Reading mode: Light Dark

F550 in good light.

Go to last post
PAUL TILL

PAUL TILL

Veteran Member
Messages
9,286
Solutions
4
Reaction score
799
Location
Tunbridge Wells, UK
First thing I have to say is the 460,000 dot LCD is useless in this kind of light, even the old 230,000 dot LCD on my S100FS is better or maybe the fact that I can tilt it helps.

Just so you can get an idea of the I.Q. Nothing fancy as I could barely see what I was shooting.

All straight out of the camera and shot in EXR DR Mode. ISO100 Size M 4:3 Fine DR400% with the sun behind me.

One thing I've noticed is you can shoot at ISO100 in EXR DR Mode with the F550, if I remember correctly with the F200EXR it pins you to ISO200 in EXR DR Mode.

Personally I think Fuji needs to give the camera a noise reduction setting via a new firmware so we can turn it down in the menu like they have given to the HS20. There's to much smearing even at base ISO for my liking.

There's something about the images from the 550 that is not Fuji they just don't have the colour or tone that Fuji is known for, they remind me of the HS10's images and I don't like the images from the HS10.

The images look over processed out of the camera, I prefer the way a DSLR gives you soft unprocessed images that you can work on in PP.

I'm not very happy with it and didn't enjoy using it. To be honest it's not an easy camera to use, with the new mode dial your settings get changed when you don't want them too, the LCD is useless in bright light and every time you check your picture the next time you go to shoot the histogram has vanished so you have to press a button 5 times or once and use the dreaded mode dial.

Click (original) if you want the full sized image.

Paul.



























 
Paul, I must be in the vast minority here. I think those images are very, very nice and see nothing wrong with them, considering its a small carry everywhere camera.

No, its not going to shoot like my Canon G12, and that will not hold up image wise to my Pentax DSLR's.

Paul, just my opinion, not criticizing as everyone sees things differently.

wll
 
Hello Paul,

I don't like these colors either. I mean they're ok but definitely not something that's comparable to the older cameras. Not the famous fabulous Fujicolor :(

Regards
 
wll said:
Paul, I must be in the vast minority here. I think those images are very, very nice and see nothing wrong with them, considering its a small carry everywhere camera.
Click to expand...
That's what I was thinking also. I know that Paul knows how to get the worst out of the F550 lol! But to my eye he also knows how to get wonderful images out of it (these ones, and that duck shot). Me confused. Maybe I need something other than a crappy non-calibrated monitor to see the glaring faults.

Cheers,

Wayne
http://www.pbase.com/wayne_n

 
PAUL TILL said:
PAUL TILL said:
What do you think is off about those images JB? I actually think they look very nice, so what am I missing?
Click to expand...
The mush. :P Did you look at the full size pictures?
Click to expand...
Yes, but for some reason the mush is not jumping out at me. At least, the mush seems to be distant enough that it's not disturbing. But, I think I must be missing seeing it. If you get a chance, please post a crop of said offending mush. Thanks.

p.s. I'm not immune to seeing offensive mush - it's one of my pet peeves of the F70 where I see it often in foilage which is in the shadows.

Cheers,

Wayne
http://www.pbase.com/wayne_n

 
Wayne
Wayne N. said:
What do you think is off about those images JB? I actually think they look very nice, so what am I missing?
Click to expand...
Paul has always posted clear crisp images with a variety of cameras, if he is unable to do so with this camera I would think its a bad copy... or faulted

--
JB
I am not a photographer, I’m just a guy that takes pictures.
http://www.buckshot.BuckshotsPhotos.photoshare.co.nz

http://www.fujimugs.com/mugshots/show_member.php?country=&act=&hasmug=&challenge=&cat=&sortby=&sortdir=&thumb=&srch=&member=1341
 
I personally don't see anything wrong with these images.
The colors could be a little more saturated, but it's not a big issue.

By the way, I've noticed that the original full-size images here are all more than 3MB in size.

In your previous thread, the images were much smaller in size, about 1MB. Did you do something differently?

John
 
Wayne N. said:
buckshot said:
Paul has always posted clear crisp images with a variety of cameras, if he is unable to do so with this camera I would think its a bad copy... or faulted
Click to expand...
I agree. My problem is that these also look clear and crisp to me. I'm sure that someone will show me the error of my eyes though.
Click to expand...
I think his point is excessive NR on the shots. They are decent enough as in subject composition etc I believe we're looking at the smearing problems I see quiet a bit of detail lost loads of it in fact if I'm amazed makers simply ignore the needs of users I'd rather have some noise/grain and details than a smeared out session but then I print I guess the suits don't ;-)

This is hardly news common problem on smaller sensors and yes the F70 smears away too I just think Fuji ramped it up even more since the F80 and newer models bad move IMO
 
dotbalm said:
So these are SOOC.

What happens if you apply your sharpening method?
Click to expand...
I think trying to sharpen back into an image something that has been lost (or was never there) is never pretty.

--

Not one duck, squirrel, seagull, pigeon, flower, or statue photo posted in 4+ years.
 
Midwest said:
dotbalm said:
So these are SOOC.

What happens if you apply your sharpening method?
Click to expand...
I think trying to sharpen back into an image something that has been lost (or was never there) is never pretty.
Click to expand...
Agreed. In such a case I like to play with the file, for example by converting to black and white, adding harsh contrast and potentially grain.

But in this series it's not evident to me that there is a problem SOOC. Since Paul has just about the best if not the best sharpening routine, I'd be interested to see the results on these images. I know what he can do when applying it to other Fuji images so it would be an interesting informal comparision, and I think fair since most of the time he sharpens IINM.
 
dotbalm said:
Midwest said:
dotbalm said:
So these are SOOC.

What happens if you apply your sharpening method?
Click to expand...
I think trying to sharpen back into an image something that has been lost (or was never there) is never pretty.
Click to expand...
Agreed. In such a case I like to play with the file, for example by converting to black and white, adding harsh contrast and potentially grain.

But in this series it's not evident to me that there is a problem SOOC. Since Paul has just about the best if not the best sharpening routine, I'd be interested to see the results on these images. I know what he can do when applying it to other Fuji images so it would be an interesting informal comparision, and I think fair since most of the time he sharpens IINM.
Click to expand...
It would also be very interesting to see what Paul could do with the RAW files. Would RAW provide a substantial improvement in images like those?

Cheers,

Wayne
http://www.pbase.com/wayne_n

 
dotbalm said:
. . .

But in this series it's not evident to me that there is a problem SOOC. Since Paul has just about the best if not the best sharpening routine, I'd be interested to see the results on these images. I know what he can do when applying it to other Fuji images so it would be an interesting informal comparision, and I think fair since most of the time he sharpens IINM.
Click to expand...
Those images look good to me too, but I immediately spotted a difference just by noticing how much slower they loaded compared with the images that Paul posted in the other thread. There the files were 1MB Normal. Here they appear to be 4MB Fine. He'll probably take offense, but he may not have liked the earlier 1MB night images which also seem to have been underexposed for an additional reason. His dislike for Kim who really likes the F550 may have made it easy for him to find fault with the F550 when it really did produce inferior images. But now with his much nicer 4MB images, he still finds fault with them. So has he locked himself into a position or is the F550 really as bad as he thinks it is, or is his F550 defective? His photos here, other than the first and last are using wide apertures (good) at longer focal lengths, but the first and last, both wide angle shots, used f/8, an unnecessarily small aperture that is generally not a good place for small sensor digicams to be if you want to avoid diffraction blur and mush. Mush, that in any case isn't nearly as obvious as what Fuji's earlier camera models produced.
 
I'm with you and Wayne, and doubtless others. While the IQ wouldn't stand in my way, I surely appreciate Paul's comments that he didn't enjoy using. That's the kiss of death, no matter what a cam has going for it.
wll said:
Paul, I must be in the vast minority here. I think those images are very, very nice and see nothing wrong with them, considering its a small carry everywhere camera.

No, its not going to shoot like my Canon G12, and that will not hold up image wise to my Pentax DSLR's.

Paul, just my opinion, not criticizing as everyone sees things differently.

wll
Click to expand...
--
Tim, FZ18, F20
 
Billx08 said:
dotbalm said:
. . .

But in this series it's not evident to me that there is a problem SOOC. Since Paul has just about the best if not the best sharpening routine, I'd be interested to see the results on these images. I know what he can do when applying it to other Fuji images so it would be an interesting informal comparision, and I think fair since most of the time he sharpens IINM.
Click to expand...
Those images look good to me too, but I immediately spotted a difference just by noticing how much slower they loaded compared with the images that Paul posted in the other thread. There the files were 1MB Normal. Here they appear to be 4MB Fine. He'll probably take offense, but he may not have liked the earlier 1MB night images which also seem to have been underexposed for an additional reason. His dislike for Kim who really likes the F550 may have made it easy for him to find fault with the F550 when it really did produce inferior images. But now with his much nicer 4MB images, he still finds fault with them. So has he locked himself into a position or is the F550 really as bad as he thinks it is, or is his F550 defective? His photos here, other than the first and last are using wide apertures (good) at longer focal lengths, but the first and last, both wide angle shots, used f/8, an unnecessarily small aperture that is generally not a good place for small sensor digicams to be if you want to avoid diffraction blur and mush. Mush, that in any case isn't nearly as obvious as what Fuji's earlier camera models produced.
Click to expand...
I hate to admit it, but I have to RTFM because I don't know/recall how many real apertures the F550 has. Is it one with two NDs? Is it two with one ND? If at a given FL f8 were achieved using a ND...then is f8 as diffraction-inducing than if it were based on a true aperture based f8 using a smaller radius than what is used in conjunction with a ND? I could look this up, but I'm late for dinner as it is..REALLY late to the point my wife wants to clean up and if I miss the window...guess who "gets" to clean up. :)

I have to get crackin' on my F550...I haven't put it nearly through the paces I should.
 
Wayne N. said:
It would also be very interesting to see what Paul could do with the RAW files. Would RAW provide a substantial improvement in images like those?
Click to expand...
My impression from the RAW comparisions I've seen on Kim's blog is yes.

I haven't installed the Silkypix app which came with my F550. I have not developed the RAW myself as a result, though I'm shooting with it about half the time.

But if I could develop these using Adobe's products (hint, hint), then I'd be set to develop those .RAF's w/ ACR...hence my "vote" over on the Adobe forum that Kim set up.

http://feedback.photoshop.com/..._support_fujis_wonderful_new_cmos_exr_sensor

As it stands, once LR3 sees images on the card from my F550, I uncheck all the RAWs since there's no point to import them into the catalog. PSE9 just tells me it skipped them or something. I'm running parallel catalog/libraries until I figure out if I'm comfortable/confident w/ LR3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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