Fuji brings back the 2/3" sensor

And at 11MP mounted behind a 28-400mm (equiv) zoom no less.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012410fujifS100FS.asp

it's too much to ask for for a short wide zoom of this quality, isn't it? 24-85 maybe? perhaps

2009 i guess, although they will probably have a 600mm out instead.

Very nice job, they're on the right track. 6-8Mp would have been enough though.

 

Later this year 2/3" 24-85 cam and I'll be happy as a clam, ok?

 

...no wait, if Olympus brings out a 4/3 sensor p&s with reasonable zoom and price then I'll be happy as a manatee (when not driven over by a boat).

 

 

I really need more coffee.

It mentioned film simulation mode. Is that a code word for high ISO?

 

I'd rather have a real DSLR with that bulk to carry; At least one can remove the lens for a

more compact packing of gear.

It will be interesting to see what else they build around the new super-CCD chip.

Nope, the film simulation modes seem to be colour emulsion simulations - Velvia, Provia etc.

[[although they will probably have a 600mm out instead.]]

 

Not with a sensor this big.

 

A smaller sensor will get you a camera that's 26-520mm

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012204olysp570uz.asp

Is "wide dynamic range" the same as "high dynamic range"?

Just reading your subject line was enough to get me interested. Especially having seen what Fuji sensors can do on the S3 SLR. But, sadly I was disappointed when I looked at the article. Just what is wrong the camera makers? If I wanted that sort of bulk, I'd use a APS framed camera like a 350D.

 

I still like my 2002 model coolpix 5000 because its compact, has a bigger sensor (than 1/1.7 or 1/1.8) and has RAW (well, NEF). I'd like some light rangefinder to supplement my DSLR not try to imitate it.

 

sigh

 

nice try Fuji

Chris,

 

I agree the camera is sort of at an odd point relative to other camera sizes in the super-zoom/bridge category. Next to something like the Canon S5 or the Olympus 560 (or the newly announced 570), this camera does not appear to be focused on the same market.

 

However, considering the focal length range and the sizes of lenses needed to match it on the 350D, the Fuji is not a bulky camera by any means.

Clearly, this camera is not aimed at the same market at the "junk" cameras like the Canon S5.

The image quality from most of the smaller superzooms is horrid. I believe Fuji is offering a

true SLR alternative for those of us who may not want to lug a body a set of lenses. Throw in

movie mode and other "bridge" features, and it looks nice. Yes, it's big. But compare the

feature set and lens range pound for pound with an SLR setup, and it looks lighter all the

time. If the images can stay clean up to ISO 800, well, I'll be in line for one.

Horrid? I've seen some really wonderful images from these types of cameras. The key was that the photographer knew what they were doing and they understood their tools.

Rob,

 

Well, it's all a matter of reference. Compared to any SLR, the images from the tiny sensor cameras are, at best, bad. Add to that the heavy-handed NR and the result is a smudged mess. There's no reason for this. Image quality has actually dropped since the Sony F717, which was a 5MP camera with a 2/3" sensor. Why? Marketing. You can still produce good pictures with them, just as you can with a Holga, but from a technical point of view the image quality of most small sensor P&S cams has been dropping steadily over the past few years. Since the new Fuji has a larger sensor and fewer pixels than other cams, like the Canon G9, I'm hopefull that Fuji has produced a "bridge" camera that can produce clean images up to ISO 800. That would make it a nice choice for me when I hike, bike, or take a motorcycle trip. There's no way I could carry the SLR equivilant for that lens range on most of those trips. BTW, when I used the term "horrid" I had the Sony H9 in mind. A true dog.