S9000 Image quality

[jbabbage]

I'll know more when I do my comparative tests tonight.
--
Jim Babbage

 

[Ulli Pietsch]

I had four similar 300 dpi crops of each of the fullsize images from dcresource (as downloaded, no processing) :







printed at a shop catering to professional photographers. The S9000 at 200 ISO has a similar look (noise and detail level) to the R1 at 400 ISO. The S9000 has acceptable (to me) noise levels at ISO 200 without any further procesing whereas the FZ30 would be unacceptable (to me again) without further processing. The FZ30 seems to have better sharpness and detail level than either the R1 or the S9000 in this sample set.

I'm guessing that applying further noise reduction to the FZ30 to get similar levels will reduce the difference in detail and sharpness.

--
Ulli Pietsch

 

[Fleming]

You note the better detail of the Panasonic, but have you taken into account that it is the tightest zoom also?

 

[Ulli Pietsch]

I'm trying to take that into account.

On one of the printed crops, the rear end of the horse sculpture measures 67 mm high for the S9000 image and 71 mm high for the FZ30 image which is not all that large of a difference. The apparent detail increase may also have to do with contrast settings as the FZ30 image seems to have more contrast. This can also be tied into a differnt in camera "curve" since I perceive that the S9000 has a slightly higher dynamic range than the FZ30.

--
Ulli Pietsch

 

[rander3127]

--It's not that great and NO threat to DSLRs.
-Rich

See these images from a guy on pbase.

http://www.pbase.com/gearoidmuar/fuji_s9500s9000_test

 

[Fleming]

Thanks, Ulli, I appreciate the comparison and came to the same conclusion on dynamic range. The 9000 does seem noticeably better in that regard, but perhaps you're on the mark with regard to lowering of contrast. The soft contrast may well be why Fuji chose to include a contrast control for the first time that I know of.

 

[jbabbage]

Well I am happy to say my first S9000 was a dud. I exchanged it yesterday for a new one and have done an almost identical test with the new cmaera. The results are MUCH MUCH better. More than adequate for vacation snaps and PR work at the least.

Thanks everyone for your input.

http://www.nms123.ca/jim_babbage/fuji_test/index3.htm
--
Jim Babbage

 

[Fleming]

Glad you're happy, Jim. I think I prefer the Contrast Standard/Sharpness Hard shots. A pretty low level of in-camera sharpening seems to be the case with the 9000 at least at Normal setting. That's OK, since I prefer to sharpen in PP anyway.

 

[83bj60]

Well I am happy to say my first S9000 was a dud. I exchanged it
yesterday for a new one and have done an almost identical test with
the new cmaera. The results are MUCH MUCH better. More than
adequate for vacation snaps and PR work at the least.

Thanks everyone for your input.

Great news! Would you say the results are similar to the samples at dcresource.com?

Love to see some samples shots!

 

[jbabbage]

In a slightly earlier post, I did include a link to my latest tests. I shot some copy work to try and be a bit more empiracal in my judgement.

Shooting some landscapes and nature stuff tomorrow.
--
Jim Babbage

 

[jbabbage]

All right, just came back from a shoot in a nearby park garden and - WOW. I'm MUCH happier with my results. I shot in RAW, JPEG FINE with Chrome setting, some with Hard sharpness, others without. IQ is night and day between the two cameras

I'll post some samples soon - unmodified. Right off the top though, I'm impressed with how the camera held detail in the reds and the shadows. It did fairly well in some ofther contrasty situations, although the highlights are a little iffy at times, but that is to be expected at the price bracket this camera is in.

I did a lot of manual focus and that focus ring is a bit of a hair trigger - takes a bit getting used to, but overall it worked fine
--
Jim Babbage

 

[Brogan]

I did a lot of manual focus and that focus ring is a bit of a hair
trigger - takes a bit getting used to, but overall it worked fine

Agreed.

I was playing around with it last night and it takes avery steady hand to get it bang on and keep it there.

 

[jbabbage]

I have some new samples online. Some have a link to the raw file for download. None of hte images have been processed on a computer, other than the exporting of the RAW files to TIFF then JPEG.

http://www.nms123.ca/jim_babbage/s9000_tests/Fuji%20S9000%20test%20pics/index.html

I am much happier with the camera after an exchange. It seems the one I first bought was a bit of a dud.
--
Jim Babbage

 

[Fleming]

Thanks for posting the link to the new samples. I can see why you're much happier. I see nothing to complain about in these shots, other than one of the thistle shots that could have used a little less exposure. I would be happy with these, and that's saying a lot -- since I own an F10 ! ;^)

I think whoever came up with the idea that Fuji is seeking a less artificial "digital" look with the Realphoto processing is on the right track. There have been complaints about F10 softness, too, but I know the resolution is there, and I can sharpen it a lot if I want to bring it out. I prefer this new approach, because sharpening halos (which are rare in the new camera's shots) ruin many an otherwise good digital image. While I'm running on, I think the colors are more realistic, too. And the combined effect is a more film-like look. Do you agree, Jim?

 

[jbabbage]

Yes overall I am much happier. The dynamic range of these images - especially in shadow detail - is quite impressive. Now that I have the new camera, and have learned a few things about it both by using it and reading the forums, I plan to use it a lot more often.

Next step - printing!


--
Jim Babbage

 

[63megapixel]

thanks.

 

[stefano888]

Thank you Jim.
I think we all have to be grateful to you.
Nice pics and great camera too.
--
stefano-italy

 

[the mighty boosh]

I just found today after another trial run that high contrast, and high sharpening, with normal saturation, give a result that I like veerrrrry much.

Was dissapointed though when I came across a brown hawker dragonfly sitting in a bush and wasn't able to get any kind of a decent macro shot unless I used the digital zoom which didn't help the quality any. I'm sure the old fast lenses on the s602, 7000, would have got a great pick though.

Don't buy this s9000 if your into macro stuff, one of the reasons why I loved the s602.

 

[Mattias77]

Well, actually I think the S9500 (S9000) seems to take some really good macro images. For example this one:
http://nefius.nl/S9500/S9500_macro3.jpg

Actually, I think this one is really good!

I just found today after another trial run that high contrast, and
high sharpening, with normal saturation, give a result that I like
veerrrrry much.

Was dissapointed though when I came across a brown hawker dragonfly
sitting in a bush and wasn't able to get any kind of a decent macro
shot unless I used the digital zoom which didn't help the quality
any. I'm sure the old fast lenses on the s602, 7000, would have got
a great pick though.

Don't buy this s9000 if your into macro stuff, one of the reasons
why I loved the s602.

 

[the mighty boosh]

Well thats me told, again.

I'm amazed. I tried taking a picture of a dragonfly about 15 times bigger (and which was asleep totally stationary) than this bee, and in 30 pics, taking them with all the time in the world I didn't get one as good as that.

Mind you I was hand holding the camera and the light was low with cloud.

Ok, how do you get macro shots like that with the s9000?????