Fuji S1

Richard Mandelkorn · May 2, 2000

.Hey Phil,

Get a life. 2-3 years in the business does not impress me as a great deal of
experience. Right now, in this economy, almost anyone competent can do well with
a camera. I suggest you hold your enthusiam until you've weathered a recession -

and I promise you, one will come. I've known lots of would be "pros" over the last

twenty years who thought they had a great edge on everyone else - a new "take" on
the industry -most of these I encountered in the mid-eighties. After the last
recession few if any were left.

I suggest you notice what kind of photographers are the survivors and successes
out there. They are the ones who are not so insecure as to think that they've
discovered some secret "key" to success. They are most likely to be the ones who

willingly and enthusiastically teach at workshops, discuss their work in magazines
and generally share their knowledge, because when all is said and done, it's
what's inside that counts; how you "see" from within yourself, how you work with
shadow, light, and composition; how you do business with and relate to your
clients that insures success. The rest is all smoke and mirrors.

I see this forum as a place for such people. If you wish to blow your horn about how

great you are, have the maturity and balls to back it up with facts. Otherwise keep it

to yourself and don't waste my time or the others here who are legitimate pros just
to make yourself feel good.

Rick M. - A pro since 1978

Phil said:
"Most true professional photographers I know (myself included for over 20
years) are more than happy to share ideas, equipment, techniques, and

Phil19445 said:

other information to help out their fellow shooters in all disciplines of
photography" MAYBE IF YOU HAD SOME NEW IDEAS DIFFERENT TO

Click to expand...

EVERYONE ELSES YOU WOULDNT! WHY NOT ENLIGHTEN US ALL WITH SOME
OF YOUR CLEVER VENTURES!

Phil19445 said:
Thank you........I will carry on making large ammounts of money!
Maybe in a year or two you will find out what im doing!!!!!!!!!

All the best,

Phil

Pete Biro · May 2, 2000

Rick: Only since '78

Your reply to the 'dude' who knows all and tells nuttin' was right on!

I started making hides from snappin' pix in '55 (wasted the first 20 years of my life doing other stuff)

Richard Mandelkorn said:
Rick M. - A pro since 1978

Jón Ragnarsson · May 3, 2000

Phil Askey said:
Matt said:

Try this link http://www.zing.com/magazine/04.05.2000/columns/tech_guru/
Very good article, good sample pictures. Compared it with a d1.

Click to expand...

Res is pretty good, though I didn't like the S1's colour (look at the
blimp pic)

I have never been to the Nevada desert so I don't know how the sky looks there, but I think these to cameras are neck to neck in image quality. The sky in th Fuji Airship photos look more natural to me on the D1 (maybe a bit too purplish), but the Paris photo looks better on the S1. (Again,those buildings could just be that yellow, and the S1 is wrong).

Being amateur, I just can not justify the price difference, even though the D1 has F100 body

Jón

Lin Evans · May 3, 2000

Jón Ragnarsson said:
Phil Askey said:

Matt said:

Try this link http://www.zing.com/magazine/04.05.2000/columns/tech_guru/
Very good article, good sample pictures. Compared it with a d1.

Click to expand...

Res is pretty good, though I didn't like the S1's colour (look at the
blimp pic)

Click to expand...

I have never been to the Nevada desert so I don't know how the sky looks
there, but I think these to cameras are neck to neck in image quality.
The sky in th Fuji Airship photos look more natural to me on the D1
(maybe a bit too purplish), but the Paris photo looks better on the S1.
(Again,those buildings could just be that yellow, and the S1 is wrong).
Being amateur, I just can not justify the price difference, even though
the D1 has F100 body

Jón

Jón

The pictures were tiny and don't reveal the extreme "softness" of the S1's images. Look elsewhere at the various shots made with the S1 and I think you will have a different opinion about the "neck and neck" image quality. The D1's image quality is magnititudes better than the S1 with the same lens and subject. I've posted comparison shots using direct crops from Fuji's various professional shots (fruit bowl, eyes of model, etc.) which show that even 1.46 megapixel results from the D770 Sony are far sharper at the pixel level than the S1. The smaller the picture, the better the S1 looks. When you look at full sized images, it makes you immediately want to take the shot to PhotoShop and sharpen, sharpen, sharpen. The problem is, you can't! The interpolation has caused fuzziness that can't be fixed in software.

Lin

Bernard Carns · May 3, 2000

What is really out of place is the mean spiritedness and arrogance.

Pro or non pro it has no place here.

Be real adults.

Leave the mean stuff in the sandbox.

That is where it should have stayed.

If you were real adults you'd apologize to each other for being so disrespectful, and the next post you post would have a lot more humanity in it.

BC

Rick M. said:
Get a life. 2-3 years in the business does not impress me as a great
deal of
experience. Right now, in this economy, almost anyone competent can do
well with
a camera. I suggest you hold your enthusiam until you've weathered a
recession -
and I promise you, one will come. I've known lots of would be "pros" over
the last
twenty years who thought they had a great edge on everyone else - a new
"take" on
the industry -most of these I encountered in the mid-eighties. After the
last
recession few if any were left.

I suggest you notice what kind of photographers are the survivors and
successes
out there. They are the ones who are not so insecure as to think that
they've
discovered some secret "key" to success. They are most likely to be the
ones who
willingly and enthusiastically teach at workshops, discuss their work in
magazines
and generally share their knowledge, because when all is said and done, it's
what's inside that counts; how you "see" from within yourself, how you
work with
shadow, light, and composition; how you do business with and relate to your
clients that insures success. The rest is all smoke and mirrors.

I see this forum as a place for such people. If you wish to blow your
horn about how
great you are, have the maturity and balls to back it up with facts.
Otherwise keep it
to yourself and don't waste my time or the others here who are legitimate
pros just
to make yourself feel good.

Rick M. - A pro since 1978

Phil said:

"Most true professional photographers I know (myself included for over 20
years) are more than happy to share ideas, equipment, techniques, and

Richard Mandelkorn said:

other information to help out their fellow shooters in all disciplines of
photography" MAYBE IF YOU HAD SOME NEW IDEAS DIFFERENT TO

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

EVERYONE ELSES YOU WOULDNT! WHY NOT ENLIGHTEN US ALL WITH SOME
OF YOUR CLEVER VENTURES!

Richard Mandelkorn said:

Thank you........I will carry on making large ammounts of money!
Maybe in a year or two you will find out what im doing!!!!!!!!!

All the best,

Phil

Click to expand...

JCDoss · May 3, 2000

Bernard Carns said:
What is really out of place is the mean spiritedness and arrogance.

Pro or non pro it has no place here.

Be real adults.

Leave the mean stuff in the sandbox.

That is where it should have stayed.

If you were real adults you'd apologize to each other for being so
disrespectful, and the next post you post would have a lot more humanity
in it.

BC

I agree with you, BC. I only started this post because I was interested in what people thought about the Fuji S1! Sheesh!

Fred H. · May 3, 2000

..>

Member said:
Jón
The pictures were tiny and don't reveal the extreme "softness" of the
S1's images. Look elsewhere at the various shots made with the S1 and I
think you will have a different opinion about the "neck and neck" image
quality. The D1's image quality is magnititudes better than the S1 with
the same lens and subject. I've posted comparison shots using direct
crops from Fuji's various professional shots (fruit bowl, eyes of model,
etc.) which show that even 1.46 megapixel results from the D770 Sony are
far sharper at the pixel level than the S1. The smaller the picture, the
better the S1 looks. When you look at full sized images, it makes you
immediately want to take the shot to PhotoShop and sharpen, sharpen,
sharpen. The problem is, you can't! The interpolation has caused
fuzziness that can't be fixed in software.

Lin

Lin:

You are as free to express your opinion as anyone, but when you start to use hyperbole such as 'extreme' I feel I have to call you on it. By most standards of quality the S1 pictures are somewhat soft - in no way do they fit the extreme category. I suggest you make your points with a bit more judicious choice of words. I might also say that I have seen your shot of the fruit bowl and thought that you had used an 'extreme' amount of sharpening on it.

Fred H.

Eugene Powers · May 3, 2000

Jon,
I see you don't have either camera yet.
Here is my point.

Regardless of minute or not so minute image quality, then you have digital camera in your hands you take a lot of pictures. In fact on average you will take

10 times more pictures than if you used film. This thing alone justify cost of D1.

On the other note, Did anybody noticed that highlights are blown on S1 shot?
Just like it was blown on the original picture of the model in the black dress.
Metering problem?

Eugene

Jón Ragnarsson said:
Phil Askey said:

Matt said:

Try this link http://www.zing.com/magazine/04.05.2000/columns/tech_guru/
Very good article, good sample pictures. Compared it with a d1.

Click to expand...

Res is pretty good, though I didn't like the S1's colour (look at the
blimp pic)

Click to expand...

I have never been to the Nevada desert so I don't know how the sky looks
there, but I think these to cameras are neck to neck in image quality.
The sky in th Fuji Airship photos look more natural to me on the D1
(maybe a bit too purplish), but the Paris photo looks better on the S1.
(Again,those buildings could just be that yellow, and the S1 is wrong).
Being amateur, I just can not justify the price difference, even though
the D1 has F100 body

Jón

Lin Evans · May 3, 2000

Fred H. said:
..>

Member said:

Jón
The pictures were tiny and don't reveal the extreme "softness" of the
S1's images. Look elsewhere at the various shots made with the S1 and I
think you will have a different opinion about the "neck and neck" image
quality. The D1's image quality is magnititudes better than the S1 with
the same lens and subject. I've posted comparison shots using direct
crops from Fuji's various professional shots (fruit bowl, eyes of model,
etc.) which show that even 1.46 megapixel results from the D770 Sony are
far sharper at the pixel level than the S1. The smaller the picture, the
better the S1 looks. When you look at full sized images, it makes you
immediately want to take the shot to PhotoShop and sharpen, sharpen,
sharpen. The problem is, you can't! The interpolation has caused
fuzziness that can't be fixed in software.

Lin

Click to expand...

Lin:
You are as free to express your opinion as anyone, but when you start to
use hyperbole such as 'extreme' I feel I have to call you on it. By most
standards of quality the S1 pictures are somewhat soft - in no way do
they fit the extreme category. I suggest you make your points with a bit
more judicious choice of words. I might also say that I have seen your
shot of the fruit bowl and thought that you had used an 'extreme' amount
of sharpening on it.

Fred H.

Actually Fred, there was zero sharpening on the Sony comparison shot. Do I have to post it and the Fuji shots yet another time to demonstrate the EXIF file to make you happy? I think the term "extreme" fits the softness of the S1 images and I'm looking at them on three color matched 21" monitors of above standard quality (and I'm wearing my glasses - for the record). Why don't you "sharpen" the Fuji images, post them and let us see just how good they can be? If you can do it, you're better with the tools than I am and I will be willing to eat my words. I'm not going to loose any sleep worrying about it because the likelyhood of that happening is statistically nil.

Best regards,

Lin

Fred H. · May 4, 2000

Lin:

You can make or not make whatever you like, but we will just have to agree to disagree on the issue of whether the S1 images are 'extremely' soft -I also would have to say that if the image from the Sony 770 (or was it 700?) was not sharpened by you or in camera, then perhaps you have been conditioned to accept overly sharpened images because as I remember the images I saw what I would have sworn were sharpening artifacts - could there be something that might be called oversharp? As to whether I can present a suitably sharpened S1 image - I would have to say that I was able to sharpen the S1 bowl of fruit a good amount (without any noticible sharpening artifacts) but I wonder if you would be satisfied with any image from the S1 - you seem to have developed a 'thing' for Fuji.

Fred H.

Fred H. · May 4, 2000

Eugene Powers said:
On the other note, Did anybody noticed that highlights are blown on S1 shot?
Just like it was blown on the original picture of the model in the black
dress.
Metering problem?

Eugene

Eugene:

Did you notice that highlights are blown on the same shot from the D1? Look at the lower right and you will see that there appears to be about the same degree of bloom as in the S1 image - it seems that a different part of the scene happened to strongly reflect the sun.

Fred H.

Lin Evans · May 4, 2000

Fred H. said:
Lin:
You can make or not make whatever you like, but we will just have to
agree to disagree on the issue of whether the S1 images are 'extremely'
soft -I also would have to say that if the image from the Sony 770 (or
was it 700?) was not sharpened by you or in camera, then perhaps you have
been conditioned to accept overly sharpened images because as I remember
the images I saw what I would have sworn were sharpening artifacts -
could there be something that might be called oversharp? As to whether I
can present a suitably sharpened S1 image - I would have to say that I
was able to sharpen the S1 bowl of fruit a good amount (without any
noticible sharpening artifacts) but I wonder if you would be satisfied
with any image from the S1 - you seem to have developed a 'thing' for
Fuji.

Fred H.

Fred H. · May 4, 2000

Lin:

I used the 'sharpen more' in photoshop to get the image which I will send you and you can judge whether it is sharp enough for you and you can post it for all to see. Others who may still have the image and PS 5.5 can sharpen it for themselves to see who may be closer to the truth of the matter. I sincerely believe that with this sharpening any further detail is just not there (even for 3.2 Mpixel camera given the same setup). I'll point to the much improved detail in the ridges of the cantelope and the 'hair' on the kiwi fruit, and the seeds in the strawberries are now quite distinct.

Fred H.

SL · May 4, 2000

There's no way you could sharpen any details into the shots shown here(full-res examples):
Go to:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/EVENTS/PMAS00/S1Special/S1Special.HTM

Fred H. said:
Lin:
I used the 'sharpen more' in photoshop to get the image which I will send
you and you can judge whether it is sharp enough for you and you can post
it for all to see. Others who may still have the image and PS 5.5 can
sharpen it for themselves to see who may be closer to the truth of the
matter. I sincerely believe that with this sharpening any further detail
is just not there (even for 3.2 Mpixel camera given the same setup). I'll
point to the much improved detail in the ridges of the cantelope and the
'hair' on the kiwi fruit, and the seeds in the strawberries are now
quite distinct.

Fred H.

Fred H. · May 5, 2000

photodude said:
There's no way you could sharpen any details into the shots shown
here(full-res examples):
Go to:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/EVENTS/PMAS00/S1Special/S1Special.HTM

Well Photodude, if you wish, I could probably go back and find a few hastily taken and very unrepresentative images take with the camera of your choice.

These images in no way represent the capabilities of the camera. In the first place, these were taken, it is my understanding, with one of the hand built prototypes which were at the show. In the second place, I would attribute most of the 'softness' to poor focus or some other factor. Going by what you show, I would as soon buy the S1 as to throw it in the nearest lake. But I know that these samples are bogus so I won't have to worry about charges of littering.

I wonder if you have seen any of the samples at the Lonestardigital site - which are much more representative of the camera.

Fred H.

Search

Fuji S1

Richard Mandelkorn

Member

Pete Biro

Guest

Jón Ragnarsson

New member

Lin Evans

Guest

Bernard Carns

Senior Member

JCDoss

Member

Fred H.

Guest

Eugene Powers

Guest

Lin Evans

Guest

Fred H.

Guest

Fred H.

Guest

Lin Evans

Guest

Fred H.

Guest

SL

Active member

Fred H.

Guest

Keyboard shortcuts