Reading mode: Light Dark

f70exr vs f200exr

Go to last post
sncast said:
Photos from F70 seems better, in complex.
Do you have night shots?
Click to expand...
Of course I have night shots that I took during the three years we owned the F30, and I have night shots taken with the F70exr, but I did not do direct comparison test photos between the cameras as in the previous sets. Here is a short alcoholic beverage tour:

Here is a wine bar in Granada, Andalucia, photo taken in October 2007 with the F30, ISO400, focal length 8mm (36mm equivalent), 1-60th second @ f2.8, with on-camera flash:



For my part, I was impressed in the detail resolution of the wine labels coming from such a tiny camera.

Now here is a restaurant scene in Ibusuki, Kyushu, photo taken in October 2009 with the F70exr, ISO800, focal length 5mm (27mm equivalent) 1-60th second @ f3.3, L (3444 x 2487 pixel) size, with on-camera flash:



The ISO800 F70exr shot is much granier/noisier than the ISO400 F30 shot, obviously. However, the foreground hand gripping a beer mug, upon which the autofocus apparently locked, affected the plane of focus, and the lack of detail in the faces may reflect the fact that only the depth of field at such a wide angle allowed the faces to appear anywhere near in-focus.

The following image, shot in an izakaya (tavern) in Kagoshima, Kyushu, may be more representative of flash shots from the F70exr -- the beer bottle in the middle of the shot is in better focus than most of the objects in the Ibusuki shot -- but again it was shot at ISO800, focal length 5mm (27mm equivalent), 1-60th second @ f3.3, L (2712 x 3616 pixel) mode with on-camera flash:



The limitations of the range of the on-camera flash are evident in the Kagoshima izakaya shot above.

Not a nighttime shot, but a cellar shot, the following photo, which suffers from camera shake, was shot in the Archery Summit (Dundee Hills, Oregon) winery with the F70exr without flash, handheld at 1-4th second, ISO200 focal length 5mm (27 mm equivalent) @ f3.3, M (1944 x 2544 pixel) size; the image stabilization of the F70exr allowed a marginally acceptable image; I could not have shot handheld with the F30 with anywhere near this level of acceptability:



(I know, I know, that I should have set the ISO higher for the shot above; mea cilpa . But sometimes you just grab a shot with the camera set to whatever it had been set to when you grabbed it, don't you know?)

And of course, for non-moving subjects, the F70exr has the Pro Low Light mode that the F30 lacks. Here is an image of the bottle of wine that we drank with Thanksgiving dinner six weeks ago, exposed in the F70exr's Pro Light Mode without flash:



I hope you find these examples helpful.
 
For shots in low light, there isn't story. F30 is better, I use it without flash, ever.

At 800 ISO is my best. Last summer we stay in Louvre Museum and took a lot of pics.
Very satisfied.
Looking your photos, maybe I can buy a F70 and hold F30.
Sorry for my english, I'm italian.

Stefano
 
prime said:
. . .

The following image, shot in an izakaya (tavern) in Kagoshima, Kyushu, may be more representative of flash shots from the F70exr -- the beer bottle in the middle of the shot is in better focus than most of the objects in the Ibusuki shot -- but again it was shot at ISO800, focal length 5mm (27mm equivalent), 1-60th second @ f3.3, L (2712 x 3616 pixel) mode with on-camera flash:
http://prime-ebc.smugmug.com/photos/758683375_dsico-X3.jpg

The limitations of the range of the on-camera flash are evident in the Kagoshima izakaya shot above.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced that this shot proved that the flash wasn't powerful enough. It's probably the result of the F70's "Super Intelligent Flash", which limits the flash output at times as noted in the manual :
prime said:
When the flash is used, the camera's Super Intelligent Flash system instantly analyzes the scene based on such factors as the brightness of the subject, its position in the frame, and its distance from the camera. Flash output and sensitivity are adjusted to ensure that the main subject is correctly exposed while preserving the effects of ambient background lighting, even in dimly-lit indoor scenes.
Click to expand...


According to the spec's section at the back of the manual, the flash's effective range at ISO 800 and with the lens at the wide angle is 1 to 13.8 feet. The people at the far end of the table appear to be at or near the effective limit of the flash, so if the flash's full output was used, I think you'd see gross overexposure from about the middle of the table and closer. You said that the focus point was the beer bottle in the middle of the table. I think it's actually a little closer, as the man on the left (wearing glasses) seems to be in better focus that the woman on the right that's at about the same distance from the F70 as the bottle. The exposure of that man seems to be pretty good, and the man seated to his right (the closest to the camera) is overexposed. So the F70 probably throttled the flash to properly expose at the distance where it was focused, and whether that was on the man or the bottle, both seem to be much closer than the maximum distance that the flash is rated for. If the F70's flash was 8x more powerful it would probably have produced the same exposure. That's what "smart" flashes are designed to do.
 
Billx08 said:
I'm not convinced that this shot proved that the flash wasn't powerful enough. It's probably the result of the F70's "Super Intelligent Flash", which limits the flash output at times as noted in the manual :
Click to expand...
Imagine how the image looks if the people at the far end are perfectly exposed ... those at the near end are wiped out completely.

Light gets dimmer with the square of the distance, so you simply cannot perfectly light people at widely varying distances with a single flash.

http://strobist.blogspot.com/2007/05/on-assignment-two-speedlight-group-shot.html

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
I also thought the flash was very weak at first and jumped to that conclusion, after doing some testing I found it was quite good for it's small size.

This is literally a pitch dark room, shot at ISO 200 even. Iso 400 lit it up even brighter.


Billx08 said:
prime said:
. . .

The following image, shot in an izakaya (tavern) in Kagoshima, Kyushu, may be more representative of flash shots from the F70exr -- the beer bottle in the middle of the shot is in better focus than most of the objects in the Ibusuki shot -- but again it was shot at ISO800, focal length 5mm (27mm equivalent), 1-60th second @ f3.3, L (2712 x 3616 pixel) mode with on-camera flash:
http://prime-ebc.smugmug.com/photos/758683375_dsico-X3.jpg

The limitations of the range of the on-camera flash are evident in the Kagoshima izakaya shot above.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced that this shot proved that the flash wasn't powerful enough. It's probably the result of the F70's "Super Intelligent Flash", which limits the flash output at times as noted in the manual :
Billx08 said:
When the flash is used, the camera's Super Intelligent Flash system instantly analyzes the scene based on such factors as the brightness of the subject, its position in the frame, and its distance from the camera. Flash output and sensitivity are adjusted to ensure that the main subject is correctly exposed while preserving the effects of ambient background lighting, even in dimly-lit indoor scenes.
Click to expand...
According to the spec's section at the back of the manual, the flash's effective range at ISO 800 and with the lens at the wide angle is 1 to 13.8 feet. The people at the far end of the table appear to be at or near the effective limit of the flash, so if the flash's full output was used, I think you'd see gross overexposure from about the middle of the table and closer. You said that the focus point was the beer bottle in the middle of the table. I think it's actually a little closer, as the man on the left (wearing glasses) seems to be in better focus that the woman on the right that's at about the same distance from the F70 as the bottle. The exposure of that man seems to be pretty good, and the man seated to his right (the closest to the camera) is overexposed. So the F70 probably throttled the flash to properly expose at the distance where it was focused, and whether that was on the man or the bottle, both seem to be much closer than the maximum distance that the flash is rated for. If the F70's flash was 8x more powerful it would probably have produced the same exposure. That's what "smart" flashes are designed to do.
Click to expand...
--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/
 
Kim Letkeman said:
Lloydy said:
... If I were spending the money, today, I would still buy the F200 EXR over the F70 EXR.
Click to expand...
Excellent technical insight. I would do the opposite. And what did he just learn? Nothing :-)

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
And loking at your pictures on here so would most I would Imagine, I did thank for showing so many outstanding shots with the F200

Rhoda.. .
--
I have my opinion and so I am allowed to give just my point of view
 
not done a detailed comparison. However, I will say I was very happy with the color and DR of the F200. Did not like the slow response time, lack of controls/raw.

My S90 , in jpg, is prob about the same as the F200...without doing a detailed comparo. But in raw, the extra sliders avail. are just that bit extra, and the faster response, the better I.S. on the faster lens, ...are why I like this S90 better now. And one of the neat things about the S90 is when you shoot raw+ jpg, you can go back and erase either ONE of them..and leave the jpg for example after the fact. Even my 50D doesn't do that. I wish.
 
CAMMASTER said:
Kim Letkeman said:
Lloydy said:
... If I were spending the money, today, I would still buy the F200 EXR over the F70 EXR.
Click to expand...
Excellent technical insight. I would do the opposite. And what did he just learn? Nothing :-)

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
And loking at your pictures on here so would most I would Imagine, I did thank for showing so many outstanding shots with the F200
Click to expand...
One presumes that you meant to respond to Dave and not me. Because you just appeared to say that most would go for the F70 when I know that you meant the F200.

No matter, though, because it appears to be leaning F70 these days ... as it should.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

André BARELIER
For Pixel 9 pro owners
Replies
1
Views
7K
sprucemesa
S
Stockholmed-in-BadMusic
Panasonic Lumix S5II vs Nikon Z5II + L-mount vs Z-mount
Replies
14
Views
29K
RBIV
RBIV
Pennyfan
Sigma 17–40mm f1.8 DC ART for Fujifilm (Feat Test Chart vs XF1655 Gen1)
Replies
6
Views
13K
1000DTL
1
Pennyfan
  • User review User review
Sigma 17–40mm f1.8 DC ART for Fujifilm (Feat Test Chart vs XF1655 Gen1)
Replies
1
Views
11K
Winterfrost
Winterfrost
L
Canon R7 + Canon 100-400mm (+ 1.4x) vs Sony A6700 + Sigma 150-600mm
Replies
12
Views
10K
Planterz
Planterz

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