Al Roden
Well-known member
It's also about reliability - and judging by comments in both forums the Fuji wins hands down amongst the stories about cracked bodies, poor focus etc of G2
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Fujifilm F601 or S602 or Canon powershot G2 or Nikon cp4500 ??
- Thread starter TaZzz
- Start date
Yes, the G2 body suffered a design defect, which AFAIK has been now resolved. As far a poor focus, I have seen the same complaints in every forum. From the images I have seen, a lot more g2 users are getting in focus images than 602 users.
kgu
Member
Al,
cough .....it's the 602 that wins hands down with stories of excessive noise, green casts, artifacts, smearing, harsh sharpening, banding..ect. For me, in the end it's all about image quailty. The 602 has great features but not the images to compete with the G2. I'll take a repairable hairline cracked G2 over a firmware-less correctable 602 at the moment. The G2 is plently reliable. All DC have some workarounds.
Have a nice weekend!
cough .....it's the 602 that wins hands down with stories of excessive noise, green casts, artifacts, smearing, harsh sharpening, banding..ect. For me, in the end it's all about image quailty. The 602 has great features but not the images to compete with the G2. I'll take a repairable hairline cracked G2 over a firmware-less correctable 602 at the moment. The G2 is plently reliable. All DC have some workarounds.
Have a nice weekend!
kgu
Member
This is the first time I have heard these problems described by BertD about S602. I have read Fujifile forum for weeks and never heard of them. When you buy a G2, I have read many buyer from Canon forum prey for God to get a good and no-defect one. This is not the case in S602. I am not saying that S602 is 100% no-defects. But, it is rare problem compared to G2. Lots of new S602 user reports something then they find out that because they don't know how to use the camera. This is the most of problem cases about S602 in Fuji forum. Judge for yourself.
kgu
kgu
B
Bob Williams
Guest
The 602 is a good 3mp camera, if you can stand the artifacting
from the Fuji chip. A lot of people can't. It is almost as good
as the 2 year old G1 as far as 3mp cameras go, and has a lot of
nice features. The G2 is the best, bar none, 4mp camera at this
time, and that includes cameras that originally sold for 2000$.
Why people insist on comparing the 602 to cameras like the G2,
E10, and the D7 is beyond me. It is a good 3mp camera, period.
from the Fuji chip. A lot of people can't. It is almost as good
as the 2 year old G1 as far as 3mp cameras go, and has a lot of
nice features. The G2 is the best, bar none, 4mp camera at this
time, and that includes cameras that originally sold for 2000$.
Why people insist on comparing the 602 to cameras like the G2,
E10, and the D7 is beyond me. It is a good 3mp camera, period.
Al Roden
Well-known member
re the comparison - I guess people are saying it's not just the amount of Mp that matters!
Al Roden
Well-known member
I guess another aspect of this - for 602 read 6900 and there weren't many problems on the forum with those either. Also with a new camera such as 602 you might expect a few teething problems - wouldn't expect to still get them with a G2 which has already sold 100 times more..
Kristian Salo101843
Leading Member
Yes, that is why the G2 takes better quality pictures than the 5Mp Nikon CP5000 
Kristian
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck
Kristian
---
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck
Al, I think people do this comparison largely as a result of believing Fuji marketing hype. They assume that if the cameras has "SuperCCD" (sic) and a "Native 6mp" mode then it must be capturing more information than 3mp. The claims from the Fuji faithful range from: The best 3MP capture, to equivalent to 6mp capture.
In fact Fuji never mentions the downside of their tradeoff, artifacts, which in my opinion is far more grevious than the limited upside. In fact the Honeycomb shows no superiority over grid, just differences as one would expect with any tradeoff.
Here are martini bottle clips One from the s75 (3mp) and one from the 602 in 6mp mode. The mode which is suppossed to extract most detail. I upsampled them to the same width. The originally had the same proportion width in the full frame so this is an accurate depiction of the "benefits" of honeycomb CCD.
Its 6mp doesn't need that much up-sample, and with theoretically more (if you believe fuji) detail capture should look much better than a mere 3mp image. Have a look. IMO its quite debatable wether the 602 captures any more detail than the s75. But there should be no debate that it has many more artifacts and really look poor.
The standard answer to this from the fuji faithfull, has been that it won't show up in prints. Sure if you print small enough you can hide the artifacts, but what is the point of the "extra detail" captured by super CCD if it can handle up-ressing without falling apart. And this is not isolated, I checked the 6900, 601 and 6900 3mp version and they all look similarly bad.
For additional comparison I added a G2 and 707 to show their detail. All done the same way. Find original same frame view width and upsample crop to 800 pixel width. You have to click those images to see them though.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/guidryp/images/g2.jpg
http://www3.sympatico.ca/guidryp/images/f707.jpg
Al Roden
Well-known member
Pete
excellent bit of comparison here.
When I said "people are saying it's not just amount of mp that matters.." I guess I really meant that some of us aren't that bothered about blowing anything up beyond 10 x 8. I never was under any illusion that 602 could manage 6Mp - even Richard Dunn's investigatin suggested more like 4Mp even after interpolation.
What I was getting at is that 3mp really is good enough for some of us and the other benefits of the 602 - big, lens, fast focus, beautiful handling - outweigh the facility to have more Mp (which some of us don't need). So sorry for the confusion. No doubt a G2 at 4Mp is clinically sharper than a 602 at 3Mp but at the size I print and view I'm more than happy.
Cheers
Al
excellent bit of comparison here.
When I said "people are saying it's not just amount of mp that matters.." I guess I really meant that some of us aren't that bothered about blowing anything up beyond 10 x 8. I never was under any illusion that 602 could manage 6Mp - even Richard Dunn's investigatin suggested more like 4Mp even after interpolation.
What I was getting at is that 3mp really is good enough for some of us and the other benefits of the 602 - big, lens, fast focus, beautiful handling - outweigh the facility to have more Mp (which some of us don't need). So sorry for the confusion. No doubt a G2 at 4Mp is clinically sharper than a 602 at 3Mp but at the size I print and view I'm more than happy.
Cheers
Al
Al, I think people do this comparison largely as a result of
believing Fuji marketing hype. They assume that if the cameras has
"SuperCCD" (sic) and a "Native 6mp" mode then it must be capturing
more information than 3mp. The claims from the Fuji faithful range
from: The best 3MP capture, to equivalent to 6mp capture.
In fact Fuji never mentions the downside of their tradeoff,
artifacts, which in my opinion is far more grevious than the
limited upside. In fact the Honeycomb shows no superiority over
grid, just differences as one would expect with any tradeoff.
Here are martini bottle clips One from the s75 (3mp) and one from
the 602 in 6mp mode. The mode which is suppossed to extract most
detail. I upsampled them to the same width. The originally had the
same proportion width in the full frame so this is an accurate
depiction of the "benefits" of honeycomb CCD.
Its 6mp doesn't need that much up-sample, and with theoretically
more (if you believe fuji) detail capture should look much better
than a mere 3mp image. Have a look. IMO its quite debatable wether
the 602 captures any more detail than the s75. But there should be
no debate that it has many more artifacts and really look poor.
The standard answer to this from the fuji faithfull, has been that
it won't show up in prints. Sure if you print small enough you can
hide the artifacts, but what is the point of the "extra detail"
captured by super CCD if it can handle up-ressing without falling
apart. And this is not isolated, I checked the 6900, 601 and 6900
3mp version and they all look similarly bad.
For additional comparison I added a G2 and 707 to show their
detail. All done the same way. Find original same frame view width
and upsample crop to 800 pixel width. You have to click those
images to see them though.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/guidryp/images/g2.jpg
http://www3.sympatico.ca/guidryp/images/f707.jpg
I agree the 602 has one of the nicest bodies and feature sets out there, it is a camera I would like to own. But Image quality is a pretty big stumbling block when it comes to a device that's main purpose is to take images. You are bringing up 4mp again here. Have a look at the pictures below. That is a 3mp standard image compared to the "6mp" fuji sensor output.
IMO I find the 3mp standard image better. This is the stumbling block for me, I think the fuji image doesn't stand up to 3mp standards when the artifacts are taken into account.
I would agree with all of that, if only I thought the 3mp image was equivalent to standard sensors. Its back to the question of the artifacts...
Sony S75 3mp:
Fuji 602 6mp Mode:
Al Roden
Well-known member
Hi Peter
about 3 weeks ago the wires were alive with pros and cons about all of this - Richard Dunn and others, UK photo mags etc etc. On balalnce they all said 602 was well up with best of the 3Mp cameras and acknowledged the 6Mp was more marketing hype. What Digital Camear in UK voted the 6900 - predecessor - as the prosumer digital camera of 2001 and acknowledged this is better. So, if like me, you're happy with 3Mp and don't blow images up to extremes to try and expose the warts then I know I've made the right decision and all the arguments in the word about image quality wouldn't matter - all those issues have been aired many times over past weeks - can give you some of the threads if you want..
An if image quality really is the thing to aim for, surely there's only one answer - wait 10 years until the 50mp camera or whatever comes out?
about 3 weeks ago the wires were alive with pros and cons about all of this - Richard Dunn and others, UK photo mags etc etc. On balalnce they all said 602 was well up with best of the 3Mp cameras and acknowledged the 6Mp was more marketing hype. What Digital Camear in UK voted the 6900 - predecessor - as the prosumer digital camera of 2001 and acknowledged this is better. So, if like me, you're happy with 3Mp and don't blow images up to extremes to try and expose the warts then I know I've made the right decision and all the arguments in the word about image quality wouldn't matter - all those issues have been aired many times over past weeks - can give you some of the threads if you want..
An if image quality really is the thing to aim for, surely there's only one answer - wait 10 years until the 50mp camera or whatever comes out?
I agree the 602 has one of the nicest bodies and feature sets out
there, it is a camera I would like to own. But Image quality is a
pretty big stumbling block when it comes to a device that's main
purpose is to take images. You are bringing up 4mp again here. Have
a look at the pictures below. That is a 3mp standard image compared
to the "6mp" fuji sensor output.
IMO I find the 3mp standard image better. This is the stumbling
block for me, I think the fuji image doesn't stand up to 3mp
standards when the artifacts are taken into account.
I would agree with all of that, if only I thought the 3mp image was
equivalent to standard sensors. Its back to the question of the
artifacts...
Sony S75 3mp:
Fuji 602 6mp Mode:
Well these threads have been flying for years, I only started paying attention when the 6900 came out. I don't take anyone as an expert. I just trust what my eyes see, and what logic reveals. Its not only the detail but low noise performance of the G2 that makes its tops in image quality, and I am simply not willing to compromise image quality when something better is available in the same price range. I will wait for now. Hoping the G3 has a more SLR like design.
One last example:
Or the 15sec exposure night shots:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/FujiS602Z/Samples/Night/DSCF0011.jpg
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong2/Samples/Night/IMG_0238.jpg
Cheers,
Peter
One last example:
Or the 15sec exposure night shots:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/FujiS602Z/Samples/Night/DSCF0011.jpg
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong2/Samples/Night/IMG_0238.jpg
Cheers,
Peter
An if image quality really is the thing to aim for, surely there's
only one answer - wait 10 years until the 50mp camera or whatever
comes out?
I agree the 602 has one of the nicest bodies and feature sets out
there, it is a camera I would like to own. But Image quality is a
pretty big stumbling block when it comes to a device that's main
purpose is to take images. You are bringing up 4mp again here. Have
a look at the pictures below. That is a 3mp standard image compared
to the "6mp" fuji sensor output.
IMO I find the 3mp standard image better. This is the stumbling
block for me, I think the fuji image doesn't stand up to 3mp
standards when the artifacts are taken into account.
I would agree with all of that, if only I thought the 3mp image was
equivalent to standard sensors. Its back to the question of the
artifacts...
Sony S75 3mp:
Fuji 602 6mp Mode:
B
Bob Williams
Guest
Peter, if you see the artifacts, like I do, pointing them out does
no good. It is just not the camera for us. It has a lot of great
features. I just looked at some macros the other day that were
excellent from it. For those that see the artifacts the way I do,
it is just not an option. I would love to see the same camera with
a Sony 4mp sensor, instead of the so called Super CCD, as the
4mp sensor produces a cleaner image than the 5mp sensor does
so far without heavy noise reduction in camera. For a 5mp camera,
right now the Minolta holds the crown, as it produces no problems
that can not be fixed. All of the others produce artifacts and
problems that can not be corrected or recovered. The G2 is the
top 4mp camera, but someone is long overdue with a long zoom
version, causing the present controversies about other cameras.
The top 3mp camera is hard to pick. In some ways, the Sony S75
is great, with clear images with ok if over saturated color, and a
pretty good macro. The G1 produces the best overall images in
non macro mode, but has problems with some kinds of shots, and
the shutter speeds to get those clean images are limiting. It has
the very best flash system by far of the 3mp class unless you are
really into manual settings. It's macro is marginal. The Nikons
own the macro areana, and are decent cameras overall, with pretty
good image quality. The 602 has worse artifacting than the
QV3000, worse image quality than any of the other top three,
but has a very good macro, better lens range, and better manual
controls than the other three. It is a good three mp camera if the
artifacting and color don't bother you. It does not have the top
3mp image quality, much less G2 image quality. The evidence to
support all of this is all over the web for anyone to look at. Every
time a new Fuji comes out, every forum on DPReview gets
slammed by the Fuji people repeatedly, and they refuse to look
at the evidence at all, so posting proofs does not help. I long
ago started to think that many of these posts come from Fuji
shills that are supposed to just keep everyone discussing Fuji,
even if the discussions are not in Fuji's favor. I think the old
saying that any publicity, even bad publicity, it better than no
publicity, is the point. Not the actual image or camera quality.
no good. It is just not the camera for us. It has a lot of great
features. I just looked at some macros the other day that were
excellent from it. For those that see the artifacts the way I do,
it is just not an option. I would love to see the same camera with
a Sony 4mp sensor, instead of the so called Super CCD, as the
4mp sensor produces a cleaner image than the 5mp sensor does
so far without heavy noise reduction in camera. For a 5mp camera,
right now the Minolta holds the crown, as it produces no problems
that can not be fixed. All of the others produce artifacts and
problems that can not be corrected or recovered. The G2 is the
top 4mp camera, but someone is long overdue with a long zoom
version, causing the present controversies about other cameras.
The top 3mp camera is hard to pick. In some ways, the Sony S75
is great, with clear images with ok if over saturated color, and a
pretty good macro. The G1 produces the best overall images in
non macro mode, but has problems with some kinds of shots, and
the shutter speeds to get those clean images are limiting. It has
the very best flash system by far of the 3mp class unless you are
really into manual settings. It's macro is marginal. The Nikons
own the macro areana, and are decent cameras overall, with pretty
good image quality. The 602 has worse artifacting than the
QV3000, worse image quality than any of the other top three,
but has a very good macro, better lens range, and better manual
controls than the other three. It is a good three mp camera if the
artifacting and color don't bother you. It does not have the top
3mp image quality, much less G2 image quality. The evidence to
support all of this is all over the web for anyone to look at. Every
time a new Fuji comes out, every forum on DPReview gets
slammed by the Fuji people repeatedly, and they refuse to look
at the evidence at all, so posting proofs does not help. I long
ago started to think that many of these posts come from Fuji
shills that are supposed to just keep everyone discussing Fuji,
even if the discussions are not in Fuji's favor. I think the old
saying that any publicity, even bad publicity, it better than no
publicity, is the point. Not the actual image or camera quality.
An if image quality really is the thing to aim for, surely there's
only one answer - wait 10 years until the 50mp camera or whatever
comes out?
I agree the 602 has one of the nicest bodies and feature sets out
there, it is a camera I would like to own. But Image quality is a
pretty big stumbling block when it comes to a device that's main
purpose is to take images. You are bringing up 4mp again here. Have
a look at the pictures below. That is a 3mp standard image compared
to the "6mp" fuji sensor output.
IMO I find the 3mp standard image better. This is the stumbling
block for me, I think the fuji image doesn't stand up to 3mp
standards when the artifacts are taken into account.
I would agree with all of that, if only I thought the 3mp image was
equivalent to standard sensors. Its back to the question of the
artifacts...
Sony S75 3mp:
Fuji 602 6mp Mode:
kgu
Member
Your comparison is wrong. Fuji S602 has best quality of image in 3mp fine mode as reviews in this web site and some other places.
kgu
kgu
An if image quality really is the thing to aim for, surely there's
only one answer - wait 10 years until the 50mp camera or whatever
comes out?
I agree the 602 has one of the nicest bodies and feature sets out
there, it is a camera I would like to own. But Image quality is a
pretty big stumbling block when it comes to a device that's main
purpose is to take images. You are bringing up 4mp again here. Have
a look at the pictures below. That is a 3mp standard image compared
to the "6mp" fuji sensor output.
IMO I find the 3mp standard image better. This is the stumbling
block for me, I think the fuji image doesn't stand up to 3mp
standards when the artifacts are taken into account.
I would agree with all of that, if only I thought the 3mp image was
equivalent to standard sensors. Its back to the question of the
artifacts...
Sony S75 3mp:
Fuji 602 6mp Mode:
Al Roden
Well-known member
Sorry guys - just realised I'm on the Canon forum (this thread originally started in the Fuij forum) so little point in carrying on the debate..will be an "us and them" whatever happens.
I'm certainly not a Fuji employee - and very nearly bought a G2 recently until I realised its limitations for me - anyway, hope you enjoy your Canons and Sonys - I have no intent to give extra publicity to Fuji as you say - there's no 10% in it for me - even if I have just bought one after careful consideration...
Have a good week
Al
I'm certainly not a Fuji employee - and very nearly bought a G2 recently until I realised its limitations for me - anyway, hope you enjoy your Canons and Sonys - I have no intent to give extra publicity to Fuji as you say - there's no 10% in it for me - even if I have just bought one after careful consideration...
Have a good week
Al
An if image quality really is the thing to aim for, surely there's
only one answer - wait 10 years until the 50mp camera or whatever
comes out?
I agree the 602 has one of the nicest bodies and feature sets out
there, it is a camera I would like to own. But Image quality is a
pretty big stumbling block when it comes to a device that's main
purpose is to take images. You are bringing up 4mp again here. Have
a look at the pictures below. That is a 3mp standard image compared
to the "6mp" fuji sensor output.
IMO I find the 3mp standard image better. This is the stumbling
block for me, I think the fuji image doesn't stand up to 3mp
standards when the artifacts are taken into account.
I would agree with all of that, if only I thought the 3mp image was
equivalent to standard sensors. Its back to the question of the
artifacts...
Sony S75 3mp:
Fuji 602 6mp Mode:
kgu
Member
They make len thread something like xx.5mm which is quite rare and hope people will buy their specific lens adaptor.
They make battery to be their own proprietary one instead of common AA.
They make a $800 camera like a brick instead of some SLR style.
They make camera with body crack and lots of quality problems like dead/hot pixles, etc. even after it release for more than 6 months.
They make hot-shoe which can only be used with very few flashs, basic their expensive ones.
They can't make better choice? Definitely they can, but they just want to make more money from user. That is what I think of them. It will definitely offend lots of people here. But consider the price, I think they should better meet user's needs on features. This is my last post in this forum anyway. Bye.
kgu
They make battery to be their own proprietary one instead of common AA.
They make a $800 camera like a brick instead of some SLR style.
They make camera with body crack and lots of quality problems like dead/hot pixles, etc. even after it release for more than 6 months.
They make hot-shoe which can only be used with very few flashs, basic their expensive ones.
They can't make better choice? Definitely they can, but they just want to make more money from user. That is what I think of them. It will definitely offend lots of people here. But consider the price, I think they should better meet user's needs on features. This is my last post in this forum anyway. Bye.
kgu
Hi guys. I am currently living in UK and have already owned a
Fujiflim MX1700 and Canon EOS 100. I am thinking of buying a new
digital camera with a better resolution than my current one. I
can't decide which one I should go for, and so far I've got 4
models in mind, which are the Fujifilm F601, Fujifilm S602, Canon
Powershot G2 and Nikon CP4500. Here's my needs.
Budget:
£800 (max)
I can spend up to £800, but if I do, I will have no money to go
travel or anything else, cuz I am still a student. So I am looking
for something that's value for money.
Primary use of the camera:
I am planning to use it when I go travelling in Europe in the near
future. Might use it for other purposes other than travelling since
I am a semi-enthusiast.
Here's the price that I can get for those camera in UK.
Fujifilm F601 - £383 + £82 (for 2x 128mb smartmedia) = £465
Fujifilm S602 - £544 + £199 ( 1gb microdrive) + £27 (charger and
batteries) = £770
Canon Powershot G2 (black) - £725 (1gb microdrive included)
Nikon CP4500 - £530 + £199 (1gb microdrive) = £729
So let me ask my question again. If you were me with the above need
and budget, which camera would you buy? and why?
I hope you can really help me out. I am confused.Thanks in
advance.
Regards,
Kee
(Sorry for the multiple posts. I had already post this message in
the Fuji forum)
Al Roden
Well-known member
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum