my several-year-old point-and-shoot (Fuji E900) versus a Canon s95

[mhahn]

<p>Would there be any difference in the image quality? Note that the E900 was considered a pretty good-quality camera (for a point-and-shoot).<br />Thanks,<br />Martin</p>

[phule]

<p>The image quality from the E900 has always been impressive. (A friend of mine has one and still uses it regularly.)</p>

<p>In this studio/still-life test comparison, (you'll have to scroll down for the E900) I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a significant advantage over the E900 by the S95.</p>

<p>http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_s95-review/using</p>

<p>http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_e900-review/</p>

<p>You can probably find similar comparisons at other review sites. Certainly the S95 offers other compelling features (screen resolution, IS, wider lens, larger aperture, HD video, SDHC instead of xD, improvements in operational speed) which may or may not be important.</p>

[mhahn]

<p>Thank you, Rob. I will definitely check out these image comparisons.<br>

Martin</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>I owned an e900 and as Rob says, the IQ was impressive; I actually have exhibited small (8 x 10) prints made from it in an exhibition. I agree with Rob also that you won't find a significant advantage in the S95 over the e900, but what you WILL find is that the S95 will make it easier to capture the photograph. There's no denying that modern technology has advantages, but to me good IQ is good IQ, no matter how old the camera is. I think the advantages of a more modern camera are probably that it's more reliable, and has all the latest gimmicks to make it easier to take a good picture; and the S95 is a lot more pocketable that the Fuji.</p>

[mhahn]

<p>Thank you , Ted. I have actually exhibited 11x14's from my E900! Now, would anyone besides me say they are any good? I don't know, but I think they are.<br>

Martin</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>Mine were good, too - in fact at that exhibition I had 20 photos and only sold three of them (it's tough out there these days) but one of them was an e900 image. I really did like that camera, and if I had not given up on small sensor cameras in general, I'd probably still have it. These days, my carry-around-all-the-time small camera is an Olympus EPL-1 with a Panasonic 20 1.7 lens on it. Not quite pocketable in jeans or shirts, but okay in a jacket pocket, and great image quality. </p>

[mhahn]

<p>which reminds me of something else I've been wondering about:<br>

Would the image quality of an EPL1 or 2 be noticeably different from what I get with my Olympus E410?</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>I can't answer that question directly, martin, as I have had no experience with Olympus DSLRs - my big cameras are Nikons. But, the images that come out of my EPL-1/Panasonic 20 lens are amazing. The EPL1 uses a pretty weak AA filter and the 20 1.7 is a very sharp lens, so I get very sharp pictures from the combination. I'm a low ISO guy and if I shoot my D200 and EPL1 at ISO 200, there really is not much difference; the EPL1 image may even be a bit sharper. </p>

[bill_tuthill]

Martin, you can check the imaging-resource.com Comparometer to answer your E410 question. Without looking I would say the EPL1 or 2 is probably an improvement. Note that the EPL2 does not have an AF assist lamp, but its updated lens is faster focusing in good light, though still not very fast.

 

The imminent Fuji F550EXR seems to be quite an advance, so you might want to wait for it as an E900 replacement.

[mhahn]

<p>For some reason, the EPL2 comparometer page is blank. Does it work properly for anyone else?</p>

[bill_tuthill]

Works for me, even at home with relatively slow DSL connection.

 

Do you have JavaScript disabled?

[mhahn]

<p>Don't know about JavaScripts (not sure what they are), but I can use the Comparometer now. Only thing is, none of the Olympus dslrs seem to be included in the pull-down list (just the micro-four-thirds cameras).</p>

[bill_tuthill]

You have to click Display "All" Cameras to see discontinued models.

 

The comparometer is a Javascript widget. I guess your problem was an unreliable Internet provider.

[mhahn]

<p>"display all cameras" in the Compararometer pull-down list? I don't see that.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

No, in the top line "Display Current | All Cameras" you need to click All. (Current and All are underlined in blue.)

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I'd think at low ISO probably not a big difference, though the Canon does offer a wider-angle 28mm-equiv lens which might make a difference to some. The Fuji on the other hand offers an optical viewfinder, which you might miss. I would expect that the much newer Canon would be better >= ISO 400 (though the dcresource reviews Rob posted show that the Fuji is actually pretty impressive at higher ISO considering its age). The S95 would also offer HD video.</p>