Hey! You should know that this product has been discontinued. Here are our current recommended cameras in the Ultra Compact Digital Cameras category.
Fuji FinePix F100fd
Editor's Review
Shutterbugs who want high megapixels for their images will enjoy this camera and it's vast array of features including Wide Dynamic Range for better light distribution, Dual Image Stabilization, Face Detection and Automatic Red Eye Removal. In addition, The F100fd is one of the first cameras which can boost ISO to over 12800 - one of the first models to reach that level.
Editor's Review
Shutterbugs who want high megapixels for their images will enjoy this camera and it's vast array of features including Wide Dynamic Range for better light distribution, Dual Image Stabilization, Face Detection and Automatic Red Eye Removal. In addition, The F100fd is one of the first cameras which can boost ISO to over 12800 - one of the first models to reach that level.
Specifications
- 12.1 Megapixels
- 5x optical zoom lens with 28mm wide angle capability / 8.2x Digital Zoom
- Multi, Center, and Continuous AF with Face Detection
- Dual Image Stabilization
- AVI Movie Mode with Sound
- 100-12800 ISO Exposure Modes
- JPEG File Formats
- 2.7-inch high resolution wide angle LCD
- SD, SDHC and xD Storage Media and 57 MB internal capacity
- NP-50 Li-ion battery
- Part Number: 15820728
- UPC: 74101481006
- Release Date: Apr 20, 2008
Shop for F100fd Accessories
Fuji FinePix F100fd Comments & Questions (write your own!)
1) I battle to set my white balance... i Know the theory and on land it is dead easy, but underwater i spend my first 15 minutes of my dive trying to set the white balance. it keeps saying Under! what am i doing wrong? i think it has to do whith the angle i hold the slate and or camera not sure though.
2) Alot of my pictures are a blur, i have the stabalizer switched on but still end up with a blur, what is it that i am doing wrong? Often i will sit at the same spot taking multiple photos but they all a blur eventually i will get one that id brilliant, but by then i have missed everything else. Please advise me what it is i am doing wrong
Also in the Fugi market was does FD mean after the model number?
Thanks!
I had looked at the Panasonic LX3 but discounted due to 10mp and the issue with the more mp the less light that is available.
Has anyone had any issues on Japan versions of this camera or other's? I understand the returning to Japan issue if the camera doesn't work but wondered if there are any other problems?
1. The Fuji has a f 2.8-5.0 lens. LX3 a f2.0-2.8. Depending on the zoom used, the LX3 will provide anywhere from 2 to4Xs the light of the Fuji. More light means less ISO needed and some of the Fuji's advantages vanish. But wait, there is no IS on the Fuji and the LX3 has one of the best IS in the market providing an additional 1.5 to 2Xs f stop advantage.
2. The Fuji has a 2.5" 230K LCD, the LX3 a 3" 460K LCD.
3. The Fuji uses an Xd 2.0 MB limit memory card, the LX3 can use an SD card that is faster and provides up to 8Xs or more memory. The Xd card is notoriously slow, by the way, although in fairness it has to handle the storage of much smaller images.
4. Up to 15 second shutter speed for the Fuji, 60 seconds for the LX3.
5. Manual Macro mode for the Fuji, automatic for the LX3 although you can use manual Macro for better focus speed and preciseness. The LX3 can focus down to one (1) centimeter.
6.the Fuji lens has a 36-108 mm equivalent but it is hard to beat the advantages (IMHO) of the 24 mm Wide Angle lens.
7. Fuji has no Hot Shoe, the LX3 has. You might want the ability to make that addition of an external flash at some time.
8. Re Flash, the Fuji's is too close to the lens increasing red eye problems, the LX3 has a pop flash further removed from the lens.
9. The LX3 can take pictures in 4:3, 3:2, or 16:9 aspect mode. Nice feature. Fuji ?. Interestingly, the picture in ALL 3 modes will have the same diagonal field of view.
10. The LX3 can do AE bracketing and can even take both RAW and regular JPGs at the same time.
11. Flash not quite right? The LX3 has the ability to adjust its flash power as well as the EV setting.
12. The LX3 has an active Histogram.
13. One of the great things about the LX3 is that it also has many, many other flexible adjustments it can make in picture parameters. The bad news is that it will take me quite a while to figure out and remember what all of them are.
OK, let's state that I must be biased. I have an LX3. And nothing here is to say that the Fuji F31FD wasn't one of the greatest P&S low light cameras ever made. I just wanted to explain that you don't necessarily have to buy a jacked up price used camera without a warranty and perhaps an uncertain future as to reliability or pay an exorbitant price for a new F31 when there might be some reasonable alternatives out there. Someone at Amazon.com wants $700+ for a new Fuji FD31FD. Now that is what I call cult status or someone who is getting greedy beyond reason.
I think you meant 2GB, not 2MB. But I submit that isn't a bad thing. Reason being, if a card get corrupted, you can swap it out for a second card and you're back in the game. The larger the card you have, the less likely you'll have a second card to back you up. Does that make sense?
Your other points are spot on though and I would definitely add the LX3 to the list to consider.
As far as the flash Hot Shoe I was mentioning that not for the purpose of 3rd row flashing but for other family situations (weddings,etc) where it could come in handy and, of course, a bounce flash is always going to get you better results than the in camera flash with the additional advantage that red eye becomes non-existent.
You got that right about the 2 GB but there is merit in having a big memory card in order to take those 720 HD videos. Yes, I know they are not in replacement of a good video camera like my Sony Hard Drive one but I don't always have that with me. Someone said that the best digital camera is the one that is with you. Maybe we could change that to the best camcorder is the one that is with you?
I agree about the RAW bit. Some of the LX3 people have indicated that they didn't think the RAW was that much better than the LX3 JPGs and have left RAW behind them.I agree about the small card advantage but since I haven't had a single problem since my first Foray into digital cameras in 1998 I tend to not think about that after taken about 9000 pictures (a small number compared to many, I suppose).
Thanks again for your many pieces of Sage advice. It is what makes the Internet such a grand place to surf.
"Unfortunately, Fuji gave in to the Megapixel race on the FinePix F100fd, which pretty much did away with the high sensitivity advantage that made earlier models such a success. The F100fd performs slightly better than other compact cameras, up to a point (ISO 800), but above that, images become a noisy mess."
imapnet.com/boren/F31vsF100/
I tested 6MPix F31fd/F50fd/F100fd at ISO 400,800,1600, and 3200.
Hope it might be useful. Sorry English is not my native.
uncleodd.multiply.com/journ...
imagenomic.com/nwpg.aspx?f=... makes big claims as to noise reduction efficacy. I have no idea whether it is the best product or just another contender, but the point is: there should be information in those extra megapixels that can be used intelligently to create a superior downsized image.
So, what if the *best case* post-processed image of the F100FD were used to compare against the F31FD? I'm guessing it would beat the F31FD.
However, you might argue this approach would unfairly handicap the F31FD, by depriving it of similar post-processing improvement.
So, ultimately, the fairest comparison would be to take the source images, do the best you can at post-processing, and then compare the resulting images. Clearly, a simple but crude downsizing comparison could be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
BTW, what *is* the best software to use to correct for noise in high megapixel cameras?
I am an amateur photographer. But very inclined to get the best out of my camera. Could you please guide me on how best to use my camera.
Any suggestions, links would be appreciated.
Thanks
TIPS TO FASTER CAMERA PERFORMANCE:
Prefocus. Hold down the shutter half way to get a prefocus of the image you're shooting. When it changes, prefocus again. This will speed up your camera's performance during picture taking since it won't have to autofocus before it shoots the shot.
Use faster SD cards. Yes, there are faster cards and it does make a difference in writing the image file to the card. This is especially key if you're taking multiple or burst images.
Fresher batteries. Use alkalines at least. But I recommend using high energy batteries designed for digital photography. Varta is a good brand. They are usually sold in camera shops, are long lasting (because they are sold in small quantities) put out alot of energy.
Shoot in "sports" modes when you're in situations that require action. Night or available light modes when in night time settings. These presets can help in speeding up your shots, rather than the camera taking a split second to evaluate the conditions of the lighting.
Go manual. If you are manually focusing, particularly in darker settings, you can constantly refocus the image as things happen. Also, the infrared does have a range and if your image is out of that range you can end up with the camera's "best guess" or infinity setting which may not help. You can also go manual on fstops and shutter speeds as well, getting more light faster when you choose.
Go with a shallow depth of field.
Pan with the action. You can create some pretty cool shots by panning with your shot, focusing on your subject. This will create the effect of your subject in sharp contrast to the blurry background.
Use a flash - even in day time. This will "freeze" the image and cause your subject to "pop" in the shot. However, flash is only designed for limited range and can dissipate outside of about 20-25 feet unless you're using a zoomable flash.
Stick with 100-400 ISO. Going higher will cause more noise/grain in your shots, particularly in darker settings.
If you have anything specific, or any other questions, feel free to ask.
1. He didn't mention what kind of Varta batteries to get but, in any event, get the rechargeable Nimh batteries as they have high energy and cycle fast for flash shots. Besides, buying non rechargeable batteries will have high costs if you take very many pictures.
2. Light does probably dissipate outside of 20-25 feet but most digital point and shoot cameras have a range that is woefully short of that distance and if they claim that distance or longer, it is because they are increasing the ISO settings to intolerable levels that will produce LOTS of noise. With most cameras stick with a maximum of 10-15 feet and don't get too close because many cameras don't dump the flash power quick enough and tend to blow out the picture by serious over exposures. Better to take a close up by zooming in from 8-10 feet away. This will reduce the over exposure problem in two ways. First, a reduction in light because of the distance. Secondly, the fact that zoom shots cause the lens to gather less light.
None of this is a criticism of Aditya's advice but intended to further mention some additional options.
I tried to gather some information and here it is..(with respect to my Fuji F100fd)
1) ISO : Controls the shutter speed. The higher the ISO the faster the shutter speed is. This helps in freezing a moving object or can even reduce camera shakes.
2) EV exposure: This adjust the aperture of the camera depending upon the ISO settings. Again this helps to control the exposure to light for a particular shot.
3) Dynamic Range: The contrast between bright and dark spots in a shot
4)White Balance: should be adjusted to match the background light.
Now there are things which I couldn't figure out. These are
1)Photometry: which comes with three options Multi, Spot and average
2)AF Mode: Which these three options Center, Multi and continuous.
3) There are options where you can choose what quality of image you desire from your shot. For eg: there are two options with 12 MP. One is 12M F 827 frames and the other is 12M N 1316 frames. Whats the difference between the 2.
And 4) Is it possible to take long time shots with F100fd?
Sorry if they are too specific to my F100fd. Not sure if all the questions make sense. Thanks Aditya D and fredbillie for your help. I really appreciate it
Enjoy
Anil
Thanks
AJ
2) AF mode - this stands for auto focus and allows spot focus, multi(average) focus and continuous refocusing as you move the camera (uses more power hence fewer pictures from a set of batteries)
3) Quality of image - determines the degree of compression of the data and therefore how precisely the image is reproduced when viewed later. The number after the 12M is how many images you can place on what's left on the memory card. The greater this number the less precise is the reproduction of the image because the compression of the data is greater to squeeze more images in the same card. 12M 827 will give you the best image provided 827 is enough images for your purposes.
4) Maximum duration of exposure is 8 seconds and it is automatically controlled by the AE(auto-exposure) system.
I just received my F100fd. I am really impressed with the quality of pictures. But I think i got a problem. I hear some soft chirping sound after i take pictures. This is in addition to the sound made by the lenses.
Please help me in deciding whether the camera is defective
Thanks
forums.dpreview.com/forums/... guess is you may find more Fuji F100fd owners there that could help.
As I wasnt sure what to do with it, I returned the product and got a new one. The one doesnt produce any noise after I take pictures. So I guess the other one was defective.
Anyways thanks fredbillie for helping me out.
The argument is essentially this: CCD chips on point and shoot cameras a smaller and as such, fitting in more pixels causes them to lose light sensivity. Sure, there’s more data on the chip, but the chip can’t absorb the light data and what it ends up with is a picture that has more noise than image quality. In addition, the more megapixels a camera has, the larger the lens it needs to provide the clarity it deserves and prevent diffraction due to a loss of detail with smaller apertures. But since we’re talking portable point and shoots here, those large lenses simply aren’t being made.
Finally, with larger mega pixels comes longer saving time due to their requires huge storage capacity, or more compression if not storing images in RAW format. The result is a noisier image and a dissatisfied camera user who thirsts for high quality and speed but fell into the trap of "more must mean better."
In the end, relying on a smaller MP that can balance all these needs may indeed be a better answer.
This leads me to the f31, which has half the MP at 6 megapixels, which Image Engineering states is the "sweet spot" for snapshot style point and shoot cameras. The lens compared to the F50 is comparable, but the f50 has a longer focal length as does the f100. But the f100 has a larger LCD, which will translate to shorter battery length.
first thing I noticed is that the A720 has a superior macro setting, yielding close pictures that are REALLY close, whereas, the macro for the F100 really looks like the camera was held at arms length. Color saturation on both are comparable (though I found the A720 gave slightly bolder images) and sharpness is also superior on the A720.
- your mileage may vary though
The argument is essentially this: CCD chips on point and shoot cameras a smaller and as such, fitting in more pixels causes them to lose light sensivity. Sure, there’s more data on the chip, but the chip can’t absorb the light data and what it ends up with is a picture that has more noise than image quality. In addition, the more megapixels a camera has, the larger the lens it needs to provide the clarity it deserves and prevent diffraction due to a loss of detail with smaller apertures. But since we’re talking portable point and shoots here, those large lenses simply aren’t being made.
Finally, with larger mega pixels comes longer saving time due to their requires huge storage capacity, or more compression if not storing images in RAW format. The result is a noisier image and a dissatisfied camera user who thirsts for high quality and speed but fell into the trap of "more must mean better."
In the end, relying on a smaller MP that can balance all these needs may indeed be a better answer.
In addition, you won't even be able to notice that additional megapixel difference in 99% of pictures since they're snapshots of 4x6 or less. So you end up paying more for something you aren't really taking advantage of. That doesn't strike me as being worth the money, IMHO.
Essentially, the image is reduced to the set quality after it has been processed by the CCD. As such, the light still goes through those pixels, only that after some basic processing steps pixels "thrown out" to make the image to the desired setting and size. This process is called "Choking" and that will cause Artifacting and noise. Additionally, you'll also loose details of the recorded image.
Some cameras have written into their firmware a process called "binning," which merges the signals of multiple pixels to make larger pixels. Usually at a 4-1 ratio. This will essentially turn a 12-megapixel camera into a 3-megapixel camera. And that gives you the opposite problem of too many pixels on the chip ... you now have too few and as such, will run into artifacting instead of noise.
As for comparing them, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you. I see much more detail in the A720 images at ISO 1600. So, as the old saying goes - "your mileage may vary." And regardless of whether you see more detail or I do in either camera, the point is that bthere's also an unacceptable amount of noise.
In addition, although I often suggest using that link to compare images, how often are you going to have controlled lighting & still life conditions when you're taking pictures?
But one thing I will always agree with you James is the stupid race for megapixels that doesn't seem to stop and is fooling a lot of novices when buying a new camera (thanks to the salesmen !). At one point this race will have to stop because the sensor will be too big to fit in the box or the image quality will continue to degrade like it does on an increasing number of new cameras with more megapixels. I own the Nikon D40 and I can say that this little gem is hard to beat in most aspects and it's only a 6 MP camera. Thanks for your input and your great knowledge of the digital world.
At this point, I am not sure if I am going to keep it or return it to the store. I compared similar pics taken with my Canon A720 and SD870 and they give more pleasing results to the eye in most conditions. Another strange thing is the kind of dark feel to pictures taken in bright sunlight, it is like the special dynamic range of the F100FD lowers the overall brightness of the picture to keep details visible in very bright areas of the pic. Many pics feels like being taken during an eclipse of the sun! Its that bad.
I had the Fuji F50FD for a week last month, the FD100 feels quite similar to it but a bit better overall. I am quite impressed though with the macro function, very sharp pics wth the focus dead on. Also, the pictures have generally a very high contrast feel to them but I am not sure if its such a good thing. And another thing, some of the pics have a weird violet-purple hue to them which Canon never has. But overall, the Fuji cams produce more than average quality pics.
So, to conclude, I can say that Canon will be hard to beat in the ever enlarging world of compact cameras. And James, a critic does not have 36768 points for nothing... Keep up with your great wisdomed advices for all uf us to benefit from.
You may also wish to post a user review for everyone to benefit from. Thanks for your kinds words, JP!
This is not acceptable for a camera that pretends to call itself "the ultimate compact", as Fuji claims.
The Canon A720IS gives constantly superior results - exposure, color and texture wise - even if the Fuji has an overall sharpness that sometimes amazes me. I just ordered a Fuji F30 and a Fuji F31 FD from Japan, I expect to receive them this week. Can't wait to compare them with the F50FD and the F100Fd which both have 2 years more of evolution in the body and brain. But it does not seem to be reflected on the results.
As for the F100FD, it's got great qualities but it's obvious that they went too far in the megapixel race. The F30 has a 1/1.7" sensor size for 6MP and the F100FD has a 1/1.6" for double the amount of megapixel. The quality of the pictures suffers from this unrespected rule of three.
Was the era of the best digicams in 2006-2007? It seems so. But I suspect that they can do a lot better than they are now, they are just putting a border line between the compacts and the budget DSLR to sell more cams. Otherwise, this market would die.
What do you think James?
I am looking specifically for a camera good for underwater photography (low light natural colours)
F100FD has it so far but just want to make sure, or any other ideas around the same price range (~300 for camera and uw housing)
6mpixel.org/en/?
<...> best low light performance you need 2-6 MP. Recall that you only need as many MP as you are going to use. Which is to say, there are only two reasons to have MP 1) print size--larger prints require more MP to avoid seeing the dots. For example, 2MP is fine for 4X6 inch prints. 3MP needed for 5X7. 7MP for 8X10. You can calculate the required number of pixels for a very nice print by multiplying the width X length (in inches) X 90000. Anything above this is not visible in ordinary prints. Of course, I'm not speaking here of specialized arts prints but rather, ordinary commercially available prints.
2) Cropping -- the more you crop, the more MP you need. The idea is to be left with the above MP numbers AFTER you finish cropping your shot. So you could need 12MP IF you really crop away a lot of the image to get your final result. And again, this still depends on the size of the print (or computer screen which is a whole different calculation).
The natural colors part of underwater photography is more difficult because it varies with depth -- "it" being the spectrum of light. Typically spectrum shifting ranges from yellow/orange to blue and can more easily be corrected after the image is in the computer where you can adjust it to your liking with software such as Picasa2 (free from Google), PhotoShop and others.
Best wishes.
Yes, the old Fuji F31fd with "only" 6.3MP was an amazing low light camera but they are not making that camera anymore so what is one to do (don't want a larger DSLR)? Incidentally, as if to prove your point, used Fuji F31fds are selling for $395 and new ones (if you can find them) for $425
The Jury is still out but early reviews of the Fuji F100fd seem to be very promising. And I don't see a lot of good alternatives (with the features I want) out there. At least the Fuji F100 starts out with a reasonably large chip compared with its peers (1/1.6-almost 2⅔ size) and it has the eighth generation of a highly regarded, low light capable, Super CCD HR VIII. That counts for something.
To sum up. I agree that the pixel race is just down right stupid and a marketing ploy used by the manufacturers who have convinced many people that more is better BUT, as of right now, I am stuck with choosing the best option I think viable to me despite my concerns about too many pixels.
Your point is well made that if you want specific bells and whistles which are new and important to you, then the 4-6MP count seems a lost cause.
I'll be interested to see how the F100fd turns out, but considering that the F50fd didn't match up to the F31fd in terms of low light photos I'll not be holding my breath.
Thanks for your well written post.
I don't believe this is true. The type & size of the sensor & camera processor determines the quality of the photos at low light.
F100fd should have same size but newer version of sensor compare to F31d. With a high resolution it should be much better than F31d. I don't own one so I can't say it for sure. But I did an extensive research of F100fd and S2000HD and this link gives a good example on how well F100fd can perform at night:
nickbland.zenfolio.com/p904...
The truth is, for most sizes of photos and some cropping, 6-8 MPs will give you all the resolution you need and the wailing is over what quality low noises the F100fd could have produced with Optical IS and a new processor if it had kept the pixel number down to a reasonable number.
imapnet.com/boren/F31vsF100...
So, I'm interested in compact cameras with pixels larger than 3 micron. As of today (January 24, 2009) in current models I found
- Fujifilm S100FS (3.5 micron), a little heavy.
- Panasonic LX3 / Leica D-LUX 4 (3.4 micron)
- Fujifilm F100fd / F60fd (3.2 micron)
- Pentax S10 / Ricoh GX200 (3 micron)
LX3 has the biggest pixels (for a compact) and by far the fastest lens. So, the LX3 is ideally suited for low light conditions if you are willing to pay the price and can live with a zoom range of 24-60.
Fujifilm F100fd and F60fd have the same sensor. But due to the larger zoom range, the F100fd is slower than the F60fd.
I didn't mention the Sigma DP2 (large 4.5 micron) as I look for a zoom lens the DP2 misses.
I lost only one thing the 5Xs zoom of the FX500 versus thye 2.5Xs zoom of the LX3 but since using the full zoom of the FX500 produced poor results in many instances I have learned to stand a little bit closer to my subject. The results are VERY GOOD and the low light performance miles ahead of the FX500.
WP-FXF100 underwater housing (40m) ~£120
I am looking to buy this as I have heard great things about the
previous model's (F31) ability in low light and underwater but I
am comparing models at the moment (Looking at Canon A650IS)
One thing you might find useful - if you buy this camera test it
with a few low light photos and flash photos BEFORE you buy,
some reviews mention a bad run where the sensor is bad and
a pink line appears down the left hand side of the photo, if you
get this test another camera and buy one that doesnt have the
bad sensor (the defect does not occur in all cameras)
Obviously, the low light condition can be at least partially overcome with a good flash unit but it almost always causes light and dark spots unlike the "natural light" photos.
The Fuji F100fd has 12MP so us very unlikely to be a good low light performer. Putting more MP on the same size (small) CCD light sensor makes each individual pixel get smaller and therefore less sensitive to the incoming light. That results in more noise. Anything over 4-6MP on this size CCD decreases the light sensitivity. Check out this European URL addressing this issue
6mpixel.org/en/?
Fuji FinePix F100fd Reviews
Fuji FinePix F100fd Reviews by Digital Camera-HQ Users
- 5.0 out of 5
I compared features, picture quality, ease of use and the end result...great pictures when I printed them out! There is a lot of competition, like the Casio, Sony, Canon, Pentax and Olympus point and shoot cameras...but for the price and what this camera is capable of...with 12.1 megapixles, a 5X optical zoom, wide angle lens, as well as the quality of the Fuji F100fd and the ease of producing truely stunning pics, this is the best DigiCam available.
It quickly "boots up" from startup, and is ready to take pics within a second! The camera does all the work, as a good "point and shoot" is supposed to do. And yet, study the owners manual to really get the full capability of this camera. Portraits can be taken in soft, natural lighting, with the camera capable of extreme low light photos, (12,800 iso!)with great color and exposure. The face detection technology will focus and frame up to 10 faces in a group shot, assuring good exposure on each person. Dual image stabilization keeps the camera induced shaking to a minimum, 5 frames per second! The CCD is FujiFilms 10th generation Supper CCD that allows deep layers of color unlike other cameras, and makes the pictures more like an actual "film" type camera.
A newbie to camera's will find that they can easily produce pictures that will equal the professional photographers best efforts!
- 5.0 out of 5
I am an SLR guy, with a lot of photography experience. I retired recently from 25 years with a SoCal Police agency, where I had plenty of opportunities to use a camera(s) in the performance of my duties. I started with a Konica camera, 35MM film, and moved up to more and less sophisiticated cameras over the years. I finally settled on the FujiFilm FinePix brand, because the value to price was always there, lots of features for the money and great picture quality. Also the overall "right out of the box" ease of use was impressive, as was the way the camera's seemed to hold up, even when handled rather roughly! When it was time to retire, my buddy bought me a new FujiFilm F100fd, andI have to say this is the best I've owned yet! You would have a hard time trying to take a bad picture with this camera! Colors are perfect, the focusing power and the rapid shutter speed, as well as the capability to take pics without (virtually) ever having to use the flash, is incredible. Portrait quality faces, clear colors...terrific! I can hardly wait till we take our RV out camping and get to try out this camera in the great outdoors, like Yosemite and the North Rim of the Grand Canyon in the winter! 5 Star and 2 thumbs up for this gem!
- 5.0 out of 5
This camera is way underrated in this forum. Being a Coolpix 3100 user for several years I took top of the line Coolpix S600 and was rather disappointed with it - lots of chromatic aberrations, image noise, inability to shoot in the dark, etc. I also tried top-scored (in this forum) Canon 790 IS and had to return it either. Canon is a good camera, but only during the day. Finepix 100fd has excellent image quality during any time of the day! Colors are beautiful and natural as well. And I strongly agree with Alan (see post as of 6/12/08) - some pictures are like a work of art, you just want to look and look at them. I could never expect this kind of photographs from such a small camera. In addition it boosts 5x wide-angle optical zoom. There is no match to this camera in its class. I do have this pink effect on an LCD screen, but it happens very rarely, but most of all, do I care about it if image quality is perfect - not at all.
- 5.0 out of 5
I am a professional photographer by occupation so when it comes to buying a compact for myself I am very picky. I use a Sinar digital studio camera and a Canon eos 1ds at work so I find it hard to accept a massive drop in quality with my compact. You have to accept that a small sensor with a huge number of pixels is going to mean images wont be as "clean" as pro cameras but this little Fuji strikes the perfect balance between quality, size and ease of use. What I (and most people) want from a compact camera is a small, easy to use, fun product which is capable of turning out good quality images and has a scope for a little bit of experimentation. The F100fd is small enough to take anywhere in a pocket. This is my biggest criticism of many digital compacts. It doesn't matter how many more features your camera might have, or how impressive the lens looks if you can't be bothered to take it with you when a photo opportunity presents itself. I'll have my little Fuji while your camera is gathering dust in a drawer at home. I nearly bought a Canon G9 after using a friends. It really is a lovely camera and has loads of manual control available but in the end it isn't small enough to comfortably put in a pocket and the image quality wasn't visually superior. The Fuji is great at balancing flash and available light. Colour and contrast are very natural and it even has a reasonable movie mode. The face detection mode really works and is very useful and the Enhanced portrait mode is a nice touch. You really will make your friends happy when they see what this does for them. It's a little "Hollywood" to use all the time but it really does give the Airbrushed flawless skin effect without having to faff around in Photoshop. Most compacts are used as party cameras in low light conditions. The Fuji is perfect as it seems to have a better high ISO performance than other compacts, the flash/ambient light balance is excellent and the enhanced portrait mode really flatters. When pushed it can get a little more serious and turn out proper images which to my eye are superb (even compared to my work cameras) It might not look as sexy as other comapcts (eg the Panasonic Lumix range) or be as "Hands On" as something like a Canon G9 but I would recommend the Fuji to anyone.
