Fuji S602Z - 6 or 3 M

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by Angel, Dec 14, 2003.

  1. Angel

    Angel Guest

    What's the difference between pixels and effective pixels? The Fuji 602S
    apparently has 3M but effectively writes at 6 M due to some octagonal stuff
    it does with the pixels? Have I got a 6M pixel camera or a 3 million?

    Also, and this might sound stupid - most prints, at least in my holiday
    snapper frame of mind, are 6 x 4 inches, but the camera ratio is not 6 x 4
    so you always have to crop or am I being a ****?
    Angel, Dec 14, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Angel

    Bill Guest

    It's a 3 MP camera, as it states on the box it comes in. It can produce 6MP
    files (by interpolation) of you need a larger file. This is the same as some
    software can do with an image. But it has nothing to do with the octagonal
    shape or staggered arrangement of pixels. That technologhy is supposed to
    give better horizontal and vertical resolution, but not more pixels.
    You should be able to print 4x5 prints without cropping.
    Bill, Dec 14, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Angel

    Canopus Guest

    With most good image software such as Paint Shop Pro etc. you can use
    templates and even create them for printing. If you make or have a 6 x 4
    template then you can drag the image into it, resize it by dragging its
    handles so that it completely fills the template (some of it will be
    slightly outside the template), move it around until what you want is inside
    the template and then print. You can create or choose templates for
    whatever paper size you have and even create cells within the template so as
    to print multiple copies or different pictures on the same sheet.

    Canopus, Dec 14, 2003
  4. I have a 602...
    I take all my pics with it at 6mp and fine jpg mode (best quality
    below the TIF file). I have shot and tested at all teh resolutions and
    digital zooms, and there is no diffeence i can see at 400%
    enlargement, in the details. The higer pixel count is perhaps a tad
    better at some things, but notmuch difference. In theory, the best (as
    in least) compression at 3Mp should yield the best picture..take some
    pics and see for yourself. What the camera does at 6,3, and 1mp it
    seems, is to use less of the sensor..the 1mp at zoom is the same as at
    6mp pixel for pixel, just a cropped version of the bigger image.

    The pic you want printed will be printed at 4x6 or whatever you
    request. if the pic is of the wrong aspect ratio, one of thwo thaings
    can happen - the photo lab will either print it smaller and leave a
    shite border on 2 sides (not likely!) or they will crop off what don't
    fit (in my case, they cetner this pic..my baby in the crib shot now
    has a baby with no head AND no feet!)

    to set the aspect ratio, in most editing programs you can crop to a
    size in inches, or in Photoshop if you bring up the square selection
    tool you can type in 4 and 6 or 8 and 10 ot 6 and 4, etc, and then it
    makes a selection on the pic - you can resize it by dragging a corner,
    or move the whole rectangle around, and it will keep the aspect ratio
    at 4x6, 8x10, etc.

    the best thing to do, and what i did last week, is to make 10 or 15
    pics of various things and take them to the photo lab and see what you
    get back...i gave them sepia times, b&w and b&w with a colored item in
    it, non standard aspect ration (hence baby pic), jpg at various
    compression (350k to over 2Mb) and a 17Mb tif file, other tif files, i
    enlarged a pad part of a pic to the equivlaent of an 8x10.

    i was more than satisfied at everything. Well, the baby pic.. but now
    i know! The 350k and a 2.1Mb files of the same thing, the 350k had
    seme jpeg compression artifacts in it, but nothing too hideous.

    basically figure it this way...for good output, whether at a photolab
    or your printer, you need to print the image at 200-240 DPI. So to get
    a good 4x6 pic, you need a file of no less than 800x1200 pixels. At
    6mp the fuji does an image 2880 wide - good enough for 12 to 14

    So if you are at the zoo and want to take 200 pics, what is the best
    compromise between 6m basic and 3m fine compressions? your call...i
    chose 6mp and 'medium' compression, and i got 223 pics on a a 256mb CF
    card. If i want to print at 5x7 or 4x6 i have a larger image to start
    with, and the slight loses with the more compression I cannot see..but
    that is me, and i doubt as i age my vision will improve. Your mileage
    may vary.

    Chris P in PA, Dec 14, 2003
  5. Angel

    Richard Guest

    The 602z is a 3mp camera (but not a standard 3mp camera!), due to the
    arrangement of the pixels (octagonal as you correctly spotted) it produces
    6mp pictures. When taking pictures at3mp, it doesn't take the native 3mp
    from the ccd (it downsamples the 6mp image), otherwise your picture will be
    at 45 degrees...

    To be honest the 6mp pictures (if downsampled later) are of equal quality
    of a good 4mp camera.

    Fuji's CCDs are really mean't for printing. The whole idea is that you
    shouldn't be able to tell the difference between a print from a fuji 3mp
    and another camera with 6mp printout...

    Richard, Dec 15, 2003
  6. Angel

    Phöènix Guest

    Correct. 35mm are commonly printed 3:2, digital are 4:3 like most PC
    I don't know where you live but in the UK you can find online printers that
    do 4:3 prints e.g. 6"x4.5" or 5"x3.75" rather than 6"x4"
    Phöènix, Dec 15, 2003
  7. Angel

    Mark Herring Guest

    Sorry---completely wrong.....

    Octagonal, diagonal---whatever the shape of the pixels---you do not
    get 6Mp out of 3. The 6Mp is created by interpolation

    Resolution measured in Mpixels is an imperfect definition, but--if
    used consistently--it is very useful. Plus, its all we have.

    Be clear on this: The resolution limit set by the number of pixels
    (ie independent spatial sampling sites) CANNOT be changed by the shape
    or arrangement of the pixels.

    In the extreme, people have said that Fuji did the diagonal thing to
    get better results form horizontal and vertical bar charts. Whatever
    their motive, their unique architecture does not enable 6Mp file sizes
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    Mark Herring, Dec 17, 2003
  8. Here is the exact sensor count, note S602 is a very good value...

    George Preddy, Dec 18, 2003
  9. http://www.pbase.com/image/23420444

    I really need to update the prices on that chart, it's been a few months. I
    used pricegrabber.com for all, here are the prices as of today...

    Fuji S602 (3.1MP) - $418
    Sigma SD9 (10.3MP) - $699
    Fuji S2 Pro (6.1MP) - $1749
    Canon 10D (6.3MP) - $1386
    Nikon D100 (6.0MP) - $1378
    Canon 1Ds (11.1MP) - $6599
    Kodak 14n (13.7MP) - $3654
    George Preddy, Dec 18, 2003
  10. Angel

    Bill Guest

    What?????????? Where on earth do you get your information? Picture at a 45
    degree angle.......sure!

    If you don't know what you're talking about, better not to post!

    Yes it is a 3MP camera, and , with interpolation, it CAN produce a 6MP image
    file, IF the user wants to.

    Bill, Dec 20, 2003
  11. With the same optical resolution as a convention 3MP camera, all else equal,
    yes. The Fuji brick lattice CCD is ever so slightly higher res when
    oversampled than not, but that is because it is a brick lattice and a
    transform needs to take place. It is the proverbial self licking ice cream
    George Preddy, Dec 20, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.