Used Fuji S2 body

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by RichA, Apr 9, 2005.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I've been offered one for $830.00 in good shape.
    Should I take it or is it too outdated now?
    -Rich
     
    RichA, Apr 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sounds a bit expensive but other than that it's a good camera if you can
    live with having to use non-rechargable batteries.
     
    Jeroen Wenting, Apr 9, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. I don't know if that's a good price today.

    I *do* know that I've had an S2 for 2.5 years now and I'm still very
    pleased with it.

    Depending on what you do, and what other equipment you have, it may or
    may not be the right camera for you to add now; you haven't told us
    anything about your needs.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 9, 2005
    #3
  4. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Just general photography. I used to own Olympus gear but sold it
    when digitals got going. The Fuji means Nikon lenses.
    -Rich
     
    RichA, Apr 9, 2005
    #4
  5. RichA

    Pete D Guest

    You can use NiMh AA's for the main batteies, the non rechargeables are for
    the flash aren't they?
     
    Pete D, Apr 9, 2005
    #5
  6. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I figure if they're getting $500 used for a Canon Rebel, then the Fuji
    must be worth $800.
    -Rich
     
    RichA, Apr 9, 2005
    #6
  7. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Alan Browne, Apr 9, 2005
    #7
  8. What non-rechargable batteries? I use normal NiMH AAs. In fact, the
    battery system *not* using any proprietary battieries was a factor in
    my choosing this camera.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 10, 2005
    #8
  9. I moved briefly (it turned out) to Olympus from 1987 to 1994, before
    autofocus sucked me back to Nikon. So the basic digital choice at the
    end of 2002 was D100 vs. S2. I'm very happy with my S2.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 10, 2005
    #9
  10. The S2 requires AAs as well as CR123s. You may be confused with the S3 which
    drops the requirement for the latter.
     
    Jeroen Wenting, Apr 10, 2005
    #10
  11. Flash, AF motor, and light meter.
    Only the sensor and the electronics related to that directly (CF card
    reader/writer, screen) are powered by the AAs.
     
    Jeroen Wenting, Apr 10, 2005
    #11
  12. RichA

    Crownfield Guest

    actually, that is not true. i do not know why you think that.
    you should get one, and try it.

    the only thing that does not work
    with the CR123 out is the built in flash.
     
    Crownfield, Apr 10, 2005
    #12
  13. I've owned an S2 since the end of 2002. I've never handled, let alone
    owned, an S3. So I'm pretty sure I'm not confused.

    The S2 does not in fact require the CR123As; it works fine without
    them, except for the builtin flash (which is small, weak, and
    inflexible; can't tilt up to bounce for example). So I find the flash
    no loss.

    And you can, if you wish, buy rechargeable CR123As, though I haven't,
    and hence haven't actually tried them in my S2. See
    <http://www.thomas-distributing.com/delkin-rcr-123a-rechargeable-charger.htm>.
    (They're pretty expensive, and I'd need two sets of two and two
    chargers to be at all happy; so I just skip the CR123As, or use
    ordinary ones if I actually need the built-in flash for anything.)
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 11, 2005
    #13
  14. The S2 body works fine without the CR123As. I use it that way most of
    the time, for thousands of photographs in the last few years. The
    only thing you lose is the built-in flash, which I hardly ever use (I
    use an SB-80DX quite a lot, though).
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 11, 2005
    #14
    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.