Fujifilm's FinePix S8000fd megazoom camera gets reviewed
Filed under: Digital Cameras
Relevant Posts
- Dell's Core i7-packin' Studio XPS hits the review bench (48 days ago - 304 Comments)
- Apple's 24-inch LED Cinema Display review (25 days ago - 154 Comments)
- Cowon S9 review (11 days ago - 85 Comments)
- Dell's XPS 730x H2C Core i7 gaming PC benchmarked and tested exhaustively (17 days ago - 53 Comments)
- HP MediaSmart Server ex487 gets hands-on love and full-blown review (11 days ago - 29 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
John M @ Oct 4th 2007 1:33PM
That noise performance can usually be atributed to alot of megapixels on a small chip. The pixels are so closely aligned that they bleed over into each other and cause "noise". So, the higher the megapixel does not always mean the higher the detail. If not properly implmented it can actually cause the reverse effect.
jm @ Oct 4th 2007 8:44PM
This is misleading, true high megapixel cams on small chips do create noise, more so than if on a big chip but in general given the same chip size higher megapixels will add more detail. Just look at new generations of DSLR's, first gens with 6 megapixels are by far lower in detail than the newest models with 10+ mp even though they have the same sensor size.
John M @ Oct 4th 2007 8:59PM
Thats the point. More megapixels on a smaller chip will not necessarily look better than less megapixels on a bigger chip.
spass @ Oct 4th 2007 1:33PM
"18x" sounds great for marketing guys.
Manufacturers keep extending the zoom reach, but they keep adding at the telephoto end, while really the wide angle end needs more reach.
~36mm wide, equivalent in 35m film standard still proves insufficient for our needs.
almostinfamous @ Oct 4th 2007 1:40PM
you could take a few steps back, maybe?
you don't get the same perspective, i know, but dude. 18x zoom is 18x zoom.
joewhat @ Oct 4th 2007 3:57PM
Taking a step back is quite often not possible,e.g. taking indoor photos or inside Egyptian temples (ok, maybe indoor photos is a more common example...)
I agree that they should focus on reducing the noise level in most cameras, but not by software tweaks, but by reducing the megapixels. I read somewhere that the image quality is actually degrading since the cameras got more than 6MP simply because there are not photons/electrons left per pixel.
Also it would be really useful to have a GPS in more cameras to use sites like http://www.photrax.com directly and geotag to always know exactly where you took your photos...
Barry @ Oct 8th 2007 10:42PM
wide angle on the S8000Fd is 27mm not 35mm
Jason @ Oct 4th 2007 1:58PM
Are there ANY digital camera's out there that might be an option for someone looking for low-light performance?
I don't have the money for an M8 (oh what an amazing camera!) and more mega pixels turn me off.
I want F1.8 or better and low noise. I don't care if that means a 5MP or even 3MP sensor.
Cranium @ Oct 4th 2007 2:06PM
Get a used Canon D30 and a 50mm 1.8. Can't imagine you'd spend more than $350 for a setup like that, and it produces wonderful photos.
mike @ Oct 4th 2007 2:15PM
They're really doesn't seem to be. I've been looking around too and for an F
mike @ Oct 4th 2007 2:18PM
apparently you cant use a less than sign without breaking the comment. anyways i was just going to recommend noise ninja or some other noise reduction software as you wont find a really good low light point and shoot. the sensors are too small.
thispaceforsale @ Oct 4th 2007 3:42PM
RE: lowlight
Just got a fuji f31 for $200+ off the fujimall website. The camera is a beast in lowlight, clearly the dominant camera in the compact class and the sweetspot of megapixels, puts the Canons to pasture. It's a shame it's been discontinued.
Dan @ Oct 4th 2007 4:44PM
Get a Fuji F20 or 31. These 2 camera are amazing in low light.
Colin @ Oct 4th 2007 2:11PM
Get an old used DSLR (cheap and low megapixel) and a nice prime lens for it. There's no way you'll get f1.8 on a zoom lens without having to mortgage your house. In addition to the availability of f1.8 or better lenses, DSLRs have the advantage that you'll be able to use higher ISOs without the pictures looking like trash. If you're really concerned about noise, run all your pictures through Noise Ninja.
toonces @ Oct 6th 2007 3:51PM
My dad is looking to convert from the 35mm world to digital. Right now he has an Olympus that has a great zoom. He doesn't need a DSLR w/ the add on lenses. Would something like this be nice for him? I've seen it as low as $316 online. At that price I might pick one up to replace my Nikon Coolpix 5.2.
Barry @ Oct 8th 2007 10:35PM
I just got this camera last Friday and I'm very impressed, I used the 18X zoom fully extended.shooting the top of a Dallas landmark from 3 miles away and you can read the writing on the billboard behind it. Amazing!! Macro mode is equally impressive. Buy it before Christmas, I'm sure they'll sell out fast.
Yoshi @ Oct 9th 2007 6:13PM
The size of the image sensor in this camera is about 6.5X5.5 mm.
If you try simple arithmetic, 3264/6.5 or 2448/5.5 , you will see, in order to make
8 meg quality of image, the lens needs to have about 500 line/mm resolution.
Even for a much solidly structured 35 mm SLR lens, to have 100 line/mm resolution
is not easy. Let alone, wobbly, plasticky lens which the lens element has to move for 18X zoom range.
Naive consumers are just fooled by the myth, the larger the number the better.
It is not neccesary true.