I got fed up waiting for the S3 and decided to jump off the waiting list and buy an S2 to keep my F100 company. I think I got a good deal, S2 body, Lexmar 1.gb Compactflash/Pro 40speed with w/a, and a mains/in car charger with Nimhs, all for £1,186.00.
My intentions are to use this camera primarily for portraits, until I become accustomed to digital shooting, before using it for weddings etc.
Any hints, tips, (or donations to my overdraft fund) would be appreciated.
#1. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 0Wed 07-Jul-04 12:42 PM
There are a few S2 users here and we'd be happy to share info. Unfortunately Nikonians isn't a very active site for "alternative" F-mount users, but perhaps we can change that.
Does Fuji still sell the Hyperutilities (computer controlled shooting software and the EX raw converter) separately except in the US market packages? If you have a laptop, tethered shooting in the studio is a really effective way to work and see just how the camera and image settings affect the image.
#2. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 1
#3. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 2visagephoto Registered since 21st Aug 2003Thu 08-Jul-04 03:01 PM
I have a Nikon 28.2.8 a 50.1.4 and a Tamron SP90(MF), I'm considering a (constant aperture) zoom lens which will at least cover the above focal lengths,I also have an SB800 speedlight, and a Metz 45ct5 as a backup. Studio strobes: Prolincas 3x250ws & 1x125ws, I'm not sure if these are safe to use with the S2? (no problems with my F100).
JPEG or Raw? I'm not sure, Raw seems to be the choice mode, but requires proprietry software and longer write times. I'll have to experiment with both Raw and Jpeg fine, which would you recommend?
I was messing around with the camera yesterday and took a couple of snapshots at the highest resolution in Jpeg fine mode, when I transferred the file to my PC the print size was quoted as being 42" by ??" at 300ppi, I'm not sure if I misread the figures? I thought an image direct from the camera would be around 15"x 11" at 300ppi and would have to be interpolated up to this size.
#4. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 3Thu 08-Jul-04 04:37 PM
42" @ 300 ppi = 12600 pixels wide. Unless you interpolated the image, the sensor resolution is only 3024 pixels wide (6 megapixel file). If you create 12 megapixel files from the Fuji sensor's tiled layout (12 Mpix is 4256 pixels wide), you get about 9 megapixels of actual resolution.
I shoot jpeg for convenience, raw for any images I really care about. Raw gives you a lot of flexibility and the best quality.
You need 18mm to get the same angle of view as your 28mm wide.
#5. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 4Benny Registered since 22nd Jul 2004Thu 22-Jul-04 05:25 PM
Hiya chaps, just joined the forum, S2 through and through had it about a year now and wouldn't swap it for anything, honestly!
My angle on the JPEG or RAW, I use JPEG all the time, the compression ratio is pretty damned good. When the image is viewed in HSL mode you see that you don't really lose much and you can certainly perform much further post-processing with levels, curves etc without making JPEG artefacts visible.
I would reccomend RAW though if your taking pictures in low light and will have to pull detail out of the image quite dramatically, especially/mainly people shots. Low light presentation/awards events etc where the use of flash is pretty poor.
I do take this 12MP Raw with a pinch of salt, RAW is supposed to be straight CCD data with no processing etc yet to get 12MP, interpolation is used, so some degree of processing must have been used.
#6. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 5Fri 23-Jul-04 06:37 PM
True, but the Fuji's sensor array is offset, not a raster grid. So the theory is that more detail can be extrapolated from the non-rectangular raw data (and the test results at sites like dpreview and others confirm about 9 million pixels equivalent). In practice, this isn't a very big resolution bump, but it's useful. Nobody claims that the S2 delivers 12 Mpix of detail, but the Fuji sensor requires interpolation for any resolution of output due to the octagonal pixel tiling. Even a 6 Mpix image from the Fuji sensor has to be interpolated.
#7. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 6Nabil_2004 Registered since 02nd Mar 2004Wed 28-Jul-04 05:12 PM
Jpeg is amazingly good on the S2 (I've posted a few shots made with the S2 at the best quality Jpeg setting, normal sharpness and vivid saturation).
I find the "normal" sharpness setting on the camera enables some postprocessing (unsharp mask in Photoshop) without having the artefacts of a too heavy sharpening generated by the camera.
I find the best results are when I underexpose for about one stop and then use the new "Highlight/Shadow Filter" in Photoshop CS to unveil all the little hidden detail in the shadows WITHOUT blowing the highlights.
It's a great tool!
Visit my Nikonians Gallery at:
#8. "RE: Couldn't wait for the S3" | In response to Reply # 7Wed 28-Jul-04 11:25 PM
I'm not happy with such compromises, but I'm glad you've found a workflow that gets you what you need. Underexposing is a sure-fire way to encourage Fuji's track-noise to show up, especially when you excavate the shadows in post processing. I do agree the S2's a great tool, I would like it to be packaged in a more capable camera however.