What do yall think about this camera?

[Shadow1]

Fujifilm FinePix s1500FD


i have a Fujifilm FinePix A800 camera and ive taken some really good pics with it such as these:




so obviously the Fujifilm line seems to be good. i wanted to ask you photo gurus here. have yall had experience with this camera or with any cams from the Fujifilm line?

[Shinobi]

I have no experience with Fujifilm's but the best advice I can say is to go try it out.

[zelseman]

If you are wanting to stay with a Point and Shoot instead of a DSLR, then one of those "super P&S" is where you want to be. If i were to get a P&S i would want it to have all the manual features possible and a flash hot-shoe. We dont really know what you shoot and how much you want to spend, so its kinda hard to tell you.

[Shadow1]

If you are wanting to stay with a Point and Shoot instead of a DSLR, then one of those "super P&S" is where you want to be. If i were to get a P&S i would want it to have all the manual features possible and a flash hot-shoe. We dont really know what you shoot and how much you want to spend, so its kinda hard to tell you.

well i WANT a Rebel XT but those run about $600. if i can buy a suspension set up for the price, its too much. lol. $200-$250 is the max i want to spend tho. i dont want a cam with a crap load of settings that ill have to study the manual for 3 months before i use it. lol.

[Julianachos]

Fork out at least $300 or so and get an Advanced Point and Shoot. I had a Kodak Z812 IS before my Nikon D80. It wasn't a bad camera.

[zelseman]

well i WANT a Rebel XT but those run about $600. if i can buy a suspension set up for the price, its too much. lol. $200-$250 is the max i want to spend tho. i dont want a cam with a crap load of settings that ill have to study the manual for 3 months before i use it. lol.

Rebel XT's are not $600. I wouldnt buy an XT. THey are old and somewhat outdated. You can find a gently used Xti or Xsi for that matter, or 20d for around $300-$400. Shop camera forums, ebay, or craigslist for a good deal on gear.
Haha, $600 for an XT! I bought my grandma an Xt this time last year for $340 with everything included and less than 5k shots taken on it.

[Shadow1]

Rebel XT's are not $600. I wouldnt buy an XT. THey are old and somewhat outdated. You can find a gently used Xti or Xsi for that matter, or 20d for around $300-$400. Shop camera forums, ebay, or craigslist for a good deal on gear.
Haha, $600 for an XT! I bought my grandma an Xt this time last year for $340 with everything included and less than 5k shots taken on it.

well i must have been looking at the XTi. lol. i was at walmart and saw it. lol. it was either $399 or $599. one of the two. lol.

[zelseman]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...light=canon+xt
xt for $225

A kit lens with IS can be had for around $120.
If you are buying your cameras from walmart, then you arent going to get the best deal.

[gcvphoto]

No. Bad color scale. Fuji does not make a quality camera. I have had much experience. Stay away from Fuji. Same goes for Kodak. *Remember* These are photography film companies, not camera companies. Stick to Canon or Nikon. Canon originated the DSLR and have always been ahead of all other camera makers.

[zelseman]

No. Bad color scale. Fuji does not make a quality camera. I have had much experience. Stay away from Fuji. Same goes for Kodak. *Remember* These are photography film companies, not camera companies. Stick to Canon or Nikon. Canon originated the DSLR and have always been ahead of all other camera makers.

I would have to disagree that Canon is on top of the DSLR world. I think Canon still offers the larger variety of lenses at a cheaper price, but Nikon is ahead of Canon in the wireless flash game by far. The in camera controls of the Nikon flash system are awesome. So, both systems are very good, each with its own pros and cons.

[gcvphoto]

They invented DSLR. Nikon just followed suit and copied, but couldn't match the quality of the sensor or the color scale that Canon offers.

I would have to disagree that Canon is on top of the DSLR world. I think Canon still offers the larger variety of lenses at a cheaper price, but Nikon is ahead of Canon in the wireless flash game by far. The in camera controls of the Nikon flash system are awesome. So, both systems are very good, each with its own pros and cons.

[zelseman]

They invented DSLR. Nikon just followed suit and copied, but couldn't match the quality of the sensor or the color scale that Canon offers.

I would really like to know where you are getting your information from.
According to a quick google, Kodak released the first DSLR in 1991 called the DCS-100. However, Nikon released a body several years before that was an electronically controlled still camera so its not like Canon was worlds ahead of Nikon by any means. What makes Canon cameras so much better than Nikon?
The only reason that I bought Canon of Nikon was because I had used Canon film cameras and was used to ergronomics of the bodies, I also had a few EF lenses laying around and they would not have worked on Nikon bodies, and Canon offers more lenses in different monetary levels and more focal lengths than Nikon. However, I would still be extremely able to shoot for a living with a Nikon body. Saying that Nikon cant match the quality of the sensor or the color scale of Canon is just not true.
Read through some of this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...-d3-d300.shtml
Nikon's flash system alone is a solid reason why I know a few of my photographer friends have chosen Nikon.

[ilovemycb7]

I would really like to know where you are getting your information from.
According to a quick google, Kodak released the first DSLR in 1991 called the DCS-100. However, Nikon released a body several years before that was an electronically controlled still camera so its not like Canon was worlds ahead of Nikon by any means. What makes Canon cameras so much better than Nikon?
The only reason that I bought Canon of Nikon was because I had used Canon film cameras and was used to ergronomics of the bodies, I also had a few EF lenses laying around and they would not have worked on Nikon bodies, and Canon offers more lenses in different monetary levels and more focal lengths than Nikon. However, I would still be extremely able to shoot for a living with a Nikon body. Saying that Nikon cant match the quality of the sensor or the color scale of Canon is just not true.
Read through some of this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...-d3-d300.shtml
Nikon's flash system alone is a solid reason why I know a few of my photographer friends have chosen Nikon.

Interesting.

Any high end body will produce comperable results I'd think. Hell the sony a700 (I believe) that my friend just bought uses a nikon d300 cmos sensor. So I think once you get up into that level it's preference, and often times narrowed down to canon/nikon for the sake of lenses and popularity.

It's like anything in the world. Different products exist for a reason. If only one worked the others wouldn't be arround.

[zelseman]

It's like anything in the world. Different products exist for a reason. If only one worked the others wouldn't be arround.

This is also what I am saying. You cant simply say one IS better than the other. One is better than the other at certain things, and vise versa. Once you get to the pro world of bodies, its a toss up.

[Tnwagn]

And even then it all comes down to the person behind the lens. I'm sure there are guys that could take better pics than me with my D40 than I could take with their professional gear.

As to which brand is best, it comes down to personal preference. They all make quality gear.