FujiFilm's 12 megapixel F200EXR camera promises a revolution, might just deliver
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Feb 4th 2009 1:25AM
posted Feb 4th 2009 1:25AM
Read -- Official specs
Read -- Preview
posted Feb 4th 2009 1:25AM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Interesting. Hopefully more manufactures realize that only cramping megapixel won't do any good.
What do you mean by "more"? Fuji hasn't realized it either. Well, they did, but when their excellent low pixel, high image quality small cameras weren't selling as well as the 8 and 10 MP monsters 2 years ago, they decided to increase the MP count.
I respect their small cameras, but I'd respect them even more if they made this a 9 MP camera (or less). It would still be marketable, and would provide even better quality.
What exactly was the Super CCD EXR link supposed to do? Because it doesn't seem to work.
Okay, now it works. I'm a bit skeptical, but I can't wait to see the reviews.
try this instead
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092308fujifilm.asp
Yay, more useless, noise-filled crap.
Bring on the compact Four Thirds cameras already.
On the other hand, if this delivers, the combination of EXR and Micro Four Thirds could be an amazing combination.
@msaliver, Fuji already has cameras using Nikon DSLR bodies. I doubt we'll see a move to Four Thirds.
You're a moron, a micro 4/3 camera will be larger than this, especially when equipped with interchangeable lenses.
You ever heard of the Fuji F10, F31? The only compacts with decent noise performance in low light (usable ISO 1600)? The 6MP mode on this camera could be a return to those glory days. Plus a micro 4/3s camera won't be pocketable - it could be the size of a M8, maybe a DP1; definately not as small as this.
"a micro 4/3 camera will be larger than this, especially when equipped with interchangeable lenses."
Who said it wouldn't, and who mentioned interchangeable lenses? Hm, you can now take your derision and turn it on yourself. But first check it out:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compact%5B1%5D
They even use "camera" in there for ya!
YpoCaramel,
I checked out the F31. Thanks for the tip. From the DPReview tests, it looks like they have a decent platform made better by very judicious use of noise reduction. Fuji nailed the balance between noise level and detail retention on that one it seems.
Just wish it had a wider lens (and the use of xD is pretty lame).
A very clean six megapixels on these little cameras would be great.
@Jason
Technically µ4:3 isn't four thirds. Sure it has the same sensor size, but the cameras are not by definition dSLRs.
Asides from that, Fuji did sign on board to the original four thirds standard. They just haven't contributed anything. (probably because the system never managed to gain a sizable chunk of the market)
I wanted to say I was hoping to see people stop complaining about "mexapixel race" since camera manufacturers are now making bigger sensors with same amount of pixels. But Information Central ruined my hopes.
I've also noticed lots of complainers actually "go with the flow", bash products they've never seen or used just because they read few articles that "increasing amount of pixels without increasing sensor size brings more noise and nothing more".
If you want to complain about some specific product, please read reviews first. Or, better, own the product and bash it as much as you like.
Thank you for your time.
Did you read the article? It's not a bigger sensor. It's the same puny 1/1.6" chip. Do you look at the tests of cameras with this pixel density? I do. They're garbage, without exception. Any details that might have been resolved are smeared to oblivion by the noise reduction or buried in the noise. The images look like they've been run through a Photoshop watercolor filter.
Ridiculous megapixel numbers and zoom factors are marketing crap that merely preys on people's ignorance. The biggest problem in point-&-shoot cameras today, after their abysmal picture quality, is their nearly universal lack of reasonable wide angle. People don't think: Where are they using their cameras most of the time? In relatively close quarters, at social or family events and often indoors. They're trying to get everyone in the picture as they're backed up against a wall. Yet manufacturers are pushing "12X zoom!" Idiotic. No one is out birdwatching with a tripod and Canon Ixus.
The problem is that people now will accept nearly anything. The dominance of piss-poor compressed video, which makes a mockery of our ever-larger and better TVs, proves that. This failure to vote against low quality with one's dollar means that high quality is dead, even for those who recognize and are willing to pay for it. In many consumer goods, we saw the peak of quality years ago and we're now on an accelerating slide down.
Enjoy!
@ Information Central: Interesting reading on DPReviw about this camera, because the chip actually offers modes EVEN YOU might see the value in: "The camera is the first to use the company's EXR technology that can use the sensor in three different ways to optimize resolution, dynamic range or low-light performance... The camera is the first to use the company's EXR technology that can use the sensor in three different ways to optimize resolution, dynamic range or low-light performance."
The second two chip functions sure buck the mega-pixel race that we can both agree is utter bullshit.
Panasonic's LX3 isn't garbage.
Hey Rob,
I'll check out the DPReview on it. Thanks for the summary.
@Information Central
As far as modern compacts go, 1/1.6" is actually on the big end (not counting the DP1). Most use 1/1.8" - 1/2.5".
Yeah, some of the chips now are truly laughable.
But I'm talking about something like this:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/22/olympus-drops-jaws-with-retro-micro-four-thirds-concept
@Information Central
I know. I myself am waiting [im]patiently for a compact µ4:3 camera. With the 20mm f1.7 pancake equipped this would certainly be the best *pocketable* low light system money could buy.
This EXR technology is interesting though. While I wouldn't expect miracles, it could potentially offer decent low light in a small package (without having to nix the zoom). The slow lens is troubling though. At its widest it's half a stop slower than the F30, and a stop and a half slower than the LX3.
Haha, I can't believe they're still bothering with xD. At least they figured out to put SD on the camera too, otherwise they wouldn't sell any.
I wonder what the percentage of people who buy this camera and actually end up using xD will be...
Agree, took them too long to see the error of their ways here. I had a Fuji that I really liked and considered them again. But after SDHC came along, I moved on when they didn't. I imagine this one thing cost many sales.
I wish Olympus would make this realization. One thing that has me worried about their µ4:3 model is that it might only support xD.
Why do camera companies always have to express the size of their imagers with these asinine improper fractions? 1/1.6 = WTF??!? Just say 5/8" already!
1/1.6: you only have to check the denominator to compare it to other cameras.
5/8": you have to calculate the exact ratio each time.
I've been waiting for this. My girlfriend needs a new camera, but I can't say I like very much the fact they put over 6 megapixles in a camera that doesn't resolve much more than that - and with all those extra megapixles struggle with low light photography. But seeing it has 12 megapixles kind of put me off, so it better prove itself in reviews. That's more than my dslr with a lot bigger sensor.
The newest compacts definintly can resolve all that resolution, but only in optimal circumstances.
@ Michael Zhou: Please show me the tests that show compacts resolve 12MP, because I am skeptical that many (if any) do. And even if they did "under optimal conditions," my guess is those conditions would never be met in the real world. Thus the high pixel density compact cameras are wasting low-light capabilities, adding noise, and throwing away dynamic range (all of which are really matter in the real world).
The neat possibilities here are with the wide dynamic range since they are using a new technique. I doubt the high-ISO photos will look any better than previous F-series cameras, but you never know.
good for Fuji
i've used Fuji camera (Finepix F20) and it's great.
I have a Fuji camera, which uses xD. They max out at 2GB, which makes them basically useless for super high-res photos and video. Plan on taking a whole pocket full of cards with you if you buy one of these.
dude, read the specs: xD & SD/SDHC Cards.
Thanks, Dave, I missed that.
Okay, so what's the point in having xD support if you can just use SD instead? They're cheaper and have higher capacities.
xD was presumably left in to appease customers that were already forced to buy them for their older Fuji models. It might also have something to do with their agreement with Olympus.
this camera is missing 720p movie recording tho:( the panasonic FX37 can do 720p, would like a camera that can do that.
12Mp is anti-revolution. Six Mp would have been a revolution.
The revolution that Engadget didn't mention in this article is that the chip has three modes, two of which throw out the 12MP resolution:
"The camera is the first to use the company's EXR technology that can use the sensor in three different ways to optimize resolution, dynamic range or low-light performance... An EXR Auto mode lets the camera select which of the three sensor modes is used or the user can make that decision themselves." (from DPReview)
(Sorry to Koby below, I had only meant to post this to Mick, but screwed up)
Maybe this will finally replace my F30, no point and shoot is able to beat it for low light which is basically where most of my friends and I take pictures, ie bars
The revolution that Engadget didn't mention in this article is that the chip has three modes, two of which throw out the 12MP resolution:
"The camera is the first to use the company's EXR technology that can use the sensor in three different ways to optimize resolution, dynamic range or low-light performance... An EXR Auto mode lets the camera select which of the three sensor modes is used or the user can make that decision themselves." (from DPReview)
The LX3 is supposed to be a fairly serious low light performer at least as compacts go. It doesn't have a superCCD, but it does compensate with a fast f2-2.8 lens and slightly larger sensor.
Lumix LX3 FTW!
There's some good deals on the F100fd which is what the F200EXR is likely replacing. Mine should be getting delivered tomorrow.
I think the EXR tech is quite neat. I'd probably just keep it at 6MP and leave it. I only wish the lens' was brighter, that sensor + bright lens would have been great. But instead they put in a dim lens that will likely offset much of the gains in sensor :(
why would you make that assumption? Fuji probably wants to increase its reputation for real superior low light compacts. the lens (hopefully!) won't detract too much if Fuji knows what's good for them. otherwise people are going to flock to the cannons and sonys that they always assume to be the best.
Fuji missed the boat again. No HISTOGRAM! Their manual is online and there is no mention of a histogram anywhere. This camera is strictly for the beginners who think they're gonna "upgrade" from a VGA camera phone all the way to a pocket phone. And then, they must be going green: they recycle coke bottles so they can make zoom lenses that hardly get any light through. You need iso 1200 on the Fuji (f3.3) to match 400 iso (all other factors being equal --which of course they're not) on the Panasonic LX3 (f 2.0). Then of course the Panny has much better Image Stabilization, Raw format, etc.
Fuji: YOU SCREWED UP AGAIN !!!
It's easy to see how the 12 MP model doesn't introduce any new details when compared to the 6 MP model:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf50fd/page6.asp