>Sad, really. For one, it remains very much to be seen that their
>sensor is three stops better than the point and shoot competition -
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>reason for most people ever to acquire a DSLR.
>
>>>Can you believe Fuji is coming out with a 9MP S9000 Point and Shoot
>>>(claiming to be a DSLR) with the 35mm EQV of a 28mm to 300mm lens that
>>>has NO image stabilization. Sounds like they missed the boat.
>>Their idea apparently is that the higher sensitivity of their sensor
>>compensates, so they don't need it.
>How can higher sensitivity making up for camera shake? A faster shutter
>speed only helps out a little.
How are you thinking here? A good image stabilisation is generally
considered to allow about three stops slower shutter speed on a still
subject. Thus, if you are have tree stops higher useful sensitivty,
then you can go three stops faster in shutter speed, and then you can
take _all_ the pictures you can take with image stabilisation, and
then some, because faster shutter speed of course also works for
moving subjects, where OIS is utterly powerless.
If you, however, have both a better sensor and OIS, then you're in a
diffferent league again, and would have a product with unique selling
points.
>Besides, you may want to control depth
>of field with shutter speeds.
I obviously was too brief. Fuji's sensor doesn't have a higher
baseline sensitivity. What it is claimed to have is a higher range of
useful sensititities, a bit more lik a DSLR sensor. So you don't lose
your 100 ISO. You just get a useful 400 ISO (or, if we are to believe
the hype, even a useful 800 ISO) to go with it.
Jan Böhme
Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik.
Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur.
measekite - 30 Jul 2005 00:37 GMT
>
>
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
>the hype, even a useful 800 ISO) to go with it.
>
You use DOF control when you are forced to go to a higher shutter speed
if you do not need it. IS works better for creativity.
>Jan Böhme
>Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik.
>Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur.
>