Reading mode: Light Dark

602 was not taken as serious tool

Go to last post
30 years ago it was 35mm Slr users being dismissed by Rangefinder and Medium/Large format users. The Rangefinder people would counter you made too much noise with the Slr and their greater bulk would result in missed shots. The Medium/Large format people would dismiss both the 35mm RF and SLR as toys and not for anything serious.

It is the same now only the technology being debated is different.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating and I find it very satisfying when a 35mm, medium format or even a digital pricebigot who believes that a digital camera that costs less than $1500 is not a serious tool, while looking at one of my 8X10 framed prints uses it as an example to support their particular view of why the S602 should be dismissed or comes to the realization that what has just mesmerized them was from the S602 and not from what is their view of a serious tool.

NeilV
Edward Casati said:
Any 35mm film camera can be considered inferior by the medium
format and large format crowd. They are snobs also.

Your friend does not crop? Another sure sign of being a total snob.
I crop to whatever ratio is best for my composition. Limiting
myself to the manufacturer specified film ratio is just plain dumb.

My suggestion. When speaking to other "artists", be a snob yourself
and refuse to discuss your equipment. Let your product speak for
itself. It is not the equipment that you use that is important, it
is the art that you create that should be discussed.

Edward

On a side note... I hate the zoom toggle on the S602, and the
barrel distortion is significant enough to make the camera unusable
in many wide angle situations. So I agree with your snob friend
from a technical perspective. He just needs to learn some manners.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Leo said:
I was showing my 602 to a professional artist and he valued it very
low for two simple reasons which are apparently are very important
for his use of a camera.
1. Not a smooth zoom. He had a hard time to set zoom. It was under
or over of what he really wanted. He does not repair his photos
later (crop) after it is take. It is one time deal and should be
the way he wants. One of the reasons - he does not have the time
luxury to fix it later. His feel of composition is at the level
when he does not guess. He does not click to find later that
cropping is required.
2. The second dislike was the 602 large barrel distortion. That was
simply not acceptable.

He is not a snob and has several well working simple older film
cameras 6x6 cm and 35 mm SLR with good lenses.

After hitting these two barriers he handled the camera back to me
and did not touched it after. He was very surprise that this tool
could cost $600. That price tag could deliver a good 35 mm camera.
For developing and printing he uses a professional lab. I have
checked the lab charges $5 to $10 for one photo red-eye fix. After
all my former digicams I think very highly of the 602 and would
never return to the film type photography. But again, I am just a
hobbyist. For me the camera is fun but for him is a tool. He did
not want to know more about this camera based on these two
described above deficiencies.
I do like the camera and often felt that its zoom made of steps. It
has not been a news for me all my former cameras behaved the same
way (may be Nikon was a bit smoother). The barrel distortion is
also not a news for low priced digicams. We are mot respected much
by designers and manufacturers – we are buying these cameras
as pancakes anyway.
If I have to buy a new camera today then it could be only 602. In a
year .... who knows.
Leo
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I was watching the National geographic channel on photography and the professional photographer for national geographic was shooting with a Nikon dslr or maybe it was a canon, whatever it was he mentioned he changes the pics later using software, i take it this guy doesn't use dslr's, even dslr pics need sharpening in photoshop right? Picky, picky, picky is all i can say.
 
batty said:
As usual, you do post a lot of common sense.

It was nice of Leo to make the original post, 'though.

Thank you, Leo.

Certainly makes my one remaining braincell jump up and down with a
plea for work.

If any 'professional' person is happy to continue with film, then
so be it — but they aught to be aware of what they might be
missing, through shunning the likes of the 602.

The 602 is as good as any tool, and much better than a lot, it
really depends upon who is using it — I've known the owner of a
£6,000 (sorta $12,000) Lie Nielson smoothing plane make nothing but
hamster bedding, out of nice pieces of hardwood; if you think that
photography could become a very expensive hobby - just try
woodworking.

Anyway, IanR, have you converted all of those neanderthal Nikon
film users to Fuji digital?

I hope not, because if everyone knew how relatively easy it can be
to produce excellent pictures, the bottom would fall out of the
market.

--
batty.
ianR said:
Leo said:
crayz said:
There's all this talk about how expensive digital is. And yet...how
much do SLR people spend on film?

I don't think the cost comparison is so simple. I shot over 6000
shots in the 2 years I owned a Fuji 1400z. How much would that have
cost me to buy the film for all those, much less develop them?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
6900
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
batty66824 said:
Barrel Distortion, I will give the man right,just unacceptable. I wuold never bay a Wide angle because allready at 35 mm there is to much distortion. I am waiting ,at the movement I do not have a 602, but maybe buying the new one ? who knows.
Click to expand...
Her is some of the picture I was taking with the 602.
http://sitecenter.dk/ritzlau/scrapbog/view_all.nhtml
here is some from Greenland:
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/ritzlau
 
ianR said:
Barrel Distortion
Photobrush has a feature that'll fix it, and there's a great little
freeware called debarrelizer that will plugin to Photoshop and do
it for you almost automatically. You can set up an action and batch
process too. I've put it on my site for download if you want
it.Very simple and works in a couple of seconds.
http://www.ian-ratcliffe.com/
Click to expand...
very very useful tips, ian...thank you very much !!

--
Regards
Leonardo - Fuji602
 
You are so right.

But Leo was just sharing with us his experience with a friend of his, who happens to make a living from the images that he makes. As such, it is far better said than unsaid.

Irrespective of the equipment that this particular 'professional' uses, and that which he refuses to even countenance, I guess that most of us would like to produce pictures that are of a commercial quality equal to 'professional' output.

And in this respect, a tool is just a tool; it doesn't matter whether it comes from Fuji or Nikon or wherever.

What these forums within dpreview encompass, is a joy in making good pictures, irrespective of the brand of camera used; it's just neat to gather us all under individual brand headings — so that we might more easily share common technical problems, and their resolution.

But we here, are ALL photographers, of one degree or another.

--
batty.
(the woodworker)
Shizhu Pan said:
In the old age, most cameras have fix lens, i.e. lens with fixed
focal length, and almost all the wide angle lens suffers from
barrel distortion.

If you think there really were great photographers in the 1960's
and 1970's or later, then you should admit smooth zoom and barrel
distortion have nothing to do with "serious tool" or not.
Click to expand...
 
Leo said:
tdkd13,
I wanted to impress him ))) But for him it was a toy and not a tool
to use for his work. That is all. For me it is a tool, because my
requirements are lower. It is not that he was not impressed but he
would not use it for his work. All film related expense are not
important to him but spent time and image quality that he knows how
to get out of his film SLRs.
Leo
Click to expand...
For me a 4x5" Speed Graflex is a toy now {even though years (OK decades) ago it was my main camera good for just about anything in its day}; And so are all rangefinder type cameras [never found 1 I liked]; and even 2¼ [6cm by ??] are specialty cameras that I have little use for any more; My 35mm Minolta {which was for over a decade my favorite and got better results with than most other Pro's in my area {news type} and that era with their Nikons and Canons [Interestingly many condemed not only the camera but the user untill they saw the important thing "results"]} now now the poor camera sits in a case in a closet and has not been used in a year.

On the other hand I've seen photos from artitst that use photography as their medium 1 used disposable 35mm cameras ONLY that I can't approach with the best film cameras.

So {in my opinion}:
Was he correct that the 602 is not a good camera for his uses?
Probably Not.

Was his rejection of the camera for his useage approptiate?
YES!! Absolutely! He must decide what he likes and wants {I reject ALL
rangefinder cameras that do not have other focusing mehods due to
the fact I see through it to the point I can not fucus them in low light
but that does not mean that they do not have a palce in photography}.

One point you made that amazes me if he is an artist who uses photography to capture the concept (as did Norman Rockwell for example) then paints, sculpts or what ever his art the barrell distortion and zoom steps are of absolutely NO consequence. If photography is hi medium I can not imagine a photographic artist who does not edit his work. To me that eliminates his status as an artist and makes him a photographer. For that matter a digital photographer [film photographers have labe that do this work] who does not edit their work is either entry level, a very poor photographer or so good I should be begging for a seat in their next class.

As for the barrel distortion of the 602 it is not really that objectionable and is quickly correctabel in several software programs.

The statement or implication that the 602 is a toy to him is in my opinion at the very least brash and probably indicates an attitude problem; but in no way diminishes the fact that many Pro's and Semi-pro's are using the 602 with great success. Does the 602 have limitations, idiosyncracies, design comprimises? Absolutely, but that is no different from the S2, D100, D1x, 1D, ... and so on with every camrea film or digital.

--
Ray
RJNedimyer
 
FotoGrl said:
Hope there is always room for another opinion. I currently use the
S602 extensively and feel it is a great camera. I love almost
everything about it and the things I don't are very minor and not
even worth mentioning. . For me it performs beautifully and is
very reliable. It has become one of many important tools in my
arsenal. I would not hesitate to use it for an important
assignment or for my leisure. You might also be interested in
knowing that I too am a professional.
" http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallByMember.asp?mem=20857 "
Click to expand...
I remember your work well and would state you are definately an excellent Photographic Artist and greatly enjoy your work.

If you are wondering I will state I am not generally a fan of "Photographic Artists" but I like almost all of your work a lot.

To me the quality of your work would qualify you as a "Professional" even if you never made a cent at it. BTW I am one that maintains to be a professional you must do more than make money at something. Attitude, preformance, behavior, the way you handle people and many other factors are part of being "Professional" and being paid is not the deciding factor {except to your bank account and the IRS or its equivalent}.

--
Ray
RJNedimyer
 
Cost of actual printed images was not a big reason for me to choose digital. I mainly chose to go digital for perhaps the opposite reasons that your professional friend chose not to. I like having total control over my images from start to finish. I like the fact that I (not a lab) can tweak the image in any way I feel necessary. I try to avoid the lab as much as possible because I find that I almost always like my colors richly saturated and the labs print them more natural-- which leads me to return my images over and over again to get a print that satisfies me.

Being a professional photographer and consequently knowing several other pros I know that many of us relish the ability to crop outside of the camera. I also like digital because many of my assignments require me to turn in digitized images. It is easier for me to burn a cd then to have to scan negatives or slides and then burn them.

I also like digitals instant preview of the images. I can tell if I am "on" with exposure and composition and showing the client if I am doing portraiture helps to ease their mind and break the ice.

Of course I work with a 35mm and a slew of lenses. But my real joy is working with digital. Just because one pro discounts this camera don't think this camera is junk. I recently sold images produced by this camera to a company that is using them for a cover of a magazine. I have also exhibited and sold prints in a gallery using the images from this camera. A pro friend of mine before getting a Canon D60 and a S2 exhibited images using a Canon G1. So I can attest that these cameras can and indeed sell quality images.
eLeo said:
crayz said:
There's all this talk about how expensive digital is. And yet...how
much do SLR people spend on film?

I don't think the cost comparison is so simple. I shot over 6000
shots in the 2 years I owned a Fuji 1400z. How much would that have
cost me to buy the film for all those, much less develop them?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Thank you for your kind comments Leo.
Leo said:
FotoGrl said:
Stephen W. said:
There's a big difference between an SLR and a 602 still.

The Fuji 602 is a great camera, no question about it, especially in
comparison to other consumer digital cameras at the sub 1k range.
Unfortunately it is still extremely lacking to Film SLRs that can
be acquired for 1/4th as much.

I enjoy using my fuji for experimentations and General purpose
photography, but my SLR performs exceptionally well and beyond the
fuji for half the price of what I spent on the Fuji.

Since you're friend is a professional, you can expect him to have
much higher tastes then normal. It'd be like attempting to extoll
the virtues of a Ford Focus to a NASCAR racer. They're obviously
looking at a feature set well beyond your own needs.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Leo said:
tag attached to them. It is too expensive for him. That may be why
professional people do not buy 602 but EOS D60, S2,Nikon D100 and
Click to expand...
Most professionals who move to digital already have quite a sizeable investment in lenses for their 35mm gear. And, as Canon and Nikon are the two leading pro camera firms, it is logical that they stay with what works for them. Also, both Canon and Nikon provide professional services to their photographers, including expedited repair and loaners. So, it is the total package of service that your pros look to, as they have to make a living off thier images.

--
John

Fuji 6900Z, Fuji2600Z,
Pentax PZ-1p, Pentax ZX-M, Pentax MX, Oly Stylus
http://www.pbase.com/jglover
 
Leo said:
Stephen,
Then why these professional SLRs for just a body = $2,000 plus
good! lenses. Then why they do not impressed much with “a lot
of camera for the money”? Because that is not what they
need. They are buying not “a lot of camera for the
money” but a good camera for a lot of money. Do not be so
Click to expand...
A professional 35mm body will cost you $2000 as well. The EOS1 series and Nikon F5 generally run about two grand for the body, so buying a $2000 DSLR is just like purchasing another film body. And yes, they are buying a good camera for the money, as you say, especially in the 35mm arena. The EOS1's and F5's are built like tanks, weather sealed and can stand up to quite a lot of abuse, which is one of the things you pay for.

--
John

Fuji 6900Z, Fuji2600Z,
Pentax PZ-1p, Pentax ZX-M, Pentax MX, Oly Stylus
http://www.pbase.com/jglover
 
Thank you to all for the very interesting discussion. I did not expect much of a discussion but just share my experience. There are more than 30 posts in this thread!!! I know that for my friend that taking photograph is the most important part of the process. Everybody process is different. For development and printing uses a lab where he knows, understands, and trusts the people who do the following steps of the process. Again, everyone is different. However, he was very impressed with PhotoShop ability to process the image and was thinking of digital camera as a support tool. At the beginning of his career he was the lab and knows this part also very well. He liked digital camera feature especially the preview feature with histogram. He did not reject the digital method but just lost interest to my 602. I probably would loose interest to any of P&S non functional camera in a similar manner. However, one can find many good photographs out of these cameras on photosig.com in by a camera-sorted category. Am I a snob? The followed are two definitions for the word SNOB I have found in published dictionaries.

1) One who blindly follows the taste and manners set by an aristocratic-bourgeoisie society.
2) One who has an offensive air of superiority in matters of knowledge or taste.

None of these can be applied to my friend in general and to his reaction to 602 in my shared story. He just lost interest to this particular camera. He owns several old cameras with lenses and used films he likes and knows. Also, he is a professional artist simply because its all he does for living. The definition of the word SNOB may be easily applied to several posters but we are one bunch with few of us who can not or do not want to tolerate much of anything out of scope of their point of view (or snobs) .%-). I am one of them – luckily only on a rare occasion.

I have selected my 602 based on my experience with digicams I had and after many-many hours of reading (reviews), comparison and testing different cameras including 5700, Sony 707 and G2. I do like my camera despite its large dimensions (to my taste). But I do not like the necessity to confirm this liking. The expression of dislike would cause a storm. It does exist in other forums and applied to other cameras. Many people feel more comfortably if their selection has strong support.

I like to repeat batty’s good words:

“But we here, are ALL photographers, of one degree or another.

--
batty.
(the woodworker) “

Leo
Leo said:
I was showing my 602 to a professional artist and he valued it very
low for two simple reasons which are apparently are very important
for his use of a camera.
1. Not a smooth zoom. He had a hard time to set zoom. It was under
or over of what he really wanted. He does not repair his photos
later (crop) after it is take. It is one time deal and should be
the way he wants. One of the reasons - he does not have the time
luxury to fix it later. His feel of composition is at the level
when he does not guess. He does not click to find later that
cropping is required.
2. The second dislike was the 602 large barrel distortion. That was
simply not acceptable.

He is not a snob and has several well working simple older film
cameras 6x6 cm and 35 mm SLR with good lenses.

After hitting these two barriers he handled the camera back to me
and did not touched it after. He was very surprise that this tool
could cost $600. That price tag could deliver a good 35 mm camera.
For developing and printing he uses a professional lab. I have
checked the lab charges $5 to $10 for one photo red-eye fix. After
all my former digicams I think very highly of the 602 and would
never return to the film type photography. But again, I am just a
hobbyist. For me the camera is fun but for him is a tool. He did
not want to know more about this camera based on these two
described above deficiencies.
I do like the camera and often felt that its zoom made of steps. It
has not been a news for me all my former cameras behaved the same
way (may be Nikon was a bit smoother). The barrel distortion is
also not a news for low priced digicams. We are mot respected much
by designers and manufacturers – we are buying these cameras
as pancakes anyway.
If I have to buy a new camera today then it could be only 602. In a
year .... who knows.
Leo
Click to expand...
 
FotoGrl said:
Cost of actual printed images was not a big reason for me to choose
digital. I mainly chose to go digital for perhaps the opposite
reasons that your professional friend chose not to. I like having
total control over my images from start to finish. I like the fact
that I (not a lab) can tweak the image in any way I feel necessary.
I try to avoid the lab as much as possible because I find that I
almost always like my colors richly saturated and the labs print
them more natural-- which leads me to return my images over and
over again to get a print that satisfies me.

Being a professional photographer and consequently knowing several
other pros I know that many of us relish the ability to crop
outside of the camera. I also like digital because many of my
assignments require me to turn in digitized images. It is easier
for me to burn a cd then to have to scan negatives or slides and
then burn them.

I also like digitals instant preview of the images. I can tell if
I am "on" with exposure and composition and showing the client if
I am doing portraiture helps to ease their mind and break the ice.

Of course I work with a 35mm and a slew of lenses. But my real joy
is working with digital. Just because one pro discounts this
camera don't think this camera is junk. I recently sold images
produced by this camera to a company that is using them for a cover
of a magazine. I have also exhibited and sold prints in a gallery
using the images from this camera. A pro friend of mine before
getting a Canon D60 and a S2 exhibited images using a Canon G1. So
I can attest that these cameras can and indeed sell quality images.
Click to expand...
AMEN!

But 2 differences I saved about 7 times th cost of my 6900 in the first year minus the camera and SM cards net savings over film and processing was about 5 times. Even though saving $$$$ was not a reason for the change it was NICE!!!

Second difference is since I no longer count on income from photography if you want 35mm shots you will pay much extra! since I am enjoying being non-paid so much I might even shoot digital for less or even free but I will charge fro film

PS I directed a post to you earlier but it got placed far below your post.
FotoGrl said:
eLeo said:
crayz,
For my friend as for many other professionals it does not matter.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes! costs do matter too much costs = no profit or loss = no businness
FotoGrl said:
FotoGrl said:
The film-associated cost may bother me but not them. I think if
they would shoot 6000 images these will developed and printed. Then
they would deduct these expense from taxes the same way as they
would declare the income made from these 6000 printed images. I do
not make a penny with my photos for a simple reason - no one would
pay for ....... ))))).
Leo
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Ray
RJNedimyer
 
RJNedimyer said:
FotoGrl said:
Hope there is always room for another opinion. I currently use the
S602 extensively and feel it is a great camera. I love almost
everything about it and the things I don't are very minor and not
even worth mentioning. . For me it performs beautifully and is
very reliable. It has become one of many important tools in my
arsenal. I would not hesitate to use it for an important
assignment or for my leisure. You might also be interested in
knowing that I too am a professional.
" http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallByMember.asp?mem=20857 "
Click to expand...
I remember your work well and would state you are definately an
excellent Photographic Artist and greatly enjoy your work.

If you are wondering I will state I am not generally a fan of
"Photographic Artists" but I like almost all of your work a lot.

To me the quality of your work would qualify you as a
"Professional" even if you never made a cent at it. BTW I am one
that maintains to be a professional you must do more than make
money at something. Attitude, preformance, behavior, the way you
handle people and many other factors are part of being
"Professional" and being paid is not the deciding factor {except to
your bank account and the IRS or its equivalent}.

--
Ray
RJNedimyer
Click to expand...
Thanks Ray for your kind comments regarding my work. I appreciate that.

I think something that a lot of people tend to overlook is that the camera is a tool and does not make the photographer. So many times people ask me what camera I use and where did I get it and how much did it cost. Then much later on in the conversation it dawns on them that there is a photographer behind the camera. I respect my equipment but understand it does not make me who I am.

I do see myself as a Photographic Artist and catagorize myself a Fine Art photographer. I agree with you wholeheartedly that being a professional encompasses many things. I will be the first person to agree with you that a good attitude and an ability to treat others well are the markings of a true professional. I have found it also helps to keep an open mind.
 
I seem to be suffering from tooo many ffingers, and not enough branecells of late.

I didn't really write 'Lie Nielson', although they make splendiferous hand planes; what I meant to write, was KARL HOLTEY — the world's best maker of bespoke RollsRoyce-quality hand tools for woodworkers...

http://www.holteyplanes.com/prices.htm

Depending upon where you are, these hand tools can cost as much as a motorcar, or maybe a small house, but are probably worth every penny - in sensitive hands.

Anyway, what I mentioned, still stands on its own two feet — you can have the best tools and still make many ****-ups, but these same instruments can help we mere mortals to produce results that are of a professional standard.

I like Fuji cameras for that reason, but just know that similar quality can be found from equipment by Nikon, Canon & Olympus et al.

We live in a fortunate age, but Bill Gates has a lot to answer for, in the disruption to normal life that his products will continue to cause..

So, what would we really like Fuji to come up with?

My own guess, is that many more pixels is not the answer; they seem only to be embracing Digital Imaging half-heartedly — why should we customers need to cobble together our own Panoramic Tripod Heads, Tripods/Monopods, Camera Bags or Flash Diffusers, Power Packs, Photoshop or PaintShopPro, or use screw-on Telephoto and Wide Angle lenses, when some sort of bayonnet fixing could be more convenient?

I would certainly like to see Fuji make available a whole range of suitable accessories for their cameras, as 35mm SLR camera manufacturers did do in the past.

If Fuji would come up with a wide ranging family of accessories for all of their cameras, then the number of equipment plea postings here on our forum, would diminish, and we could then really get on with taking and sharing better pictures.

I would also become redundant — pooh! I just love to fabricate, in the classic 'Blue Peter' kitchen table-top style, those accessories that our manufacturer sees fit not to produce.

--
batty.
batty said:
As usual, you do post a lot of common sense.

It was nice of Leo to make the original post, 'though.

Thank you, Leo.

Certainly makes my one remaining braincell jump up and down with a
plea for work.

If any 'professional' person is happy to continue with film, then
so be it — but they aught to be aware of what they might be
missing, through shunning the likes of the 602.

The 602 is as good as any tool, and much better than a lot, it
really depends upon who is using it — I've known the owner of a
£6,000 (sorta $12,000) Lie Nielson smoothing plane make nothing but
hamster bedding, out of nice pieces of hardwood; if you think that
photography could become a very expensive hobby - just try
woodworking.

Anyway, IanR, have you converted all of those neanderthal Nikon
film users to Fuji digital?

I hope not, because if everyone knew how relatively easy it can be
to produce excellent pictures, the bottom would fall out of the
market.

--
batty.
ianR said:
I'm afraid this attitude is very common Leo. There's a pain of
change associated with new ideas, and although digital is far from
perfect it's got a lot of advantages over film and some people are
scared of that and scared that...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Leo said:
Thank you to all for the very interesting discussion. I did not
expect much of a discussion but just share my experience.
Click to expand...
Well, somewhere else in this forum, I did thank you for starting such an interesting discussion thread.

Thank You, again.

It is something that should not stop, because we are all of diverse races, who can share a love of well-produced images or, for that matter, anything else that is produced with care.

Enough of this evangelicalism (sp?), back to Fuji-related matters,

Does anyone here know, whether the threaded cable-release shutter button of the Finepix-602-Pro can be retro-fitted to the 602/6900/4900?

I only ask here, because the same question to Fuji UK of more than a month ago, remains unanswered.

But then, I can't blame them for not wanting to talk with me yet again.

--
batty.
 
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