Canon A95 or Fuji E550

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Actually I like my old Kodak DX3600, but now want the ability to crop and
still make a decent 8x10 print. Even though I am not a novice, the Canon
mode dial makes no sense to me, but everyone says that it makes a great
photo. The Fuji looks a bit more user friendly, but reviews seem to rate
the cameras operation over its image quality. (The Fuji costs less after
rebate). I think I am suffering from information overload.
The question is- if I am reasonably with my old Kodak, would the Fuji at
least produce similar images (only larger) or would I still enjoy another
Kodak with a larger pixel count.
Thanks.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"anonomous" <bencoleman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ioAzd.30691$kq2.13198@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> Actually I like my old Kodak DX3600, but now want the ability to crop and
> still make a decent 8x10 print. Even though I am not a novice, the Canon
> mode dial makes no sense to me, but everyone says that it makes a great
> photo. The Fuji looks a bit more user friendly, but reviews seem to rate
> the cameras operation over its image quality. (The Fuji costs less after
> rebate). I think I am suffering from information overload.
> The question is- if I am reasonably with my old Kodak, would the Fuji at
> least produce similar images (only larger) or would I still enjoy another
> Kodak with a larger pixel count.
> Thanks.

I haven't got a Fuji and can't really comment on it very accurately, but
based on the reviews, it has some great strengths and also some
odd ideosyncracies. One strength is the zoom lens, which is both
wider and longer than the Canon. And you can get accessory lenses
that make it even wider and longer if you want to pay extra.

One odd ideosyncracy is that, to take advantage of the best image
quality, you're required to use an interpolated mode that produces
12 mp images. That seems really rather weird to me, requiring you
to produce much larger files with little or no more information in order
to get the best quality.

In my personal opinion all the cameras from all the reputable
manufacturers make acceptably good images. Look at the photos
and reviews at Steve's digicams, dpreview, and elsewhere. If the
photos look good to you, and I'm betting they both will, then you
can pick the camera that has the most features that you want.

Alan

 

[dylan]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

For the 14 A95 modes take a look at
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/a95.html#specs. You don't have
to use them all if you don't want to )

"anonomous" <bencoleman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ioAzd.30691$kq2.13198@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> Actually I like my old Kodak DX3600, but now want the ability to crop and
> still make a decent 8x10 print. Even though I am not a novice, the Canon
> mode dial makes no sense to me, but everyone says that it makes a great
> photo. The Fuji looks a bit more user friendly, but reviews seem to rate
> the cameras operation over its image quality. (The Fuji costs less after
> rebate). I think I am suffering from information overload.
> The question is- if I am reasonably with my old Kodak, would the Fuji at
> least produce similar images (only larger) or would I still enjoy another
> Kodak with a larger pixel count.
> Thanks.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

thanks for the advise. youre right, the images all look good to me. but i
agree with you. for the fuji, i will have to buy their 512mb xd card to
store a reasonable amount of 12mp images.
"Alan Meyer" <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jMydnU9OQJAkeVPcRVn-oA@comcast.com...
> "anonomous" <bencoleman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ioAzd.30691$kq2.13198@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> > Actually I like my old Kodak DX3600, but now want the ability to crop
and
> > still make a decent 8x10 print. Even though I am not a novice, the
Canon
> > mode dial makes no sense to me, but everyone says that it makes a great
> > photo. The Fuji looks a bit more user friendly, but reviews seem to
rate
> > the cameras operation over its image quality. (The Fuji costs less
after
> > rebate). I think I am suffering from information overload.
> > The question is- if I am reasonably with my old Kodak, would the Fuji at
> > least produce similar images (only larger) or would I still enjoy
another
> > Kodak with a larger pixel count.
> > Thanks.
>
> I haven't got a Fuji and can't really comment on it very accurately, but
> based on the reviews, it has some great strengths and also some
> odd ideosyncracies. One strength is the zoom lens, which is both
> wider and longer than the Canon. And you can get accessory lenses
> that make it even wider and longer if you want to pay extra.
>
> One odd ideosyncracy is that, to take advantage of the best image
> quality, you're required to use an interpolated mode that produces
> 12 mp images. That seems really rather weird to me, requiring you
> to produce much larger files with little or no more information in order
> to get the best quality.
>
> In my personal opinion all the cameras from all the reputable
> manufacturers make acceptably good images. Look at the photos
> and reviews at Steve's digicams, dpreview, and elsewhere. If the
> photos look good to you, and I'm betting they both will, then you
> can pick the camera that has the most features that you want.
>
> Alan
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"anonomous" <bencoleman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mOBzd.31280$kq2.21047@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> thanks for the advise. youre right, the images all look good to me. but
> i
> agree with you. for the fuji, i will have to buy their 512mb xd card to
> store a reasonable amount of 12mp images.
> "Alan Meyer" <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:jMydnU9OQJAkeVPcRVn-oA@comcast.com...
>> "anonomous" <bencoleman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ioAzd.30691$kq2.13198@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>> > Actually I like my old Kodak DX3600, but now want the ability to crop
> and
>> > still make a decent 8x10 print. Even though I am not a novice, the
> Canon
>> > mode dial makes no sense to me, but everyone says that it makes a
>> > great
>> > photo. The Fuji looks a bit more user friendly, but reviews seem to
> rate
>> > the cameras operation over its image quality. (The Fuji costs less
> after
>> > rebate). I think I am suffering from information overload.
>> > The question is- if I am reasonably with my old Kodak, would the Fuji
>> > at
>> > least produce similar images (only larger) or would I still enjoy
> another
>> > Kodak with a larger pixel count.
>> > Thanks.
>>
>> I haven't got a Fuji and can't really comment on it very accurately, but
>> based on the reviews, it has some great strengths and also some
>> odd ideosyncracies. One strength is the zoom lens, which is both
>> wider and longer than the Canon. And you can get accessory lenses
>> that make it even wider and longer if you want to pay extra.
>>
>> One odd ideosyncracy is that, to take advantage of the best image
>> quality, you're required to use an interpolated mode that produces
>> 12 mp images. That seems really rather weird to me, requiring you
>> to produce much larger files with little or no more information in order
>> to get the best quality.
>>
>> In my personal opinion all the cameras from all the reputable
>> manufacturers make acceptably good images. Look at the photos
>> and reviews at Steve's digicams, dpreview, and elsewhere. If the
>> photos look good to you, and I'm betting they both will, then you
>> can pick the camera that has the most features that you want.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
I don't know much about the Fuji, but got the A95 recently after using canon
A40 for a couple of years.
The canon is fairly easy to use, including the mode dial. You get the best
of both worlds, easy and quick settings for most situations plus manual
control if you decide to go that route. 5mp is about as high as the normal
amateur will need. A bigger zoom would have been nice, but you can get
accessory lenses for canons.
Dave Cohen