Hi, Meylot.

Did you consider the Fuji 9600/9100? This has a fold out LCD which allows groundlevel and overhead shots. Doesn't twist though.These shots from it today:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

More in the 'back to the bridge camera link' belowJohn.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr..

Yea, this Fuji S9100/S9600 was suggested to me by several other persons, and I admit it looks very powerful. Big sensor, wide angle, only the CompactFlash memory... I've seen everywhere only SecureDigital so far, so I'm little afraid..

Pity, that there's no full review on dpreview.com, this is why I haven't been interested in it earlier.Thanks, I'll surely consider this camera in my shopping fun. ..

I think CA is more a lens issue rather than a body issue..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

I dont have much experience with them but the Fujis sound like fantastic cameras... people knock the G7 a lot, but the more I learn about photography, the better my G7 responds, I think in manual mode, it's a very able camera... some people also think highly of the LX2, though some people say it has noise issues..

If you can wait there are some exciting cameras in the superzoom range coming out from Fuji and Panasonic.....

This is the one Id be curious about... 27 is a nice wide at the wide end (I love shooting wide)http://www.dpreview.com/news/0707/07072605fujifilms8000fd.asp..

1. Such issues arise in all cameras near extreme-ends of zoom. Panasonic FZ50 does a better job in reducing this before saving the images. Also at 100% view on monitor, you are typically viewing the image at 40"x60"!! At size 10"x15" (fit on 17"monitors), you probably won't see these.2. And Fuji S6000 & 9100 are worse on that!.

Meylot wrote:.

Damn! These palings bottom and each detail look awful because of hugefringing...What do you think? It doesn't exist on each photo, maybe it won't beso bad?.

Meylot..

Keep smiling, Ajayhttp://picasaweb.google.com/ajay0612(Thanks for your precious time & invaluable comments)..

I know that on monitor I see it in much higher size, but I've compared many sample photos and S5 looks significantly worse. And as for:.

Ajay0612 wrote:.

2. And Fuji S6000 & 9100 are worse on that!.

I observe something diametrically opposite...

Meylot wrote:.

Ajay0612 wrote:.

2. And Fuji S6000 & 9100 are worse on that!.

I observe something diametrically opposite..

Just follow the following links to learn what reviewers have observed:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms9000/page6.asp(Specific image quality issues)http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S9100/S9100A4.HTM(Chromatic aberrations)Keep smiling, Ajayhttp://picasaweb.google.com/ajay0612(Thanks for your precious time & invaluable comments)..

I'm not expecting that chromatic aberration won't occur, but less noticeable is better. I'm still holding by opinion that Fuji's issues are lower than Canon S5's..

When I compare your links with this below I observe very similar problems on similar level. If one is better, I say Fuji.http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons5is/page6.asp.

However it is not a point of my posting here. Which camera would you suggest from this class?..

As someone who shot with a film SLR for decades and owner of the FZ50, I'm trying to do my best not to comment in these "looking for" threads unless one really screams out for the Pany. This one does..

Just one guy's opinion but I don't think you can buy a better bridge camera than the FZ50. When you measure it against any of it's direct competitors, it always seems to offer more..

Don't worry about the noise, it's less of an issue than many make it out to be. Take a look at the pics posted in the Panasonic Talk forum and let your eyes be the judge, Meylot..

Re SLR-like models, to paraphrase a famous man: If you can find a better camera, buy it...

No, you are mistaken. The Fuji S6000 is much better than rivals Canon S3/S5 and Sony H?. Not sure about Panasonics though. The Leica lenses may be better..

What you need to do is look at everyday images, not the extreme ones on camera review sites. The most obvious ones are shooting through trees at a bright background. If you are getting CA that bad on light coloured pillars etc then there is something terribly wrong..

Cheers..

I noticed you didnt put a price limit on it, why not jsut make the jump to an SLR. THe Olympus 410 or 510 kit is very affordable, not a huge camera, and offers a lot of bang for the buck... there are several not expesive do it all lenses out there trhat arent pro quality, but better then non-DSLR like the Sigma 18-200 OS and the Tamron 18-250... just another thought...

Panasonic FZ50. And regarding noise problems, I suggest you to stick to ISO100 and below with all P&S. Personally I would shoot RAW to capture maximum details and PP every image..

Meylot wrote:.

However it is not a point of my posting here. Which camera would yousuggest from this class?.

Keep smiling, Ajayhttp://picasaweb.google.com/ajay0612(Thanks for your precious time & invaluable comments)..

Meylot wrote:.

Yea, this Fuji S9100/S9600 was suggested...only the CompactFlash memory... I've seen everywhere onlySecureDigital so far, so I'm little afraid..

Actually, although I can't imagine what you think the problem is with CF, it has two memory card slots anyway: one for CF, one for xD..

Meylot wrote:.

Pity, that there's no full review on dpreview.com, this is why Ihaven't been interested in it earlier.Thanks, I'll surely consider this camera in my shopping fun. .

Here's a review of it's predecessor:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms9000/.

I don't recall any differences between what I read there and what I got with my own S9100, and I've heard repeatedly that the S9100 is nearly the same thing with only minor or insignificant upgrades, so I think you can pretty much treat that as a S9100 review..

If the flippy-tippy screen is paramount, you've got no better bet than the Panasonic FZ30 or FZ50, because the Fuji S9100 screen is only tippy, not flippy. I say that as someone who picked an S9100 myself over the FZ30/50; I went that way because I figured the screen would be nifty but not essential and the Fuji's screen's mobility was close enough, plus the Fuji's a bit smaller and lighter with a lower pixel density on the sensor and a lower price. The tippy screen on the S9100 was one of the reasons why I got that instead of the cheaper S9600 with it's bigger sensor (the others being more memory capactiy, a convenient additional control wheel on the body, and maybe another thing or two I'm forgetting; others would also add that it has a flash mount and S9600s don't), but the added "flippy" part, the difference from S9100 to FZ50, wasn't a high enough priority to me; otherwise I'd have a Panasonic FZ50 myself..

With the flippy-tippy screen as a priority: the only others I can think of are on the Canon S3 and S5 and a couple of Canon A-series compacts (with numbers in the 600s), which are just not the same sorts of camera as an FZ50 and not meant to compete with it... and the only other cameras that are similar to an FZ50 in most other ways (like Fuji's S-series) don't have it's flippy-tippy screen... just some go about halfway there.....

Why a compact? D40X is a good value for money..

Or are you really dependent on live view and video (which are the only major features missing in SLRs)http://budding-nature-photographer.blogspot.com/..

I am afraid SLR is not an option, even cheapest kits are just little too expensive..

Delvo wrote:.

The tippy screen on the S9100 was one of the reasons why I got that instead of the cheaper S9600.

Something wrong here, or I am tired now? S9100 and S9600 is the same.I understand that from S9100 and FZ50 you've chosen S9100, right?.

If the flippy-tippy screen is paramount....

Finally I could live without it, if it costs over 50$ (it's the price difference in my country).

Farther Fuji has less pixels on larger CCD, standard batterys and lovely wide angle (28mm vs 35mm), while Panasonic FZ50 has optical IS - very wanted in S9100. Reviews say that FZ50 has also worse IQ...

Meylot wrote:.

Something wrong here, or I am tired now? S9100 and S9600 is the same..

Yes, I got my 6 in the wrong place. Everywhere I said "9600", I meant "6000" (apparently also called "6500" depending on country). Almost the same specifications, but fewer pixels on a smaller sensor, a screen that doesn't move, one less physical control wheel, and no flash hotshoe..

Meylot wrote:.

Panasonic FZ50 has optical IS- very wanted in S9100. Reviews say that FZ50 has also worse IQ..

Fuji's funny about image stabilization. Their website says they have it, but if you take a close look at how they describe it, it's "fake IS". They're just talking about a mode setting which uses a slow shutter speed to avoid catching incidental movement in the picture, uses ISO or F/# to compensate for the reduced light, and counts on Fuji's nifty high-ISO performance to retain image quality with those settings. In other words, it's the same "manual image stabilization" photographers have used all along; they're just saying Fuji cameras are better at it. There's no separate new part built in there dedicated to moving things around to cancel out incidental camera movement, as "IS" is conventionally used to mean. They'd probably also call a tripod an "auxilliary IS attachment"...



(It does make me curious what speed people normally shake their cameras at, because that would set the lower limit for shutter speed to do your own IS that way...).

Anyway, I've had no problem with the lack of IS. I just hold the camera in both hands up against my head using the viewfinder, or sometimes find something else to stabilize against like a tree or the concrete-&-brick wall of a public fountain's pool or my car. I've taken pictures with the little shaky-hand icon up warning me that it could be a problem, and they come out fine anyway, but sometimes I adjust my shutter speed if it worries me. I find IS to be rather inflated in importance. But then I guess that's what you'd expect from someone who bought a Fuji knowing they only had "fake" IS! ..