File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
How come no one on /p/ shoots fujifilm DSLRs? I found a nice deal on a S2 but I've never heard anything about them.
>> Anonymous
because they are a nice product

inb4LOL INCREDIBLE DYNAMIC RANGE

they are much slower in every way compared to the nikon bodies they are based on

and we all know /p/ loves fast cameras
>> Anonymous
Some people prefer them to Nikons, if you can stand to lose some features. Color on Fujis is supposed to be really nice.
>> Anonymous
>>224845
Do you mean burst shot speed or light sensitivity when you say "speed"?

I don't shoot the olympics or anything like that. I mostly shoot buildings and bodies of water that... arent moving all that fast.
>> Anonymous
The Fujis are portrait cameras, really. I'd get a newer Nikon with the changeable saturation if you want to get some nice building/landscape shots.
>> Anonymous
>>224851
Newer Nikon? As in not a D100? I also see a nice price on one of those.
>> Anonymous
I have a Fuji s1 great camera ,
better color then the Nikon d40 I borrowed

only bad things
The sensor can get dirty very easily ,
found that Nikon lenses are "slow" so you have to a just for that .
>> Anonymous
What features are the fujifilm SLRs missing? Also how can they be bad if they use Nikon lenses? It's like getting the best lenses with even better electronics.
>> Anonymous
>>224878
> best lenses

inb4shitstorm
>> Anonymous
>>224880
Even Canonfags will agree Nikon has the best lenses. It's a fact. Nikon is a lens company. It's what they do.
>> Anonymous
>>224883
/me gets some popcorn and settles in for the show.
>> Anonymous
>>224883

That is very true.

Frankly, you can trust Nikon gear. The same goes for high end Canon gear. It's reliable. It's sturdy. It will take the abuse that goes with professional rigors. You can pick up a Nikon every day, and use it, just like you use a tool. Hell, you can drive nails with old Nikons. That's the quality we're talking about here.

When you make your livelihood, you don't choose the brand that offers an equivalent, even similar system, you choose the brand that is a trustworthy and time-tested tool. Thus, Nikon. There are always distinctions to be made between Nikon and Canon, but I've often heard this statement, and I believe it: Canons are the best cameras made by engineers, but Nikons are the best cameras made by photographers. It's a generalization, but that feels very true to me.
>> Anonymous
I honestly don't understand where you people are coming from. Nikon is one of the great pioneer companies in photography and it's been around even longer than Canon. Given that a lot of their development budget over the company's life has been focused on the production of better photosensitive devices. You'd seriously be at a loss if you were to simply ignore Nikon's great achievements in the field of photography and their contributions even today.

Nikon optics, which are used in OP's camera are also some of the leading optics manufacturers in Japan, most certainly on par with the Carl Zeiss of old, pretty much like Leica, except heavily underrated.

As for this camera, you need no more than take a swift look around the camera to know it's a really good camera for the money. First off, Nikon took it's cue for ergonomics from professional SLR designs. This isn't a flimsy camera and it isn't difficult to handle (unlike a certain entry-level model produced by Canon). Its control menus are certainly on par with Canon's fantastic ones, if not better, given that there is a much better integration in this camera's system than there is with Canon's entry level SLR's, perhaps even a higher level. The optics and imaging device are certainly where it's at with this model, however. Through Nikon's expertise (and history) in the creation of light-sensitive devices, you can most certainly assume, without a doubt, that this camera is at a whole different level than you'd find in an SLR. This sensor, coupled with Nikon's optics makes gives this camera the edge over the similarly-priced cameras produced by the Japanese market.

You guys need to do some reading on these companies instead of dissing OP's camera. You'll realize how much you've missed and even lost by buying an expensive all-in-one SLR system when you could have achieved comparable/superior quality images from a well-priced, spot-on solution as the one OP has put on the table.
>> Anonymous
>>224883
>Nikon is a lens company
> best camera made by photographers

And yet all the bitching and butthurt on here is about the camera bodies. You basically never see a comment like "LOL OMG the Nikon VR is so much crappier than Canon IS LOOOL TOOL".

Could it be because, in reality, no one on /p/ has any idea about anything?
>> Anonymous
>>224887
Are you saying the fujifilm S2 is a good bet, or a Nikon body is a good bet? I'm a little confused about your stance. What does Fujifilm bring to the table as opposed to just a straight Nikon body?
>> Anonymous
>>224888

inb4 DC faggot copypasta
>> Anonymous
>>224889

their own sensor
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>224885
I recognize this one.

>>224887
But not this one. So I'll take it seriously like I normally do by mistake.

Nikon is a great pioneer, and has been around longer than Canon as an optics company. But Canon got into the camera business first with the Hansa Canon before WWII. It had a Nikkor lens, funnily enough, but the Nikon One was a postwar "oh god our company's going bankrupt" measure. So if the dickwaving's based on time, Canon wins sorry.

Optics: Underrated? ahahahaha read the story about how Nikon cameras first came to America.

Next two paragraphs: Okay I give up what are you smoking.

OP: Fuji DSLRs are Nikon DSLRs with Fuji sensors in them and a bit of a price premium. They're good if there's something special from the Fuji sensor you need (epic dynamic range), and are willing to pay for it.

However, apart from the S5 Pro, which is pretty much exactly the D200, older Fuji bodies were based on Nikon's film cameras, so Fuji had to do the interface design themselves and it may not be as good. Try it out first to see if you like it.
>> Anonymous
One of the Fuji bodies has only 87 or 89 or something absurdly small like that percent viewfinder coverage. The other has a typical, run-of-the-mill, 95%. That's why I wouldn't shoot with them; as someone said, they're pretty much.... not dedicated, but designed for... portrait cameras, primarily for wedding photographers who want both shadow and highlight detail on the black tux and white dress.

I also personally don't really give half a damn about shadow detail, I push stuff to black 80% of the time when processing, so that's another reason why they're not for me: I just don't really need them, although I would like it if they licensed their technology and it became standard, no reason not to go for the best DR. I would think it would be more profitable, too, to license Nikon (and others) the technology for every one of their chips instead of building a niche body.

But other than the coverage issue on one of them, from everything I've heard they're good cameras.

But as for why no one on /p/ uses them... most people on /p/ don't have multiple bodies, like the aforementioned wedding photographers do. I would imagine they're also a little most costly than the equivalent Nikon models.
>> Anonymous
>>224894
Ah thats a very good point. My Fujifilm S700 has a terrible interface. If you guys knew the rediculous things you had to do to manual focus... oy.
>> Anonymous
>>224887

This post is almost nonsensical. The OP's camera is a DSLR just like the DSLRs almost everybody shoots with, just with a proprietary sensor that almost no one will notice the difference with.
>> Anonymous
>>224887

is epic copypasta
>> Anonymous
>>224900
Fujifilm makes Velvia and so they must make awesome sensors. /thread
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
you should check out the fuji s100fs

it's 14 X zoom and 11 megapixels with image stabilizer with a tilt LCD
>> Anonymous
>>224911
GTFO with your P&shit
>> Anonymous
>>224916

lol, insecure much
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I use a finepix S6000fd, but it's not a real SLR

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix S6000fdCamera SoftwareDigital Camera FinePix S6000fd Ver1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:02:15 11:49:17Exposure Time0.2 secF-Numberf/3.1Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/3.1Brightness-3.5 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.60 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2136Image Height2848RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>224926
That is so fucking noisy. The picture is barely even still in there. Go into photoshop, open a 2136x2848 canvas. Go to noise > Add Noise... 100% Uniform noise. Make sure monochromatic is unchecked. Tada. You have an equivalent masterpeice.
>> Anonymous
>>224927
And it affects the photograph how?

Noise doesn't matter for most photographs of any substance, only pretty pichurs are significantly impeded by it.

PROVE ME WRONG.
>> Anonymous
>>224928
You proved yourself wrong. Your photo is completely unappealing to look at because it is so noisy. What COULD have been a beautiful crisp shot of interesting architecture is now a smudgy blurry clusterfuck.
>> Anonymous
>>224928
Resize it to about 30-40% and it'll look much better.
>> Anonymous
>>224929
I'm not the guy who posted the picture. One can make out everything important in the picture, all the shapes and the content. That's all that matters in a substantial picture, not whether it's sharp or not, clean or noisy.

Exhibit A: Look at any picture made on 135 in even moderate darkness before, say, 1950 or so. Grainy as hell. And yet, we regard the works of Cartier-Bresson, Capa, etc. as great, we don't even pay attention to the grain.
>> Anonymous
>>224932
Film Grain adds character. Digital Noise does not. No one says oh that noise just makes the picture. We dont seek out sensors for particular types of noise. We want no noise.
>> Haddock !!xREx2m9lgBs
My dad used to have an S1 Pro, great camera, wish it still worked. :(
>> Anonymous
>>224935
Wrong, or rather, close-minded. Film grain "adds character" because you're used to it, you're accustomed to looking at it, the same way you're accustomed to looking at flat 2D pictures and seeing a scene and not some blotches on a canvas or paper.

Digital noise also can "add character" in the right images. I would do "pic related," but hardware is glitchy on my end ATM and I can't.
>> Anonymous
>>224939
Digital noise cant add character. That's insanity. Noise is by definition not wanted. You have your signal and then you have your noise. This isn't analogue. This would be like people saying they like it when their CD player cant read. Oh that digital noise is awesome. It makes the song sound more warm and alive when it wont play because of a disc error. Noise in analogue like a record player can be good. Digital noise can NEVER be good.
>> Anonymous
>>224942
So grain is like record scratches and noise is CD errors?

Anyway, you are fucking close minded.
>> Anonymous
>>224942
You're being dense. How is heavy film grain not "noise?" It interferes with the clear resolution and depiction of the scene. It's just as much of a distortion as digital noise.

Oh wait, it makes it more "warm?" Heh. In fifty years, people will be saying the same stuff about noise. "The new clean ISO 8,000,000 on the D40 with its Widjit-a-thing chip is too clean. It doesn't have that character old CMOS or CCDs have. Lol, I'd rather shoot with that old '00s consumer D40, or at least the old D39."
>> Anonymous
>>224945
Yes that is exactly what it is like.
>> Anonymous
Lol 8000000 ISO... Take a picture of a black hole and blow out the highlights.
>> Anonymous
The difference between film grain and noise is that noise is multicolored. Film grain (on a color stock) takes the form of granular bits that are generally the same color as the surrounding area - it just looks like the image was spraypainted on crumbs or sandpaper or something. Digital noise looks more like a very tiny person puked on the image.

Incidentally, because of this characteristic, converting a noisy image to black and white usually does a great job of saving it. Rather than looking like a camcorder screenshot, it looks like a grainy news photo with a lot of old-world charm.
>> Anonymous
>>224878
No one has responded to this. What features are the fujifilm DSLRs missing?
>> Anonymous
>>224963
This is very true. When I have to shoot high ISO with my point and shoot I just switch it over to black and white because the pictures will be un usable in color but come out very noise in B&W.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>224964
Find out yourself. Dpreview.com has an excellent camera model comparison tool.
>> Anonymous
>>224972
Why and how?

The EF mount is notoriously hard to copy and Samsung already has an alliance with Pentax.
>> Anonymous
Hey actually how come no one ever talks about Samsung SLRs either? I had no idea they even made them until just now. They have 4 of them. They have Samsung made APS-C sensors in them and use Pentax lenses. They sound pretty cool with a lot of unique features like digital preview and a personal settings button. It also has ISO sensitivities all the way up to 6400. At least the GX-20 does. That's the one I'm looking at. How come no one ever uses these things? They sound pretty neato.
>> Anonymous
I guess
>>224972
was trolling a little too hard and realized what he made up didnt make any sense.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>224975
Samsungs are rebadged Pentaxes that come with so-called Schneider kit lenses. If you can get one cheaper than a Pentax in your area, why not - it's the same thing.

Kinda like the Fuji S5 and Nikon D200, except there are even fewer differences and the Samsung is cheaper than the brandname equivalent.
>> Anonymous
>>224975
The Samsungs are just re-branded Pentax, with a few tweaks to body and menus. That one's a K20D.

Samsung builds Pentax's sensors, the same way Sony builds Nikon's. I don't see how it makes business sense for Samsung to offer the exact same camera pretty much (whereas Nikon and Sony differ radically, even some details on the sensors are different) but hey.
>> SAGE
>>224885
this man is a troll guys.
>> Anonymous
>>224983
I hear that same argument about one company's cameras being made by engineers and the other by photographers... With practically every company placed interchangeably within. It's all bs.
>> Anonymous
>>224981Samsung builds Pentax's sensor

Nope, only the latest CMOS is Samsung.

Everything else is made by Sony.
>> Anonymous
>>225141
How come none of the companies use cooling to get less noise? Say you have a small canister of liquid nitrogen that sits on the side and when you are focus locked it is actively cooling the sensor so you can shoot at 128,000 ISO with no noise.
>> Anonymous
>>225154
>>225154
>>225154

High end SLR's get knocked about, dropped, thrown, go to extremely cold and hot places... do you want to take a canister of compressed gas with you, though those conditions, against your face?
>> Anonymous
>>225169
Yes.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>225169
look at paintball equipment, that goes through more rigor than any camera Ive ever owned does and it uses compressed gases.

The real reason is probably that its cost-prohibitive
>> Anonymous
>>225198
Not only it's cost-prohibitive (esp. considering the need to somehow deal with dew that will inevitably form on the supercooled sensor), it will require you to carry gas canisters that you can't recharge anywhere except the manufacturer's service facility.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>225204
I don't see how thats necessarily true, there are a lot of commercially-available cooled gases that could be used. It's all speculation though anyway.
>> Anonymous
>>225154

I'm 90% sure medium format digital is usually cooled somehow. Which goes with the "it'd just be too whatever" because H3D (as opposed to old Hassys) are supposed to just be studio cameras that don't get a beating.

Plus, having it on only during focus lock would create problems. Going from a hot electrical environment, in a black body, at midday to really, really cold? I'm sure you know what moving between different temperatures does.
>> Anonymous
>>225248
With a heatsink. We're talking awesome active cooling here.
>> NatureGuy !se3A3TwzdY
>>225198
Airsoft guns shoot what is basically silicone for lubricant and propane as a propellant. You can do some amusing stuff with the gas airsoft guns because of that, though if you do it, be ready to replace your seals on gun and magazine.
>> Anonymous
>>225422
I dont know of any airsoft guns that shoot anything other than airsoft pellets with C02... What the hell are you talking about?
>> Anonymous
>>225540

Different poster here.
He's talking about green gas guns. Green gas is propane with a dab of silicone mixed in for lubricant. You can actually substitute propane for green gas with little to no ill effects.
>> Anonymous
>>225648

Agh, sorry /p/, I meant to sage 'cause I added nothing to the thread. I guess I forgot.
Too late now.
>> Anonymous
>>225540

sigh...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_gas
>> Anonymous
PROB BC IT SUCKS
>> Anonymous
Cameras??? Photos??? Lenses?? Why dont we try talking about any of those. /k/ is thataway
<---
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
the S2pro is based off an F80 body, this makes it a quite rugged and strong camera. Anything the F80 supports the S2pro will also support (lenses and speedlites, basically everything thing nikon makes)

I've played with an S3pro and other been slow (if your into your pray and spray sooting tactics it will be too slow for you then) its a fantastic camera. I'm sure the older S2pro will be fine if you can get it for a good deal.

tl;dr
just buy the fucking thing.
Dont ask /p/, they will tell you to buy a D3 or 1DsIII and a Hummer with a helipad on the back for your private helicopter.
>> Anonymous
>>224843
I spent about a week with my friend's S3. Good body but he only had sigma superzoom lenses. Heavy as fuck but it could use AA batteries as standard.
Don't remember too much about it since I borrowed it like a year ago.
>> Anonymous
>>225705
What did you think of the shots from it? Was the quality good? Was there nice colors? That's what I always hear about Fujifilm cameras.
>> Anonymous
>>225708
What I always hear about the pro Fuji bodies are is the dynamic range.
>> Anonymous
>>225711
What I always hear about Fujifilm bodies is shit sux
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>225721
S1pro is based off the F60 (a shit body, i have one)
S2pro and S3pro is based off the F80 (a pretty good film body)
S3pro is based off the D200 body (a really nice prosumer body)

so... umm... yeah...
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>225725
correction to my mistake
>>S3pro is based off the D200 body (a really nice prosumer body)
should read : S5pro is based off the D200 body (a really nice prosumer body)
>> Anonymous
Around these parts we speak through pictures. The only one in this thread sucks and is noisy. Where are the pictures... Unless ya'll aint /p/ enough.
>> Anonymous
Awesome
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=9SLdTnGjH6E
>> Anonymous
>>225708
Good dynamic range, good performance in low light, but dodgy white balance.
Batteries died really quickly. I think at 200 shots.
>> Anonymous
>>225779
Dodgy White Balance? Shouldn't you use custom anyhow?
>> Anonymous
>>225914
I was even a bigger newfag at the time and it wasn't mine anyways.
>> Anonymous
I wish somewhere like Bestbuy or Circuit city carried the Fujifilm SLRs... I'd like to try one out.
>> Anonymous
>>225725
>S1pro is based off the F60 (a shit body, i have one)
The F60 isn't a shit body, it's not bad as a backup or a first camera..

Yes. I'm just butthurt because I own one.
I would like to see some pictures taken with one of these!

Anyone have any?
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
     File :-(, x)
>>225960
lol i own one too
It was my first AF camera and introduced me to the Nikon way and yeah, its actually not that bad. It was the bottom of the range so cant expect much but it did perform great!

I can give you a shot from a F60! Taken with some old Konica film on the west coast in the South Island of New Zealand.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNikonCamera ModelNikon SUPER COOLSCAN 5000 EDCamera SoftwareNikon Scan 4.0.2 WImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution4000 dpiVertical Resolution4000 dpiImage Created2007.11.18 21.44.48Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1024Image Height678
>> Anonymous
Yeah we need some pictures. I can't beleive no one owns a Fujfiilm body here...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>225964
Saved off of facebook. I believe that this was taken with my friend's S3.
>> Anonymous
>>225977

pig-disgusting
>> Anonymous
>>225979
He's a photoshop whore.
His daddy bought him a whole SLR kit because he's one of the country's most famous photographers/graphic designers.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>225982
This one was taken at a Mini club event while he was gay for minis. Probably his least-sucky shot in all his pictures. Reflections are nice.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>225987
a Mini, do want
>> Anonymous
Can we get a respectable example of a fujifilm SLR?
>> Anonymous
>>225982
That's a pretty good boost for fujifilm SLRs right there.
>> M?e?e?s?e??? !iZn5BCIpug
>>226054
DPREVIEW YOU TWAT
>> Anonymous
>>224854
>a just
>> Anonymous
>>226321
??
>> wotcha can do wiv an S2 Noobert
http://www.pbase.com/gilazouri/china

(gee, it might be ok for landscapes)
>> Anonymous
>>226387
Wow those are really cool. Great examples of non retarded HDR.
>> Anonymous
>>226387
It might WORK for landscapes, like a chair leg might work for killing someone. A knife or a gun are a lot more effective though as they are designed for it.

tl;dr Buy Canikon
>> Anonymous
>>226387
Protip: for a landscape photography exclusively large format is the only choice.
>> Anonymous
>>226758
Protip A) Format choice is personal and subjective, and often particular to the individual work. While LF film has the best technical quality, someone might want a look they can't achieve with available films or film at all. They might just prefer an all-digital workflow. Etc.

Protip B) Even Ansel Adams used a Hasselblad sometimes.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
These pics were taken with my S1 Pro.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePixS1ProCamera SoftwareDigital Camera FinePixS1Pro Ver1.00Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:03:11 16:27:56Exposure Time1/560 secF-Numberf/9.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating320Lens Aperturef/9.5Brightness8.9 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length79.00 mm
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePixS1ProCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution0 dpiVertical Resolution0 dpiImage Created2008:03:11 16:34:10Exposure Time1/560 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating320Lens Aperturef/16.0Brightness10.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length28.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1024Image Height679
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePixS1ProCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:03:11 16:37:39Exposure Time1/560 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating320Lens Aperturef/16.0Brightness10.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length28.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1024Image Height679
>> Anonymous
Aparantly Fujifilm cameras are for pictures of cars not portraits...
>> Anonymous
>>226962
Police Interceptor Calender Photoshoot.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I would just like to say that I've used the S2's, S3's, and S5's all in a commercial setting where I've honestly shot thousand of pictures a day, each day, for weeks (not kidding at all, try and guess where I am) and although slow they do make excellent portrait cameras. There colour and dynamic range are impressive and they take a lot of damage. Not the biggest fan of AA batteries in the S2 and S3 but easy enough to tether in a studio. Firewire ports tend to be weak on the camera and can fail over time. S5's are pretty nice and so far haven't had any trouble with them at all (not the biggest fan of control layouts though, and the liveview thing is useless)

Picture related S3 Pro with hastily chosen settings.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
shot at Dawn .. guess where I live??

As stated ,, sensor seems to get dirty easier , umm noisier , ( mirror slap ) then other DSLRs I have used , uses AA batteries , a plus for can buy four in a pinch and keep shooting .

good camera to buy to wait for two years when every camera will be full frame
>> Anonymous
>>227365good camera to buy to wait for two years when every camera will be full frame

next year, not 2 years
>> Anonymous
>>227366

Well still think that only the pro / high end will be full frame. There will be some lower end , enthusiast that won't be .. think it will take two years for all the companies to offer full frame cameras across their entire line .
>> Anonymous
Doesn't ANYONE own a fujifilm DSLR and take good pictures? I'm starting to worry that this camera may indeed make you take bad pictures. It's the only credible excuse for there being no good fujifilm DSLR examples.