Real Life Comparison of D200 vs S5

[Mike D]

I've noticed that the Fuji S5 is in stock at many retailers so some

photographers may already be using it. I already use a D200 but often

experience the limited dynamic range in the whites and grain at high ISO. I

would be interested to find out if the dynamic range and grain reduction is

significantly and noticeably improved with the S5. I like the idea of having

another body with significantly different capability of the first but with all

the controlls in the same place.

[jim_e.]

I'd like to know too. Was just checking the specifications of the S5 at B&H and the camera looks sweet. 1900.00 for 12.3 megs isn't bad either.

[ivaylo_iordanov]

I think the article below shall provide answers to a least some of your questions. As far as I

am aware this' the first direct comparison. Reading the English translation is pure agony but

the pictures (fully sized) speak for themselves.

 

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%

2fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2fcda%2freview%2f2007%2f02%2f27%2f5666.html

[mjt]

when i saw the subject, i assumed the post IS about a real-life comparison. so much for assuming :) ("Is there a Real Life ...?" would have been better).

 

i'd also like to add that Megapixels should not be a measure for validating the price of a camera ... plus, it should not be a measure of image quality.

 

with that being said, the S3 Pro is predominately used in studio/portrait/wedding photography world. and although the S5 is based on the D200 framework, i don't think you can fairly compare the two, since the S5 Pro is targeted to a different market.

 

although these aren't hands-on reviews, they do provide specs and perspectives on the S5 Pro:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092502fujifilms5pro.asp,

 

http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/fujifilm_s5_pro/,

 

http://www.thinkcamera.com/news/article/mps/UAN/366/v/1/sp/,

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/photokina/sd14-s5pro-report.shtml,

 

pre-production review:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/fujifilm/finepix/s5pro/fujis5pro_EN1.html

 

regards, michael

[ivaylo_iordanov]

For some reason the system breaks the complete link, so please C&P the parts bellow on your

browser.

 

http

 

://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=

 

http%3a%2f%2fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2fcda%2freview%2f2007%2f02%2f27%2f5666.html

[mjt]

i couldnt get the Japanese link (provided above) to work without some effort ... here's another version:

 

(http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2Fcda%2Freview%2F2007%2F02%2F27%2F5666.html&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools)

 

regards, michael

[ivaylo_iordanov]

mj t, ".... and although the S5 is based on the D200 framework, i don't think you can fairly

compare the two"

 

Well, the above is an over-simplification bordering on misrepresentation. S5 Pro use almost

everything - except the sensor of course and the 4 channel reading/ fps - from Nikon's

D200. The body aside, metering system, focusing module, flash system, battery, etc. are

directly from Nikon. The fact that one can shoot with the same lens on both bodies makes

the comparison fair IMO.

[jim_e.]

True mj. Megs don't make the image. But they do make for a bigger one.

[bill_keane2]

The S5, and S3 are sometimes referred to as 6mp cameras. They seem to excel in tonal range. But not in straight out resolution. The SR technology adds "mini-pixels" to the 6mp sensor, but I don't know if this is regarded broadly as a 12mp camera.

[mjt]

hi Ivaylo ...

 

 

i'm still not convinced they are the same camera to be compared. pre-production versions run at about 3 FPS, which give the D200 an advantage in the "almost serious" sports photography camp. the live preview and face recognition features of the S5 are indicative of what i mentioned before - a camera dedicated mostly to the studio/portrait/wedding world. the D200 can shoot almost twice as many [continuous] images compared to the S5 Pro.

 

the film simulation modes, if you read about them, all refer to enhancing the image when used in the studio or for portrait work. from the LetsGoDigital review, statements such as, "This approach will definitely appeal to nature, portrait, studio and wedding photographers", are quite common.

 

i have ordered an S5 Pro, since i do a lot of studio/portrait/concert photography. i'll continue to use the D200 for the sports end of my work. once i have this camera in hand and have shot a couple hundred photos, i'll report back.

 

regards, michael

[wj_lee]

Dynamic range in fuji S5 looks great but the jagged line on 12mp output is very off putting.

[ivaylo_iordanov]

Hi Michael,

 

We are saying essentially the same thing. You focus on the details that differentiate the

two cameras but the actual reason for that is only the different sensor employed by Fuji

and the associated software. The higher fps in D200 has been made possible due to 4

channels read out from the sensor, e.g. it's part of the sensor integration.

The rest of the two cameras - which is A LOT - remain (almost) identical.

 

Wish you great photo opportunities with your future S5.

 

Regards,

 

Ivaylo

[ptkeam]

For what it's worth, I had aFuji S2 as my first DSLR. I was pretty happy with it. I bought a D70 as a backup & found myself using the D70 most of the time -- (ergonomics, size & weight). In terms of image comparison I found that the Fuji DID have a broader dynamic range, but for the stuff I do (nature, urban streetscape etc.) I didn't find the Fuji to be THAT much better -- I sold the S2 & got another D70. Still using the D70's today.

I know this isn't exactly on topic, but I thought I'd contribute my Fuju/Nikon real-world experience.

[tonybeach]

Well the S5 is not a true 12 MP camera in the sense that the D200 is a true 10 MP camera, I read in a post by Julia Borg at DPR that a reasonable way of looking at the overlapping photosites from the S5 is that they can contribute to greater resolution in those parts of the image where the DR in fact overlaps. However, to realize this extra resolution, one needs to use a Raw converter that can take advantage of the overlapping photosites (i.e., not the one provided by Fuji); I presume Julia was referring to Raw Magick Lite, co-authored by her dad. If true, this would suggest that the S5 may in fact resolve more detail than the D200 one to two stops below the highest EV of the shot.

 

A wrinkle in all of this is that the D200 can be set to bracket shots at different exposures and the resulting multiple exposures can enhance the resolution (this according to Thom Hogan in some correspondence I had with him about Autopano which he is currently using for HDR panoramas). Presumably, stacking images provides more data for interpolation.

 

Okay, so I would also like to see images taken by competent photographers (real world or otherwise) comparing the DR and resolution of both the S5 and D200, and some HDR shots for good measure too.

[mjt]

hi Anthony ...

 

thanks for the technical!

 

i've read where the S5 "resolves" to 8 MP, not the 12 as is advertised (6+6 = 12 effective). this statement is a quite different argument than the typical "it's 6 MP ... no, it's 12 [effective] MP!" arguments. the 8 MP argument is arrived at mathematically, which i can't validate (my math skills are pretty weak :)

 

be that as it may, looking at the same shots coming from an S5 and D200 (for the work i'm looking for from the S5) the shots from the S5 are far better. when i look at portrait shots from the two cameras, i see better quality from the S5.

 

i look forward to using the S5, most especially, when shooting local concert venue shows (and obviously studio portraits). i never use flash during a show, so i invite myself to shoot high-ISO. based on my experience with S3's, i know the S5 will perform as expected (i.e. - very low-noise images).

 

don't get me rwong, i love the D200 - it has its place in my camera bag for its intended purpose, just as the S5 will have its place.

 

let's remember, this is not a competition, but rather ... it's about using the correct tool for the job at hand.

 

regards, michael

[tonybeach]

Hi Michael,

 

Essentially the camera sensor is a photon counter with a BFA and other filters in front of it. Debates about the colors are essentially about those filters, how the converter being used interprets the interpolated data (Nikon Capture is the preferred option for Nikon cameras), and what colorspace you are working in. Now if you want to sacrafice the resolution and WB advantages of shooting in RAW, then this becomes a discussion of color modes and the ASIC in the cameras being compared.

 

Using Capture One, Raw Magick Lite, and Nikon Capture I converted a portrait of my girlfriend and since I was working in sRGB colorspace the first two converters converted to that colorspace; I thought Nikon Capture was doing the same, but I suspect in retrospect that it didn't because the image looked better (specifically having to do with warmer skin tones and no green tint) until I sent it to Costco to print and the print came back without the pleasing colors because Costco used sRGB colorspace.

 

It's considerations like this that make me wary of reviews from strangers regarding best colors, etc. As you said though, best tool for the job and whatever best facilitates your workflow is all that is important.

[mjt]

hi Anthony ...

 

you might ask Costco if they can provide you with their profile, so that you can see how it will be printed. personally, i use MPIX.com and use their provided profile. if you adjust your photos using the profile, there is a selection, when submitting photos for print, which states, "do not adjust image", which means they'll print the photo as you submitted. if you don't, then a human will intervene and bring your photo(s) into their workflow software and adjust it as necessary for printing.

 

maybe Costco does not have human intervention for photo printing? if they did, those processors would see the difference in white balance, tint settings, and so on.

 

regards, michael

[tonybeach]

Hi Micheal,

 

I have the printing profile for my local Costco, but you have to get a different profile for each store and even have to specify a specific printer if they have more than one a the store you are using.

 

In this instance the file had Nikon aRGB colorspace embedded and that was tossed out when the file was printed, the soft proof showed everything was in gamut and wasn't useful to avoiding the problem.