Click On Photos To Enlarge
Photos By Michael Dubiner

   

      

FUJIFILM FINEPIX F10-A STREET PHOTOGRPHERS DREAM DIGITAL CAMERA
(But you may not want to rush out to buy it yet, there may be better to come next month)

The Voice Behnd The Lens
Writings on Photography and Beyond.
With writer, street, documentary photographer Michael Dubiner.

     For those who have been with this column over the past few years, it is obvious that I have been obsessed with the idea of a small digital camera, with good low light capacity, to effectively emulate the high speed Black & White films that can shoot at 1600 or 3200 ISO. The FUJIFILM FINEPIX F10 comes close. And hopefully an even more versatile camera, the E900 will be released by Fujifilm next month.

Until recent history, Black & White photography was limited to 400 ISO films, pushed when necessary. Color films were initially much slower and gradually started raising their speed. Then came the modern ISO 3200 films embodied by Kodak TMax Black & White3200 film. Hand held evening and low light indoor photography became a reality.

Higher ISO's have always come at the cost of higher noise with digital cameras. There was the same tradeoff with film. Film's grain pattern is generally more pleasing to the eye than Digital's "grain". There is some argument as to whether it is because "film grain" is what we are used to or because of other reasons. In any event, most Street Photographers have strived to eliminate unpleasing grain would choose the look of "film grain" as opposed to "digital grain.", when stuck with one or the other.

The F10 has a truly revolutionary sensor, as far as prosumer digital cameras are concerned. DSL's, often use larger chips to capture the digital image. If they do not, it is the body, the lens and software that makes than a better camera than the F10. Prosumer cameras use a postage sensor, the sized referred to as APS. The latest 7+ mega pixel sensor that is used in most cameras is manufactured by Sony. Each company has competed to improve their software architecture to accommodate this sensor. In order to miniaturize the camera, the sensor size must be limited unlike their larger cousins, the DSL's. The F10 has a 6.3 mega pixel sensor. In the past, Fujifilm interpolated their mega pixel count, arguably inflating it unfairly. This sensor is a full interpolated 6.3 mega pixels. What is unique about this camera is that it comes with an ISO rating of 1600. While in my opinion, this camera should only be used at a maximum of ISO 800, it will capture a usable image at the higher ISO, if necessary, and it shoots genuine usable images at ISO 800.

I am not going to go into all the specifications of the F10. Suffice it to say that it is a small, simple, camera that can do what my expensive film cameras can do with that high ISO film. In addition, you get all the benefits of digital. To learn more about nitty gritty of this camera, you can go to http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/fuji_f10.html for a full review and to the forums at dpreview.com or the promo stuff from Fujifilm at http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/digitalF10Overview.jsp

But don't necessarily buy yet! Fujifilm has announced the E900 due out in October. While it will not be as small as the F10, and it appears to have a maximum ISO of 800, the camera will probably outshine the performance of the F10. It is almost certainly going to have a sensor that is the same or similar to that used in the F10. Also, Fujifilm's E900 is the first prosumer camera that has announced a true (read uniterpolated} 9 mega pixel count.

The first image shows what the F10 can do that the others cannot. Lots of post processing, but I was able to get the image of this wonderful woman. We were at a wedding on the dimly lit porch of a country club. If I were using flash, the first shot would have been the last secretive one. Instead, I was able to get a series of shots, without her ever knowing. Her slight movement magnifies her energy and gives the image a feeling of being there. Using a flash would have frozen her hand, lit her artificially (that pasted in the picture look, blown out additional highlights in the wall behind her and would have rendered the left background almost completely dark. I have used at least half a dozen prosumer digital cameras extensively. None of those cameras could have taken this shot. DSL's can get the shot, but not significantly better. And I never would have been able to take my brick unobtrusively to the wedding, let alone surreptitiously enough to manage this shot.

Why do I choose to show the rear of this camera? Because of another stunning feature of this camera. A 2 ½ inch LCD that takes up 2/3 of the rear. The bigger the better and you would never expect this size LCD on such a small camera. Bigger cameras are sometimes bigger for a reason. This camera lacks an optical viewfinder to eliminate size, which would eliminate the camera for many people. I rarely use any viewfinder for Street Photography as my images are taken surreptitiously, normally, from a camera hanging from my neck, high up on my body. For the moment, this technique, with this and all other prosumer cameras has had to be abandoned. More on that later.

The camera is the fastest digital I have used. On in around 1 ½ seconds and the first shot fired a second or so later. Also, there is virtually no shutter lag.

Other upsides of the camera, it is easy to use and as I said before, it is quite small. Small is important! My prior "carry around" camera was the Canon S70. It was slightly bulkier and I used it less. In part, it was less fun and easy to use.

There are plenty of downsides.

First and foremost, it only shoots in JPEG format. While the file size is huge, over 17 mega pixels when the file is opened, you do not have the versatility of RAW mode. In RAW mode, with other cameras you can "push" the camera by adjusting it to -2 exposure adjustment and then re-adjust the image when converting from the RAW mode. This raises your shutter speed 2 "stops", sometimes greatly minimizing hand blur, the most common cause of blur in these cameras. The image may not be perfect, or may require other significant post processing, but at least you can get the shot. With JPEG, a 1 stop underexposure is about your reasonable limit. I have read that this camera should be adjusted for -1/2 to -2/3 underexposure so that highlights are not blown out. That is what I have been shooting at for all my shots. That is wonderful for the Street Photographer who will gladly take the underexposure so that the shutter speed is automatically set higher if your lens is already open all the way. With this adjustment, which can be automatically set to remain the "current" setting and which can be changed easily, the "effective ISO" is 1000 when the camera is set at ISO 800, an even faster speed

The above said the E900 features a maximum ISO rating of 800, although there is a mention of ISO 1600 on the Fujifilm promo site. If it is the same or a similar sensor as used in the F10, the rating should really be ISO 1000. As to the sensor, it must be the same or better, as the E900 is a couple of months newer and significantly more expensive and full featured. Plus, it uses the RAW format, among others, so that if it works like the other RAW formats I have used, it will give those extra 2 stops, when needed. If all is as expected, this camera has the possibility of outperforming any film I have used for Street Photography for low light image making. My formula with TMax 3200 film was to shoot at ISO 1600 and tell the lab to process as if I shot at 3200. I overexposed and "pushed" the film. Why? Because, through experimentation, I found it gave me the contrast I needed when shooting in low light situations. With the E900, +or- 3200 ISO shooting may be possible with a pocket digital camera.

I digressed, the downsides. As I mentioned earlier, the camera has a usable ISO 1600 setting. However, the image is so highly processed for noise reduction that it looks as much like painting as it does a photograph.

The camera uses those xD- Picture cards. While the camera is on loan for free, I had to buy one of those stupid cards to test the camera. The card supplied might hold (2 images at the maximum image quality the camera produces.

The card is ejected from the camera unless you are careful and the battery has no holder so it tends to slip out if care is not used. On the other hand, I shot 300 images over a weekend, some with flash and a couple of movies on one battery that still had plenty of juice the next day.

The F10 is amateur in every way except for the build and looks. No aperture priority or shutter priority, no ability to adjust noise correction, and as mentioned no RAW or optical viewfinder. It is a point and shoot all the way. However, the camera gives you enough options to compensate for 90% of the problems if you understand digital cameras. If you do not, Fuji camera related forums like those at dpeview.com will explain what to do or you can email me at duby@duby.com and I can tell you what you need to know. The camera adjustments are easily made and the important ones like ISO settings and over and underexposure are simple and quick.

The camera is silver. Personally, I am convinced that the black cameras are less obtrusive. The E900 is matte black.

The F10, like all other prosumer cameras that I have ever seen does not allow for the attachment of a neck strap. It has a place for the wrist strap and nothing on the other side. That leaves no ability to use the camera in my normal way, hung around my neck, snapping while I am standing or walking, framing the shot by what I think the camera lens is seeing. It is very easy once practiced. I have not come up with a good way of shooting surreptitiously with these prosumer cameras other than palming the camera with a finger on the shutter. Since my hand is not always in the same place every time I do this (as it is when the camera is resting on my chest), it is much harder to frame the shot, or even sometimes to get it at all. Once I get the camera I want, just like my beloved film camera, the Contax G2, I may have a carry case made for it so I can carry it the way I want it.

A word of warning. Don't ignore the flash! If you need the shot, it is low light and the obtrusiveness of the flash does not matter (i.e.: the groom kissing the bride) go ahead and take a shot or 2 with the flash and then turn it off.

By the way, the camera works great outdoors as well. It is not only a high speed, low light camera.

Also, Fujifilm is counting on it's sensor to carry the ball for its upcoming line of prosumer cameras. The F10 and the E900 do not use image stabilization as is becoming common with other manufacturers. The advertising can be confusing. Fujifilm reduces camera shake allowing you to shoot in low light by reducing noise at higher ISO, allowing you to use a higher shutter speed in low light situations. Image stabilized cameras or lenses allow you to shoot in lower light because the "anit-shake mechanism" in effect "absorbs" shake which causes the blur in most low light images. Since it stands to reason that the Fujifilm sensor would be even more effective at reducing camera shake if it was coupled with image stabilization, that feature would have been appreciated.

But who am I to complain? I should have an E900 for review my hands in a few weeks. With RAW format, high ISO capability, an optical viewfinder and a full range of features that higher end prosumer cameras have, it should be a wonder if it works as advertised.

But, you always pay a price. The E900 should be selling for 1 ½ times what the F10 costs or more. By the way, I have seen the F10 selling for as low as $289. The E900 will be larger, not big, but bigger. The LCD will only be 2", not the 2 ½ "of the F10. Of course, it will be slightly heavier.

Should you buy into the revolution? It depends. If you have $300 or so to blow on a useful toy, buy the F10. On the other hand, the E900 will be in the stores by the end of October. Reviews on the camera should be out in 3 weeks or so on this site and on others. You may want to wait so see if the tradeoff between features and weight are worth it.

Katrina. What can I say? It is a massive tragedy, another national tragedy.

The incredible failure of local, state and federal officials to pre-prepare for this storm is a disgrace.

If we can agree on anything, it is that government needs to be there when individual, corporate, philanthropic, faith based, volunteer and other non-governmental types are unable to cope with an emergency. That, and protection of life and property. I never understood in the day before the storm hit the Gulf Coast why the Superdome was referred to as a "refuge of last resort". The reason was simple. While the building gave refuge from the winds and some of the rain of the storm, it was not stocked with food water, sanitary and medical supplies and security so that it could be called a "shelter", as in Red Cross Shelter, the way we have them in Florida. Here a "shelter" is equipped to house, feed and secure the short term residents. There are special needs shelters that are equipped to care for the frail, elderly and needy. Where was that system in the City that most Americans knew as most vulnerable to a hurricane? Where were the helicopters dropping food supplies, water, sanitary supplies and the military to restore law and order at the Superdome and the Convention Center? It was inexcusable the man in charge of FEMA, the apparently less than qualified Mr. Brown, knew about the disaster at the Convention Center after I did, because I was watching CNN.

At the very beginning of a new century, we are again learning that our government is unable or unwilling to do what its citizens expect most, to fulfill its roll in protecting them. This is already becoming a political issue. It should not be. It is a colossal failure of government, at all levels, to concentrate on what is most important to its citizenry. Now watch us spend one or two hundred billion dollars and mourn the lost lives when we could have saved it all for maybe 1/10 of that money.

(The author, Michael Dubiner is a professional image maker and lawyer who lives in Wellington, Florida. His articles will appear twice monthly on PixiPort. His work can be seen at PixiPort.com and at his web site, duby.com.)