The New Fuji F11!

Looks like Fuji have decided to make an improved version of the Fuji

F10 with more manual user controls!

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0509/05092901fuji_f11.asp

Wow. I am so excited about this I can hardly contain myself. What will they think of next. This is such a stunning, innovative, genre-crushing product that I am sure everyone will want to run out and buy one. Everything else shrivels into insignificance at the weight and import of this announcement. Wow.

 

;-)

I think it's great that Fuji has listened to the market on this one. ISO 1600 and manual controls make for a nice point and shoot.

I assume the first response above is sarcastic, but few photographers who have seen the results of the F10 would challenge the claim that it IS like no earlier camera.

 

Yes, the F10 images look like they came from a small point-and-shoot (and that will always be true until APS-sized sensors come to pocket cams) but the Fuji's performance at ISO 800 and 1600 is in a completely different league than Canon's comparable cameras or Olympus's or anyone else's.

 

(I wrote a short review of the F10 here in May: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00C5ET )

 

For serious photographers looking for a p&s, the F10 deserves serious consideration, its primary shortcoming being the lack of manual controls (now remedied in the F11).

 

So yes, this announcement is news for any photographers who recognize the advantage of being able to use high ISO's. Those who don't mind a lot of noise with their 400 and 800 shots can snicker all they want, but the test results are hard to dispute.

After spending the last few weeks reading the reviews of the F10 (thank you Ralph & others), I was just about to purchase one so as to take advantage of the $30 rebate offer (until 10-01-05). But now I'm wondering if I should wait for the F11...

 

I'm sure the manual controls will be nice to have on occasion, but I'm not sure how often I would end up using them anyway, considering that the F10 has the option of changing ISO & +/- exposure for creative control. Given the option of manual controls or an optical viewfinder, I would probably choose the viewfinder as a more worthy upgrade.

 

May I ask those of you with the current F10 to comment on the manual control issue: do you find yourself wanting these, or have you learned to get by without them? And, how about the soon to be available E900, which has the viewfinder and (I think) the same low light capabilities - would this camera be a better choice (or, at least worth waiting to hear the reviews for)?

 

Thanks!

After you told us about the F10 I made it a point to check it out for myself. I just couldn't buy it without a viewfinder. I tried. So, now they have made it even more desirable (I don't shoot digital yet) but I still can't buy it! Pity. Too long squinting through little windows, I guess. Old habits, and all that.

 

Gup.

<< And, how about the soon to be available E900, which has the viewfinder and (I think) the same low light capabilities - would this camera be a better choice (or, at least worth waiting to hear the reviews for)? >>

 

Well the E900 only allows up to ISO 800 and is not as small or light as the F10/F11. However it does offer a higher MP count with a slightly larger sensor (1/1.6" vs 1/1.7" of the F10/F11). The E900 also offers a slightly wider lens (32mm vs 36mm).

 

I think a comparison between the two is in order before deciding.

<< I just couldn't buy it without a viewfinder. >>

 

Given the quality of the viewfinders in 95% of the digital point and shoot market, I find this an odd sticking point. Do you really want 80% or less coverage, no parallax correction, and no crosshairs?

 

Using the LCD full time takes practice and nothing more.

I think that many "serious photographers" in the end would not be satisfied with a camera that does not have the ability to connect an external flash. The compromise in lugging around an external flash and its power for such a camera is obvious, but one that I think should be available as an option for cameras supposedly addressing a "serious photographer" market. Perhaps this issue can be lessened with the usage of slave flashes; I should try that sometime.

<< I think that many "serious photographers" in the end would not be satisfied with a camera that does not have the ability to connect an external flash >>

 

What "serious photographer" would not recognize this camera as a point and shoot? Are you really equating aperture and shutter priority on a point and shoot to "proessional camera?"

How ironic of me... "professional"

Are you sure you didn't actually mean "processional" camera? Cameras that come in long, organized lines?

Seems just like yesterday I was wishing that Fuji would add a version of the F10 with

more manual controls. Wait, it was just yesterday.

 

The main question is how much control over noise reduction it will offer. I would

prefer less aggressive noise reduction.

Rob, each to their own. I didn't say I couldn't take a shot with an EVF. I meant I don't want to. I prefer to frame a shot while looking through a glass window with one eye shut. Call me a freak. How do you crop a shot while holding it at arm's length in brilliant sunshine?

 

I was at a Rolling Stones show in Toronto on Monday night surrounded by dozens of different variations of digital p&s cameras. I bet not a decent shot was obtained by anyone. Everyone holding their cameras (or their phones) up in the air with one hand trying to see the screens. It was laughable. Anyway, I was standing on my chair in the 4th row centre and the guy beside me offered up his camera for me to take a few for him. I immediately put the cute little thing up to my eye and started framing. Then I flipped it up for some verticals. The guy grabbed my leg to get my attention and was saying 'no, no, use the screen'. I tried one and it felt so unnatural I went back to using the little window. I shot for about 10 minutes or so and when he emails me the results I'll probably post a few.

 

You also seem to have misunderstood the other poster who typed a "serious photographer" would look for an external flash sync of some kind. You thought he said "professional photographer" and proceeded to deride him about recognizing this as a p&s camera. Have you never seen a p&s camera with external flash capabilities?

 

Perhaps reading a post more than once before responding would help.

and now it looks like the ironic gremlin got me, too.

I meant you said 'professional camera'.

 

Gup.

<< How do you crop a shot while holding it at arm's length in brilliant sunshine? >>

 

1) I don't hold a camera at arms length. I don't understand where people get this idea from. I hold it at the posistion I need it.

 

2) Easily. I have very little trouble framing with the LCD. If I think I did mess up the framing, I just take another shot.

 

 

<< Everyone holding their cameras (or their phones) up in the air with one hand trying to see the screens. It was laughable. >>

 

Which is why I purchased an A80. I can rotate the LCD and hold the camera above me. It works wonderfuly especially when there are no chairs for me to stand on.

 

<< I tried one and it felt so unnatural I went back to using the little window.>>

 

Which is exactly my point. You give something one or two shots and come to the conclusions that it's wrong. If you fell twice when trying to learn how to ride a bike, did you give up?

 

<< You also seem to have misunderstood the other poster who typed a "serious photographer" would look for an external flash sync of some kind. You thought he said "professional photographer" and proceeded to deride him about recognizing this as a p&s camera. Have you never seen a p&s camera with external flash capabilities? >>

 

I didn't misunderstand anything. I have seen lots of point and shoots with external flash capabilities. I know that there are plenty of third party flash units that can sync with the flash on cameras that don't have hot shoes. All of this is completely useless because this camera was not designed for that market. It's as if the original poster had complained that a new Ford Focus couldn't keep up with F1 cars on the track and that Ford should always give Focus owners the ability to race their cars professional. It's a completely different market and a completely different tool.

Just assume all the spelling mistakes in my previous answer were due to the fact that I've had too much coffee this morning.

I agree that the LCDs on most p and s cameras are far superior to the "viewfinder" when framing a shot.100% coverage is far better than 80%!

 

The only time the optical "viewfinder" is of any use is when there is very bright conditions.

 

Anyway the display technology is improving to the point when this problem will be eventually solved!

Rob, I won't know how this looks until I actually upload it, but it is a picture from the Sept. 23, 2005 Toronto Star newspaper shot by Peter Power. I have counted 13 p&s cameras being used simultaneously to shoot some TV celebrity. It was scanned on a Canon entry level flatbed that's 6 years old (the very reason none of my work is available to be seen here at PN).

 

Gup.<div></div>

Gup,

 

What exactly is your point in posting this photo? I see very few people using digital cameras at arms length (as defined by the entire length of ones arms being extended) except for those in the back of the crowd. And they're not doing anything that hasn't been around since the Brownie was sold. Professional photographers hoist their 1D Mark II's over other reporters heads all the time. Point and shoot users have been doing it with film cameras for years and years.

 

There is absolutly nothing new here.

<p><i>For serious photographers looking for a p&s, the F10 deserves serious consideration, its primary shortcoming being the lack of manual controls (now remedied in the F11).</i></p>

<p>Perhaps. </p>

 

<p><i>So yes, this announcement is news for any photographers who recognize the advantage of being able to use high ISO's. Those who don't mind a lot of noise with their 400 and 800 shots can snicker all they want, but the test results are hard to dispute.</i></p>

<p>So with the F11, can you force it to stick with a specific ISO. There have been complaints of it being too eager to bump up to a higher ISO whenever shutter speeds get slower.</p>

 

<p>Also, is there an easy way to manage exposure compensation? If you have to dive into the menus to do so, then I don't think it has enough manual controls. At the least, you should be able to adjust exp. comp. and either shutter speed or aperture w/o going into the menus.</p>

 

<p><i>Given the quality of the viewfinders in 95% of the digital point and shoot market, I find this an odd sticking point. Do you really want 80% or less coverage, no parallax correction, and no crosshairs? </i></p>

<p>Depends on what you're using it for. For street shooting, it is very useful (and sometimes necessary) to be able to turn off an LCD to use the camera in an unobtrusive manner. A 2.5" LCD can give off a surprising amount of light and attract lots of attention in some circumstances. It's also nice to be able to leave it on for long periods w/o draining the battery due to the large screen.</p>

 

<p>I'm actually not too concerned about accurate framing with a camera of this type. Perhaps that's why I didn't mind using a rangefinder film camera, either.</p>

 

<p>larsbc</p>

<< It's also nice to be able to leave it on for long periods w/o draining the battery due to the large screen. >>

 

I agree this is very nice, as are camera settings to do a quick shut-off of the LCD after review. I am surprised to find that the F10 and (I'm assuming) the F11 both have 500 shot ratings on a single charge. That's something I've only been able to achieve with 2200 mAH NiMHs and above. Pretty impressive battery life.

 

I'm not arguing against usign a viewfinder, I think they can be useful. I'm only arguing against generalizations with regards to using the LCD for shooting.

I was worried that the LCD would run down the batteries on the F10 as well. But after using it for a month I have not even seen a low battery warning. The days of avoiding the LCD because of power drain are over. It took me a couple of days to get over it, but I do not miss it at all. And I have to agree; I've never seen a good optical viewfinder on a P&S, film or digital. I would say get over it and just let go of the optical viewfinder on a P&S, they were required in the past but not anymore.

 

I really like my F10, and yes I have had a couple of situations where manual control would have been nice, but those are probably situations where a larger format camera would have been better anyway. I usually use the natural light mode, and use the AE lock to play with exposure. Have not played with exposure compensation yet, but it is available on the F10. So, yes it would have been nice to have and I would buy the F11 if it were available now. Would I delay? Depends on how long and what I would take photos of in the interim. I've take hundreds of photos in the past month and I'm glad I as able to do so...

 

I'm pretty impressed with the camera. Getting to a couple of functions is clumsy, but you get use to it. The outstanding feature is the usable high ISO speeds and the lens. The controls are OK. Noting really bothers me about this camera. And yes, I would have to agree that any 'serious photographer' who needs a P&S or otherwise handy camera should take a long look at this one. Would it replace a DSLR? No, but it will put them to shame in some situations and it will replace my D300 (because of its early demise) until I can justify another DSLR investment.

 

There are some photos in my portfolio that were taken with the F10 if anyone would like to see how well the high ISOs look and such.

F10 and F11 seem to be effective with their 1600 ISO. Pictures look so good! But, I ask at those who already use F10, do you think it's good noise reduction or a new sensor better at high ISO? Because I had some good result with my Olympus C60 at 400 ISO and Noiseware noise reduction software. By the way I obtained with it some decent results by manually exposing as if it had 800 or even 1600 ISO and then pushing the histogram on my PC. So if it's just noise reduction it's good to have it onboard (and much less work to do on the PC), but not good enough to leave my current camera which I bought only six months ago and has quite all the features of the new fuji but high ISO.

What do you think about it?

Regards