Reading mode: Light Dark

Too much NR on F31 & F40 or my eyes not so good?

Go to last post
D

donquijote

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
477
Reaction score
0
Location
Istanbul, TR
I've been reading how great Fujifilm compact cameras F31/30 and F40 are, especially in lowlight. When I look at the shots taken by them (I assumed that sunlight pictures whould have more detail), I see people's face look flat with no detail (kind of painted look) because of the noise reduction or whaetever else it is. Also the shots look very flat overall with no 3D depth feeling. People's faces look much better and alive (not ghost-like) on Canon and Nikon shots. Tell me I have bad eyes!
 
 
donquijote said:
I've been reading how great Fujifilm compact cameras F31/30 and F40
are, especially in lowlight. When I look at the shots taken by them
(I assumed that sunlight pictures whould have more detail), I see
people's face look flat with no detail (kind of painted look) because
of the noise reduction or whaetever else it is. Also the shots look
very flat overall with no 3D depth feeling. People's faces look much
better and alive (not ghost-like) on Canon and Nikon shots. Tell me I
have bad eyes!
Click to expand...
Which Canon? Which Nikon? I have no personal experience with Nikon, but I have a Canon 5D, 400S, and A620, and have some experience with Panasonic and Sony digicams. I also have Fuji F31fd. At ISO400 (the highest available on the S400 and the A620), the F31fd is FAR superior. None of these cameras rivals the 5D (or, say, the Nikon D2XS) if the images are viewed critically at full size, but, as compact digicams go, I haven't seen any that beat--or, in most cases, come close to--the image quality of the F31 and other Fujis that use this sensor.

Bob
 
donquijote said:
danny_only said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=20945542&q=richard+higgs&qf=m

http://www.pbase.com/rhiggs1
Click to expand...
Ok, the girls are nice and the skin color is accurate but their face
skin looks all-around flat as I said. They don't have any color
change or any little contrasts across their faces. People's real
faces are not like that.
Click to expand...
Fuji cameras 31fd and 40fd indeed are famous for low noise. There are two reasons for that. First is their famous low noise CCD censor. Second is the noise reduction.

When it comes to noise reduction, Fuji indeed pulls all the stops but it does it quite clever. Most of the noise reduction is chroma, that's why you don't see color specs even in high ISO images. It was shocking at first, when I looked at Fuji images and compared them with Canon output. On Fuji you can clearly see the artifacts of noise reductions but no color noise!

Of course it comes with a price - it kills subtle, small scale color fluctuations. Hence, the smooth, sometimes overly smooth, "plasticy" look.
 
This is interesting - if your Canon give more depth and detail and more life and less watercolourfeeling - do you mean that applies also in lowlight shooting? With our without flash.

If you get a fair amount of noise in yr lowlight Canon pics (if you dont - which model???) how do you deal with that? Leave it? PP? If PP - doesnt that take away the detail, flatten and produce watercolour effect in yr Canon pics.

If I can get o good cam with viewfinder(need it in daylight) that can produce pics close to F3x in lowlight - preferaböy without flash - then i would accept some PP to reach a god result even if PP has a learning curve.

Could you post some example pics?

Best Regards
 
thank you very much for the explanations. I bought an f31fd a month ago, it is a very good camera, there is no doubt about it. I looked at my pictures, and the test samples from dpreview and other sites, and they are all very sharp. BUT I have always felt the pictures coming out of it have a kind strange unreal feeling, it subtle, but I can feel it when compared with the pictures taken by my canon a620 or canon s400. It's kind of bizarre, because all the details look pin sharp, but somehow the overall picture looks somewhat "silky".
Gena said:
donquijote said:
danny_only said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=20945542&q=richard+higgs&qf=m

http://www.pbase.com/rhiggs1
Click to expand...
Ok, the girls are nice and the skin color is accurate but their face
skin looks all-around flat as I said. They don't have any color
change or any little contrasts across their faces. People's real
faces are not like that.
Click to expand...
Fuji cameras 31fd and 40fd indeed are famous for low noise. There are
two reasons for that. First is their famous low noise CCD censor.
Second is the noise reduction.

When it comes to noise reduction, Fuji indeed pulls all the stops but
it does it quite clever. Most of the noise reduction is chroma,
that's why you don't see color specs even in high ISO images. It was
shocking at first, when I looked at Fuji images and compared them
with Canon output. On Fuji you can clearly see the artifacts of noise
reductions but no color noise!

Of course it comes with a price - it kills subtle, small scale color
fluctuations. Hence, the smooth, sometimes overly smooth, "plasticy"
look.
Click to expand...
 
h35352001 said:
thank you very much for the explanations. I bought an f31fd a month
ago, it is a very good camera, there is no doubt about it. I looked
at my pictures, and the test samples from dpreview and other sites,
and they are all very sharp. BUT I have always felt the pictures
coming out of it have a kind strange unreal feeling, it subtle, but I
can feel it when compared with the pictures taken by my canon a620 or
canon s400. It's kind of bizarre, because all the details look pin
sharp, but somehow the overall picture looks somewhat "silky".
Click to expand...
Exactly! This doesn't mean other manufacturers' cameras are excellent but I would not prefer a Fuji while taking people's pictures outdoors. Faces just seem to have that plastic baby doll effect.
 
donquijote said:
I've been reading how great Fujifilm compact cameras F31/30 and F40
are, especially in lowlight. When I look at the shots taken by them
(I assumed that sunlight pictures whould have more detail), I see
people's face look flat with no detail (kind of painted look) because
of the noise reduction or whaetever else it is. Also the shots look
very flat overall with no 3D depth feeling. People's faces look much
better and alive (not ghost-like) on Canon and Nikon shots. Tell me I
have bad eyes!
Click to expand...
You are completely correct, I am struggling with this also. The exact same thing! I have a Canon Ixus 40 and Fuji F31FD. Human faces are just washed out and flat, period. My old Ixus lacks sharpness, but photo's are more realistic, and show the low-contrast details (for example in skin texture) that the Fuji clearly lacks. Fuji is maybe great for low-light and buildings.

Of course I want sharpness AND realistic photo's AND a camera that fits in my pocket. I am not sure there is such a thing. But things are changing fast who knows? Wouldn't it be possible to use a SLR sensor in a compact? I would pay almost any price for a camera with SLR quality that fits in my pocket and I can't be alone, this is a "hole" in the market IMO.

Problems with the F31D so far:
  • washed out faces at ANY ISO
  • bad image quality over 200 ISO (artefacts, blocky grainy structures visible at 100% view, even more washed out area's, smeared details)
  • when downloading pics to comp, camera freezes after 60 seconds. Have to switch off/on camera and download the remaining, until it freezes again. Download of new usb driver from FUJI did not help.
  • You can forget about further sharpening in PS, because pics are already sharpened to the max (heavy distortions will appear)
  • nearly all pics need post processing to improve (auto WB is nearly always off in normal daylight, faces look unnaturally white and flat, many pics need brightening/contrast adjustment, etc)
Good points:
  • macro/close up is really good, can take razorsharp pics
  • sharpness in general is clearly better than my Ixus 40
  • Battery life is Excellent
  • It's fast in operation
Still I am not satisfied with this camera so far and consider to go for another one.

Bas.
 
Bas Hamstra said:
  • washed out faces at ANY ISO
  • bad image quality over 200 ISO (artefacts, blocky grainy structures
visible at 100% view, even more washed out area's, smeared details)
Click to expand...
The photo below, first the entire frame reduced in size, and a full-frame crop below it, has had absolutely no post processing, and was shot at ISO200 with the F31fd. I don't see any of the problems you're talking about.
Bas Hamstra said:
  • when downloading pics to comp, camera freezes after 60 seconds.
Have to switch off/on camera and download the remaining, until it
freezes again. Download of new usb driver from FUJI did not help.
Click to expand...
I have never had this problem, and have not seen anyone post about this either.
Bas Hamstra said:
  • You can forget about further sharpening in PS, because pics are
already sharpened to the max (heavy distortions will appear)
  • nearly all pics need post processing to improve (auto WB is nearly
always off in normal daylight, faces look unnaturally white and flat,
many pics need brightening/contrast adjustment, etc)
Click to expand...
Again, this photo has had no adjustment whatsoever. It was shot in the M mode, AWB, no exposure compensation. For a portrait shot, I would not use any sharpening, but other shots sometimes can do with a bit--I use FocalBlade "Light sharpening" "Very fine details," which works well with images that need it. Most don't.

I'm wondering if you have a defective or substandard sample of the camera.

Bob



 
Nice photo Robert.

The F30 and F31 have gotten such rave reviews, I think some may unrealistically be expecting dslr quality results. I'm a bit guilty of this. There's been so much buzz, hopefully not hype, surrounding these. We have to realize that the F30 and F31 are just p&s cameras as evidenced by the photos shared in the forum. Some are very good and some are plain duds. Your picture is not doctored, but I wonder how many nice ones have been.

My F31 just arrived this evening, so I will start experimenting soon. My main reason for purchasing this was to have a take anywhere p&s I could shoot in low light conditions as well as the incredible battery.
 
Slave Daddy said:
Nice photo Robert.
Click to expand...
Thanks!
Slave Daddy said:
The F30 and F31 have gotten such rave reviews, I think some may
unrealistically be expecting dslr quality results. I'm a bit guilty
of this. There's been so much buzz, hopefully not hype, surrounding
these. We have to realize that the F30 and F31 are just p&s cameras
as evidenced by the photos shared in the forum. Some are very good
and some are plain duds. Your picture is not doctored, but I wonder
how many nice ones have been.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's anything wrong with "doctoring" photos--it's the final result that counts. As for the comparison with DSLRs; well, the much larger sensors and much more expensive cameras and lenses mean that they should perform better--and they do, other things (like the inherent interest of the subject and the skill of the photographer) being equal. I've had a Canon 300D, 20D, and now own a 5D with several L-series lenses, and I find I need to do more post-processing with the 5D than with the F31fd.
Slave Daddy said:
My F31 just arrived this evening, so I will start experimenting soon.
My main reason for purchasing this was to have a take anywhere p&s I
could shoot in low light conditions as well as the incredible battery.
Click to expand...
As long as you have reasonable expectations, and compare the F31fd with other small digicams, I doubt if you'll be disappointed.

Bob
 
donquijote said:
I've been reading how great Fujifilm compact cameras F31/30 and F40
are, especially in lowlight. When I look at the shots taken by them
(I assumed that sunlight pictures whould have more detail), I see
people's face look flat with no detail (kind of painted look) because
of the noise reduction or whaetever else it is. Also the shots look
very flat overall with no 3D depth feeling. People's faces look much
better and alive (not ghost-like) on Canon and Nikon shots. Tell me I
have bad eyes!
Click to expand...
...
Totally agree with you.

I just don't like the F30/31's JPEG artifacts. Just too much, even at ISO100.
...
 
  • When taking low light shot I often also do not like the colors rendered and because of it looking soft. But then again better with alomst any other P&S at the same circumstances I would not be able to take a foto at all!
  • I realized that at low light the auto W/B does get it wrong easily, changing the W/B manually often result in a much better colors.
  • I love my F31fd, mostly I get great colors at daylight, but not always, sometimes it looks like being smeared over with some paste. The best way I can think of to describe the tone quality of the ones I don't like is calling them 'sick'. I have no idea yet on what it depends to get good, or less good colors.
cheers,
kuuan
--
please review my fotos at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/8003463@N03/
and my movies at: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=kuuan
 
donquijote said:
I've been reading how great Fujifilm compact cameras F31/30 and F40
are, especially in lowlight.
Click to expand...
They are, they blow the competition out of the water.
donquijote said:
When I look at the shots taken by them
(I assumed that sunlight pictures whould have more detail), I see
people's face look flat with no detail (kind of painted look) because
of the noise reduction or whaetever else it is.
Click to expand...
It is true to say that the noise reduction on the images is heavier than I personally would choose (as is the sharpening and contrast) - BUT - and it's a big one - I know what I'm doing, I do a lot of work at high ISO with available light using a DSLR and am very experienced at post processing and could happily manage my own images - but I'm probably not a typical Fxx camera range target buyer. They are aimed at a market where the vast majority of buyers will probably only use the cameras for holiday and social keepsakes and take their memory card straight to the local photographic store for a set of 4 x 6 or 5 x 7 reprints. And with that likely end use, the results are spot on - the images are set up to look great on paper, straight from the camera - and they do, even in implausibly poor light.

You have to keep in mind what these cameras are and judge the results with that perspective. They are relatively inexpensive digicams that fit in your pocket and out-perform anything else on the market in the same price bracket and feature-set. I have an F11 - I've seen nothing in the subsequent models to make me want to upgrade yet - my son has an F20 - so those are my areas of direct experience, not the F31 or F40s, it's true to say.

You also have to consider what you do with the images - the Fxx range have the super CCD in them which is made up of strange octagonal shaped photosites and this gives rise to a rather odd looking image on-screen - images have a very distinct appearance. But they print exceptionally well - I have several 30 x 20 posters from my old Fuji 602 - and can withstand a lot of manipulation digitally and once resampled or whatever to their final format, they usually look considerably better than the 1:1 pixel view might have suggested.

So it rather depends on how you're judging the images and in what format - I think the Fuji Fxx camera images don't look their best when viewed at 100% magnification on-screen, that is clearly not how they will finally be used and published and until you're used to its appearance, if you're more experienced with other cameras, they do look a little odd on-screen. Try printing or resampling a full res image and then judge how it looks.
donquijote said:
Also the shots look
very flat overall with no 3D depth feeling. People's faces look much
better and alive (not ghost-like) on Canon and Nikon shots. Tell me I
have bad eyes!
Click to expand...
Without seeing the images you're referring to, which might just have been badly taken, it's difficult to know why you don't like their appearance, maybe the Fuji look is just not to your liking, in which case, buy a Canon or Nikon instead. I own several brands of camera and have no particular loyalty - within reach of me here I have 2 Fujis (+ my son's F20 when he's at home), 2 Canons, a Nikon and an Olympus. But without a shadow of a doubt, my F11 is the only compact/digicam that can hack it in the same lighting conditions that my 20D DSLR can. My Canon compact is trash in comparison, truly unusable - it's great in daylight and for macros, but once the light falls, the F11 really shines.

I don't have any low light portraits available to post, but these were all taken in very low lighting conditions - my Canon and Nikon compacts wouldn't even have got the shots. All at 1600ISO, wide open and less than 1/20 shutter speed. If you don't like the look of the Fuji images, then you'll need to consider other marques, but don't expect to get shots like these with it. It's that simple.











(I think this one may be 800ISO)









--
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