Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro

Released September, 2006
  • 12.1 MP
  • APS-C 23 x 15.5 mm CCD
  • 2.5" LCD
There is almost no difference between a RAW converted using the Fujifilm utilities and a JPEG straight from the camera, obviously both the RAW conversion engine and camera using the same tone and color mapping.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)

Benchmarks Real world tests of the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro

Low light image quality Highest ISO setting that still achieves great image quality

FinePix S5 Pro
448 ISO
EOS 5D Mark II
1,815 ISO
D3300
1,385 ISO

Color depth The number of variations of color the camera can capture

FinePix S5 Pro
21.6 bits
D7200
24.5 bits
D3300
24.3 bits

Dynamic range Maximum range a camera can capture in one image from light to dark

FinePix S5 Pro
13.5 ev
Nikon D2Xs
10.9 ev
Rebel T5i
11.2 ev

Photo Gallery Wallpaper quality closeups of the camera

Reviews Word on the street for the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro


8.0
The Fujifilm S5 Pro continues in its predecessors’ tradition of providing superior dynamic range and tonal quality for specialist portrait and wedding photographers, who will be delighted with its outstanding capabilities in these areas, as well as its superb handling, build quality and performance.

9.0
The Nikon's great for stock photography, wildlife and sports, but if your interests are still life, portraiture or more considered pictorial photography, the S5 Pro is the best digital SLR you can get.

Overall

8.4 Out of 10

What People Are Saying Give it to me straight

Sensor

The resolution / detail - whilst good for a 6MP camera - is nowhere near 12 megapixel's worth, and if you need really crisp results for big enlargements this isn't the best choice.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)
Despite this, the S5 produces final JPEG images that are 4256 x 2848 pixels, or 12.12 megapixels, and RAW files that are 3043 x 2036, or 6.98 megapixels, which will inevitably resurrect the old arguments about Fuji’s image interpolation that have been echoing around the forums and letters pages since the Super CCD was first introduced.
by TrustedReviews (Feb, 2011)
Its high-ISO noise reduction is one of the best I’ve seen from any DSLR, producing noise-free images at 1600 ISO and acceptable shots at 3200 ISO.
by TrustedReviews (Feb, 2011)

Image quality

There is a clear 2.0 EV difference in total dynamic range between the 100% and 400% settings, and it's possible, with careful exposure, to get almost 12EV out of a JPEG - this puts the S5 Pro streets ahead of all its competitors.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)
The S3 Pro offered three main picture modes: Standard, where you could adjust the dynamic range (normal and wide), contrast, sharpness, tone and saturation; F1 for simulating the smooth tonal properties and wide contrast range of a negative film; and F2 for simulating a high-contrast, high-saturation slide film.
by TechRadar (Mar, 2007)
That said I wouldn't get too excited; the difference between the F1a, F1b and F1c variants is subtle, to say the least (and we couldn't really see any sharpness difference), and F2 is probably best avoided as it uses over-the-top colors and such strong contrast that you lose all dynamic range.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)

Raw

As well as FinePix Viewer (fairly comprehensive browsing, renaming and transfer) you get the 'helper application' FinePix Studio, which offers a selection of fairly basic raw conversion tools (though it must be said it's a huge improvement on the 'Raw Converter LE' that Fujifilm supplied with the S2 Pro - that had no user settings at all).
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)
For a (more) level playing field for comparison we also shot our studio scene in RAW mode with each camera and converted it using Adobe Camera RAW 4.1.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)
On the other hand there are some 'issues'; continuous shooting / buffering when taking advantage of the expanded dynamic range is pretty limiting and the raw files are huge (and don't play well with non-Fuji raw converter).
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)

Dynamic range

With all the emphasis on colour and dynamic range another impressive aspect of the S5’s performance has almost been overlooked.
by TrustedReviews (Feb, 2011)
But when it comes to continuous shooting, next to the Nikon D200 - with its fast direct pipes from sensor to buffer - the S5 Pro looks positively pedestrian, and if you do shoot with the dynamic range expansion turned on you'll find yourself hitting the buffer limit with infuriating regularity.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)
Anyone used to the sluggish performance of its predecessors will be pleasantly surprised by the overall improvements in speed, and particularly by the improved buffering, which now allows bursts of up to 21 shots if you're prepared to sacrifice the extra dynamic range and shoot at a D-range setting of 100.
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)

Iso

Noise is essentially non- existent at ISO 100/200, and only slight at ISO 400/800..
by TechRadar (Mar, 2007)
The image processing has been revised heavily to offer better quality and an extra-high ISO 3200 setting.
by TechRadar (Mar, 2007)
The S5 Pro is marginally more sensitive than the D200 at all ISO settings (the D200's ISO setting are pretty much spot on, the S5 Pro's are a little conservative).
by DPReview (Jul, 2007)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

sensor

Type CCD
Megapixels 12.1 MP
Resolution 4256 x 2848
Size APS-C
Area 23 x 15.5 mm
Crop factor 1.6x
Pixel size 29.4 microns
Light sensitivity 100 ISO to 3,200 ISO
Codecs
  1. RAW
  2. JPEG

display

Type LCD
Size 2.5"
Resolution 230 k dots
Has a touch screen No
Has a flip out screen No
Supports live view No

shutter

Min 30 s
Max 1/8000 s

performance

Max continuous shooting None
Continuous shooting None

features

Includes a GPS No
Supports HDR No
Automatic panorama No
Create realistic 3D images No
Image stabilization None

video

Video None

focus system

Type Contrast detection

viewfinder

Viewfinder mirror Opaque
Viewfinder Viewfinder
Type Pentaprism
Coverage 95%
Magnification 0.94x
Viewfinder size 0.6x

form factor

Size 147 x 113 x 74 mm
Thickness 74 mm
Weight 920 g
Is weather sealed No
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus