More S602 blown night shots

did anybody try it?.........
...... did it work?
....... did it work well........??

on legality ........
I'm not sure if it is illegal to use them as opposed to sell them.......

it might just be iliegal to sell them - because in kids hands they can pose a nuisance.....
for a legitimate application like camera focussing it might be ok.....
on dangerous....

I'll ask my son how dangerous they are ...... he did an astrophysics degree and studied lasers, but he generally says everything's dangerous.......!!.

this particular one is low powered and not very focused... arguably it's more like a tight focused mini torch

I suspect there is more power/danger in a high powered flash -
but I'm not advocating it as alright for shining in anybodies eyes....
obviously thats to be avoided....
regards ga-ga

Phil Blinkhorn said:

I have used a Maglight Solitaire for such situations for many
months now with a high success rate. It can be fiddly handling the
camera, with external flash attached - due to the whole balance
being thrown out - and the little torch but it works fine around
90% of the time and, with fully charged batteries, the light gives
a throw of up to 4 metres.

Adjusting the beam to a fine point provides adequate contrast and
illumination for the 6900z to autofocus and manual focus is easy.

PhilB

ga-ga said:

If anyone wants to get really hyper about this - and I really don't
see the need ------
It struck me that a little (illegal) penlight laser pointer that my
son used to have - would have made an ideal AF assist light - it
had a number of different front ends and I even think one had a
pattern of parralell lines ..... it was about the size of one
penlight cell and had a push button on one side - could have easily
been fitted with a mount to go on the flash shoe....
........ can't find the thing when you want it.........!!!

regards ga-ga

ianR said:

ga-ga said:

Civil-Smivell...!!
.......humbug.......!!
good reply Ian and good support John.....!!
you guys I think have the 6900 and the 602 might be a little
different -
but I don't have much concern on this front - its a load of
drivell......
I echo Ians technique tips..... good stuff and a good level
head......!!
I have a few extra thoughts......
quoting from the FM....
Specifications
"Focus: Passive-type external AF sensor + CCD-AF sensor"
the 602 has two methods of AF
1 the external sensor and
2 CCD contrast......
I believe 2 is more efficient if the ISO level is higher - but I am
not too sure of that - what I am sure of is that the EVF becomes
significantly brighter if 800 or 1600 ISO is selected - and this
definitely aids LL focussing......
if using manual focusing an APPROXIMATE focus from the viewfinder
visually is all that is needed because of the large DOF.
I think that it is likely in LL conditions that the CCD AF will be
the only one to work......??
another thought is be careful not to obscure the external AF sensor
which is in the front of the flash housing just behind the focusing
ring and easy to obscure with fingers....
I have heard it said that the AF is more sensitive if called from
QF in MF.....
I doubt this but Ian is right that any motion at the time of
sensing will interfere with locking....It may be that users taking
the trouble to MF are being more careful and get better focus
because of the extra care......
so ...... what does the 602 have for LL photography......

800 & 1600 ISO......
external & CCD AF
manual focus
Manual focus lock & direction indicators.....
Manual focus magnification area for visual focus.
very good low noise levels..
(and he wants to trade it in for a $3 disposable - I'll do that
trade..!!)

......... and if all that fails..........
there's a 2 METER trick.........
that the camera defaults to 2 METERS if the AF cannot lock..
2 METERS is the optimum distance for flash portraits.... and will
give a wide DOF.....
so don't forget if all else fails use the 2 METER trick.........
............ NOT 2 feet..........!!!

regards ga-ga

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

Click to expand...

leonardo fornaiolo said:

Shizhu Pan said:

I suggest you use an electric torch for that, an electric torch
could be no more than $10, and it acts just like AF assistant lamp.

You seem not to be a beginner in photography, so I assume you know
manual focus at least. Conventional SLR photographers mastered
manual focus fairly well. Why not try manual focus? It's very
powerfull when shooting moving objects and dark scene.

Click to expand...

Italian people agree

Click to expand...

At least you seem to be joking. Its clearly the camera, all pro reviews note the 602 AF has real problems in low light. Besides, a good 25% of my low light shots are actually in focus, I think we simply have different standards on whether thats acceptable or not. To me, its not.

ga-ga said:

Nice snaps SG.........
I'm begining to get the picture........!!!
thinking about it I have to agree with you!....
I can see now why you would prefer a $3 disposable......
I'll give you $10 for the 602 you can buy three disposables and I
could USE another 602......
I have an UZI with an excelent AF assist light
and a Nikon F401 and a Miniolta SLR
any camera with an active AF light will do this particular trick
better
not all cameara have all features...
If you really want to spend your life taking snaps in the dark -
go buy something else........!!!

Click to expand...

Thats the advice I was trying to get out of you. In other words, you agree the problems are inherent to the camera and have nothing to offer in terms of real solutions. Thanks, thats all you had to say without the blind purchase loyality and immaturity.

leonardo fornaiolo said:

Leonardo Fornaiolo said:

camera that can function in less than perfect lighting, at least
when using the flash. Strongly considering a 707 or 717 at this
point.

Click to expand...

Dear sg,

a few days ago I asked to this forum for the IR night shots with S602.
Someone replied me, and told me to buy filters...etc.
But I did'nt search for wonderful colours in my shots...
I want to do something similar to sony night shot, IN ORDER TO
AUTOFOCUS IN LOW LIGHT CONDITION !!! THE SAME PROBLEM THAT YOU HAVE
!!!

Click to expand...

Hmmm, I don't know if IR light would help. Its a great idea since it won't destroy the setting itself, but I don't know if the 602's passive contrast focus algorithms would have any additional info to work with. If you are successful, please post that here.

Leonardo Fornaiolo said:

manual focus is the best solution for me, but in almost every case
our wisches is to shot faster to catch the instant!!

Click to expand...

Me too, and the problem with manual focus solution is that there is no way to check results precisely on scene. The LCD often looks in focus (this goes for bright light too) when the pic itself is off just enough to be unfixable with post processing.

Leonardo Fornaiolo said:

I'm still search in Italy for this (instead in the USA you have a
lot of resellers), and before to buy one I plan to test-it, because
nobody is sure regarding IR true capability of our camera, we don't
know wich kind of hotmirror fuji put, and so...
this is my solution, but I hope that fuji too want to help us by
telling some solution for our common problem (auto focus in low
light).
unfortunately, they don't reply to my e-mail!!

Click to expand...

Fuji customer serivice emailed me back once about dust inside the lens, I can't remember the email address and I've since deleted it, but it was found on their official web site.

Exactly right. Having used laser pointers for conference work for many years, I have been aware of their dangers and strictly controlled their use as even the most responsible adult can have an accident.

ANY laser pointer can damage eyes - the exposure required for damage may vary but almost all cheaply available pointers are NOT eye safe. In the UK there have been instances of bus and fire engine drivers being permanently blinded by criminally stupid people fooling with these "to see what would happen".

Why use a laser when a torch will do?

PhilB

sg10 said:

ga-ga said:

It struck me that a little (illegal) penlight laser pointer that my
son used to have - would have made an ideal AF assist light - it
had a number of different front ends and I even think one had a
pattern of parralell lines ..... it was about the size of one
penlight cell and had a push button on one side - could have easily
been fitted with a mount to go on the flash shoe....
........ can't find the thing when you want it.........!!!

Click to expand...

I thought about this too as an admittedly somewhat ridiculous
crutch, but my 602 apparently like yours, contrary to what you've
been posting, also needs help. Unfortunately, I did find my lasar
pointer and its got warnings all over it for not being eye safe.

I think its important warn anyone reading this NOT to try your
idea, the Sony lasar illuinators work in a completely eye safe
spectrum, pen lasars can cause instant, permenant eye damage.

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

Hi Phil et al

I think if a laser is classified as class 1 it is safe to be viewed with the naked eye. I just checked and the definitions are here
http://www.princeton.edu/~ehs/laserguide/section_3.htm
I don't like the idea of it though.
Ian

Phil Blinkhorn said:

ANY laser pointer can damage eyes - the exposure required for
damage may vary but almost all cheaply available pointers are NOT
eye safe. In the UK there have been instances of bus and fire
engine drivers being permanently blinded by criminally stupid
people fooling with these "to see what would happen".

Why use a laser when a torch will do?

PhilB

sg10 said:

ga-ga said:

It struck me that a little (illegal) penlight laser pointer that my
son used to have - would have made an ideal AF assist light - it
had a number of different front ends and I even think one had a
pattern of parralell lines ..... it was about the size of one
penlight cell and had a push button on one side - could have easily
been fitted with a mount to go on the flash shoe....
........ can't find the thing when you want it.........!!!

Click to expand...

I thought about this too as an admittedly somewhat ridiculous
crutch, but my 602 apparently like yours, contrary to what you've
been posting, also needs help. Unfortunately, I did find my lasar
pointer and its got warnings all over it for not being eye safe.

I think its important warn anyone reading this NOT to try your
idea, the Sony lasar illuinators work in a completely eye safe
spectrum, pen lasars can cause instant, permenant eye damage.

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

Click to expand...

--
6900

Its not cheating when he writes it in the remarks. The other problem with those of course is that an 602/6900 didn't take the impressive low light lock ons, as is clearly shown in the exifs, they only were used for the tripod based night shots. Obviously a tripod doesn't solve the 602's problem of point/shoot/focus ability in low light. Another camera does, but thats exactly what I'm trying to determine.

ga-ga said:

Nice Pics John!......
now thats what I CALL low light photography..........
...... the more I see of SG's snaps.... the more I understand.......!!
but he'll probrably say you cheated with a tripod......!!
regards ga-ga

Click to expand...

leonardo fornaiolo said:

hey guy,
is there anybody that can help me??
My 602 don't autofocus correctly in low light condition!! do you
have some experience about?

)))))

It's a joke!!!

in every case, interesting subject and useful discussion,
compliments to everybody the spent 2cent in this forum, and in this
subject

Click to expand...

I agree its an important subject. AF in all lighting conditions is a major s602 weakness from my experience compared to other quality digitals. Some seem too insecure to dicuss it, but I'm all for useful discussions about obvious, pro identified weaknessness. Reading the dpreview review is all one needs to do to acknowledge this problem is factually real, regardless of "opinions" that their particular 602 model is immune...

"Despite the S602Z's "twin AF" system (passive external sensor combined with TTL CCD AF) it still required quite a bit of light to focus (compared to other 'prosumer' digital cameras). It's a shame that Fujifilm couldn't slip an AF assist lamp into the design of this new camera." -dpreview

ga-ga said:

sorry fumbled.......
I meant.....

THESE are low light shots.........
http://www.pbase.com/bighampster/canucks

Click to expand...

I don't see anything there that even close to low light. With the 602 I agree they'd be are challenging--perhaps even to the point of lowering to a (to me useless) 1MP quality, but with most cameras they'd be on the very easy side of the spectrum with all the artficial light flooded on them. I think, some broad daylight shots would be darker.

ga-ga said:

these are night shots......
http://www.pbase.com/robbief/pisa

Click to expand...

With a tripod, at infinity.

ga-ga said:

these are just a joke........
http://www.pbase.com/sg10/focus

Click to expand...

The Sony's perfectly focused little or no light shots shown there would indeed be a joke to try with the S602. I agree with you. I did think it would be nice to illustrate that the S602 does focus properly at night (with a flash), some of the time.

Which brings me to another point worth mentioning for those interestied in real discussion, the LCD isn't capable of breaking out the difference between a good shot and a just bad enough to toss shot in terms of focus, even using full zoom in on the preview/playback. This makes low light (and even daylight) AF problems much more frustrating--with no reliable way to determine the need to reshoot unless the AF error is truly hideous, and honestly, that happens a lot too.

ga-ga said:

ga-ga

ga-ga said:

ga-ga said:

leonardo fornaiolo said:

hey guy,
is there anybody that can help me??
My 602 don't autofocus correctly in low light condition!! do you
have some experience about?

)))))

It's a joke!!!

in every case, interesting subject and useful discussion,
compliments to everybody the spent 2cent in this forum, and in this
subject

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

sg10 said:

blind purchase loyality and immaturity.

Click to expand...

Interesting thread this!

You by your own admission purchase a camera that has an aknowledged well documented deficiency in its low light focusing ability, an area that seems to be critical to your shooting style, presumably thinking that you can somehow better those who have reported it but fail to do so, yet you still doggedly carry on using it.... I think I'm seeing the purchse loyalty etc from a different point of view here.

Just get another camera and get over it !

--
http://www.pbase.com/mikebee

I'am using a mini flashlight (maglite) as an Focusassistant. Complicated but it works fine. My opinion about the 707 717 is that pictures taken with flash en indoor are less colourfull and blurry then the 602

sg10 said:

After losing about 75% of my Halloween indoor and night shots to
unusably poor focus, my S602 is about to hit ebay (all taken with
the built in flash). Does any one have any usuful tips for getting
consistent sharp focus this camera in low light and night
situations with the flash, or is it simply a lost cause?

The only dark shots I was able to get in focus were done using the
lens-covered 2 foot focus trick, and then trying to estimate 2 feet
away. Those were obviously hit or miss as well, but thank goodness
I got a few shots that way.

Last year I used my old Fuji MX-700 at night and it was virtually
perfect. I love the S602 in bright light, but I really need a
camera that can function in less than perfect lighting, at least
when using the flash. Strongly considering a 707 or 717 at this
point.

Click to expand...

Hi Ian,

The US Laser Safety Program is based on specific parameters and is scientifically sound BUT:

Eyes can be temporarily affected and even permanently damaged by any intensive light source focussed directly on the eye, particularly in low light conditions where the eye is wide open to gather the maximum amount of light.

Newer lasers should be prominently marked with their classification - older, and many cheaply produced lasers, imported from the Far East, were not.

Even Class 1 lasers should not be pointed at individuals by untrained personnel for any reason according to most authorities and this is backed up by the Health and Safety Executive in the UK as the output on cheap lasers can vary and exceed their classification.

There is legal opinion in the UK that, given most people would not know what sort of laser was pointed at them and given the widespread coverage of permanent injury caused by laser misuse, pointing ANY laser in a public place COULD lead to a prosecution as it may be construed as threatening behaviour. Certain UK police forces will confiscate any pocket laser illuminated in a public place.

See also: http://www.mmu.ac.uk/personnel/h-s/guidance_notes/laspen1.pdf

http://www.yale.edu/oehs/PDF_files/5_98sb.pdf

http://www.salford.gov.uk/consumer/tradingstandards/tradeleaflets/ Safety/laser%20pointer%20leaflet.doc

http://www.redstone.army.mil/safety/rad/jtf/0595_1.html

PhilB

ianR said:

Phil Blinkhorn said:

ANY laser pointer can damage eyes - the exposure required for
damage may vary but almost all cheaply available pointers are NOT
eye safe. In the UK there have been instances of bus and fire
engine drivers being permanently blinded by criminally stupid
people fooling with these "to see what would happen".

Why use a laser when a torch will do?

PhilB

sg10 said:

ga-ga said:

It struck me that a little (illegal) penlight laser pointer that my
son used to have - would have made an ideal AF assist light - it
had a number of different front ends and I even think one had a
pattern of parralell lines ..... it was about the size of one
penlight cell and had a push button on one side - could have easily
been fitted with a mount to go on the flash shoe....
........ can't find the thing when you want it.........!!!

Click to expand...

I thought about this too as an admittedly somewhat ridiculous
crutch, but my 602 apparently like yours, contrary to what you've
been posting, also needs help. Unfortunately, I did find my lasar
pointer and its got warnings all over it for not being eye safe.

I think its important warn anyone reading this NOT to try your
idea, the Sony lasar illuinators work in a completely eye safe
spectrum, pen lasars can cause instant, permenant eye damage.

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

Click to expand...

--
6900

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

ianR said:

Thanks ga-ga and John
The EVF being brighter at higher ISO is something I hadn't thought
of but it makes sense.

Click to expand...

The EVF will be brighter at a higher ISO because the CCD gain is increased, giving a brighter image in the LCD and EVF. This will make it easier to see the image, but it does not change the amount of contrast the AF system sees, as that contrast/phase shift is coming form your subject. Unless you add more light to the scene, that should not change.

But it will help you to better see where you are trying to focus.

--
John

Fuji 6900Z, Fuji2600Z,
Pentax PZ-1p, Pentax ZX-M, Pentax MX, Oly Stylus
http://www.pbase.com/jglover

Hi Phil

Good research. It would seem from those references that most laser pointers are classII or class III and are therefore fairly dangerous when pointed at someone's eyes. Probably best to avoid confusion and just say DON'T' as you already stated.
All the best
Ian

Phil Blinkhorn said:

The US Laser Safety Program is based on specific parameters and is
scientifically sound BUT:

Eyes can be temporarily affected and even permanently damaged by
any intensive light source focussed directly on the eye,
particularly in low light conditions where the eye is wide open to
gather the maximum amount of light.

Newer lasers should be prominently marked with their classification

• older, and many cheaply produced lasers, imported from the Far

East, were not.

Even Class 1 lasers should not be pointed at individuals by
untrained personnel for any reason according to most authorities
and this is backed up by the Health and Safety Executive in the UK
as the output on cheap lasers can vary and exceed their
classification.

There is legal opinion in the UK that, given most people would not
know what sort of laser was pointed at them and given the
widespread coverage of permanent injury caused by laser misuse,
pointing ANY laser in a public place COULD lead to a prosecution as
it may be construed as threatening behaviour. Certain UK police
forces will confiscate any pocket laser illuminated in a public
place.

See also:
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/personnel/h-s/guidance_notes/laspen1.pdf

http://www.yale.edu/oehs/PDF_files/5_98sb.pdf

http://www.salford.gov.uk/consumer/tradingstandards/tradeleaflets/
Safety/laser%20pointer%20leaflet.doc

http://www.redstone.army.mil/safety/rad/jtf/0595_1.html

PhilB

ianR said:

Phil Blinkhorn said:

ANY laser pointer can damage eyes - the exposure required for
damage may vary but almost all cheaply available pointers are NOT
eye safe. In the UK there have been instances of bus and fire
engine drivers being permanently blinded by criminally stupid
people fooling with these "to see what would happen".

Why use a laser when a torch will do?

PhilB

sg10 said:

ga-ga said:

It struck me that a little (illegal) penlight laser pointer that my
son used to have - would have made an ideal AF assist light - it
had a number of different front ends and I even think one had a
pattern of parralell lines ..... it was about the size of one
penlight cell and had a push button on one side - could have easily
been fitted with a mount to go on the flash shoe....
........ can't find the thing when you want it.........!!!

Click to expand...

I thought about this too as an admittedly somewhat ridiculous
crutch, but my 602 apparently like yours, contrary to what you've
been posting, also needs help. Unfortunately, I did find my lasar
pointer and its got warnings all over it for not being eye safe.

I think its important warn anyone reading this NOT to try your
idea, the Sony lasar illuinators work in a completely eye safe
spectrum, pen lasars can cause instant, permenant eye damage.

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

Click to expand...

--
6900

Click to expand...

--
PhilB

Click to expand...

--
6900

Hi John

Yes, that's exactly what I got out of it. It would avoid having to frame with the other eye open though wouldn't it!!

It amazes me, when I think of the low light shots I've taken, and the people with the problems aren't the one responding to the solutions did you see that?

I really think some people just want sympathy and to be comforted that it isn't there fault. I bet when they read someone saying they can do it, they don't even read any further.
All the best John
Ian

John Glover said:

ianR said:

Thanks ga-ga and John
The EVF being brighter at higher ISO is something I hadn't thought
of but it makes sense.

Click to expand...

The EVF will be brighter at a higher ISO because the CCD gain is
increased, giving a brighter image in the LCD and EVF. This will
make it easier to see the image, but it does not change the amount
of contrast the AF system sees, as that contrast/phase shift is
coming form your subject. Unless you add more light to the scene,
that should not change.

But it will help you to better see where you are trying to focus.

--
John

Fuji 6900Z, Fuji2600Z,
Pentax PZ-1p, Pentax ZX-M, Pentax MX, Oly Stylus
http://www.pbase.com/jglover

Click to expand...

--
6900

Yes, you're right here. The tripod has no bearing on this discussion, as we've been discussing the AF ability. A tripod will not help that. My images here were able to lock a focus, but without a tripod, I could not shoot these images handheld, due to the slow shutter speed.

And yes, I used my 6900 for only the first five or six images. The other were all taken with my Toshiba, but I also used a tripod for them as well, I just did not get that into the notes. However, some of the Washington stuff was handheld, but I could not remember which ones were, and which ones were not.

And for the record, the tripod I was using for all these shots was a Bogen table top tripod with the 3009 mini ball head. A great little tripod to carry with as it fits in practically any camera bag.

sg10 said:

ga-ga said:

Nice Pics John!......
now thats what I CALL low light photography..........
...... the more I see of SG's snaps.... the more I understand.......!!
but he'll probrably say you cheated with a tripod......!!
regards ga-ga

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
John

Fuji 6900Z, Fuji2600Z,
Pentax PZ-1p, Pentax ZX-M, Pentax MX, Oly Stylus
http://www.pbase.com/jglover

leonardo fornaiolo said:

Leonardo Fornaiolo said:

Italian people agree with Shizhu Pan !!! the problem is not in the

Click to expand...

Camera, is in the man!! even if for 900 € the technology should
help the man (and Sony do it !!).

Leonardo

Click to expand...

Please take a look at my night shots in PISA (Italy) and tell me your comments.

http://www.pbase.com/robbief/pisa

I tell you that in Piazza dei miracoli where is the tower there is a difficult condition of light! , Monuments can be on the dark absolutely so AF doesn't work at all and some parts where the light is strong!

ciao
ciao
Rob

MikeBee said:

Interesting thread this!

You by your own admission purchase a camera that has an aknowledged
well documented deficiency in its low light focusing ability,

Click to expand...

It is a pretty well documented deficiency, and I certainly knew f2.8 was a dim lens for indoor shots when I bought the camera. What I didn't fully realize until I had the camera for a while was the various dynamics would all contribute to already touchy AF problems, really in a wide variety of lighting situations. There are several dynamics interacting here that make the 602 the only focus-frustrating camera I've ever owned (owned 4 digitals and one pro quality film SLR)...

1) The great optical zoom is realistically an outdoor tool permanently bolted on. The lens in absolute terms is rather dim, though quite bright for a 35-210mm (exif says 220). This makes a contrast based passive AF system a difficult choice due to shake and relatively long shutters.

2) The ISO sensitivity isn't up to date at 3MP, this also makes camera shake a more prominant consideration then it is with the competitors. Its also interesting that other cameras use faster shutter speeds at the same ISO in controlled testing conditions, I find that dissapointing as well.

3) The AF system only misses by enough to make the LCD preview look ok, even when zoomed in. If the focus was either spot on or largely inaccurate, there'd be no problem since even if 90% of the pics were way off, you could know on the spot what you have or need to shoot again. Unfortunatley, the AF system floats just in and out of usability, making the S602 experience almost untennable, despite an otherwise fabulous package.

MikeBee said:

I'm seeing the purchse loyalty etc from a different point of view
here.

Click to expand...

I'd certainly like to salvage the S602 purchase if I can find some genuine nuggets of knowledge that from even a partial solution here in Fuji talk. So far I've gleaned a few tips that might help a little, I'm certainly willing to test them. Since I love the S602 so much in bright light and with its movies, even if I can make it only marginally usable in low light I'll probably keep it. So far though, I classify it as near useless in anything but fairly bright light, even with a flash, and I'm not sure I can live with that given the outstanding overall perfromance of other cameras in this price range.

MikeBee said:

Just get another camera and get over it !

Click to expand...

I'm leaning twoard getting a 717 and keeping both for a while, then selling one. I'd keep both, but either one of these is already pressing my bulkiness limit, so no way. I didn't get a 707 (no 717 then) when I bought the 602 because its movie modes were so limited, plus memstick. But with the 717's extended moives (still a joke compared to the 602), improved burst modes, and 128MB memsticks now selling commonly in the $30 range, I think it makes sense to look at the Sony again. I also thought the 602 was more compact, but realistically the requirement to thread filters into a tube makes it slightly bulkier than a 707/717, I think.

Price isn't a factor for me, nor was it when I decided on the S602--and if it focused more reliably I'd still be thrilled with it as the best overall digital cam, at any price. I find it very frustrating to have no all around high end digital camera available for purchase at any price: VGA 30fps movies, 5MP+, decent burst modes, reasonable quality optics. No such thing exists for sale at any price, though the technology has been around for a long time.

Anyone know of a

Sg..
obviously you are right ........

and obviously (as I seem to remember observing before) anybody that doesn't share your opinions is wrong......
you have a lot in common with MY WIFE .....
anyway, just trying to be helpful.....
and helping you on to find the camera of your dreams.........
I've done a quick trawl of dp indepth reviews of EVF cams....
in respect of AF assist light for your favourite criteria - ie snaps in the dark
Dimage 5 - NO
Nikon 5700 - NO
Dimage 7 - NO
Fuji 602 - NO - lol....
Sony 717 - YES
Dimage 7 - NO
Oly E100 - YES
OLY Uzi - YES
Canon P90 - NO
Dimage 7i - NO

Incidently I own a Uzi and although the AF light is excelent I think it is the least desireable feature of the camera....

I try to avoid taking familly snaps - unless MY WIFE presses me..... and even then - I don't really see the need to take them in the dark!.....

So looking at your choices - both the oly's are only 2mp obviously not good enough for you.... you only have one left SONY 717.
Please hurry up and buy one and go and play in the sony forum......!!
regards ga-ga

sg10 said:

ga-ga said:

Nice snaps SG.........
I'm begining to get the picture........!!!
thinking about it I have to agree with you!....
I can see now why you would prefer a $3 disposable......
I'll give you $10 for the 602 you can buy three disposables and I
could USE another 602......
I have an UZI with an excelent AF assist light
and a Nikon F401 and a Miniolta SLR
any camera with an active AF light will do this particular trick
better
not all cameara have all features...
If you really want to spend your life taking snaps in the dark -
go buy something else........!!!

Click to expand...

Thats the advice I was trying to get out of you. In other words,
you agree the problems are inherent to the camera and have nothing
to offer in terms of real solutions. Thanks, thats all you had to
say without the blind purchase loyality and immaturity.

Click to expand...

John Glover said:

The EVF will be brighter at a higher ISO because the CCD gain is
increased, giving a brighter image in the LCD and EVF. This will
make it easier to see the image, but it does not change the amount
of contrast the AF system sees, as that contrast/phase shift is
coming form your subject. Unless you add more light to the scene,
that should not change.

Click to expand...

There is a certain gap in your logic. While changing settings does not
change light levels, it does change the light detected. Hence the
selected ISO WILL affect the AF system - unless it can change the ISO
itself while it operates.

--
cheers!

Gunn