Fujifilm FinePix S100FS vs DSLR or other?

Yup. 2 cameras, several lenses and tripod. The tripod alone weights 9 lbs and the 100-400 is 3 lbs.
Tired of packing around 40 pounds of stuff and changing lenses.
40 pounds ... I'd hate that too. Of course, you could always leave
the other 20 or 30 cameras at home :-) ...

Gotta love all the exaggeration we get on the FTF ...
Come weight it all if you're so smart.
Canon 1000D weighs in at 17.7 ounces ... 40d weighs in at 29 ounces
... consumer lenses weigh in around a pound each or less ... so you
should be packing maybe 3 to 5 pounds for a big consumer kit and
perhaps 2 pounds for a small one ...

Note that the S100fs weighs in at a hefty 34 ounces ... 2.125 pounds ...

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
--
--- Ron_M
--- After 55 years of photography I shoot for memories not perfection.
 
I love you photos too Dave.

--
--- Ron_M
--- After 55 years of photography I shoot for memories not perfection.
 
Yup. 2 cameras, several lenses and tripod. The tripod alone weights
9 lbs and the 100-400 is 3 lbs.
Still won't get anywhere near 40 ...

And the exaggeration is furthered by your including such a heavy tripod in the mix ... you are comparing a very capable field kit that must be approaching professional quality with a convenience electronic item ... that's apples and oranges ...
40 pounds ... I'd hate that too. Of course, you could always leave
the other 20 or 30 cameras at home :-) ...

Gotta love all the exaggeration we get on the FTF ...
Come weight it all if you're so smart.
Well, I'm smart enough to spell weigh correctly :-) ... and to compare apples to apples ...

I have a kit like that ... big carbon fiber tripod with one of the best ball heads out there ... two bodies, almost a dozen lenses by now ... it doesn't add up to 40 pounds and there is no valid comparison to a bridge cam ... it's apples to oranges.

A proper comparison is my D300 and 18-200VR or a smaller lense and the 70-300VR .... or both ... nowhere near 40 pounds ... I carried this kit with me on several business trips this spring and summer and it added only a few pounds to my carry on.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
Yup. 2 cameras, several lenses and tripod. The tripod alone weights
9 lbs and the 100-400 is 3 lbs.
Still won't get anywhere near 40 ...

And the exaggeration is furthered by your including such a heavy
tripod in the mix ... you are comparing a very capable field kit that
must be approaching professional quality with a convenience
electronic item ... that's apples and oranges ...
It is all pro stuff and check out tripods to see what they weigh.
40 pounds ... I'd hate that too. Of course, you could always leave
the other 20 or 30 cameras at home :-) ...

Gotta love all the exaggeration we get on the FTF ...
Come weight it all if you're so smart.
Well, I'm smart enough to spell weigh correctly :-) ... and to
compare apples to apples ...
Just another smart a$$ on the forums. Your belt size is probably larger then yu IQ.
I have a kit like that ... big carbon fiber tripod with one of the
best ball heads out there ... two bodies, almost a dozen lenses by
now ... it doesn't add up to 40 pounds and there is no valid
comparison to a bridge cam ... it's apples to oranges.

A proper comparison is my D300 and 18-200VR or a smaller lense and
the 70-300VR .... or both ... nowhere near 40 pounds ... I carried
this kit with me on several business trips this spring and summer and
it added only a few pounds to my carry on.
So that's your stuff, not mine. Idiot.
--
--- Ron_M
--- After 55 years of photography I shoot for memories not perfection.
 
you are comparing a very capable field kit that
must be approaching professional quality with a convenience
electronic item ... that's apples and oranges ...
It is all pro stuff and check out tripods to see what they weigh.
Hardly. I said "approaching" ... the 30D and 40D are nice cams, but they hit the pro-sumer mark ... barely. The Panny bridge cam ... well ....

And the weight of your tripod is completely irrelevant ... as I said, it does not play any part in a valid comparison. See below ...
Well, I'm smart enough to spell weigh correctly :-) ... and to
compare apples to apples ...
Just another smart a$$ on the forums. Your belt size is probably
larger then yu IQ.
Yeah ... let's go all ad hominem there instead of making a useful point. Some people get downright nasty when their incomprehensible writing is challenged ...
A proper comparison is my D300 and 18-200VR or a smaller lense and
the 70-300VR .... or both ... nowhere near 40 pounds ... I carried
this kit with me on several business trips this spring and summer and
it added only a few pounds to my carry on.
So that's your stuff, not mine. Idiot.
More of that dazzling wit ...

Let's revisit your original assertion for just a moment ... you said "I'm thinking along those lines too. I have the Canon 30D and the 40D as well as several lenses. I also have the Panasonic FZ30, which was a great camera, but it's LCD does not work anymore and it is coming to the end of it's life. With all this equipment I usually grab the FZ30 as I go out the door. Tired of packing around 40 pounds of stuff and changing lenses."

I mentioned that (a) it was not possible to hit 40 pounds with that much equipment, and (b) it is invalid to compare 40 pounds of stuff with a bridge cam.

To clarify:

You can't compare carrying a heavy tripod, two bodies and a bag of lenses (presumably made of solid lead to get to 40 pounds) with a single bridge cam, even a brick like the S100fs.

That's about as intelligent as comparing the use of a sledge hammer against a tack hammer when you need to put a few tacks into the bottom of a chair. No one on the planet would even consider the former, so there is no valid comparison. But when you need to get rid of an old garage you reach for the big dog .... Clear enough?

Actually ... don't answer that. Since you appear to be unable to do anything but spew vitriol, let's just agree to disagree on the issue.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
DSLR because of the inbody stabilization.

Myself I expect to switch from my Pentax K10D to an Olympus when the K10D gets a bit older. And I LOVED the OM series Olys in 35mm. The Oly lens can be hideously expensive but quality is excellent.

The Sony DSLR series is a bit lower in quality but has the advantage of many Sigma lenses.

To go with whatever body, get a reasonably inexpensive zoom covering the range you want. The better size and quality of the sensor should make up for the somewhat lower quality Sigma or Tamron lens.

FYI I have and use the S100fs but have a specific need few people value - silence and the use of the LCD as a viewfinder without monkey-motion or compromises.

None of this will match the Canon sensor quality nor the high ISOs available from Nikon. I may possibly switch to Nikon if I can afford adequate coverage in their lens-based stabilization.

Nice as it is the S100fs will offer you nowhere the image quality of the 20D.
--
bill wilson
 
Sounds like a pay per view event. Perhaps fuji could hire Hulk Hogan, & Nikon maybe hire Jesse Ventura to represent their D40. Then these two veteran wrestlers could go head to head, lens to lens, or even chip to chip. Of course who's lens is bigger is the real question isn't it?
--

'To use a camera as a means of artistic expression, a certain quality of spirit must be brought to aid light & air' -Bayard Wootten 1926
http://www.bearzimages.com

 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top