If I may share the settings which I use most frequently.
Ironically EXR Auto or EXR ... is not the best setting. They often select unnecessarily high ISO.
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
P-mode is my most preferred with these settings
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 low compression
Note: at P-mode, camera works on the shuttle speeds (and 2 apertures) 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 (the 2-consecutive shot of Ricoh CX-1's 9MP initiative is adversely affected by subject movement). Similarly, a picture at low light can be pretty ugly for a poorer noise control 12MP as compared to better noise controlled 6MP (not talking of noise suppression).
The weaknesses of most compact digital are too small sensor, noise as ISO increases, loss details because of low DR, smaller aperture, shorter lens for some like LX3, optical quality at extreme zoom for beyond A4 reproduction (only needed occasionally) and any longer optics than 5x is likely compromise under space and weight constraints.
At this point in time, F200EXR has proven to strike a balance in emphasing portability (PDAphone size) with adequate optical range, good resolution, lower noise, wider DR and higher ISO more than most others except big enough aperture. But its ability to handle ISO800 beyond any others make the need of bigger aperture unnecessary, not forgetting the inconvenience of bulk and weight for the faster lens. And between lens size and optical sensor, personally the latter is more important. It seems to me that F200EXR and LX3 are the only non-DSLR generous enough with larger sensor which delivers DR and noise control that most compact digital cameras can only admire.
But one major problem with F200EXR is to discover on the PC monitor that the camera LCD sometimes has betrayed its unusually good picture quality, particularly in the details and absence of noise in low light conditions that very few compact digitals can seriously handle.
