The Finepix 4700 has at least 2 problems. One, you have to pay 3 Megapixel prices for a 2 Megapixel camera. And two, you have to store a 4 Megapixel image (high res) even though you really have only 2 Megapixels of data. I am not going to waste my time shrinking all the camera images. Why couldn't Fuji just have added a 3X zoom lens to the 2700 and call it the 3700?..

Boy would I like to have seen an MX 2700 with the MX 1700 zoom. I think Fuji over shot the hype, the camera, and the price...

I just wish people would stop being so negative about the 4700z. Fuji have done an amazing job with the camera, and the Super CCD gives great results, esp. when printing.The Colour balance is great with good colour depth. Thefeatures are endless and the interface is second to none. If you're looking for a camera with better picture quality, you're not going to get it at such a lovelly size with great design...

I have a 4700 and I think it really isn't a bad camera at all. Yes, it's a 2.4 megapixel camera and performs as such. However, it's colour saturation and white balance is much better than many of the 3 megapixel digicams out there. The images produced are warm and very pleasant to look at. Compare it to the S20, you'll notice the difference.It has a 3x zoom lens, compact size, avi recording capabilities, fast shutter speed, lightning fast operation, sold build quality, ergonomic menu system etc. To those of you that think the camera is outrageously overpriced: Think again.

Do these features more than make up for the extra one million pixels on the S20 and the blue cast? They surely do...

The blue skies look better than on many other digicams, however, the Extremely BAD noise problems, even in only slightly dark areas of daytime shots, render this camera UNUSABLE. When will the manufacturers be able to get their act together on these persistent noise problems on ALL non-pro 3.xMP digicams?You can see many samples of severe noise problems in many of the daytime samples on Steve's Digicams page @.

Http://www.steves-.

Digicams.com/fuji4700_samples.html..

Really think you should rip on fuji for this, because they made one mistake that I consider HUGE, and it's the one reason I'm not going to buy it: This camera captures 2.4mp pictures, but only gives you the option to save 4.3mp (2400x1800) or 1.2mp (1280x960) !!that is ridiculous! if they would just provide an output resolution that matches the actual image quality, like 1800x1350, it would be a great camera! Am I missing something here?..

The 4700 cost me $702 and it was well worth it. I take this camera literally everywhere. It is compact and handy. A great zoom. Great colors and tons of features. Too much is made over the megapixel "mistake".

I'd like to see more battery power, but again that's with many digital cameras. I have the Sony 770 and the Fuji 2700. I use the 4700 more than either.This is not a "professional camera" and why would it be one? People who buy this camera are not pros...

I've been doing HEAVY research between the Olympus 3000 series and the Fuji Fine-Pix 4700 digital camera's now for about a month, trying to decide which camera I wanted. I must say reading some of the user reviews on the Fuji, I was really having a hard time deciding on what to buy. I had pretty much ruled out the 3000 line of digi cams with Olympus mainly because of it's CHEAPNESS looking case! The case is made out of some kind of hard plastic or wood material that has been painted black, I'm all into technology but the technology has to look good on the outside just as it does on the inside, needless to say, the Olympus 3000 series is just very CHEAP looking, P E R I O D!!!There was really no other camera out on the market that caught my eye other then the Fuji Fine-Pix 4700. Very hi-tech looking camera, love the auto lense cover, I especially love how the LCD is somewhat 'embossed' inside the camera, for instance the Olympus model cameras that have the LCD feature has the LCD almost 1/4 of the way out from the camera, this makes it very easy to damage it, scratch it etc...Fuji really put some serious thought into this camera. One thing I would like to mention is my opinion on the resolution argument. DROP IT! Who cares if the TRUE resolution from the camera is only 2.4 MP??? That is well above PHOTO QUALITY, the final output from that 2.4 MP shot looks pretty damn good if you ask me, I did some test shots as soon as I bought the camera and the shots almost knocked me out of my chair, no complaints here! Some say this camera is overpriced, that you can go out and by a true 3.X camera for the same price, so why spend the same price for a 2.X something camera? We'll look at it this way, you get quite a bit of features with this camera, such as all the photo mode's, auto lense cover, very compact camera...the list goes on and on...and the camera is just as hi-tech on the outside as it is on the inside.

I'm glad I decided to go out on a limb and try this camera out.It is a AWESOME camera!..

Well hav e to say even if this performs just like a 2.1 camera I can get it less than most 2.1 cameras. The test photos I looked at had better color than most other camers. Only the nikon had beter color. But the detail on the Nikon was just under the Fuji camera. When printed you could not tell any differance. The Nikon is about $45 dollors more so I'd rather have a 47000 and have the 4.3 mega pixels printed on the outside. HEHEHE..

Why did they get rid of the remote trigger ability that was in the MX-700 range. I want to be able to have my PC trigger the camera and download the resultant image then delete it from the camera...

This camera rules. Ignore most of those negative comments above.. forget the 4mp rant [show me a 1600x1200 camera that has these features!] - the camera takes great pictures, has a ton of features and is a worth the price [~650$]Battery power is above average [using only 2 NiMh 1600mA] And neat features have been packed into this camera. The manual features make it more than just a point-and-shoot camera.This camera stores images fast! Watch out for the flash, that could get 'clutzed' off. Metal frame though. Cool James Bond feel.

Have a blast. 90 seconds *is* a long time.400 images in 15 days... thats enough JPG's to sell me on it...

Upgraded from the Kodak DC290. The Fuji blows it away. 8 x 10 pics printed on an Alps MD-5000 dye-.

Sub printer were soft fromthe Kodak. The Fuji rivals 35mm prints. Got so excited over the 8x10's that I had to purchase another printer to do poster prints. I'm awating the arrival of an Epson stylus photo 1270...