.
 
I've shot the D200 as my primary for the last year ... I do portrait and wedding professionally, both my wife and I shoot in our studio. She uses our S3 most of the time.

We go to prints 30 inch and up several a week. We did 25+ years of medium format before going digital, lugging our RB67's around for those 6x7 negs they produced. Had our own custom lab, printed for our own studio and custom work for other photogs that they couldn't get done right with their regular lab. We've had a bit of experience with cameras and images.

I've now shot the S5, and brought the card home. With pretty standard settings on it, my conclusions:

Noise is spectacularly better than either my S3 or D200. Now, in my humble experience, having shot both S3 jpegs and D200 raws, using every raw processor on the market, for a large print, the D200 raw file well-pp'd does not actually out-rez an equivalently well pp'd S3 jpeg that much. You gotta get real close to see it. Like 12 inches or less. But yes, it has a slight detail edge over the S3.

And this low noise S5 print? Some around here are certain it just gives up detail to get it. Well, it gives up a bit of the detail this cam can do, I assume. However, the detail and low noise on this iso 1600 image I shot I cannot match with my D200. And the setting for in-cam NR was std.

By the time I neat image a D200 iso1600 shot to get THIS low noise, you better believe I've lost a lot of detail. More than the D200 has to give up to an S5.

And the S5 iso 1600 image still holds a better color look and the smooth tonalities through gradations.

The D200 is still faster if you're shooting sports. And using the 5fps, which I do occasionally at my kids games, but have never used professionally (that's not our area of expertise).

And I still love to shoot my D200. Heck, I still love my S2 set for either iso 800 or 1600 and in-cam b/w.

That S5 is a wonderful new tool.
 
Thanks for the report. I've been waiting for someone to give a reasonably unbiased comparison of the D200 and the S5. Too many S3 owners find it easy to hate on the D200, and the same could be said about Nikon owners regarding the S3. This seems to have carried over with the release of the S5.

At this point I have zero SLRs. I have the budget to get two DSLRs (although I couldn't get two D2Hs's at $3000+ each). Been trying to decide whether to get two D200's, two S5's, or one of each. After reading your post, I think I am leaning toward one of each.
 
The only reason for me to go to the Fuji S5 would be for the wide dynamic range. The problem is that when you switch that camera to wide dynamic range, the performance goes right down the tubes. I have a point-and-shoot with better shot-to-shot time and more shots in buffer than the S5 in high DR mode. What was Fuji thinking?

And I have no interest in going back to 6mp.

So, I'll stick with the D200, until Sony comes up with a killer sensor for the D200x! :-)
photoforfun said:
I have a D200 since dec15th 2005 and I'm very happy with it, but
the S5pro looks very tempting... I can easily live with 3fps
against 5fps, I could use my Nikon glass, I get the same low noise
as the 5D, and I have the exceptional DR possibility...
Underneath two crops of pics @800 iso posted by "summicron" in the
fuji forum as a noise comparison between S5pro and D2X
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1020&message=22470614





--
Kindest regards,
Stany
Photography is a marvellous hobby which I enjoy, not to compete...

http://www.fotografie.fr/
Click to expand...
--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper
 
AAK said:
The only reason for me to go to the Fuji S5 would be for the wide
dynamic range. The problem is that when you switch that camera to
wide dynamic range, the performance goes right down the tubes. I
have a point-and-shoot with better shot-to-shot time and more shots
in buffer than the S5 in high DR mode. What was Fuji thinking?
Click to expand...
probably because the raw file is about 25mb, i doubt the point n shoot you have has that file size. so it's hard to compare.

--
cheers,
dave
http://imageEvent.com/dayv

(equipment on profile)
 
This was shot large jpg fine using a quartz halogen desk lamp as a light source at 800iso albeit using a custom curve push. The D2x is noisy above 800 iso and shows a fair bit of luminance noise in the example I posted but the test shots from the OP are pure fantasy.



 
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