My use with the Fuji S5

W

WaveRiderXIX

Well-known member
dinabarel_DSCF1409-1.jpg


For 3 weeks, I had an S5 in my hands. I used it and wrote this up about it. Hopefully it helps out people deciding.
I have the intro to the article here, then it continues into the discussion.
FUJI S5 on the job with the Nikon D200.

The discussion itself continues onto Fred Miranda..
 
Last edited:
Great write up and very interesting.

I haven't had a chance to play with the Fuji yet but since I do a lot of weddings this camera has gotten my attention. I like the professional applications you associated with it and really enjoyed the review.

The skin tones look very pleasing and I especially appreciate the A/B comparison with the D200...

Good work.
 
Thanks for posting info/images on the S5 vs D200.
I followed that FM thread and found that the S5 does consistently produce the most accurately detailed and pleasing skin tones.
I still wasn't sure if the WB was the determining factor in the S5's favorable performance though, but it didn't seem like it.
Goes to show the magic isn't just in Fuji's sensors, they've got some brilliant processing algorithms as well.
Can't wait to see how image quality improves when they implement OCMOS sensors.
 
FatDaddy said:
Great read. Interested in moving to the Fuji from a D70.

Thanks for the images and thoughts...
Click to expand...

If you don't need speed, I would definitely say go for the S5. However, I shoot mainly people. So great skin tones are a necessity for me. Otherwise if you are in a pinch, the D200 is a great upgrade too. Only thing is, the D200 can't get me 1600ISO shots without horrible noise (which I find is VERY useful in the S5)
 
Well, what can I say, the skin tone is marvellously accurate.
 
FatDaddy said:
I am still waiting for Ken Rockwell to review the camera. Anybody curious it is www.kenrockwell.com (look under "whats new").

I wish the price was the same as the d200, I guess one day it will be.
Click to expand...

Personally I prefer the review of Philip over Rockwell. He just annoys me like no one else (Rockwell, not WaveRider)
 
Jeremy Ordan said:
Personally I prefer the review of Philip over Rockwell. He just annoys me like no one else (Rockwell, not WaveRider)
Click to expand...
Yeah, Phil's [from DPreview] reviews are required reading material before any serious camera purchase, IMO.
As for Rockwell...haha.
Below is a quote from a fantastic post that circulated around a few photo forums last month.

Monday, March 12 2007 @ 04:24 PDT
Contributed by: Liem
For a couple long hours, the folks on freenode.net's #photogeeks IRC channel dropped lines about Ken Rockwell, the photographer/blogger we love to hate.

We created these morsels along the same vein as the infamous Chuck Norris Facts, I hope you enjoy them as much as I do.

Ken Rockwell Facts

Contributed by liem, Epic|, Fufie, michel_v, neom, Wintre, Bas|k, lament, mattsteg__ and pal.


Ken Rockwell is the Chuck Norris of photography

Ken Rockwell's camera has similar settings to ours, except his are: P[erfect] Av[Awesome Priority Tv[Totally Awesome Priority] M[ajestic]

Ken Rockwell doesn't color correct. He adjusts your world to match his.

Sure, Ken Rockwell deletes a bad photo or two. Other people call these Pulitzers.

Ken Rockwell doesn't adjust his DOF, he changes space-time.

Circle of confusion? You might be confused. Ken Rockwell never is.

Ken Rockwell doesn't wait for the light when he shoots a landscape - the light waits for him.

Ken Rockwell never flips his camera in portrait position, he flips the earth

Ken Rockwell ordered an L-lens from Nikon, and got one.

Ken Rockwell is the only person to have photographed Jesus; unfortunately he ran out of film and had to use a piece of cloth instead.

When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories

Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Nikon sticker and the less good get a Canon sticker

Once Ken tested a camera, he said I cant even put Canon on this one,thats how Pentax was born

Rockwellian policy isn't doublethink - Ken doesn't even need to think once

Ken Rockwell doesn't use flash ever since the Nagasaki incident.

Only Ken Rockwell can take pictures of Ken Rockwell; everyone else would just get their film overexposed by the light of his genius

Ken Rockwell wanted something to distract the lesser photographers, and lo, there were ducks.

Ken Rockwell is the only one who can take self-portraits of you

Ken Rockwell's nudes were fully clothed at the time of exposure

Ken Rockwell once designed a zoom lens. You know it as the Hubble SpaceTelescope.

When Ken unpacks his CF card, it already has masterpieces on it.

Rockwell portraits are so lifelike, they have to pay taxes

On Ken Rockwell's desktop, the Trash Icon is really a link to National Geographic Magazine

Ken Rockwell spells point-and-shoot "h-a-s-s-e-l-b-l-a-d"

When Ken Rockwell went digital, National Geographic nearly went out of business because he was no longer phyically discarding photos

For every 10 shots that Ken Rockwell takes, 11 are keepers.

Ken Rockwell's digital files consist of 0's, 1's AND 2's.

Ken Rockwell never focus, everything moves into his DoF

Ken Rockwell's shots are so perfect, Adobe redesigned photoshop for him: all it consists of is a close button.

The term tripod was coined after his silhouette

Ken Rockwell never produces awful work, only work too advanced for the viewer

A certain braind of hig-end cameras was named after people noticed the quality was a lot "like a" rockwell

Ken Rockwell isn't the Chuck Norris of photography; Chuck Norris is the Ken Rockwell of martial arts.

Ken Rockwell never starts, he continues
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Okay, who is Philip or Phil that we talk about?

I liked some of what Ken talks about, until I saw that spankin' new Benz he drives. I thought he was scraping by trying to serve the public...

I am such a sucker...

Sorry, just looked. Phil is waverider. A sucker and slow on the uptake
 
Actually, I mistook the Phil that Jeremy addressed within this thread for the one that runs DPreview.
Either way, Ken Rockwell's reviews are still silly.
 
Digigenic said:
Actually, I mistook the Phil that Jeremy addressed within this thread for the one that runs DPreview.
Either way, Ken Rockwell's reviews are still silly.
Click to expand...

They aren't so much reviews as psychic predictions of what gear will come out and his implied short comings
 
FatDaddy said:
Okay, who is Philip or Phil that we talk about?

I liked some of what Ken talks about, until I saw that spankin' new Benz he drives. I thought he was scraping by trying to serve the public...

I am such a sucker...

Sorry, just looked. Phil is waverider. A sucker and slow on the uptake
Click to expand...

Most people know the Phil from the DP website.

Me Philip is just the DVX user who trolls here from time to time :) (aka Stitch)
Ken's money comes from his engineering. But I like his reviews because they are more put in a perspective of a user, that just happens to know how to put the math and mechanics together to make a pretty good argument on his threads. That, and he just puts them out there for people to decide if they like to take his articles serious or not. Personally, I love his articles.

Alot of people hated mine lol. But alot liked it because I showed a real-world experience job with it. But can't please them all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top