Reading mode: Light Dark

F-20 a short opinion

Go to last post
D

dixeyk

Well-known member
Messages
123
Reaction score
0
Location
Bellingham, WA, US
I recently picked up an F-20. I decided on the F-20 over the more capable F-30/31/40 because of price and because I usually shoot with a DSLR and really was just looking for a simple little camera to grab shots of my family when we are out having fun without lugging around all my gear. I went out and shot some images on a fairly nice day. After day of hiking around and image grabbing I have a few thoughts.

THE GOOD

Its a reasonably fast and easy camera to set up. The camera does a very good job with exposure even in less than ideal situations. The lens is very sharp considering its size and despite using a faily slow media technology like XD performance seems to be quick. The controls are easy to get to and overall handling is very nice. The fit and finish is good and while it is made of mainly plastic it feels better in the hand than a lot of P&S cameras do (I find the Canon Powershot A series for instance to be very plasticky feeling). Battery life is good and the camera charges up quickly. Regarding manual controls...I struggled over whether to go for the F-30/31 as I am used to shooting in aperture priority on my DSLR but I wanted somethng that would be a more spontaneous kind of image grabbing device. So I went with the F-20. I will probbaly need to go through the scene modes to see what kinds of things I can trick the camera into doing. ;)

FWIW the "Chrome" color setting (hitting the "F" button) reminds me of that over saturated colors you get from using Fuji film. I find that it is nice for images that you may want to exaggerate the color on like flowers, butterflies etc.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot...its cheap. In short, it is an amiable little traveling companion that I will not lose sleep over if it gets dropped in a river or over an embankment.

THE LESS GOOD

The LCD is hard to see in bright light but not unusable (although it take some work). The zoom is slow and I think loud (louder than I would have expected). The menu system takes a bit of getting used to as it isn't particularly intuitive but to be fair you get used to its quirks pretty quickly.

The high ISO ability of the Fuji F20 (and perhaps its brethren) is IMHO overstated in reviews. I will admit that it is better than the competition but it is no where near as good as the reviews would have you believe. It is passable and I suppose for a $150 camera that is good enough.

And finally, there is a noise/pattern that is VERY noticeable at high ISO and even present in a well lit scene at ISO 100. It is not limited to the shadow areas but also seems to appear along edges and in areas where there is a color transition. It looks a bit like dithering mixed with compression artifacts. I know that I will be accused of pixel peeping but it doesn't take an advanced degree to see it. I think the noise/pattern is distracting and detracts from what is an otherwise good performance image wise.

This is a 100% crop of an image at ISO 100. Maybe its just me but I should think that at ISO 100 an image shouldn't look that way. It reminds me of a moire pattern.



CONCLUSION

In the end I find that I like the F-20 but I find the image quality a little disappointing. Its a nice mix of easy to use and relaible image quality. You can rely on the F-20 taking a reasonably nice image under most situations without a lot of drama.

Would I get one again? As a travel camera...definitely. As a second camera to back up a more capable setup..sure. As my only camera...probably not. Would I recommend it? Yes, if what you want is trouble free picture taking.

--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
My ISO 100 images look better... dunno, maybe you didn't get the best of the flock.

Definitely feels that way to me anyway, since you say the IQ is not up to par... but where are you coming from... a Digital SLR? Because no camera other than a digital SLR matches the IQ of the F20/30/31 at ISO 400 +, and the F20/30/31fd matches and does not concede an inch to ISO 100 & 200 (Aside from the issues of overexposure, CA, PF).
 
Oh, I would have to write that I bought my F20 for $121 from Dell.com, and I received a free 1GB type M XD card. I also sent in the $30 rebate which will drop the total to $99 AR, After tax, and after shipping w/ 1GB XD card.

I can't even complain even if I wanted to heh. It's so cheap that I really don't worry about it, but enjoy taking it with me and taking pictures so much more. The value is astronomical in that sense if you think about it.
 
MelchiorZ said:
My ISO 100 images look better... dunno, maybe you didn't get the
best of the flock.

Definitely feels that way to me anyway, since you say the IQ is not
up to par... but where are you coming from... a Digital SLR?
Because no camera other than a digital SLR matches the IQ of the
F20/30/31 at ISO 400 +, and the F20/30/31fd matches and does not
concede an inch to ISO 100 & 200 (Aside from the issues of
overexposure, CA, PF).
Click to expand...
The reviewer's assessment seems a bit harsh to me, too. Good images from my F20 are as good as those from my F31fd .. and dpreview gave the F31 very high marks in IQ. Overall I prefer the F31, but more for the added flexibility than any sharp performance advantager re the F20.

--
Phil .. Canon SD700IS, S3 IS, EOS 300D & 20D; Fuji F20; F31fd
http://www.pbase.com/phil_wheeler
http://www.flickr.com/photos/phil_ox/
 
So I have heard...my experience thus far is that at ISO 100/200 the F-20 is good but not spectacular. It doesn't even come close to a DSLR at ISO 100 (issues of CA etc. aside). In fact, I don't think it is even as good as other more conventional compact cameras at ISO 100.

I figured that maybe I was expecting too much out of it at high ISO but today on a relatively sunny day it should at least be able to produce clean images. They are okay. They seem pretty well exposed although the WB is off (but that is fixable) but other than that it is unremarkable.

I am willing to accept that I am doing something very wrong. If someone has a suggestion I am willing to try it. I do not like returning cameras but if this is the best it can manage on a sunny day...
MelchiorZ said:
My ISO 100 images look better... dunno, maybe you didn't get the
best of the flock.

Definitely feels that way to me anyway, since you say the IQ is not
up to par... but where are you coming from... a Digital SLR?
Because no camera other than a digital SLR matches the IQ of the
F20/30/31 at ISO 400 +, and the F20/30/31fd matches and does not
concede an inch to ISO 100 & 200 (Aside from the issues of
overexposure, CA, PF).
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
I agree you can't complain about the price, and maybe I should just leave it at that.
MelchiorZ said:
Oh, I would have to write that I bought my F20 for $121 from
Dell.com, and I received a free 1GB type M XD card. I also sent in
the $30 rebate which will drop the total to $99 AR, After tax, and
after shipping w/ 1GB XD card.

I can't even complain even if I wanted to heh. It's so cheap that I
really don't worry about it, but enjoy taking it with me and taking
pictures so much more. The value is astronomical in that sense if
you think about it.
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
After all the cr*p I got saying the F810 would be worse and this happens. Kinda funny (not laughing at you in any way btw, just commenting on someone else). I haven't had this problem with the F810. If I had to guess, I think the problem here maybe too aggresive jpeg compression on the F20. Maybe there's a tonal range issue.

Try this:

Try a daylight scene that has a more homogeneous light- something that doesn't have like backlight subjects and they are in the shadow. Also give a try to say a face well lit in daylight (but not overly so). I think maybe you bumped into a limitation of the jpeg processor of this camera but I would try more types of shots before drawing conclusions... how are other shots doing?

--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
 
I giess in the end it is more about taking pictures than anything else and I really cannot fault the F-20 in that way. It makes picture taking effortless and fun. For the price it is a lot of camera. I can't help that I find the image quality off, but it seems if I mention it I get labeled a pixel peeper or a hack or what-have-you.

I am not here to be a troll, I bought the camera after all, I am a long time Fuji and Olympus user so I am used to quirky cameras that somehow make you love them anyway but my opinon is as I wrote it. I like it but I don't love it. Sorry.

--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
Thanks for the tips...I am continuing to try it out and I also suspect it is a compression problem (and you don't get any choice of it). All of the shots I took today have that same odd artifacting. I will try something in a studio setting and see what I get. I'll report back (if I am not banned first ;p).
Raist3d said:
After all the cr*p I got saying the F810 would be worse and this
happens. Kinda funny (not laughing at you in any way btw, just
commenting on someone else). I haven't had this problem with the
F810. If I had to guess, I think the problem here maybe too
aggresive jpeg compression on the F20. Maybe there's a tonal range
issue.

Try this:

Try a daylight scene that has a more homogeneous light- something
that doesn't have like backlight subjects and they are in the
shadow. Also give a try to say a face well lit in daylight (but not
overly so). I think maybe you bumped into a limitation of the jpeg
processor of this camera but I would try more types of shots before
drawing conclusions... how are other shots doing?

--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
You are welcome.

If you have a printer, try printing out them in your printer at the size you normally would- I am talking defintively about the old lady in your crop. See if you can notice it.

I have noticed that Fuji's interesting because at 100% the photos look sometimes dirty or with some CCD artifacts, even, but when printed, as long as there is not a lot of resize going on, they actually look sharper printed, and you avoid the postprocessing sharpening you have sometimes may want to do on other cameras (Canon from my experience, though I found their shots fine as is but they had more detail when sharpened).

In the end if you are printing at certain sizes and the photos come out fine- and if you are sharing on the internet at say 1024x768 or lower resolution sizes, then think about that in pragmatic terms this doesn't matter, and you still got a P&S that has better than regular ISO performance. There's no perfect camera, just pro's cons of different brands and makes.. you have to see if that matches your needs.
  • Raist
dixeyk said:
Raist3d said:
After all the cr*p I got saying the F810 would be worse and this
happens. Kinda funny (not laughing at you in any way btw, just
commenting on someone else). I haven't had this problem with the
F810. If I had to guess, I think the problem here maybe too
aggresive jpeg compression on the F20. Maybe there's a tonal range
issue.

Try this:

Try a daylight scene that has a more homogeneous light- something
that doesn't have like backlight subjects and they are in the
shadow. Also give a try to say a face well lit in daylight (but not
overly so). I think maybe you bumped into a limitation of the jpeg
processor of this camera but I would try more types of shots before
drawing conclusions... how are other shots doing?

--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through
some hot water'

...anon
Click to expand...
--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
 
I was wondering if they would print up well. I have a printer, I'll print out a few at 4x6 and 8x10 to see how they look. I agree abotu the Canon images. I used to use a 10D and the images sharpened up REALLY well. I have to say that except for an odd blue cast in some of the images of the sky (that I think was caused by having it set to chrome color) I thought the F-20 did a nice job with exposure in some pretty tricky situations.

Its true there is no perfect cam and it important to keep things in perspective. At around $100 after rebate I suppose the F-20 has more going for it than not. I already did a few resized to 1024x768 and 640x489 and they look fine. Also, for the casual snapshot and the odd high ISO shot it will do just fine.

Thanks again.
Raist3d said:
If you have a printer, try printing out them in your printer at the
size you normally would- I am talking defintively about the old
lady in your crop. See if you can notice it.

I have noticed that Fuji's interesting because at 100% the photos
look sometimes dirty or with some CCD artifacts, even, but when
printed, as long as there is not a lot of resize going on, they
actually look sharper printed, and you avoid the postprocessing
sharpening you have sometimes may want to do on other cameras
(Canon from my experience, though I found their shots fine as is
but they had more detail when sharpened).

In the end if you are printing at certain sizes and the photos come
out fine- and if you are sharing on the internet at say 1024x768 or
lower resolution sizes, then think about that in pragmatic terms
this doesn't matter, and you still got a P&S that has better than
regular ISO performance. There's no perfect camera, just pro's
cons of different brands and makes.. you have to see if that
matches your needs.
  • Raist
dixeyk said:
Raist3d said:
After all the cr*p I got saying the F810 would be worse and this
happens. Kinda funny (not laughing at you in any way btw, just
commenting on someone else). I haven't had this problem with the
F810. If I had to guess, I think the problem here maybe too
aggresive jpeg compression on the F20. Maybe there's a tonal range
issue.

Try this:

Try a daylight scene that has a more homogeneous light- something
that doesn't have like backlight subjects and they are in the
shadow. Also give a try to say a face well lit in daylight (but not
overly so). I think maybe you bumped into a limitation of the jpeg
processor of this camera but I would try more types of shots before
drawing conclusions... how are other shots doing?

--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through
some hot water'

...anon
Click to expand...
--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
They look like well exposed shots with good color.
tdkd13 said:
This guy seems to do allright with his, check the shots and see if
you agree. Perhaps part of your issue is looking at these shots at
100% on a monitor, not sure thats what your doing but I seem to
recall an early post in which the shots you linked were at 100%.
Take care, Ted

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=22956466

--
http://photobucket.com/albums/y260/tdkd13/
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
dixeyk said:
And finally, there is a noise/pattern that is VERY noticeable at
high ISO and even present in a well lit scene at ISO 100. It is not
limited to the shadow areas but also seems to appear along edges
and in areas where there is a color transition. It looks a bit like
dithering mixed with compression artifacts. I know that I will be
accused of pixel peeping but it doesn't take an advanced degree to
see it. I think the noise/pattern is distracting and detracts from
what is an otherwise good performance image wise.
Click to expand...
I know exactly what you're talking about here. Usually it's not too distracting and in general, is a small price to pay for everything else.
 
I have to say that either the focus was on something else in that ISO 100 shot or you have a little camera-shake issue or you have a funky F20. Just to test it if you have time, take a shot from a tripod with the 2sec timer on. Then check the 100% crop. If an Iso 100 is still fuzzy and watercolorish... then you have a problem.

Here is a hand held, lowlight, ISO 1600 shot of my cat's face. And the 100% crop is not too bad...



100% crop



Granted the fur is not detailed but at ISO 1600 you would not expect it to be.

A tripod test would help to see if yours is a bad sample of the F20. Mine seems to have good detail at ISO 100. But maybe I should go check some 100 percent crops....
--
gus
Get what makes you happy...
Anything less makes you less happy!
 
Well, I have to say that your cat picture looks better than anything I have gotten. I will go ahead and do a tripod test.
igilligantoo said:
I have to say that either the focus was on something else in that
ISO 100 shot or you have a little camera-shake issue or you have a
funky F20. Just to test it if you have time, take a shot from a
tripod with the 2sec timer on. Then check the 100% crop. If an
Iso 100 is still fuzzy and watercolorish... then you have a
problem.
Here is a hand held, lowlight, ISO 1600 shot of my cat's face. And
the 100% crop is not too bad...



100% crop



Granted the fur is not detailed but at ISO 1600 you would not
expect it to be.
A tripod test would help to see if yours is a bad sample of the
F20. Mine seems to have good detail at ISO 100. But maybe I
should go check some 100 percent crops....
--
gus
Get what makes you happy...
Anything less makes you less happy!
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
Thank you, I was wondering if I was the only person that could see it. To be honest I wish I could just ignore it but it sure is buggin' me. Maybe after I play with the camera some more I'll start to not see it (that would make things a lot easier).
Undah said:
dixeyk said:
And finally, there is a noise/pattern that is VERY noticeable at
high ISO and even present in a well lit scene at ISO 100. It is not
limited to the shadow areas but also seems to appear along edges
and in areas where there is a color transition. It looks a bit like
dithering mixed with compression artifacts. I know that I will be
accused of pixel peeping but it doesn't take an advanced degree to
see it. I think the noise/pattern is distracting and detracts from
what is an otherwise good performance image wise.
Click to expand...
I know exactly what you're talking about here. Usually it's not
too distracting and in general, is a small price to pay for
everything else.
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
Small sensor cameras to seem more prone to this kind of thing and I'm sure the larger sensor in the F-20 (relative to the competition) makes a difference. G7 noise at ISO 80...ouch.
WeiS said:
I just came across this thread in Canon forum, someone is
complaining about G7's noisiness in ISO 80. I don't know which is
worse but it seems it's common problem for small-sensor cameras.
Luckily F20's noise problem doesn't go up exponentially towards
higher ISO settings (i.e. stay quite useable) compare to other
cameras.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&thread=22954406

--
Wei Steen
-------------------------------



http://www.pbase.com/weisteen
Click to expand...
--
--
'You're like a teabag - not worth much till you've been through some hot water'

...anon
 
dixeyk said:
The high ISO ability of the Fuji F20 (and perhaps its brethren) is
IMHO overstated in reviews.
Click to expand...
As a Canon 20D user who does a lot of high ISO/available light work for a living, I just don't agree. I've been astounded by what I can achieve with my F11 - it's the compact camera I've been waiting for to supplement my DSLRs, giving me a lot of their functionality in a pocket size package. I have an F11, my son, a university student doing geology and geophysics has an F20 that I bought him recently.

If you want to see some high ISO work I've done with it, these gigs were shot with my F11 all at 1600ISO:
http://www.boo-photos.co.uk/robynv3manc/index.html
http://www.boo-photos.co.uk/robynv3sheff/index.html
I've a lot more to add to this yet: http://imageevent.com/boophotos/viarosa
dixeyk said:
And finally, there is a noise/pattern that is VERY noticeable at
high ISO and even present in a well lit scene at ISO 100.
Click to expand...
This is something I have seen commented on here many, many times over the many years I've had Fuji cameras - along with other brands - I'm not especially loyal or a fan-girl of any in particular. I think the Fuji CCD looks a little odd on-screen when viewed at 100% and especially if you've used other brands of camera, it takes a little getting used to - it just looks plain lumpy on-screen. I would suggest however that you don't allow this to put you off the F20 - which it sounds from your various threads as though it is in danger of doing.

Whilst the pattern looks a little odd on screen, the images from the Fxx series cameras both print superbly well and can withstand an awful lot of post-processing work if that's your thing. I do a lot of work on some images and am amazed at the hammering F11 images can take. They really do withstand manipulation well. I would also suggest that you judge results by how the finished product will look - whether that's an 8 x 10 print, or 800px wide screen display - view images at something that approximates the final size and I think you'll be much more satisfied.

As mentioned, my son has an F20 for his field work - he takes two main types of photos - field images of rocks, geological structures, close ups of textures and details, some of which are in dark recesses, hence thinking the F20 was ideal for him. He just used it in its first practical test on a 2 week field study and said he was over the moon with how it worked and the results he got. I asked him to save me a few examples to my hard drive for reference. His other main use is beer-sozzled social photos - I'll spare you those, but trust me, it was up to the task- he got some great fun shots.

F20 1:1 crop taken with macro mode, 100ISO, area shown is about 3" wide:



When I got him the F20 I only had access to it for an hour or two and fired off a few random shot at various ISOs.

400ISO macro 1:1 pixel crop of a small candle holder:



I make jewellery and these were some shots of stuff on my workbench at the time. 1600ISO macro 1:1 pixel crop of an area about an inch in diameter:



1600ISO macro 1:1 pixel crop of a piece of silver, about half an inch area:


dixeyk said:
This is a 100% crop of an image at ISO 100. Maybe its just me but I
should think that at ISO 100 an image shouldn't look that way. It
reminds me of a moire pattern.
Click to expand...
Apart from my comments above about the CCD appearance, it also looks to me like the main subject wasn't in ideal focus, the foliage behind looks sharper - possibly even slight movement blur - impossible to guess without shot details. It also looks like it might have been taken at quite close quarters and if the subject were closer than the minimum focus distance of 2 feet, it would automatically focus behind the subject slightly. Also, even with these small sensors, close shots still have a relatively shallow DOF - so something else in the scene might have had the optimal focus.

I'm still astounded by the performance of my F11 - considering the modest cost, I can fit it in my shirt pocket and it takes about 500 shots on a battery charge.

I took a series of landscape shots over Easter during an evening saunter, which in particular, seemed especially good for detail.

Taken at 200ISO, f5, 24mm, this is a 1:1 crop from the middle showing the extremity of the foremost property, which was my main subject and about a mile away, to fells 20 miles away-ish.



The same shot resized slightly and sharpened and saturated as if prepared for print, equivalent to a poster sized print, on my monitor. I think I'd improve the colour and wouldn't actually sharpen the sky if I were printing it. I think the detail is pretty amazing - imagine that on the wall, bearing in mind this is detail well off the main subject and in the background. I can see individual blades of grass in focus at the very front. Just because a camera is a 'point and shoot' also doesn't mean you can abandon the same care of thought and understanding of the principles in preparing to take a shot and expect good results - they still respond to the same geometry and require thought to get optimal results.



--
So many photos, so little time . . .
http://www.peekaboo.me.uk - general portfolio & tutorials
http://www.boo-photos.co.uk - live music portfolio
http://imageevent.com/boophotos/ - most recent images

Please do not amend and re-post my images unless specifically requested or given permission to do so.
 
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