X-S1 Night shots.

Hi joms:

You keep showing these studio examples with the subject a couple feet away...I'm more interested in REAL life scenes and distances like Pauls which are more typical...From what I've seen the X-S1 is lacking resolution and therefore IQ, that should be expected from a $800 12 mp camera...The IQ won't magically improve if it were $500 instead, but it might be more tolerable...But if the $500 HS30 proves to out resolve the X-S1, then to me the latter is a failure...And this could very well happen with more pixels and tighter pitch of the HS30...

lw

Hi Daniel;

Daniel Lowe said:

Funny that you like Kiwi actors, they are a bit of a laughing stock here.

Click to expand...

It's called jealousy, mate...Sam Neil, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe and Hugh Jackman to name a few are quite talented in their acting guild...

lw

Daniel Lowe said:

Silent Oracle said:

Daniel Lowe said:

One thing is for certain, don't use the S100fs for low light (or anything you don't want a hideous purple fringe around).

Click to expand...

I voiced my frustration over PF issues with my s100fs - but these can be generally controlled by the more experienced photographer - or dealt with fairly well in the PP stage.

Click to expand...

Yes, but a camera costing so much shouldn't................you know the rest.

Click to expand...

Once again, you show how little you know. It is demonstrably false that expensive cameras/lenses should not have purple fringing. High performance lenses virtually always have chromatic aberrations. It comes with the territory of extreme sharpness/fast apertures.

The Canon 85L II, a truly exotic $2200 piece of glass, purple fringes up the wazoo . The very first shot I took with this lens was of a coworker, who is black and bald, against a white ceiling. The image was so purple (where his bald head met the ceiling) that it looked like he had a purple hat on.

The Carl Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 lens also has extensive purple fringing. Again, an almost $2000 lens.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/

Every new camera release around here is like ground hog day, the same folks come out of the woodwork one by one, the same (tired) arguments/attitudes ensue, and round and round it goes.

There is nothing new in your comment below Bill, just the same tired old boring nonsense form some guy I don't know that hates my guts for reasons all of his own.

Truth is, I just like using superzoom cameras. That's all.

All I want to do is figure out if this one is a good one or not, and that is very difficult due to the resident Fuji 'fellows' and the history, anger, domination they bring to the discussion.

Paul Till is hardly a fuji fan boy, and for the record (which I have stated already) I was ready to give up on this camera until Paul started showing some reasonable results. That's why I am surprised at your attitude here.

I am also surprised at the inability of people that use these small sensor cameras to see the detail present in these shots, they are far from bad pictures and one would think there is enough evidence to at least continue the assessment. But what do we have? people encouraging Paul to ditch it already, which I believe can only be an irrational prejudice for whatever reason.

Now it may be that Paul eventually does return the camera, but the fact that he still has it is evidence to me that Paul suspects it might be ok, which gets my attention because I know he has very strong opinions and specific expectations.

I am not the one being irrational here, that is for sure.

Billx08 said:

The irony is rich tonight. Not too long ago and for many months, Daniel kept writing over and over how great a camera the HS20 was, repeatedly saying (referring to "bridge cameras") that it was the best in its class. When reminded of the superiority of the S100fs, he readily agreed, but pointed out that he had included one of his infamous "weasel words", pointing out that he had actually said "the HS20 is the best current camera in its class". And now to try to win his imaginary debate, the superior S100fs is suddenly ancient and outdated, an obsolete concept. I guess that an S100fs firmware update that lets it produce orbs will be a good thing, and bring it up to date, wiping away that obsolete concept in the short time it takes to update its firmware.

Click to expand...

Dont most modern cameras correct for CA anyway? Should be a non issue if the camera corrects it while processing the image.
--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

Those are some of the best actors I know of.
--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

Larry Winters said:

Larry Winters said:

Funny that you like Kiwi actors, they are a bit of a laughing stock here.

Click to expand...

It's called jealousy, mate...Sam Neil, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe and Hugh Jackman to name a few are quite talented in their acting guild...

Click to expand...

Yeah, but Sam Neil is a bit of a **** in real life and in that is hard to hide in NZ. The rest are aussies to we hate em anyway

Well, the HS20 has been widely considered as having the best image quality amongst current super zooms by reviewers, just a bit quirkly and you need to customize it to get the best out of it.
--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

Hi Daniel:

Daniel Lowe said:

Yeah, but the S100fs had a harsh initial reception here, no?

Click to expand...

The initial reception was harsh because they were all jpgs and the Photographers were less than skilled..Once Adope accepted the s100fs RAF files and skilled Photographers got involved, they found out how much more resolution was contained AND how easy the PF was to remove, those early nay sayers rapidly disappeared..This could still happen for the X-S1 except for the fact the Adobe's LR has proven less than spectacular with the X-10 RAF files, so the X-S1 results are more speculative at this point..

lw

alexisgreat said:

Well, the HS20 has been widely considered as having the best image quality amongst current super zooms by reviewers, just a bit quirkly and you need to customize it to get the best out of it.

Click to expand...

That's a good point Alex and one that I knew very soon after purchasing it, but do you think I could say that around here? no sir-eee, I didn't have a hope of sharing that opinion without being repeatedly savaged as not technical enough, called a liar, had my character denigrated, you name it.

Such is the good ole fuji forum.

And now we get to do it all over again! :|

Daniel Lowe said:

Larry Winters said:

Daniel Lowe said:

Funny that you like Kiwi actors, they are a bit of a laughing stock here.

Click to expand...

It's called jealousy, mate...Sam Neil, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe and Hugh Jackman to name a few are quite talented in their acting guild...

Click to expand...

Yeah, but Sam Neil is a bit of a **** in real life and in that is hard to hide in NZ. The rest are aussies to we hate em anyway

Click to expand...

Has anyone ever told you how much you resemble Sam Neill? So who do you watch under the covers at night, Lucy Lawless? She's a nice ripe Kiwi, she is. A jewel. A veritable princess, adored by fair maidens all over the world.

Larry Winters said:

Larry Winters said:

Yeah, but the S100fs had a harsh initial reception here, no?

Click to expand...

The initial reception was harsh because they were all jpgs and the Photographers were less than skilled..Once Adope accepted the s100fs RAF files and skilled Photographers got involved, they found out how much more resolution was contained AND how easy the PF was to remove, those early nay sayers rapidly disappeared..This could still happen for the X-S1 except for the fact the Adobe's LR has proven less than spectacular with the X-10 RAF files, so the X-S1 results are more speculative at this point..

Click to expand...

That's all I'm really saying Larry, I think it is far to early to make a final judgement on this camera just yet. The RAW issue could be a problem for some and I guess that is another thing to consider.

Personally I think Paul has demonstrated that there is more yet to come from this camera, his samples are certainly better than some of the first pics I have seen.

Billx08 said:

Daniel Lowe said:

Larry Winters said:

Billx08 said:

Funny that you like Kiwi actors, they are a bit of a laughing stock here.

Click to expand...

It's called jealousy, mate...Sam Neil, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe and Hugh Jackman to name a few are quite talented in their acting guild...

Click to expand...

Yeah, but Sam Neil is a bit of a **** in real life and in that is hard to hide in NZ. The rest are aussies to we hate em anyway

Click to expand...

Has anyone ever told you how much you resemble Sam Neill? So who do you watch under the covers at night, Lucy Lawless? She's a nice ripe Kiwi, she is. A jewel. A veritable princess, adored by fair maidens all over the world.

Click to expand...

I dunno Bill, Lucy doesn't really appeal to me all that much, her propensity for dabbling in politics kinda puts me off.

I'm not interested in people that play make believe for a living telling me how I should live.

Larry Winters said:

Larry Winters wrote:

But if the $500 HS30 proves to out resolve the X-S1, then to me the latter is a failure...And this could very well happen with more pixels and tighter pitch of the HS30...

Click to expand...

Can you explain this a bit more Larry? (I'm genuinely interested) I thought packing more pixels was always bad, is this not necessarily the case?

Daniel Lowe said:

Daniel Lowe said:

Daniel Lowe said:

Yeah, but Sam Neil is a bit of a **** in real life and in that is hard to hide in NZ. The rest are aussies to we hate em anyway

Click to expand...

Has anyone ever told you how much you resemble Sam Neill? So who do you watch under the covers at night, Lucy Lawless? She's a nice ripe Kiwi, she is. A jewel. A veritable princess, adored by fair maidens all over the world.

Click to expand...

I dunno Bill, Lucy doesn't really appeal to me all that much, her propensity for dabbling in politics kinda puts me off.

Click to expand...

I've never heard her talk about politics, or much of anything else for that matter. As long as she doesn't talk about politics while the cameras are rolling, the directors and producers probably don't care what she talks about off the set. Why do you care about her political views? I have no idea what hers are, but I could probably guess yours. Rather than guess and risk being wrong, I'll let you tell us either yours or Lucy's political views (if you dare), but do try to weave in a bit about cameras to make it forum worthy.

Daniel Lowe said:

I'm not interested in people that play make believe for a living telling me how I should live.

Click to expand...

Well gosh darn, you could have knocked me over with a feather. Isn't that why you're here in this forum? Isn't it what you do in most of your replies? Say it ain't so, Lowe.

Hi Daniel:

Daniel Lowe said:

Can you explain this a bit more Larry? (I'm genuinely interested) I thought packing more pixels was always bad, is this not necessarily the case?

Click to expand...

I'm not an electronics engineer, but simply put, if the signal to noise ratio remain at an optimum more pixels can equal more resolution...Which has more native resolution, a 6mp APS-C Canon Rebel or the 24mp APS-C Sony Nex-7?...

It's when the noise amplification overtakes the signal strength that increased pixels become a problem...This has happened recently with the pin head sensors...Keep in mind that sensor technology keep advancing this S/N ratio capability, which is why DxO Mark type sensor testing is so valuable..

lw

Billx08 said:

Billx08 said:

I dunno Bill, Lucy doesn't really appeal to me all that much, her propensity for dabbling in politics kinda puts me off.

Click to expand...

I've never heard her talk about politics, or much of anything else for that matter. As long as she doesn't talk about politics while the cameras are rolling, the directors and producers probably don't care what she talks about off the set. Why do you care about her political views?

Click to expand...

It's not that I care about her having any particular view, it is more that she (with another NZ actor) choose to present them in a way that blurred the lines between reality and 'fan loyalty' I don't think these issues should be approached in a way to appeal to ignorance. Some of those views also had a direct impact on the region I live in and during an awful tragedy, I found this quite distasteful.

Billx08 said:

I have no idea what hers are, but I could probably guess yours.

Click to expand...

I think you would be surprised and I doubt you could guess, I would love you to private message me your guess .

Billx08 said:

Rather than guess and risk being wrong, I'll let you tell us either yours or Lucy's political views (if you dare), but do try to weave in a bit about cameras to make it forum worthy.

Click to expand...

Lucy looks at the world with a particular 'lens' it has a tinge of red and a lot of green

Billx08 said:

Billx08 said:

I'm not interested in people that play make believe for a living telling me how I should live.

Click to expand...

Well gosh darn, you could have knocked me over with a feather. Isn't that why you're here in this forum? Isn't it what you do in most of your replies? Say it ain't so, Lowe.

Click to expand...

You can't really determine an individuals intent or character from the discussions we have here, I can tell you right now, I am not as bad as you think I am.

HI Daniel:

Daniel Lowe said:

Personally I think Paul has demonstrated that there is more yet to come from this camera, his samples are certainly better than some of the first pics I have seen.

Click to expand...

Absolutely yes on both counts...

lw

Thanks Larry, that is very interesting.

Do you think this is what Canon did with the upgrade from the S95 to the S100? I know it caused quite a stir at the time it was announced, but from what I understand the 12mp sensor actually has better resolution than the old 10mp even though it is still a tiny sensor.

Larry Winters said:

Larry Winters said:

Can you explain this a bit more Larry? (I'm genuinely interested) I thought packing more pixels was always bad, is this not necessarily the case?

Click to expand...

I'm not an electronics engineer, but simply put, if the signal to noise ratio remain at an optimum more pixels can equal more resolution...Which has more native resolution, a 6mp APS-C Canon Rebel or the 24mp APS-C Sony Nex-7?...

It's when the noise amplification overtakes the signal strength that increased pixels become a problem...This has happened recently with the pin head sensors...Keep in mind that sensor technology keep advancing this S/N ratio capability, which is why DxO Mark type sensor testing is so valuable..

lw

Click to expand...

Hi Daniel:

Daniel Lowe said:

Do you think this is what Canon did with the upgrade from the S95 to the S100? I know it caused quite a stir at the time it was announced, but from what I understand the 12mp sensor actually has better resolution than the old 10mp even though it is still a tiny sensor.

Click to expand...

I haven't followed those 2 Canons so I don't know specifically..But evidently Canon has found a way to increase the signal without increasing the noise quite as much...Therefore, more possible resolution...What I do know is that sensor technology has really advanced in the last couple years and ramped up even more recently...The desire or necessity to include full 60p HD video has spurred serious new sensor design and how they deal with data and noise...So much so, it's really non productive for us bystanders to try and hypothesize between sensors based soley on specs as we used to know them...

lw