 Better than great for everyday.
This is a great little camera for everyday use, I love it; goes everywhere with me. The picture quality (9MP) is fantastic, and I like the macro and zoom performance. As close to SLR you can get, IMO. If you are looking into serious photography, this will not do. However, fabulous camera for the price!
 A Strange Animal
I'm a huge fan of Fuji's sharpness and color reproduction (at least to my eyes)but as many of the reviews have stated it has its problems too. It has a pretty big CCD compared to many of the other cameras in its class which a huge plus. My biggest complaint with this camera is with the Flash, and its kid of silly. A pop up flash is Okay but there is no Flash on/off feature so if I want to disable the flash during a shot I have to push the whole flash back down. The write time and flash recycle is one of the slowest I've seen but there aren't too many occasions where I can't wait. I'm not sure if it is just my camera but it seems to have some "quirks" such as the LCD going from Bright to Dark, I don't know if it's a power saving feature or what. I was also disappointed in the fact that it didn't have an scene modes other than Portrait, Sports and Night. I don't use them too often but they can be useful to other people who just want to take a picture (e.g. My wife). At least it has a Manual Feature.
If it weren't for the lack of the Flash on/off feature and it's quirky behavior, I would have given it another star.
A good walk-around camera
This compact camera was announced on July 28, 2005 for Fuji's 2006 catalog, and was dropped from their 2008 catalog. That was a long run for a compact model camera. Fujifilm has moved on from it's E-series, and none of their current compact models offer a configuration comparable to the E900. At the time of this writing, remaindered E900 stock is still available on the Internet for around $200, less than half its original retail price. A contemporary camera model with a similar, albeit more fully featured, configuration would be the 12 MP Canon G9, at about $450.
The nine megapixel "Super CCD" featured on this model caused a minor sensation when it was announced. This sensor is still being used in the Fujifilm S9600 model. Super CCD sensors are unique in that their pixels are arranged diagonally, rather than horizontally. This reduces aliasing along diagonal lines (and supports pixel-doubling in Photoshop's ACR).
I considered purchasing this camera when it first came out, but opted instead for a dSLR model. But, now I wanted a compact walk-around camera for a project where a dSLR kit would be too much baggage. The E900 again came under consideration. I was attracted by these features:
~ RAW capture capability (I prefer to shoot everything in RAW).
~ 2xAA battery power is cheap, lightweight and long-lasting (e.g., Sanyo Eneloop).
~ The high ratings for the E900 I read on internet camera review sites.
At just over nine ounces, batteries included, this camera fit my requirement for portability. It is too big to fit in my shirt pocket, but I avoid putting precision instruments in shirt pockets.
Compact cameras are trending toward ever-smaller (including hi-res cameras in cell phones), while dSLR cameras are incorporating more consumer features, like "live view," image stabilization and face recognition. I guess I am becoming a digital Luddite, because Minox-sized cameras do not appeal, nor do SLR cameras laden with techno-froufrou. Offer me a camera with extended dynamic range, higher sensitivity and greater resolution, and I am listening. A camera that pays expressway tolls has some other consumer than me in mind.
The RAW capability of the Fujifilm E900 is seriously under-supported by the manufacturer, to the point of being counterproductive.
~ Selecting RAW capture requires drilling deep into the setup menu on the camera.
~ The RAW developing software included with the camera provides no image adjustments and outputs TIFF files at only 8-bit tonal depth. This obviates all(!) the value of RAW capture.
~ The exposure bracketing feature is not available in RAW capture mode.
I shoot RAW because I process all of my images in Photoshop, where RAW images, with their 12-bit tone depth, accommodate much greater image manipulation before tones start to degrade. Also, using Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), I can optimize white balance and realize another f-stop of dynamic range.
I appreciate that most camera users would not find RAW capture to be of value. Photographers using this camera are likely to use $100 software to adjust their images, which typically functions at 8-bit tonal depth. The extra image data captured in RAW cannot be used by these programs. It makes sense, therefore, that Fuji has dropped RAW support from their current models, except for their Pro dSLR and two high-end "bridge" models.
Here are the compromises/limitations I have discovered so far, comparing images from the E900 to ones from my dSLR:
~ Noise in the shadows. Pixels can't decide what color they are.
~ Color noise. Again, pixels can't decide what color they are.
~ Chromatic aberrations (colored fringes along high contrast edges. I can compensate for some of this when I make my adjustments in ACR).
~ Range of f-stops is limited (f-8 is the highest value).
~ Macro setting works only at the widest focal length, producing "big nose" distortion.
~ The tiny pop-up strobe is only good for fill flash, and even then only at close range.
The camera has a big hunk of chrome bling on the grip, giving it the look of a '58 Roadmaster. On my camera, I covered it up with a piece of gaffer tape.
I am surprised and delighted by the resolution of this 9-MP compact camera when compared to my 8-MP dSLR, considering the glass used in each. I appreciate that I can get immediate exposure feed-back on the image I just shot, including a histogram and flashing pixels to show saturation. (I have uploaded an image illustrating this to the gallery for this camera.)
I am happy with this camera for the purposes I intend.
Camera died after 6 months.
At first I thought this was a great camera, the only downfall was the batteries would drain too quickly. It was also annoying that the batteries and picture card were under the same cover. I bought this camera in July 2006. Then in January 2007 it completely died on me. I couldn't even get the lens to close. I finally brought it to a repair shop and they said the motherboard went on it. The total cost for labor and parts would be $128. I checked and for the price this camera is selling for I'm not sure if it's worth it to repair.
Good Compromise
This camera is larger than a compact, smaller than an SLR and has more pixels than most. It fits the hand well and is easy to hold and carry. It is very flexible, from fully auto to manual and everything in between. I have one gig of memory in it and it will take over 250 pictures at the highest pixel setting. The batteries seem to last forever and I've taken several hundred pictures, including flash without recharging. It works well in available light conditions and I seldom use flash unless it's actually dark. This camera will last me until I eventually replace it with an SLR.
|
DigicamHub
