More S602 blown night shots

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

ga-ga said:
Sg..
obviously you are right ........
and obviously (as I seem to remember observing before) anybody that
doesn't share your opinions is wrong......

The immature posters, anyway.

ga-ga said:
you have a lot in common with MY WIFE .....

Glad to see someone in your family has discerning taste (that was a compliment).

ga-ga said:
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

AF in darkness is not a concern, though a focusable flash assist in low light would be. Honestly, the S602 is touchy even in very bright light if you have a living/moving subject, so I think you are right, the best solution would be actual distance measuring.

ga-ga said:
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.

The Sony doesn't cut it either, as its movies are junk--I have many Sony HQX movies already form my CD400. It may be the lesser of two evils though given the low percentage of keepers from the 602. I set out on the quest to upgrade from my beloved MX-700 based on more MP alone, I set a min of 4MP, so I originally didn't even consider the S602. Its amazing to me how limited the high end choices are given the aging technology involved.

ga-ga said:
Please hurry up and buy one and go and play in the sony forum......!!
regards ga-ga

If honest talk depresses you, I think you need to reevaluate your entire life. Seriously, lighten up and enjoy yourself, you don't get to take your 602 with you, and it probably wouldn't focus well even if you could.

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

chris gunn said:
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.

Empirically it does affect it.

John Glover · Nov 2, 2002

sg10 said:
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.

That's true with regard to the zoom range. To me the 6900 is more of an outdoor photography tool. The 35mm equivalent focla length is a bit restricive indoors, though I consider the f/2.8 to be about average in speed for a zoom of this range. A fast lens in the 35mm focal length range would have been an f/2 or better. On the long end, I believe it is about f/3.1 or so at 210mm, which is still a fast telephoto. So it seems to be optimized for telephoto photography.

Also, the 35mm field of view is restrictive indoors. If I need to take indoor shots and need a wider persepctive, then it is film time...........my Tokina 19-35mm on the PZ-1p!

sg10 said:
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.

I tested the ISO settings on my 6900 a couple of months ago, when this question was raised in another thread. Granted, this was a terribly unscientific test, but I put my 6900 against my PZ-1p and my ZX-M bodies. I set the 6900 to the 50mm focal length equivalent and used the same 50mm f/1.7 lens on both 35mm bodies. I set each each lens to f/2.8 and metered a scene in my kitchen at ISO 100, 200 and 400. In every instance, the 6900 gave the same exposure value as both 35mm film cameras. Thus, it appears to me the metering and exposure system in the 6900 (at least with mine) is quite accurate and the ISO rating of the chip is correct. Or at least on par with a high end 35mm system.

sg10 said:
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.

This discussion make me feel good about my 6900. I've always relied on the AF system to get the shot as I feel lke you, the LCD or EVF are unusable to assess critical focus.

sg10 said:
Anyone know of a

Have you looked at the Oly E20? I considered the E10 because I liked the feel of the camera, it had a real, glass prism viewfinder, a real zoom ring and felt like a 35mm lens when using manual focus. The down side for me at the time was the price (it costs much more that I thought it should when compared against similiar systems), plus it was big and bulky.

And finally, my last shameless Pentax plug here......if you have any Pentax mount lenses, Pentax is supposed to release a DSLR next spring, on the order of $1600.

--
John

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

John Glover · Nov 2, 2002

chris gunn said:
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.

My understanding is the ISO setting adjusts the gain in the CCD imaging circuitry. Isn't the AF passive detection system separate from the CCD sensor? If so, then how does the increase in gain across the CCD cause an increase in the AF? Perhaps the AF system functions differently in the digital system than in a film based system.

I know with film cameras, generally AF lenses will not autofocus unless they are faster than f/5.6. The passive detection systems require a certain amount of light to operate and I assumed the digial system worked like a film camera. The AF system was a separate entity from the CCD. Based upon your explanation, the light must first pass through the CCDd and be amplified by the increased gain, then be passed along to the AF system.

So I guess the key to us understanding how this works is to know what is the light path in the camera. Does the AF system function independently from the CCD, or does the CCD gain determine the how well the passive AF system functions.

In any event, it works in my 6900 well enough for me to be happy!

--
John

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

Lynn C · Nov 2, 2002

I tried, but I could not get through all 82 posts on this topic, so forgive me if this has been already been said. A tip I picked up on this forum that works beautifully is using a red light laser beam, the kind that is used as a pointer. I picked one up at Radio Shack and was able to consistantly autofocus in very low light situations, and I have a 4900, the 602's grandfather. It really made a huge difference.
Lynn

BigWaveDave · Nov 2, 2002

I haven't purchased this myself, but Sima has a small "video" light, model no. SL-9, that will fit into a standard hotshoe. It can't be pushed all the way into the hotshoe with the 602's flash popped up, but it will go in far enough to securely lock into place. Tidy little setup. On the picture below, it's the light on the right, and it's much smaller than the light shown on the video camera. Only problem, of course, is that it's rather blinding:

Lynn C said:
I tried, but I could not get through all 82 posts on this topic, so
forgive me if this has been already been said. A tip I picked up on
this forum that works beautifully is using a red light laser beam,
the kind that is used as a pointer. I picked one up at Radio Shack
and was able to consistantly autofocus in very low light
situations, and I have a 4900, the 602's grandfather. It really
made a huge difference.
Lynn

Alias · Nov 2, 2002

Lynn,

Please read the posts entitled Class 1 in this thread and the links therein to see why you shouldn't be using a laser pointer

Regards,

PhilB

Lynn C said:
I tried, but I could not get through all 82 posts on this topic, so
forgive me if this has been already been said. A tip I picked up on
this forum that works beautifully is using a red light laser beam,
the kind that is used as a pointer. I picked one up at Radio Shack
and was able to consistantly autofocus in very low light
situations, and I have a 4900, the 602's grandfather. It really
made a huge difference.
Lynn

--
PhilB

ga-ga · Nov 2, 2002

lol.........
I'm outa here!........
your drivin' me
ga-ga

sg10 said:
ga-ga said:

Sg..
obviously you are right ........
and obviously (as I seem to remember observing before) anybody that
doesn't share your opinions is wrong......

Click to expand...

The immature posters, anyway.

sg10 said:

you have a lot in common with MY WIFE .....

Click to expand...

Glad to see someone in your family has discerning taste (that was a
compliment).

sg10 said:

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

Click to expand...

AF in darkness is not a concern, though a focusable flash assist in
low light would be. Honestly, the S602 is touchy even in very
bright light if you have a living/moving subject, so I think you
are right, the best solution would be actual distance measuring.

sg10 said:

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.

Click to expand...

The Sony doesn't cut it either, as its movies are junk--I have many
Sony HQX movies already form my CD400. It may be the lesser of two
evils though given the low percentage of keepers from the 602. I
set out on the quest to upgrade from my beloved MX-700 based on
more MP alone, I set a min of 4MP, so I originally didn't even
consider the S602. Its amazing to me how limited the high end
choices are given the aging technology involved.

sg10 said:

Please hurry up and buy one and go and play in the sony forum......!!
regards ga-ga

Click to expand...

If honest talk depresses you, I think you need to reevaluate your
entire life. Seriously, lighten up and enjoy yourself, you don't
get to take your 602 with you, and it probably wouldn't focus well
even if you could.

slipstream · Nov 2, 2002

Hi SG10 i'm not visiting as frequently anymore but you asked me to contribute when focus on s602 came up again.

Well honestly I think you should get the 717. Your clearly unhappy with your 602 and even if your problems got solved you probably would not feel very good about it anymore considering the history you already have with it. If I was in this case another camera would be the only solution. Do yourself a favor and buy another one as this one will not satisfy you anymore whatever happens.

Considering low light the 602 cant get focus in total darkness but I dont even want to take pics this way as they will never be really beautifull. But following is a pic (I showed you already in another thread) which was made in a room only lit by a computer screen and shutter of 15 sec so you can see it must have been damn dark. (on tripod as I cant handhold for 15sec

)
http://www.pbase.com/image/4726447

Also other pics I have taken in low light come out fine. Some of course dont but thats most of the time because I dont have a tripod and can't handhold it steady enough. Not really a focus problem. Sometimes I have a problem but with trying a bit you get focus. And for low light focus I always use the quickfocus button as I get better results with it.

Here a couple of other lowlight shots.

http://www.pbase.com/image/3721206 (doesn't look low llight but it was as shutter speed was damn low.
http://www.pbase.com/image/5349738
http://www.pbase.com/image/5335097

http://www.pbase.com/image/4113120 (here the persons are not sharp but thats a DOF problem not a focus problem)

david tittermary · Nov 2, 2002

SG10, check this thread out let me know

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=3692886

Bob Moessner · Nov 2, 2002

Is Fuji following this thread?

So many disgruntled with this camera and it's low light capabilities, what is Fuji doing about this. People spent quite a few dollars on this fine camera and low light is a major short coming. I would have expected this from a digital several years ago but not today and not at this level. Fuji should be called on the mat for some explaining and upgrading. This camera is new to me and I also had to grap another camera for my night halloween shots. My old Kodak 290 worked just fine and has me asking why I laid out a lot of bucks for this fuji.
Bluz

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.

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

John Glover said:
sg10 said:

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.

Click to expand...

That's true with regard to the zoom range. To me the 6900 is more
of an outdoor photography tool. The 35mm equivalent focla length
is a bit restricive indoors, though I consider the f/2.8 to be
about average in speed for a zoom of this range. A fast lens in the
35mm focal length range would have been an f/2 or better. On the
long end, I believe it is about f/3.1 or so at 210mm, which is
still a fast telephoto. So it seems to be optimized for telephoto
photography.

Exactly, its a great telephoto (noticable distortion, but hey, it comes with a digital camera attached so what do you wnat for this amount of money, I think). I wish Fuji would swim upstream a little and back off from the trendy optical zoom increases. I for one would've been much more inclined to buy this camera with an f2.0 35-105mm rather than the f2.8 6x, though I'm certain I'm in the minority.

Seems like if you are going to build a camera aimmed at the photo savvy, you should know they'd appreciate what f1.8 will do for you, perhaps with a bolt on 2x.

John Glover said:
Also, the 35mm field of view is restrictive indoors. If I need to
take indoor shots and need a wider persepctive, then it is film
time...........my Tokina 19-35mm on the PZ-1p!

28-105mm would be an even better all around lens, I agree.

John Glover said:
John Glover said:

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.

Click to expand...

I tested the ISO settings on my 6900 a couple of months ago, when
this question was raised in another thread. Granted, this was a
terribly unscientific test, but I put my 6900 against my PZ-1p and
my ZX-M bodies. I set the 6900 to the 50mm focal length equivalent
and used the same 50mm f/1.7 lens on both 35mm bodies. I set each
each lens to f/2.8 and metered a scene in my kitchen at ISO 100,
200 and 400. In every instance, the 6900 gave the same exposure
value as both 35mm film cameras. Thus, it appears to me the
metering and exposure system in the 6900 (at least with mine) is
quite accurate and the ISO rating of the chip is correct. Or at
least on par with a high end 35mm system.

dpreview has some S602 vs G2 tests online. The G2 used faster shutters at ISO 100 than the 602 used at ISO 160 on controlled scenes. Hmmmm.

But my main point was it only does ISO 400 at 3MP, which is pretty dated even if you honor the ISO 400 setting as real. This serves to lengthen shutter speeds, which would decrease AF effectiveness and increase noise. One thing seems consistent in Fuji's marketing plan, they always take a weakness and market against it very strongly (good plan). The S602's old 3MP, relatively low sensitivity CCD sensor is a great example of this. This is a very well marketed machine.

John Glover said:
John Glover said:

Unfortunatley, the AF system floats just in and
out of usability, making the S602 experience almost untennable,
despite an otherwise fabulous package.

Click to expand...

This discussion make me feel good about my 6900. I've always
relied on the AF system to get the shot as I feel lke you, the LCD
or EVF are unusable to assess critical focus.

I'm right there with you. I hate being surprised on the 18" flat screen. I find the S602 suprises me more than all my other cameras combined. My CD400, for all its slowness and missed opportunities, only shot a handful of barely missed AF shots in all the time I had it. Perhaps 99% were simply perfect. I know thats a great AF system, well above average, if not the best available.

In stark contrast to that, I'd estimate my S602 has misssed on the AF a little less than half the time, maybe 40% since shot #1. I'm up to about 3000 now. Granted, many of those are in 5 fps bursts, but the ratio remains roughly valid since I use that mode most of the time.

John Glover said:
John Glover said:

Anyone know of a

Click to expand...

Have you looked at the Oly E20? I considered the E10 because I
liked the feel of the camera, it had a real, glass prism
viewfinder, a real zoom ring and felt like a 35mm lens when using
manual focus. The down side for me at the time was the price (it
costs much more that I thought it should when compared against
similiar systems), plus it was big and bulky.

I might be ready to sacrifice the S602's amazing movie modes for still image quality and reliability if I can't better crack the AF nut, but if I do I think I'll go 717 or Dimage and keep some movie capability. Both are reviewed as superb focusing machines.

John Glover said:
And finally, my last shameless Pentax plug here......if you have
any Pentax mount lenses, Pentax is supposed to release a DSLR next
spring, on the order of $1600.

I'll probably buy a DSLR too at some point, but I won't consider that a substitute for my all around primary lug around. More like a hobby in itself. :^)

Thanks for the advice concerning it.

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

ga-ga said:
lol.........
I'm outa here!........
your drivin' me
ga-ga

Well thanks for your two cents. I like your recommendations though I'd point out that the Dimage is reviewed as a truly exceptional low light focusing camera, even with its passive AF. I may have a look if I can find on on a store shelf.

DigitalCrazy · Nov 2, 2002

Do you have the S602?

We just bought G3 and I hate it so far. We tried out the S602 at the camera stoer today and love the feel of the camera. Focuses fast and

like the way it zooms also. The view finder is nice also. I hate the teeny little viewfnder that the G3 has and the lens that blocks one of the corners of the viewfinder when you are zoomed at a certain range. I am seriously considering getting the S602 and wanted to get opinions on it if anyone is willing to help me out. I wnat a nice really nice image. I take a lot of indoor photos of grandson. Not the best lighting in the house. WIll adding an external help with this camera? I read that someone said the fact there is no AF assist that the external will not really help. Is that true? Will I need an external flash and if so what one? Thanks for any ideas you can share.

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...

--
Have lot's to learn!
TJM

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

SlipStream said:
Hi SG10 i'm not visiting as frequently anymore but you asked me to
contribute when focus on s602 came up again.

Well honestly I think you should get the 717.

I'd much rather try to find a way to keep the features of the S602. I'll proably get a 717 soon just to use side by side for a while, then sell one or the other.

slipstream said:
Your clearly unhappy
with your 602

Actually, I'm thrilled with it otherwise. I do think it has a significant AF problem which worsens rather dramatically as shutter speeds increase. Adding to that, the (built in) flash doesn't seem to help as much as one should expect. Its worth talking about, to me anyway. I love to crack the nut somehow, at least more often.

So far it seems that most agree with me, but they don't mind carrying a light/lasar around, etc. Even you have acknowedged, below, that you've given up on the S602's normal AF system. Frankly I'm shocked by the number of people willing to sweep such a basic thing as autofocus problem under the rug.

slipstream said:
and even if your problems got solved you probably
would not feel very good about it anymore considering the history
you already have with it. If I was in this case another camera
would be the only solution. Do yourself a favor and buy another one
as this one will not satisfy you anymore whatever happens.

Considering low light the 602 cant get focus in total darkness

Thats really not the issue to me, the fact is the 602 can't focus reliably in a wide variety of lighting conditions, some 3000 pics into owning it. I'd say trouble spots are summarized this way...

1) Anything indoors without very bright direct artificial light. Using the flash illunimates the subject just fine in most of these situation, the focus looks good on the LCD, but roughly 50% are throwaways when viewed on the monitor.
Using the optimist POV, 50% work just fine.

2) Bright daylight but with an animated subject. Even when great pains are taken to preset the AF on the subject then reframe, if the subject is moving the AF system tends to bypass it or miss badly even if it fills the majority of the frame and is still centered at half press, and at shutter release. This problem is intensified with strong zooms, but it still occurs even with very fast shutter speeds (500-1000+).

slipstream said:
but
I dont even want to take pics this way as they will never be really
beautifull. But following is a pic (I showed you already in
another thread) which was made in a room only lit by a computer
screen and shutter of 15 sec so you can see it must have been damn
dark. (on tripod as I cant handhold for 15sec )

A tripod still shot isn't the same, as the constrast AF system is being baby sat. Much like my #2 above, it can't lock an edge. I agree the S602 is very prone to requiring tripod, but that is a symptom of a weak passive AF system, not a demonstration of AF prowess in my view.

slipstream said:
http://www.pbase.com/image/4726447

Also other pics I have taken in low light come out fine. Some of
course dont but thats most of the time because I dont have a
tripod and can't handhold it steady enough. Not really a focus
problem. Sometimes I have a problem but with trying a bit you get
focus. And for low light focus I always use the quickfocus button
as I get better results with it.

I've seen that it locks without an !AF warning a little better as was mentioned in this thread already, but I haven't had a chance to verify that it is in fact more accurate. If it is, that will be a help, thoough obviosuly it is a hoop jumping step that shouldn't be required. Worse, it takes a long time to focus that way, which negates a key strength of the S602, AF speed.

And I'm a little confused, why do you "always use" the quickfocus button if you find the normal AF system relatively competent? That seems like an enormous contridiction to me.

slipstream said:
Here a couple of other lowlight shots.

http://www.pbase.com/image/3721206 (doesn't look low llight but it
was as shutter speed was damn low.
http://www.pbase.com/image/5349738
http://www.pbase.com/image/5335097
http://www.pbase.com/image/4113120 (here the persons are not sharp
but thats a DOF problem not a focus problem)

Thanks! Those are very neat shots. Though I have to say these all look post processed sharpened to the limits, and most still have a good deal of blur in the parts not as well served by the sharpening algorithm.

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

EXACTLY why discussing this candidly is important. I can't believe how many are carrying around lasars, tripods, flood lights, and/or using alternate focus methods to avoid using the normal AF system in situations that wouldn't challenge other passive AF systems. There is clearly a problem here with an otherwise great camera.

Bob Moessner said:
Is Fuji following this thread?
So many disgruntled with this camera and it's low light
capabilities, what is Fuji doing about this. People spent quite a
few dollars on this fine camera and low light is a major short
coming. I would have expected this from a digital several years ago
but not today and not at this level. Fuji should be called on the
mat for some explaining and upgrading. This camera is new to me and
I also had to grap another camera for my night halloween shots. My
old Kodak 290 worked just fine and has me asking why I laid out a
lot of bucks for this fuji.

Couldn't agree more. I can understand not including an AF iulluminator for cost cutting reasons, though I think the 602's AF problems are deeper than just low light, but as an absolutle minimum the flash system should work much more consistently in terms of basic focus.

tdkd13 · Nov 2, 2002

sg10 said:
In stark contrast to that, I'd estimate my S602 has misssed on the
AF a little less than half the time, maybe 40% since shot #1. I'm
up to about 3000 now.

Thats seems like an exceptionally high number to me, does that sound accurate for everyone else ? I would guess my percentage of shots where autofocus blew it would be in the neighborhood of 5 - 10 %

I do have a wish list for improvements to this camera and it would include some refinements to the focussing system however that would probably be 3rd on my list after an improved compression algorithm (I think 602 compresses too much) and a smart hot shoe with true TTL metering.

Ted

HF Cheung · Nov 2, 2002

It seems you might have missed/passed the post from tittermary. Please go check out the pictures that tittermary took. I for one am waiting for tittermary to tell the trick for those pictures in a low light club environment.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=3692886

Sorry, can't seem to be able to make this link to work.

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

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

tdkd13 said:
sg10 said:

In stark contrast to that, I'd estimate my S602 has misssed on the
AF a little less than half the time, maybe 40% since shot #1. I'm
up to about 3000 now.

Click to expand...

Thats seems like an exceptionally high number to me, does that
sound accurate for everyone else ? I would guess my percentage of
shots where autofocus blew it would be in the neighborhood of 5 -
10 %

Maybe its the type of subjects we typically take. Most of my pictures contain some action, how about you? In fairness this is probably quite hard on a passive AF contrast based system.

tdkd13 said:
I do have a wish list for improvements to this camera and it would
include some refinements to the focussing system however that would
probably be 3rd on my list after an improved compression algorithm
(I think 602 compresses too much) and a smart hot shoe with true
TTL metering.

I'd agree with the desire for kinder JPEG compression, though the tif option at least provides a great means of escape.

sg10 · Nov 2, 2002

HF Cheung said:
It seems you might have missed/passed the post from tittermary.
Please go check out the pictures that tittermary took. I for one am
waiting for tittermary to tell the trick for those pictures in a
low light club environment.

I too can post a ton of great Halloween night shots taken with the 602, problem is I can post 3 tons of out of focus shots.

More S602 blown night shots

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts