PDA

View Full Version : FujiFilm High ISO values is fake !!!



Frmg
07-31-2005, 10:18 PM
Hey users please look at this important detail ...

Fuji Finepix F10 with new SuperCCD HR ISO equivalence with Casio Exilim EX-Z750:

When light is >98% CRI is the two cases we have:

Fuji FinePix F10:
EXIF information = ISO 400, 1/345 sec, F4.3

Casio Exilim EX-Z750:
EXIF Information = ISO 400, 1/400 sec, F5.6

Look at the exposure times and the aperture values.

Ok lets go,

Fuji FinePix F10:

Focal range: 35mm
Aperture: F/4.3

So ... 35mm / F4.3 = 8.1395

Area = Pi x r^2

r= 8.1395 / 2 = 4.0697

So ... 3,1416 x 4.0697^2 = 52.0326 (mm2)

Casio Exilim EX-Z750:

Focal range: 35mm
Aperture: F/5.6

So ... 35mm / F5.6 = 6.25

Area = Pi x r^2

r= 6.25 / 2 = 3.125

So ... 3,1416 x 3.125^2 = 30.6796 (mm2)

How you can see the Fuji F10 need almost double of light when compared to Casio Exilim EX-Z750 for ISO400 !!!

For the equal ISO sensibility Fuji Finepix F10 need exposure time at ...

52.0326 . (400/30.6796) = 678 (exposure 1/678)

How the exposure of Fuji Finepix F10 is 1/345 we have ...

345. (400/678) = 203,43 (ISO200)

Is this !!! The ISO400 in Fuji Finepix F10 have the sensibilty of ISO200 in Casio Exilim EX-Z750 so the high ISO settings in Fuji new sensor are absolutly fake !!!

I think that is very important to many users in the world.

Regards,

Fábio M.G.

Ps: Sorry by my poor english I'm from Brazil

speaklightly
08-01-2005, 11:45 AM
Fabio-

I think that it is possible to debate numbers all day long. The real test is in the photos. Here is a sample night photo from my Fuji F-10. Can you please post a similiar night photo from the Casio Z750.

Sarah Joyce

TheObiJuan
08-01-2005, 11:50 AM
Fabio-

I think that it is possible to debate numbers all day long. The real test is in the photos. Here is a sample night photo from my Fuji F-10. Can you please post a similiar night photo from the Casio Z750.

Sarah Joyce

sarah, to be fair, the image you posted is of very bright lights, if it were to be a capture of natural light, then the image would be riddled with noise and suppressed noise artifacts.

Rex914
08-01-2005, 06:52 PM
I don't like throwing around numbers either, but he may have a point. A lot of companies love claiming that their cameras' ISO capabilities are better than what they really are. This user isn't putting down the F10 as a camera. He's just saying that the so-called ISO 1600 is really ISO 800, a kind of stretch that many companies are at fault for.

John_Reed
08-01-2005, 08:17 PM
Who established the Casio EX-Z750 as the "gold standard" for ISO? I'm sorry, but no definitive conclusion can be drawn about one or the other based on only comparing the two. It's possible that BOTH cameras are off, or one or the other, but the test doesn't prove which one is in error, unless I missed something, which is entirely possible! :o

speaklightly
08-01-2005, 09:39 PM
If anyone would like any other digital photos from the Fuji F-10, I can provide it, because I have almost over 1,600 F-10 photos.

My thought was this: most folks understand a photo much better than any argument over numbers. Therefore, I felt that photos were indeed the best way to settle this issue.

Gentlemen, the next move is yours....

Sarah Joyce

Frmg
08-01-2005, 10:14 PM
I don't like throwing around numbers either, but he may have a point. A lot of companies love claiming that their cameras' ISO capabilities are better than what they really are. This user isn't putting down the F10 as a camera. He's just saying that the so-called ISO 1600 is really ISO 800, a kind of stretch that many companies are at fault for.

Yes !!!

The problem not is only with Casio cameras, but with Canon, Sony, Panasonic, and many others ...
The new SuperCCD HR that Fuji say that him is much better than others because he have high ISO values but he dont have a real high ISO values.

When ISO equivalence of Fuji is are compared with any other company we have this problem.

Today is ISO400 called ISO800 in Fuji cameras and tomorrow ???

Iso50 will be called ISO200 ???

John_Reed
08-01-2005, 10:23 PM
Here (http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Fujifilm-FinePix-F10-Digital-Camera-Review-/Testing--Performance.htm) is a link to DigitalCameraReview's test of the F10, in which they praise the camera for its extraordinary low-light performance, just to back up Sarah Joyce's intuitive experience-based knowledge that it's got some unique high-ISO capability.

TheObiJuan
08-01-2005, 11:15 PM
I have no doubt that the sensor is sensitive, but the images it produce are not useable, atleast by my standards.
I have seen many 100% crops, and was let down.
The images look great at 600x450 pixels, but then again, which ones don't.
A 100% crop, of 800x800 pixels will tell for sure what the camera can do, at a decent print size or if it were cropped.

Bluedog
08-02-2005, 04:57 AM
Kinda like how Fuji uses the interpolated pixel technique but its my understanding the F10 doesn't. I agree with Obijuan ... checkout the full resolution images and you'll see the quality loss.

Frmg
08-02-2005, 08:27 AM
Here (http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Fujifilm-FinePix-F10-Digital-Camera-Review-/Testing--Performance.htm) is a link to DigitalCameraReview's test of the F10, in which they praise the camera for its extraordinary low-light performance, just to back up Sarah Joyce's intuitive experience-based knowledge that it's got some unique high-ISO capability.

We have many positive reviews saying the great low light performance in F10, but noone say that half ISO issue !!!

Balrog
08-02-2005, 01:48 PM
Okay, here's a quote from the DPReview review of the F10 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf10zoom/page5.asp):

"Noise Comparison

Here for visual comparison are six identical shots taken at 50, 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600 ISO settings in our studio. As you can see the level of noise doesn't rise noticeably until you hit ISO 800, and even then it is lower than most standard CCD cameras at ISO 400. Even the ISO 1600 setting produces noise that would be considered normal for the ISO 400 setting on many a 5MP standard CCD camera. Note also, that the indicated ISO values seem to be very close to correct (we got exactly the same exposure values from the EOS 10D we use for our product shots). "

If you read the part in bold, it specifically stated that the ISO values on the F10 were fine; and they compared it to an EOS10D, which in my opinion is as good an ISO standard as any, at least for this purpose...

In any case, the original poster did not link to any actual pictures taken of an identical scene, with intact EXIF data - it's quite possible there was EV compensation being applied to one or both of the cameras, or that the output pictures weren't equally bright. I'm inclined to trust DPreview on this one.