I am just about to buy a Fuji S2pro for, primarily, portrait work. Almost everyone I speak to tells me the S2 is better at rendering skin tones and the slower ISO of 100 gives better quality for big enlargments. But does it?
Does anyone here use a D100 for portraits and if so how is it? I just struggle to believe that the S2 can be that much better than a D100.
I really want to stick with Nikon and there is some good deals at the moment but I am being swayed by one of those popular notions that everyone seems to subscribe to, but can't really explain why.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#1. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 0Sun 01-Dec-02 05:23 PM
I'm assuming that when you say portraits, it's professionally? If it's not, I would say get the S2. It does have "out of the box" pleasing color. For professional use, D100. Shooting in mode II Adobe RGB simply gives you a wider color gamut, but you have to consider using a calibrated workflow. And I don't mean custom curves, <<view the threads>> I mean profiling your camera to IT8 or Macbeth Digital Color Chart standards. This is something you should consider if your going to output your prints to something other than inkjet, or just look at them on your screen. S2's have a higher Delta E correction than D100's <wider gamut error to correct> . That's why I chose the D100, it was simply easier to incorporate into my color workflow. As for the type of portaiture, I do a lot of commercial head shots for magazines and publications. I either let my clients view on screen, or give them inkjet proof sheets. After retouching, I give them an inkjet proof before sending it to the lab for "photographic" output. The inkjet's HAVE to match whatever output the customer needs, and all that starts with predictable color and output, and that can only happen with a calibrated workflow, and for me that starts with my D100.
Hope this helps.
#2. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 1Sun 01-Dec-02 06:15 PM
Thanks for that it does help.
Your link to the other thread doesn't seem to work.
I am talking about professionally. At the moment, I am just doing part time local portraits and some editorial but I need to have the speed of digital processing.
If I understand what you are saying the D100 does render the colour depth needed for your workflow, even if you cannot see it initially. When you say you send the image to a lab for a photographic output I assume you mean that you transfer a digital file for them to process in PS to meet the clients needs and not for them to print out.
Any way it does help a lot.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#3. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 2Sun 01-Dec-02 06:50 PM
you said..."When you say you send the image to a lab for a photographic output I assume you mean that you transfer a digital file for them to process in PS to meet the clients needs and not for them to print out."
I give my clients a inkjet as a soft proof, which they mark-up with a sharpie to let me know the changes and issues they have. After I get it back, I send the file to the lab for the clients enlargements. The clients get the PRINTS they ordered, but for magazines and publications, I FTP color corrected and sized <<dpi, gamma, color model>>CMYK files or greyscale files directly to the publisher or art director. As you can see there are a lot of color issues to deal with. I do give the final corrected file to the client, and they are free to do what they want with them, but for preparing files for magazines and such, I do that, and charge them for it.
#4. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 3Sun 01-Dec-02 07:23 PM
OK I'm with you now.
So bottom line is you get the results you want from the D100. I have read a number of reviews that state that the D100 does not render skin tones as well as the S2, but I think what they mean is that the Fuji produces a 'better' image straight from the camera. I cannot see how one camera cannot capture the data in the scope you want and another one can.
At the end of the day, clients have different expectations than I do sometimes. I use a coolpix to show people different lighting effects and how they look in certain poses and almost all of them love the pics they see on their TV screen and are amazed when I tell them they are test shots, not the finshed article.
I sold 4 pics to a magazine that were taken on an 8 year old Olympus compact, using a free film I got in the post. They were images they wanted and no one else had them so they paid for them. Yet I have spent hours working a masterpiece that has been rejected as 'technically excellent but lacks impact'. In other words, another landscape of misty rolling hills in evening light that we can get from a stock library.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#8. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 4fundy Registered since 13th Nov 2002Wed 16-Jan-08 12:07 PM
I just bought a D100 here in Japan and the colors seem fine out of the box on Auto White Balance.
Before buying it I had read about the problems with exposure, etc. here on Nikonians and asked the camera shop about it. They said that Nikon has made adjustments and they sell about 5 a month and no problems. I imagine that the D100s here in Japan are the newest out of the factory.
You might want to find a shop that sells a lot of D100s, ensuring you get one from the freshest batch, even if it is $100 more than the cheaper outfits.
This is my wife, all settings are auto except the white balance is Cloudy -3
Oregonian Nikonian presently found on Shikoku, Japan
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
#5. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 0
I won't try to delve into the technical aspects of either camera, but I do want to mention that I happen to have both the D100 and the S2 Pro. Yes, by far, the S2 Pro takes more pleasing photos - read better balanced here - right out of the camera than the D100 does. It is a beautiful instrument, but then...so is the Nikon D100. I at first cursed the D100 shortly after I purchased it, but as I continued to read various forums, I added to my database and learned to live with the camera. I made adjustments, experimented, and pleasantly discovered that the D100 custom tone curve scenario - using NC - was something that no other brand of camera had.
So I use both cameras, and loving the fact that I can interchange both lenses, flashes, and most nikon accessories on both. I give the nod to the D100 for overall adaptability, settings, and ways that one can customize the camera for a particular shoot. I give the nod to the S2 Pro for overall pleasing photographs in color, balance, and definition, along with great flash photos using any type of Nikon dedicated flash - not just the DX flash units. Honestly, I love both, but do tend to reach for the S2 Pro more often than not - at least lately. I purposely push myself to use the D100 as often as possible and am playing around with different custom curves.
It's your call. Either choice should work out well.
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina USA
#7. "RE: D100 v S2 for portraits" | In response to Reply # 5Mon 02-Dec-02 06:55 PM
Thanks Ben, you are supporting what Vis1 is saying and what I had suspected. The D100 can do the job but you have to find your way with it. That's no big deal.
I spent 1 and half hours today running back and forwards to the lab and I'm really at the end of my tether with it. My plan was to get a DSLR in the spring but I can see me doing it before Xmas. I'm at that point were I still have a full time job but do professional photography in my spare time. Trouble is, I'm out of spare time so I have to take anything that will speed up my workflow.
I don't know if you pros find this but the time spent actually taking pictures, for me, is about 20% of the total project cycle. The rest of the time is meeting clients, processing, printing, framing, invoicing, ordering, marketing etc. A lab screwing up a job or taking extra time really causes me problems (is it the UK or are labs everywhere run by people who can't organise themselves).
By the way the pic is great.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.