Fuji S5200 vs Konica-Minolta Dimage Z6

smithkt · #1 10-25-2005, 12:49 PM

After reading countless posts here and in other forums along with various user reviews (none of the major sites appear to have reviewed either of these yet) I came to the conlusion that the Fuji S5200 may just be the perfect camera for my needs.

To sum those up:

1) longer zoom
2) low/natural light ability
3) occassional moving subjects (daughter competes in Karate tournaments)

So I head down to the only camera shop in my area that actually stocks the thing to get a real feel for the camera's size and balance and take a few test shots. While doing so, the shop owner suggests the Dimage Z6 as another alternative.

The advantages over the Fuji are a slightly longer zoom, 10x vs 12x, a hotshoe for an external flash, and 6MP vs 5MP thought the sensor is the same size. I've gone back and read as much as I can find about this camera, but not much is out there. Looking at the review of it's predecessor, the Z5, there appears to be concern over noise even at ISO 200.

Wondering if any of you have any experience with the Z6 and would recommend it over the S5200. My wife, who will admit she knows next to nothing about these things, liked the idea of the external flash for certain occasions. Any thought on how important this is in a midlevel camera like these.

bond007 · #2 10-25-2005, 02:01 PM

oh where u find review for s5200?
can't seem to find anything on s5200, cuz it's so new or something

smithkt · #3 10-25-2005, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bond007

oh where u find review for s5200?
can't seem to find anything on s5200, cuz it's so new or something

I didn't find a professional review, only user reviews. I wish DCRP, DP Review, or Imaging Resource would review the S5200. All three of these sights provide extremely thorough and trustworthy reviews. Right now, I am simply relying on the feedback from people who have already bought them.

Risky Business · #4 10-25-2005, 03:23 PM

I'm not sure if it's out of your price range but you may also want to consider the Canon S2 IS.

You would gain: wide zoom (36 mm vs. 38 mm), tele zoom (12x/432 mm vs. 10x/380 mm), image stablization*, lower aperture range (F2.7 vs. 3.2), custom self-timer (as well as 2 sec & 10 sec), flip-out-and-twist LCD, time-lapse recording, excellent movie mode, stereo audio. You would lose: no RAW format, max. shutter speed (1/3200 vs. 1/4000).

Note: I'm not sure what the Fuji's burst capabilities are but the Canon's is very good (2.4 fps, unlimited).

*See my IS example (handheld/max. tele zoom) in this thread:
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13240

swgod98 · #5 10-25-2005, 04:11 PM

Don't forget the S5200's main advantage, the higher ISO ability. That is what makes the Fuji so appealing. The Fuji's burst mode, from their website, is 2 fps with a 3 frame limit...or 1 fps unlimited.

smith, if you are taking shots indoors or action, the Fuji's ISO ability will help a lot! Unfortunately, I don't know how necessary a good flash will be. It might be REQUIRED, because it will be extremely difficult to stop the action of someone kicking and punching without decent (and I'm talking sun) light.

I guess it all comes down to how bright it will be indoors. To stop really fast action, you will need approximately 1/500 shutter speed. Indoors, that will not be easy and I can almost guarantee you will be using ISO400 or higher (realistically, this is Fuji and dSLR only territory).

smithkt · #6 10-25-2005, 05:40 PM

Once again, I must say thanks again for the responses. This site rocks. I think I'm going to pick up an S5200 and take it for a test drive.

Risky Business · #7 10-25-2005, 08:37 PM

Just don't hang your hat on Fuji's higher ISO range. Considering they're using the same size sensor as many others in its class, my guess is that it will be largely unusable unless you are willing to accept noisy photos. Make sure you can return it if you buy it and test it. Or wait for a formal review.

smithkt · #8 10-25-2005, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Business

Just don't hang your hat on Fuji's higher ISO range. Considering they're using the same size sensor as many others in its class, my guess is that it will be largely unusable unless you are willing to accept noisy photos. Make sure you can return it if you buy it and test it. Or wait for a formal review.

Curious what others think about this. It was my understanding that the newer fuji cameras were using a new ccd which produced much lower noise pictures. How big an issue is this?

swgod98 · #9 10-25-2005, 10:33 PM

Risky, you should take a look at users photos. There are plenty out there. The noise seems to be controlled very well at ISO's below 800. ISO 800 is decent, but not that pretty. You will get a printable 4x6 image, but you might not be able to enlarge it much. ISO 1600 is kind of messy, but most UZ camera's at ISO 400 are just as messy.

If you are interested in capturing "indoor" action, then I believe high ISO capability will be more useful than IS...hell, it will help better than a tripod! Because IS will not help stop the action, only a faster exposure time will...which can only be done by increasing ISO (or by adding more light!)...

And that is where the external flash will help.

I feel like I'm trying to sell the S5200. I actually own an S2 IS and I can personally vouch for the useability of IS in preventing camera shake. I can often take sharp photos with an exposure as slow as 1/8th second when at full zoom. Without IS, I am doomed to an extremely faster exposure. Indoors, this usually forces me into a very dark exposure. This also means that the S2 IS can take very sharp images at exposures that will not be able to stop action (hence subject blur, but not camera shake). Here's an example of what I expect you'll see (lol):

With the S5200, there is no IS...But, raising the ISO can help you by allowing you to use a faster exposure to produce a still properly exposed image. And because using a faster exposure means helping prevent BOTH camera shake AND subject motion, this is where I put my money (I've got 50 cents) for indoor action. UNFORTUNATELY (ya, in caps), because the S5200 doesn't have IS, you might very well be doomed into keeping the zoom to a minimum, or else you might find your images blurry due to camera shake. Though, I'm guessing that if you can get a fast enough exposure to stop the action, you'll have a fast enough exposure to stop camera shake.

All the possible scenarios are difficult to walk through, and I don't own an S5200 (or any camera that is ISO1600 capable) to help illustrate the differences or validate my opinions...

If you find a place that allows returns, that seems the thing to do...though I don't like the idea of people buying camera's with the intention of returning them *shrug*

Oh, and finally...The Fuji does not really produce cleaner images at the lowest ISO value (50 for the S2). It just controls noise better at all other ISO values.

I hope I made sense. I hope I didn't say anything that isn't true. I hope it helped.

Phill D · #10 10-26-2005, 12:00 AM

I just read the review of the Fuji s9000. Whilst this was not what you were considering Jeff does cover the high iso capabilities well which from reading your post would seem to be similar to your Fuji option. It may help you make your decision. There is also the Fuji F10 review that covers this as well. I have a Panasonic FZ20 & it struggles at indoor action and low light situations even with image stabilisation & a wide 2.8 aperture, so high iso ability with less noise (if the Fuji does actually deliver that in real situations) would probably be the way to go if you can't stretch to a DSLR that is.