Unfortunately the previous thread was full (why the 150 msg cap?) so we can continue the discussion regarding the F50 and its DPR review here 
The previous thread ended here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1012&thread=25902570&page=8
First of all it takes SD, which is 1) 2-3x cheaper per MB, 2) faster, and 3) well available, where XD is slowly getting extinct.
Second, the F50fd is indeed a little slower shot to shot than F31fd, but the difference isn't that large: 2.4 vs 2.8s no flash, 2.8 vs 4.0s with flash (this is quite a difference, but not due to filesize) and 4.5 vs 4.3 with flash/red-eye (f50 is actually a little faster here).
Third, F50's file sizes are a bit larger then F31's (4.3mb vs 3.1mb), but with today's SD cards being quite a lot faster than XD the difference will be minimal in pc-download times. I even suspect SD will have an edge, even with the larger files. Plus SD will work with any cardreader, where by far most will not take the obscure XD format. Many laptops and retail PC's nowdays even have an SD slot built in, but no support for XD.
Battery time vs size is a tradeoff I'm prepared to make any day as long as I still get reasonable performance (wich is the case with F50). F31fd is plain bulky, mostly due to its large battery. F50 is a very slim design, near ultra-compact. It easily goes into any pocket. With optional spare batt's you can decide yourself how much batterypower you're walking around with (in your bag and not your cam, what's a big plus in my book).
When we then take price at launch into account the F50 becomes the obvious winner here too. It's been launched $40,- cheaper than F31fd.
For that $40 pricedifference you can buy the F50 2 third party spare batteries (giving the F50 the edge in battery time), PLUS a camerabag, PLUS a 1-2GB SD card on ebay.
Given the other properties several others and I mentioned in the previous thread the F50 is the plain better choice in my book. Even if you could buy F31 at regular prices in stead of the plain rediculous prices they're going for on Ebay these days.
F50 improved just about everything about its predesessor (metering, auto mode, highlight-blowing (previous F's were notorious for that), daytime photography, color reproduction, IS, looks, size, FD etc), is launched $40 cheaper, and does only a slight step back in the ISO800/1600 department (not at a theoretical pixel level but at a practical output/result level).
The scaled difference at ISO800 is hard to detect in a 100% crop (see review)... so it will not show on either screen (scaled) or print, and that is what really matters. The time we should be looking at a pixel level is long gone, especially since mp's whent double digits... this unless you're comparing apples to apples (scaled to same reso), and even then the per pixel level is getting less important with every new camera generation release... its the total picture that counts in real life.
--
Try to live without y'r cam
The previous thread ended here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1012&thread=25902570&page=8
Actually the F50 also improves here on several points over the previous F-series (up to F31).rocklobster said:
First of all it takes SD, which is 1) 2-3x cheaper per MB, 2) faster, and 3) well available, where XD is slowly getting extinct.
Second, the F50fd is indeed a little slower shot to shot than F31fd, but the difference isn't that large: 2.4 vs 2.8s no flash, 2.8 vs 4.0s with flash (this is quite a difference, but not due to filesize) and 4.5 vs 4.3 with flash/red-eye (f50 is actually a little faster here).
Third, F50's file sizes are a bit larger then F31's (4.3mb vs 3.1mb), but with today's SD cards being quite a lot faster than XD the difference will be minimal in pc-download times. I even suspect SD will have an edge, even with the larger files. Plus SD will work with any cardreader, where by far most will not take the obscure XD format. Many laptops and retail PC's nowdays even have an SD slot built in, but no support for XD.
Battery time vs size is a tradeoff I'm prepared to make any day as long as I still get reasonable performance (wich is the case with F50). F31fd is plain bulky, mostly due to its large battery. F50 is a very slim design, near ultra-compact. It easily goes into any pocket. With optional spare batt's you can decide yourself how much batterypower you're walking around with (in your bag and not your cam, what's a big plus in my book).
When we then take price at launch into account the F50 becomes the obvious winner here too. It's been launched $40,- cheaper than F31fd.
For that $40 pricedifference you can buy the F50 2 third party spare batteries (giving the F50 the edge in battery time), PLUS a camerabag, PLUS a 1-2GB SD card on ebay.
Given the other properties several others and I mentioned in the previous thread the F50 is the plain better choice in my book. Even if you could buy F31 at regular prices in stead of the plain rediculous prices they're going for on Ebay these days.
F50 improved just about everything about its predesessor (metering, auto mode, highlight-blowing (previous F's were notorious for that), daytime photography, color reproduction, IS, looks, size, FD etc), is launched $40 cheaper, and does only a slight step back in the ISO800/1600 department (not at a theoretical pixel level but at a practical output/result level).
The scaled difference at ISO800 is hard to detect in a 100% crop (see review)... so it will not show on either screen (scaled) or print, and that is what really matters. The time we should be looking at a pixel level is long gone, especially since mp's whent double digits... this unless you're comparing apples to apples (scaled to same reso), and even then the per pixel level is getting less important with every new camera generation release... its the total picture that counts in real life.
--
Try to live without y'r cam
