Roger Rabbit
New Member
Impressive comparison.See for yourselve the difference between the two camera!
Fujifilm
Canon
Fujifilm
Canon
From the EXIF data.
The Fuji is using F70EXR at ISO 400.
The Canon is using S90 at ISO 80.
F200EXR vs Canon S90
- Thread starter BlueFairy
- Start date
From the EXIF data.
The Fuji is using F70EXR at ISO 400.
The Canon is using S90 at ISO 80.
Another kudo to Fujiflim that the S90 with 3.75x zoom here requires a lot of trouble to find the difference in IQ as compared to the overstretched F70EXR 10x zoom. Anybody want to guess where does S90 stand if F200EXR 5x zoom comes in (already favoured in couple of test reviews against S90)?
Anyway, looking Alan Photo, F70EXR is clearly a steal for $439 compared to $699 for S90.
Personally the 2.0 aperture is more a marketing gimmicks if you look closer at its sharp fall in aperture to 4.9 at mere 3.75x.
Anyway, looking Alan Photo, F70EXR is clearly a steal for $439 compared to $699 for S90.
Personally the 2.0 aperture is more a marketing gimmicks if you look closer at its sharp fall in aperture to 4.9 at mere 3.75x.
true
but, set it to manual exposure, dial-in your own iso, fix it at 28mm - and it becomes a very capable pocket 'rangefinder' with a great 28mm/f2 prime attached.
the next 28mm/f2 manual and raw capable camera (apart from the lx-3) will cost more than double. in that respect, s90 is pretty cheap.
seriously, comparing f200exr to s90 is not an orange-to-orange comparison. if u must choose between these 2, buy what u can afford.
If you compare the 1st set of Canon photos with the 2nd, curiously the Plant/Sofa photos are warmer in the 1st set than the 2nd. Whereas the opposite seems to be true for the Fuji examples where the 2nd set is MUCH warmer than the first set! I think there is shot to shot/ exposure/white balance variation? Also, there is more detail retained on the wall outside in the 1st set than 2nd comparing the Canon images to each other.
Another thing to consider - are the colours faithful? In the second set, the Canon seems a tad cooler whereas the Fuji seems warmer. Conversely, the opposite is true in the first set where at ISO 400 the Fuji was cooler than the Canon! The question is: does it accurately reflect the actual conditions of the room? And the other question is: Why would changing the ISO from 400 to 100 produce a much warmer colour shift on the Fuji?
It would be nice if ISO/Aperture/Shutter was the same for both cameras to make it more 'orange to orange'.
Let us not fall into 'confirmation bias' trap.
Reading from this reply, I might have first sounded impolite - that was not my intent. We have to share objective views and S90 is certainly a good camera of a big name for those won't mind the price. Dropping from 2.0 to 4.9 (S90 3.75x) compared to 3.3 to 5.1 (F200EXR 5.0x) is a significant design coverup if we were to look exactly at the traded zoom range.
Touch on RAW vs JPG, perhaps, increasingly more people rarely find much benefit working with RAW if JPG technology is so matured in retaining almost everything needed for a faithful shot. Maybe keeping to mininal compression give better results than wasting memory with RAW for most laymen applications.
Some interesting thoughts at http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm , http://www.tlc-systems.com/artzen2-0048.htm and http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg will probably shift our long overdue paradigm about RAW.
Touch on RAW vs JPG, perhaps, increasingly more people rarely find much benefit working with RAW if JPG technology is so matured in retaining almost everything needed for a faithful shot. Maybe keeping to mininal compression give better results than wasting memory with RAW for most laymen applications.
Some interesting thoughts at http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm , http://www.tlc-systems.com/artzen2-0048.htm and http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg will probably shift our long overdue paradigm about RAW.
true
but, set it to manual exposure, dial-in your own iso, fix it at 28mm - and it becomes a very capable pocket 'rangefinder' with a great 28mm/f2 prime attached.
the next 28mm/f2 manual and raw capable camera (apart from the lx-3) will cost more than double. in that respect, s90 is pretty cheap.
seriously, comparing f200exr to s90 is not an orange-to-orange comparison. if u must choose between these 2, buy what u can afford.
Last edited:
I don't understand why we ended up using F70EXR to compare with Canon S90 when this thread is F200EXR vs S90.
F200EXR has 1/1.6" sensor and 5x zoom at about $370
S90 has 1/1.7" sensor and 3.75x zoom at about $650
F70EXR has 1/2.0" sensor and 10x zoom at about $400
Hope this gives a better perspective now.
F200EXR has 1/1.6" sensor and 5x zoom at about $370
S90 has 1/1.7" sensor and 3.75x zoom at about $650
F70EXR has 1/2.0" sensor and 10x zoom at about $400
Hope this gives a better perspective now.
wheresmycheese
Senior Member
it's not faair to compare iso 80 vs iso 400
that said the 200exr was much more an impressive camera then the F70EXR. some how the 70exr details seem to be 'lost'
Maybe it's unusual in the history of PnS that a top-notch camera unbelievably drops its price from USG$450 to USD225 in less than a year. Anybody can think of a clearly better PnS with consistently proven IQ even at USD500 now (LX-3, G10, G11, CX-2) since the hay days of F31FD?
Such hefty discount may reflect Fujifilm indirectly admitting its flawed intended MMI of EXR auto and EXR modes. I suspect the P mode could be the ideal mode which Fujifilm could have mistakenly overlooked. As far as consumer is concerned, nothing loss except disregard what's advertised incorrectly. For this savings of over USD200 is indeed a bonus for all of us since nothing in the horizon is replacing F200EXR yet' looking at Z700 and F80/F85EXR. With permission from my friend glim, I may share why P mode could be ideal here:
EXR HR good only at ISO100 and often unnecessarily higher ISO selected (without pixel coupling noise control 12Mp). Only DR100 used cos dual capturing not possible at 12MP
EXR DR - up to DR800 but often unnecessary higher ISO selected (with pixel coupling noise control) and disabled flash
EXR SN - only DR100 used, sacrificing benefits of higher DR which recovers details not possible with most non-DSLR, often unnecessary higher ISO selected (with better pixel coupling noise control) and disabled exposure compensation
It seems to me P-mode can bring out the best of EXR. Anyone care to share any better settings than these?
Shooting mode - P Program AE
Image size - M 4:3 for 6 MP (for active EXR pixel coupling noise control and DR dual capture as confirmed with Fujifilm)
Flash mode - Auto
Photometry - Multi (for better DR contrast sensing)
Focus - Spot
Dual IS - On
Film Simulation - Provia mode
F-button setting F-mode
- set ISO to Auto800 (noise beyond which no better than others) or Auto1600 with flash off for available light photography if ISO1600 noise can be accepted
- set Dynamic Range priority to Auto (1/3 stop lost if DR % is fixed)
- image quality to Fine for better low compression IQ
Note: at P-mode, camera works on the shuttle speeds (and 2 apertures) with regards to light conditions and zoom length before increasing eventually to this selected ISO800. DR is increased automatically for overexposure detected in the multi-metering by recovering the loss details from the other half of the 6MP underexposed according to the DR % in a single shot (dual capturing). This explains why only 6MP available in EXR operation. A 6MP with wider DR range usually produces better picture than 12MP with narrower DR range unless the picture is good with just flat exposure.
Such hefty discount may reflect Fujifilm indirectly admitting its flawed intended MMI of EXR auto and EXR modes. I suspect the P mode could be the ideal mode which Fujifilm could have mistakenly overlooked. As far as consumer is concerned, nothing loss except disregard what's advertised incorrectly. For this savings of over USD200 is indeed a bonus for all of us since nothing in the horizon is replacing F200EXR yet' looking at Z700 and F80/F85EXR. With permission from my friend glim, I may share why P mode could be ideal here:
EXR HR good only at ISO100 and often unnecessarily higher ISO selected (without pixel coupling noise control 12Mp). Only DR100 used cos dual capturing not possible at 12MP
EXR DR - up to DR800 but often unnecessary higher ISO selected (with pixel coupling noise control) and disabled flash
EXR SN - only DR100 used, sacrificing benefits of higher DR which recovers details not possible with most non-DSLR, often unnecessary higher ISO selected (with better pixel coupling noise control) and disabled exposure compensation
It seems to me P-mode can bring out the best of EXR. Anyone care to share any better settings than these?
Shooting mode - P Program AE
Image size - M 4:3 for 6 MP (for active EXR pixel coupling noise control and DR dual capture as confirmed with Fujifilm)
Flash mode - Auto
Photometry - Multi (for better DR contrast sensing)
Focus - Spot
Dual IS - On
Film Simulation - Provia mode
F-button setting F-mode
- set ISO to Auto800 (noise beyond which no better than others) or Auto1600 with flash off for available light photography if ISO1600 noise can be accepted
- set Dynamic Range priority to Auto (1/3 stop lost if DR % is fixed)
- image quality to Fine for better low compression IQ
Note: at P-mode, camera works on the shuttle speeds (and 2 apertures) with regards to light conditions and zoom length before increasing eventually to this selected ISO800. DR is increased automatically for overexposure detected in the multi-metering by recovering the loss details from the other half of the 6MP underexposed according to the DR % in a single shot (dual capturing). This explains why only 6MP available in EXR operation. A 6MP with wider DR range usually produces better picture than 12MP with narrower DR range unless the picture is good with just flat exposure.
I just bought a F70EXR recently...after trying out all the modes, I confirmed that using P mode produces the best picture quality! Here are some pictures taken in P mode in different lighting condition...
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4033/4353276185_7778ee8fd2_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4031/4353269471_5cfb68c965_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4341334466_dd9860fcff_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4071/4340625109_f9f18bc095_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4033/4353276185_7778ee8fd2_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4031/4353269471_5cfb68c965_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4341334466_dd9860fcff_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4071/4340625109_f9f18bc095_b.jpg
Last edited:
raincool2005
Senior Member
F200 is warmer, S90 is cooler
After all the talking, finally found a website that compares cameras with the same picture which supposedly a objective assessment at http://www.dkamera.de/testbericht/fu...qualitaet.html
Let's see how LX-3 and F200EXR flared here:
A closer view of an identical picture with both cameras at ISO100, LX-3 (left) and F200EXR (right)
]
Let's see how LX-3 and F200EXR flared here:
A closer view of an identical picture with both cameras at ISO100, LX-3 (left) and F200EXR (right)
