File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Fujifilm FinePix S6500fd

• Super CCD HR sensor delivering 6.3 million pixels
• 10.7x optical zoom with twist barrel control
• 2.5 inch LCD Screen with reinforced scratch resistant glass
• First camera to have Hardware-based Face Detection technology
• Sensitivity setting of ISO 100 – 3200 for photography in low light conditions
>> Anonymous
what i'm asking is 'is this camera any good?'
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>63790
Meh. I think it's better to aim upwards and get an SLR or downwards and get a pocketable P&S than a superzoom.
>> Anonymous
That's a very fine superzoom, high-end SLR-like digicam; but if you want the whole range of SLR lens ranges without compromises, then you really need an SLR.

If you can't change lenses on it, then you are already limited from the get go.
>> Anonymous
>>63792
I concur. You might as well spend an extra $100 or whatever and get the D40. Of course you're not gonna get 10X zoom with the kit lens, but that shouldn't matter anyhow.
>> Anonymous
>>63794

I would actually recommend a D70s (if you want to go with Nikon) or the XTi/400D (if you want to go with Canon) as the D40 is somewhat crippled. The D40 lacks the body-AF drive, which means you can't AF with the older Nikkor lenses, some of which happen to have great image quality for low prices. It also has only three AF horizontal-only points, not ideal for action/sports, and no aperture preview button; the latter makes it very hard, without taking 20 aperture-bracketed photos, to do proper subject/background separation via DoF. A very important factor if one wants to attain professional-looking cityscene or portrait shots. Without the preview button, you are merely guessing as to which f/number will give you the correct DoF to put the whole person/subject into sharp focus relief.

Actually, come to think of it, you might want to go for the older pro-DSLR bodies in that case (Canon 1D and Nikon D2H). They go for around ~$700-$800, comparable to the newer SLRs, and give you all the pro features plus large and bright viewfinders.
>> Anonymous
I used a friend's prosumer super-zoom (Sony DSC-H1) two weeks ago, and I was actually pretty impressed. It had a few features that actually beat anything in my own camera bag (FE2, F100, D40). It had great image stabilization, something that only comes with specific, individual lenses on an SLR. It had movie mode, which is sometimes fun just for shits and giggles. It had a 432mm lens; the closest I had was my 80-200. The biggest benefit was definitely portability, though. As much power as interchangeable lenses give you, you also have to physically take them everywhere you go. I could carry that little Sony essentially in my pocket; it wasn't some 3-4 pound brick hanging off my neck like the F100.

Prosumers suck because: limited aperture. they all only go to f/8. Big problem if you want depth of field. Myself, I never shoot past f/8 anyway, but it could be a big consideration. They also have wimpy wide angle options; most don't zoom out past 36mm, unless you want to go buy a cheapo wide angle adapter that'll work about 3 times worse than a dedicated lens.

prosumers rock because: lots of great options already built in, portability, low price that stays low (a $600 D40 turns expensive real fast after flash, more lenses, etc.), and an overall simplified approach to taking pictures. I also don't see anything here on /p/ that couldn't have been taken with a prosumer camera.

If I were to buy a prosumer, I would get something with a flash hotshoe (the Canon Powershot S3 has one) to really open up your options for lighting. I would also definitely get something with mechanical image stablization (avoid "digital IS", that just means the camera bumps up the ISO to get a faster shutter speed). The Fuji doesn't have either of these, so look for something that does. They'll make a big difference in the long run.

oh, and food for thought. Ken rockwell ftw.
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>63802

>Prosumers suck because: limited aperture. they all only go to f/8. Big problem if you want depth of field. Myself, I never shoot past f/8 anyway, but it could be a big consideration.

There isn't nothing achieved by going past F/8. Image quality starts to drop, and with small sensors and small focal lenghts, f/8 should be more than enough to get it all focused. It might even be too much, when considering image quality.


> I also don't see anything here on /p/ that couldn't have been taken with a prosumer camera.

Haven't noticed ISO 1600 photos with almost no noise? Or that nice boke which blurs rightly used everything else except the subject? (Feel free to prove me wrong. I'd like to see a nice boke and low noise, which both come from a non-(d)slr.)

>oh, and food for thought. Ken rockwell ftw.
>http://kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm
Ken has a point. The more you pay, the easier it [photographing] gets. Though, you still need that good photographer.
>> Anonymous
>>63810

Absolutely right, which is why I never shoot past f/8 myself. But some folks do, and would consider a maximum aperture of f/8 a serious detriment. Then again, smaller sensor size = more DOF, so maybe it's not so bad.

About bokeh: it's a fair point, but a technical one. The nicest bokeh comes with the nicest 2.8 pro lenses, and since I haven't seen anyone shooting with that nice new $1500 70-210 Nikkor, I feel safe saying that a long zoom on a prosumer should sufficiently blur the background. And the only reason someone would shoot at iso 1600 is low light, which is where the image stabilization or hotshoe flash comes into play.

Don't get me wrong, I love SLR's. I lug around two or three of them everywhere I go. Thoreau said, "Simplify, simplify." and it doesn't get much more simple than an all-in-one 36-432mm zoom camera with IS, movie mode and maybe a hot shoe.
>> Anonymous !!qbjmd5/jJq2
butt
>> Anonymous
>>63810

Be very careful with Ken's site; he says a lot of contradictory things ("I rarely change lenses, so plastic mounts aren't a problem" later "I always change lenses!"); 90% of what is on there is annoying, about 10% of it is decent though.

But that's a simple conclusion, there are features and more bells+whistles in a $5000 camera than in a prosumer/digicam/whathaveyou.

The point is to not get the OMGBESTEST CAMERA IN THE WORLD, but to get the camera that is right for you.

Oh, just to note, there are some Fujis and Panasonics with good noise characteristics at ISO 800 and even ISO 1600, although the smaller sensors in such high-end digicams, as compared to 1.6x/1.3x crop or FF dSLRS, will by definition have more noise.

Boke is not dependent on aperture alone, but also the distance of the focal plane to the subject versus the distance of the subject to the most visible point in the background (acceptable within the assumption of critical sharpness and CoC)
>> Anonymous
>>63815

concur about ken. for all the time he's devoted to putting down gear addicts, it's pretty funny that every single article on his site would be devoted to tech specs, etc.

still, one of the few sites that are a must read, photography-wise.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP Here.

Thanks for the help, guys.

I'm pretty good with an SLR -- I've taken 100s of pictures with my now vintage EOS500. Bearing that in mind, do you think buying a Nikon D50 at £300 is a better buy than the £200 Fuji I posted?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>63828
Nah. If you've already got an EOS, get yourself a Rebel XT. That way, they can share lenses.
>> Anonymous
I think they're about £450 with a decent lens, and I want a new lens with it.

But other than the price, yeah they're my favorite.
>> Anonymous
>>63828

Depends on you. How often will you shoot with it? Every day? Once a week? Once a month?

If you're looking for a one-time investment camera with a lot of capability, ease-of-use and pretty good image quality, get the prosumer. But don't get the fuji; it has no stabilization. Honest to god, you won't know how ever took photos without it once you've used it, especially in low light or at long focal lengths (like the 300mm that the Fuji offers).

If you're looking for a basic camera body around which you can eventually grow an entire system around, get the EOS like ac suggested or a Nikon.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>63831

Hmmm... all that digital stabilization does is notch up the ISO, and I'm sure that because this is a 66.7mm lens (300mm equivalent for 5mm format), I can shoot at 1/60s before shake becomes an issue at full zoom.

I have an image stabilization phone and camcorder -- I barely notice it with the phone, but the optical system the camcorder uses is very fluid and natural.

I'll bear your advice in mind, though. Right now I'm thinking of this Fuji -- it's cheap and fully manual, plus the face recognition will be good for social gatherings. I'll probably use it almost every day, and when it inevitably gets old, I'll get as good a Canon DSLR as I can afford.
>> Anonymous
*sigh,* 35mm equivalent, not 5mm

perhaps i am dumb, after all :(
>> Anonymous
>>63837
1. With a sensor like that, you need to keep the ISO down. 1/60th won't cut it many times.

2. The only issue isn't the physical size of the lens, but how noticable a shake is. An extreme telephoto, like a 300mm lens, makes shake far more noticable than a medium telephoto, like a 60mm lens. That old rule doesn't apply to crop sensor photography.

3. All superzooms are fully manual, with the exception of the Panasonic TZ-3. Depending on budget and portability, I would suggest going with the DMC-FZ8 (smaller, cheaper) or DMC-FZ50 (better, handles like a DSLR, even with focusing and zoom rings on the lens) from the same company.

4. Am I the only one here who finds face detection to be a really gimmick? All it's going to do is average the distance between the faces and focus on that point. Nothing autofocusing yourself on a similar point or manual focusing to such a distance won't do.
>> Anonymous
>>63848
The phrase "really gimmick" should read "really silly gimmick."
>> Anonymous
>>63848Am I the only one here who finds face detection to be a really silly gimmick?

I have this camera and I agree with you. I rarely use the FD function.
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
get it, nice bang for your buck.
>> Anonymous
To be really honest, I have no idea why the FD even exists. I don't understand why I can't identify faces. I just don't get it. I was using my friends camera, and felt like I was piloting a predator drone, monitoring some sand people.
>> Anonymous
sub par optics, just go for the better canon dslr models.
>> Anonymous
>>64039
its not that you cant identify faces, its that the camera can, and will try to autofocus and meter so as many faces are in focus and exposed correctly as it can do.
>> Anonymous
>>64042
In other words, it's for people who lack two really basic photography skills

1. Picking a focus point, for either manual or auto focus. Seriously. I've seen people who know nothing about photography, not even what focus means, figure out the "point camera at subject and move camera" technique.

2. Exposure. Spotmeter on someone's face.