Fujifilm’s Finepix HS10 is among the new breed of superzoom cameras utilising, the somewhat cheekily named, backside illuminated CMOS sensor technology. At 10.3Mp there is a drop in image size compared to CCD models, but the light gathering capabilities make up for this, apparently. There’s even one in the iPhone 4, so if it’s …
"There’s even one in the iPhone 4"
Unless the iPhone 4's camera is a massive improvement on its older brothers' cameras, this is not a huge endorsement.
Nobody knows yet
But it has switched from CCD on all current models to backside illuminated CMOS, and physically increased the size of the sensor in proportion to an increase in pixels.
Why worry about the batteries?
Finepix's have used AA for years. They are cheap, have great capacity, and if you run flat in the field you can go and buy some replacements. Or use them in the R/C car in emergencies....
£5 at the most gets you four 2700mAh AA's - not exactly going to break the bank! Three sets plus a charger still comes in less than one replacement Canon battery.
On the basis of the photos shown...
...I can't honestly say I'm all that impressed. And I usually like Fuji stuff.
It was a dull day when they took the pics and the Fuji captured this fact perfectly.
1080p sample please please pllease
ive been thinking about getting one of these primariliy for the 1080p video... great I thought. a reg review....
arg... where is the 1080p video sample????
purty puleeze mister... post one now post one now.
'normal' batteries and an Electronic View finder?
I suspect this camera will run at £3 per hour....
8x 2700mha rechargables + good charger....£30
Good chargers should be able to charge batteries independantly of each other. Ideal for kids toys that seems to require 3.
I note you made no mention (or test) of the continuous shooting modes that this camera offers. 10fps at full resolution, albeit limited to 7 frames (less if using RAW mode), but still a good addition for action shots where you can choose the best one from a bunch taken close togethe.
Just waiting for mine to arrive from amazon, but the delivery is delayed otherwise I would have had it by now :-(
It's a bit gluttonous... I recently bought the K-x, and I get about 1400 or so shots from a set of 4 Lithium batteries.
The images provided are soft and murky. THat sort of money could get you a Canon Powershot G11, which produces nicer results, and also shoots RAW, so you can lift some more detail out of the extremes, and not be hampered by dodgy white balance issues.
A far better choice than this, assuming that the reviewer didn't do it an injustice by just taking manky-looking shots.
This one does RAW as well, it just wasn't mentioned in the review.
I always see people comparing one camera to other models and saying the other does better on XXX where XXX is some random factor. Well, of course you can always pick one aspect that is better. The G11 is 30 quid more at Amazon, has only a 5x zoom rather than 30x, 640x480 movie mode instead of 1080p HD etc.
For the money, this one has loads more features, and comparable image quality with other cameras of its type.
For batteries I'd use HYBRIO type rechargeables, they last longer, and hold charge for many months.
But the photos don't look any better than my £69 Samsung S85
Flash, hood, filters?
Anyone know how it performs with external flash? Any scope for lens hood or filters?
What I really want is a basic DSLR with a manservant to carry a selection of lenses, but we have to cut back on in these economic times, so I'm thinking this could well be a substitute.
My S9500 is old now but this has a lot of features this beastie seems to have lost.
For instancem screw thread in the shutter buttin for a bulb/remote shutter control
and a standard socket for remote flash unit leads.
OK never used any of these but the cameras really fast on has resulted in some rather nice shots at dog agiility shows.
>Up top is smaller viewfinder than previous versions, undoubtedly not a major feature on these cameras, as everyone seems to use the rear screen nowadays.
Everyone except me it seems. Rear screens are awful in anything other than subdued lighting, Viewfinders allow far more accurate focussing/composition in most 'normal' situations.
I have one
I have one. I run it on Eneloops; I much prefer the AA batteries because I can carry spares easily and cheaply, and I don't need yet another charger. I have a great charger for Eneloops, which I already use in my GPS, toothbrush and other equipment.
It gets a lot of criticism from people who seem to expect DSLR quality and/or performance. The images look good at desktop sizes (or on a HDTV), but not at 100% or printed bigger than A4. For all its bulk and controls, it has the tiny sensor of a point-and-shoot compact. When you use the burst modes, the camera gets so busy it has trouble updating the monitor, and then locks up for 15-20 seconds while it processes them. Shot-to-shot time isn't great either. It has RAW, but that's even slower.
Aside from that, it's good. The colours are good and the lens is great. You couldn't get 1-30x on an SLR; it would be too big, it's something you can only build for a tiny sensor. Even the image quality is a step up from my old P&S, and it's nice to have PASM modes, manual focussing and all the other controls.
All this high level zoom sounds good but the reality is anything much over 10x is unusable unless you're using a tripod or have perfect daylight conditions. Even with image stabilisation the smallest hand shake is converted into a nice fuzzy blur.
High speed recording duration
The maximum high-speed recording duration for a single clip varies a lot between cameras using this type of sensor, e.g. 10 minutes for Casio EX-FH20 and 10 seconds for Sanyo VPC-FH1. It's normally hidden in the specs somewhere, and for this camera it looks like 30 seconds. It makes a big difference if you're recording sports. I've found that sometimes high resolution 60fps recording and postprocessing with e.g. Twixtor is a better bet - there are examples of both at spannerspotter.com.