- Joined
- Jan 16, 2006
- Messages
- 5,903
Well, I finally got a chance to do some comparison shots with the new and old camera to see the difference...
Some background for those who don't read every single thing I write on here.
About eight months ago, we got a Canon SD600 Elph for my wife. This is a 6 megapixel, 1/2.5" sensor - I believe it is the same used it most of Canon's 6mp point-n-shoots including the S3.
We just bought a Fuji F40fd to get better low-light ability. This is an 8mp model with a 1/1.6" sensor - their "SuperCCD HR" sensor. I would have preferred an F31fd (6mp, 1/1.7" sensor) which has some more options, but they were getting hard to find and, more frustratingly, only take xD cards - which generally cost about 2x what SD cards cost, and we already had a stock of SD cards and I wasn't interested in spending the extra money to get a couple decent-sized xD cards. (Also, from glancing at Beach Camera, many of the Fujis have shot up in price - the F31fd is about $50 more than last time I looked.
Before the Canon is sold, I'm going to do some side-by-side tests. Here's the first results. First up, the ever-popular ISO test. These are 100% crops of a bookshelf/toyshelf. A couple things to remember - since the Fuji is 8mp instead of 6mp like the Canon, 100% crops are tighter. Now, the other thing that really sticks out here is - what happened with the Fuji at ISO 400? It looks like it had focusing issues. All the pictures were taken from a tripod using the 2- or 10-second timer (no 2-second timer on the Canon) with no changes other than setting the ISO, so I'm guessing that it's just a hiccup, but it did happen, so there it is. I'll try to do one or two more similar tests while I have both cameras and see if it repeats itself.
Other than that, it's pretty straightforward. The Fuji does quite well but frustratingly, it does seem to have overly aggressive noise reduction - with the bigger sensor, I'd rather see a little less noise reduction in exchange for more details. With the Canon, noise goes up as expected, this is especially notable in the dark background and in the brighter page "panda" page in the middle, both of which start to get fairly mottled at ISO 200. The Canon maxes out at ISO 800, while the Fuji goes to ISO 1600.
Here's your basic bright, sunny outdoor photo (of our rather sad-looking flowers!) - full frame shots resized to 800x600 each, then some 100% crops. I do prefer the slightly more saturated color in the Fuji (both cameras were on the normal color modes), but if you look at the 100% crop, you'll note that the Fuji seems to focus slightly deeper in the photo than the Canon. The Canon has the twig in focus, while the Fuji is focusing on the flowers farther back. This is also visible in the rest of the photo, looking closely you can see that the Canon seems to focus on the flowers a little better.
This is more of a lens test than a sensor test - the same shot as before, but with both cameras at their max 3x zoom. Neither one seems to get all the flowers in focus, but again, the Canon is focusing slightly closer than the Fuji, which is probably where you want it to for this kind of shot. I'm not sure that this is a chronic issue or just one for this kind of thing, where there are many different levels. The Canon does seem to show you better where it's pulling its focus from (via boxes around the areas it focuses on), while the Fuji seems to only show you a specific area if it's detecting a face. I admit, though, that I haven't read the manual all the way through and may be missing something.
Finally, here's a basic flash shot, I cropped the originals slightly and resized. Again, I prefer the Fuji's slightly more saturated colors slightly, and the flash seemed to do a better job of not overpowering the scene.
I also did comparisons of the movie mode. The Fuji's colors were again a bit nicer and it seemed better in low light, however it records at a lower bitrate - a 10-second move in the Canon was about 18 megs vs 12 megs on the Fuji. This means that you get room for more movie on the Fuji, however the loss of bitrate is definitely noticable. I would have to give the Canon the nod for movie mode - the lower bitrate is just too serious an issue, but if you're not putting them side-by-side, the Fuji will be pretty acceptable for the average user. I can post examples if anyone's curious.
So, the sensors... I think the sensor itself is pretty clearly a standout item in the point-n-shoot realm, where high noise levels in anything but bright light or flash are commonplace. I don't think the extra resolution (8mp vs 6mp) is significant, the 8mp Fuji does still seem to capture more detail but probably not enough to make a difference in real-world usage.
So far, I'm more or less happy with the upgrade, but unfortunately the F40fd is certainly not perfect. I used it last night a bit at a party and even with the flash on, it consistently took flash photos at ISO 800, resulting in unnecessary noise-reduction artifacts. I don't know why it did that, as shooting the flash photos at ISO 100 seems to produce perfectly acceptable shots as well. Granted, I didn't use the "party" scene mode, but it is still strange behavior. Unfortunately, I didn't notice it until the party was over...
The Fuji's noise reduction is a bit too strong; if you go looking at 100% crops, you'll see little noise but sometimes some detail wiped away. This is a big shame as the sensor is, I believe, doing a great job of capturing a lot of detail and at relatively low noise levels, but some of that is lost via the software.
The focusing issue with the flowers is a little strange but as I said, I haven't noticed it with anything else yet so I'm not sure that it's anything to be concerned about, but I'll be paying attention to that. For people shots, the face detection seems to work pretty well, so those should be well-focused.
On the positive side, it definitely works much better in low light than the Canon, the flash is stronger and seems better-controlled, responsiveness feels about the same, the LCD is better (more pixels), and the controls are nicer (more of them, including an actual dial, unlike the Canon.) One thing that is odd, the tripod mount is not lined up with the lens. Strange! But overall, it is a nice little camera for a fairly cheap price (currently $192 at Beach). It's bigger than the Elph, but still easily can fit in your pocket or in a compact camera carrying case.
Meanwhile, the Canon is certainly not a bad little camera, but somewhat featureless, and with frustrating levels of noise at ISO 400 and 800.
Hopefully this is some useful info for anyone curious about how the sensors and cameras compare. If you have any comments or specific requests for any other tests, let me know. Thanks!
Some background for those who don't read every single thing I write on here.
About eight months ago, we got a Canon SD600 Elph for my wife. This is a 6 megapixel, 1/2.5" sensor - I believe it is the same used it most of Canon's 6mp point-n-shoots including the S3.We just bought a Fuji F40fd to get better low-light ability. This is an 8mp model with a 1/1.6" sensor - their "SuperCCD HR" sensor. I would have preferred an F31fd (6mp, 1/1.7" sensor) which has some more options, but they were getting hard to find and, more frustratingly, only take xD cards - which generally cost about 2x what SD cards cost, and we already had a stock of SD cards and I wasn't interested in spending the extra money to get a couple decent-sized xD cards. (Also, from glancing at Beach Camera, many of the Fujis have shot up in price - the F31fd is about $50 more than last time I looked.
Before the Canon is sold, I'm going to do some side-by-side tests. Here's the first results. First up, the ever-popular ISO test. These are 100% crops of a bookshelf/toyshelf. A couple things to remember - since the Fuji is 8mp instead of 6mp like the Canon, 100% crops are tighter. Now, the other thing that really sticks out here is - what happened with the Fuji at ISO 400? It looks like it had focusing issues. All the pictures were taken from a tripod using the 2- or 10-second timer (no 2-second timer on the Canon) with no changes other than setting the ISO, so I'm guessing that it's just a hiccup, but it did happen, so there it is. I'll try to do one or two more similar tests while I have both cameras and see if it repeats itself.
Other than that, it's pretty straightforward. The Fuji does quite well but frustratingly, it does seem to have overly aggressive noise reduction - with the bigger sensor, I'd rather see a little less noise reduction in exchange for more details. With the Canon, noise goes up as expected, this is especially notable in the dark background and in the brighter page "panda" page in the middle, both of which start to get fairly mottled at ISO 200. The Canon maxes out at ISO 800, while the Fuji goes to ISO 1600.
Here's your basic bright, sunny outdoor photo (of our rather sad-looking flowers!) - full frame shots resized to 800x600 each, then some 100% crops. I do prefer the slightly more saturated color in the Fuji (both cameras were on the normal color modes), but if you look at the 100% crop, you'll note that the Fuji seems to focus slightly deeper in the photo than the Canon. The Canon has the twig in focus, while the Fuji is focusing on the flowers farther back. This is also visible in the rest of the photo, looking closely you can see that the Canon seems to focus on the flowers a little better.
This is more of a lens test than a sensor test - the same shot as before, but with both cameras at their max 3x zoom. Neither one seems to get all the flowers in focus, but again, the Canon is focusing slightly closer than the Fuji, which is probably where you want it to for this kind of shot. I'm not sure that this is a chronic issue or just one for this kind of thing, where there are many different levels. The Canon does seem to show you better where it's pulling its focus from (via boxes around the areas it focuses on), while the Fuji seems to only show you a specific area if it's detecting a face. I admit, though, that I haven't read the manual all the way through and may be missing something.
Finally, here's a basic flash shot, I cropped the originals slightly and resized. Again, I prefer the Fuji's slightly more saturated colors slightly, and the flash seemed to do a better job of not overpowering the scene.
I also did comparisons of the movie mode. The Fuji's colors were again a bit nicer and it seemed better in low light, however it records at a lower bitrate - a 10-second move in the Canon was about 18 megs vs 12 megs on the Fuji. This means that you get room for more movie on the Fuji, however the loss of bitrate is definitely noticable. I would have to give the Canon the nod for movie mode - the lower bitrate is just too serious an issue, but if you're not putting them side-by-side, the Fuji will be pretty acceptable for the average user. I can post examples if anyone's curious.
So, the sensors... I think the sensor itself is pretty clearly a standout item in the point-n-shoot realm, where high noise levels in anything but bright light or flash are commonplace. I don't think the extra resolution (8mp vs 6mp) is significant, the 8mp Fuji does still seem to capture more detail but probably not enough to make a difference in real-world usage.
So far, I'm more or less happy with the upgrade, but unfortunately the F40fd is certainly not perfect. I used it last night a bit at a party and even with the flash on, it consistently took flash photos at ISO 800, resulting in unnecessary noise-reduction artifacts. I don't know why it did that, as shooting the flash photos at ISO 100 seems to produce perfectly acceptable shots as well. Granted, I didn't use the "party" scene mode, but it is still strange behavior. Unfortunately, I didn't notice it until the party was over...
The Fuji's noise reduction is a bit too strong; if you go looking at 100% crops, you'll see little noise but sometimes some detail wiped away. This is a big shame as the sensor is, I believe, doing a great job of capturing a lot of detail and at relatively low noise levels, but some of that is lost via the software.
The focusing issue with the flowers is a little strange but as I said, I haven't noticed it with anything else yet so I'm not sure that it's anything to be concerned about, but I'll be paying attention to that. For people shots, the face detection seems to work pretty well, so those should be well-focused.
On the positive side, it definitely works much better in low light than the Canon, the flash is stronger and seems better-controlled, responsiveness feels about the same, the LCD is better (more pixels), and the controls are nicer (more of them, including an actual dial, unlike the Canon.) One thing that is odd, the tripod mount is not lined up with the lens. Strange! But overall, it is a nice little camera for a fairly cheap price (currently $192 at Beach). It's bigger than the Elph, but still easily can fit in your pocket or in a compact camera carrying case.
Meanwhile, the Canon is certainly not a bad little camera, but somewhat featureless, and with frustrating levels of noise at ISO 400 and 800.
Hopefully this is some useful info for anyone curious about how the sensors and cameras compare. If you have any comments or specific requests for any other tests, let me know. Thanks!
