Fuji S9500 versus D-SLR

Trip Hazard

This Camera is a great piece of machinery it's not an SLR but its also not far off, no interchangeable lens but the lens attached is 28mm-300mm.

http://www.fujifilm.ie/digital/f_index.htm

Compared to D-SLRs like the D50 which is only in or around €100 more expensive
just wondering what people think of this camera in comparsion to the D50, They've got the same iso range, if it came down to it would the D50 be superier because its an SLR. Or would the S9500 hold its own.

Frankly I would be inclined to go for the S9500(Maybe because i'm used to Fuji)

What do you guys think????

Beano

I have both a S9500 and a Canon 350D and the canon wins hands down. The sensor in the S9500 is smaller than an SLRs so its gets noiser as you go up the ISO range a lot quicker than an SLR. If you're also even thinking of buying an SLR you will get frustrated by the non-changeable lens on the S9500. I know i did. Its not a bad lens but its never going to be as sharp as a 50mm 1.8 or a half decent telephoto for an SLR. I bought the S9500 before I bought the 350D and I've barely touched it since I got the 350D. Bear in mind that the price difference will be a lot more €100 once you start buying lenses for an SLR. And you will buy extra lenses if you buy an SLR. Its an addiction.

So to sum up if you buy the S9500 you are buying a camera that will give you very good service for a year or so until it is obsolete. If you buy the SLR you are buying the start of a collection you will have for years.

Of course you could just buy a film camera. More fun.

Trip Hazard

Beano wrote:

So to sum up if you buy the S9500 you are buying a camera that will give you very good service for a year or so until it is obsolete. If you buy the SLR you are buying the start of a collection you will have for years.

You make a very good point there my friend.

Beano wrote:

Of course you could just buy a film camera. More fun.

Already have one, Centon k100 (Old School baby), only have a single 50mm lens. Shame haven't actually used it since I got my Compact Digital camera (Fuji F450) But now just contomplating the idea of a D-SLR, not quite ready for the investment just yet but when I do I wanna stay under the €1000 price range.

Keep the opinions coming people.

sionnach

Go for the SLR. Once you've used an SLR for a while you'll look back on this post and laugh at the fact that you once thought the S9500 could hold its own against it.

If you buy the S9500 you're just adding an extra costly step on the road to becoming a proper photographer. Going to SLR is a move you will eventually make, make it now and you'll save some money overall. Go for a nikon or canon slr now and get an extra lens or two second hand to start off.

TempestSabre

I look at the samples on the review sites and around the web and while the photos on the 9500 are quite good for me they don't have the sharpness, clarity of the D50 or 350D.

bp_me

I have a s9500, and while it does what it does reasonably well, I would suggest getting a D-SLR.

The s9500
- eats batteries (AA)
- lcd screen is noisy in the dark
- 1.1fps max
- noisy (noiser than my liking anyway) above ISO400

In its defense, the 2 seperate card slots are a nice feature and it is nice to hold and use, but it doesnt stand up against a D-SLR.

You could pick up a 2nd hand d70 with the 18-70 (and maybe some other goodies) for not much more than the new price of the s9500.

And, for the record, the s9500 has a much larger iso range than the d50 or d70. 80-1600 vs 200-1600, though the nikons are adjustable in 1/3ev steps (I think).

K_user

“Proper photographer” what does that mean? And why do you need to own an SLR to be one? The answer is fairly simple, you don’t. We all have our own taste and style and it should be about the art, not the equipment.

TP, your choice should be based on personal need, budget and functionality. What do you need the camera for?

Its all down to what you want versus what you willing to spend. The more money you fork out will improve the quality of the camera, but not necessarily the quality of the photos. Getting a “good kit” together can be very expensive and hard to carry around. The advantage of the S9500 is that for a manageable price you can have most of the features of an average DSLR kit and it comes together in the one camera. There is always a give and take though. You will never stand up to 2 grands worth of specialised equipment, by spending E500. But its important to remember that you don’t need E2000 worth of equipment to take fantastic shots.

There have been a few bad reviews of the S9500, and that is because people are always comparing the S9500 to DLSRs. Why? Because there are few bench marks other than DSLRs to compare it too. And that says it all.

The S9500 is excellent, it takes quality shots, it versatile and the 28-300mm lens is first rate. If you aren’t interested in carrying around a lot of extra, expensive, equipment then this is the camera for you.

But its important to remember that a true SLR has the better sensor, potentially has the better ISO range and has the potential to have the better lens. An SLR will grow with you. Can be added too, can change and adapt.

Again its all about what you want out of the camera.

{Climbs off soap box, clears throat, fix's tie and walks off before anyone can point and laugh!!}

Fionn

well said K_user I'd agree.

main thing I'd say is to get the enjoyment out of using the camera the emphasis should be on you the person using the camera, not on the camera itself.
Obviously a SLR like point & shoot has limitations v a DSLR, then all cameras have limitations of some sort imposed on them ,thats what makes the whole thing so interesting and challenging.

I'm pretty new to all this having only got my camera four months ago. I had considered a high spec SLR like p & S but in the end decided on a DSLR, I haven't regretted that decision. I guess you'll know if you want to move on from the s9500

TempestSabre

The best competitors to the 9500 other than DSLR are the Sony Super Zooms, Sony DSC-R1, Sony DSC-H5 which are generally more expensive, but IMO have better lenses and I prefer the IQ of the Sonys. But a D50 and lense kit is about the same price.

The 9500 and other superzooms have decent movie modes too, which I like to have. But I also have a point and shoot camera which I can use for that. Generally people who get low end DSLR have other general purpose cameras aswell.

We also have a Film SLR that we've stopped using since we got a digital point and shoot, but miss the quality and the flexibility of the SLR. Hence get a DSLR. I'm still on the fence which I'll get, a DSLR or a Super Zoom.

andy1249

Ive said it before and will say it again here because this thread is specific to it , There is a world of difference between a film and a digital SLR ,
With film the phrase " the equipment wont make your photos any better " was quite true as no matter what bells and whistles the body had it was essentially just a box that exposed the film.

With a Digital this is not true , you are relying on the sensor and supporting electronics for a lot of the picture quality ,
K user , what your saying applies only to composition , it applies to nothing else in terms of a digital SLR , the equipment is all important.

While the 9500 is a very good camera , the sensor and the fixed lens limit its ability for quality photos , the D SLR ( Nikon or Canon ) is a much better buy and more value for your money and will Vastly improve the quality of the pictures.
( barring composition of course ! )

K_user

Again Andy its all to do with choice and what the user needs/requires.

If price was no option we would all be walking around with a Mark II hanging around our neck. I doubt anyone would dispute that. But price is an option. After that comes a long list of needs that is different for each user.

For example an amateur who takes shots for a hobby isn’t going to have the same needs as an amateur who sells prints to supplement an income. A person who prints shots up to and including A4 won’t be as demanding as those who want wall covering prints.

Now as I said earlier the S9500 can not match a DSLR with task specific glass. A Nikon with a lens for 24mm, for the 55mm and for the 200mm can cover almost any eventuality but at a price. Its also heavier and needs more protection. While an S9500 has it all built in. You could argue that the bigger sensor on a Nikon, along with the dedicated lens will give better results then the fixed lens at the extreme ends, which is true, but they should be about equal at the mid ranges. To further complicate the situation a Nikon could have a normal or an expensive lens attached. An expensive kit beats them all hands down, but only if you can afford it.

Then you have to take into account the pixel peepers. There is a whole world of debate on the advantages and disadvantages of each camera, based solely on the pixel issue – but I’m not going to get into that. What matters to me is the quality of the printed picture and most modern cameras, be they Fuji, Nikon or Canon, all produce top notch images. And most need PP work to a lesser or greater extent.

The S9500 is limited, I doubt that anyone would argue again that fact. But its only limited against the “potential” of other cameras, not the reality. So again what it comes down to is the user. An S9500 can be used anytime anywhere, no extras needed. Meanwhile a DSLR needs extra kit to match the Fuji, but depending on what you buy the possibilities are far greater.

{Steps off soap box again - has this man no shame?}

TempestSabre

I don't agree with that entirely. If you compare two different but similar level DSLR's like a D50/D70 or Canon 350D, theres a difference in how the images are captured by the CCD/CMOS and processed by the camera. The sensors are not the same, and the electronic and software that process the images are not the same. Thats before you talk about the difference in the lenses used. Even where cameras use the same CCD there still variations in how it is implemented, which means that images are produced are different. Maybe theres not a huge difference, but it does exist.

Composition and skill of the photographer is a different discussion. I don't think its that helpful when buying equipment. This discussion is purely about which is better purchase. On that level its purely a technical discussion of the technical ability of the camera not the photographer.

The expected use a budget DSLR and High End Prosumer level Super Zoom overlap both in specifications and in price. For me its a case of looking at the sample photos on the web, and seeing which I like best. So for example generally the 350D gets better reviews than the D50. But I like the D50 samples better. Between the 9500 and D50 I also like the D50. Between the D50 and the Sony's I'm on the fence on which pictures I like best. But when you handle the camera's I prefer the D50. However the 9500 have come down a lot in price, as have the D50's. The Sony's are still very expensive though.

Theres a compromise whichever you buy. Just buy the one YOU like best.