Issues with the Fuji S9500


Status
Not open for further replies.

custom_biker

New Member
Jul 5, 2005
54
0
0
Hi Folks,
I have been facing a lot of issues with my Fujifilm S9500 since I bought it in early January.
The main complaints are :
- The images are "soft" ... this is visible when u view the pictures at the fullest zoom
- The autofocus sucks and often doesnot function
- The images are extremely grainy even at ISO 80

Initially I thought it was just my lack of skills. But recently I came across another forum where people have complained of similar issues. Take a look at this:
http://http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=73077&forum_id=16&page=1

Before I bring the camera back to the service center, can one of the gurus on this forum help to check my sample images and advise if the pictures are indeed soft?

Image 1 using Tripod http://www.flickr.com/photos/25238835@N00/96771387/in/set-72057594060757192/
Image 2 http://www.flickr.com/photos/25238835@N00/96771351/in/set-72057594060757192/
Image 3 http://www.flickr.com/photos/25238835@N00/96771265/in/set-72057594060757192/
 

megascriler

New Member
Jun 18, 2005
394
0
0
You might want to post them at 100% crop? Maybe you can set the sharpening to high? I guess it's soft because Fuji people felt that softer images are better for post-processing.
 

michhy

New Member
Oct 21, 2005
780
0
0
about the soft images.
i read it's how the SuperCCD interpolates and later resize back to 9mp.
it may appear to lack sharpness at 100% crop, but in prints, it's very good.
also, if you perform comparison with other similar category cameras, it actually holds a lot of details than the rest, and has better sharpening potential.

again, read from reviews, but i think it sounds about right.
 

custom_biker

New Member
Jul 5, 2005
54
0
0
Well : if the images appear soft and then look good in print something doesnot sound right logically. What you see should be close to what u get! I think I have to take the camera back to Fuji.... Dont have very high hopes on their customer service though :) Let me try my luck to get the problem fixed.
 

michhy

New Member
Oct 21, 2005
780
0
0
custom_biker said:
Well : if the images appear soft and then look good in print something doesnot sound right logically. What you see should be close to what u get! I think I have to take the camera back to Fuji.... Dont have very high hopes on their customer service though :) Let me try my luck to get the problem fixed.
why dont you post some samples for us?
please use 100% crop size, thanks
 

megascriler

New Member
Jun 18, 2005
394
0
0
Just up the in-camera sharpening.
 

staz

Member
May 4, 2004
295
0
16
do u know it's harder to focus in the dark than day? the photos u show us are all during night time. i think the noise issue might be cause by underexposing your photos.if the images appear soft, u might want to sharpen it urself using photoediting software to your liking.
 

custom_biker

New Member
Jul 5, 2005
54
0
0
Here is a full size crop


You can see how the 100% crop of a section of the image looks very unsharp.

I know it is not fair to compare between cameras , but the same images taken with my EOS 350D with the kit lens doesn't look so unsharp when zoomed to actual size. According to cameralab tests on the web the resolution of the 9500 is supposed to be more than 350D.
For the actual images visit this :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25238835@N00/?saved=1
 

Zaknafein

New Member
Oct 29, 2005
1,525
0
0
my room
www.flickr.com
i dun think u should compare the S9500 to a DSLR, it is just a prosumer after all
the "unsharpness" of the pics could be due to the camera unable to focus at night.

the above problem, together with the "grainy" images at ISO 80, i might think that u have a faulty camera. some of the faulty cameras even have problems AFing during the day. maybe u should go to Fuji and see what they say?
 

eow

Senior Member
Jun 22, 2004
10,113
7
38
Look ok to me for #1 and #3
#2 look soft/oof to me



 

Zaknafein

New Member
Oct 29, 2005
1,525
0
0
my room
www.flickr.com
btw, for the pic of the tree taken with hdb at background, what part were u focusing on??
 

custom_biker

New Member
Jul 5, 2005
54
0
0
well i was trying to focus on the tree, but i was using a tripod and a cable release. The focus might have shifted a bit and moved to the bright HDB windows when the shutter was pressed.
 

Azure

Deregistered
Mar 16, 2003
2,775
0
0
ClubSNAP community
www.clubsnap.org
That your shots "appear soft and look good in print" that is very subjective. You may want to shoot with in-camera sharpening off and USM in PhotoShop. Fuji's images tend to provide for very good USM if you do that.

As the 9500 is a prosumer-class camera, you may want to bear in mind that prosumers tend to have different behaviour from dSLRs. I won't compare between my Coolpix and my S3, as both serve totally different needs. dSLRs tend to deliver a consistent level of sharpness/ISO performance, while different prosumer cameras will satisfy different types of users. To say that my Coolpix gives me superior macros will be true within a given range of conditions/constraints, yet will also draw flames from a wide range of hardcore dSLR users.

As for your images, I really see nothing wrong with them. They appear typical of prosumer low-light images. Though, as eow has pointed out, one of them does look a bit on the soft side. Have you considered user as the cause? If you are using a cable release, then you should also ensure that you don't move your set-up. Yet you yourself mentioned that "...may have moved .... when... shutter was pressed...".

Lastly, low-light shooting guarantees noise in your images, at least for all of the non-dSLR class cameras that I know of. It is just a matter of how little noise you get and how you choose to cope with it (read : using NoiseNinja or stuff like that). Learn to post-process some of your shots. After all, post-processing is part and parcel of using a digital. If you are shooting film, at least you can try to pass the buck to the lab.
 

megascriler

New Member
Jun 18, 2005
394
0
0
Maybe you could try to use MF?
 

Zaknafein

New Member
Oct 29, 2005
1,525
0
0
my room
www.flickr.com
Azure said:
Lastly, low-light shooting guarantees noise in your images, at least for all of the non-dSLR class cameras that I know of. It is just a matter of how little noise you get and how you choose to cope with it (read : using NoiseNinja or stuff like that). Learn to post-process some of your shots. After all, post-processing is part and parcel of using a digital. If you are shooting film, at least you can try to pass the buck to the lab.


do u mean the higher ISO needed or longer shutter time needed?
in this case, looking at the 100% cropped pic that the TS provided, i cant really spot any noise...
 

Zaknafein

New Member
Oct 29, 2005
1,525
0
0
my room
www.flickr.com
megascriler said:
Maybe you could try to use MF?

from what i know, its quite hard to MF using prosumers, as the EVF is usually not powerful enough to see if the focusing is sharp or not....
 

michhy

New Member
Oct 21, 2005
780
0
0
Zaknafein said:
do u mean the higher ISO needed or longer shutter time needed?
in this case, looking at the 100% cropped pic that the TS provided, i cant really spot any noise...
I do not see any noise too.
 

custom_biker

New Member
Jul 5, 2005
54
0
0
michhy said:
I do not see any noise too.
Well, my post was referring to the lack of sharpness at 100% crop not noise ... refer to my original post :
" You can see how the 100% crop of a section of the image looks very unsharp."

I am going to take some pics in daylight and post here. Let me see if those pics are sharp compared to the low light pics. Also I will monitor the AF performance in bright light conditions. Will post my findings here.

BTW, thanks to everyone for their inputs specially Azure. They were quite helpful.
 

yowch

Senior Member
Oct 16, 2002
1,044
0
36
47
Singapore, Redhill
Visit site
The lack of sharpness is quite a characteristic of the SuperCCD. The sharpness will be there on print, not when pixel-peeping. The percieved SuperCCD advantage is meant for prints.

The S9500 is MUCH better than most other prosumers of its price and type. Fuji claims that it rivals DSLR, maybe the ancient 6-years-plus DSLRs but certainly not current models.
 

diCam

New Member
Sep 22, 2003
1,168
1
0
East of SG
www.flickr.com
yowch said:
The lack of sharpness is quite a characteristic of the SuperCCD. The sharpness will be there on print, not when pixel-peeping. The percieved SuperCCD advantage is meant for prints.
I second that:)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.