Have the Fuji S pro Dslrs become classics or obsolete ?

Messages
3,379
Name
Phil aka Phiggys
Edit My Images
No
Canons original 5D is now referred to as the classic :)
But what of the old Fuji/Nikon bodied series of cameras i.e.: Spro1-Spro2-Spro3-Spro5 ?
Is anyone here still using them ?
My first digital camera was the Nikon coolpix 990 and soon after dipping my toe into digital, I realised my Arsenal of Nikon lens were sitting pretty redundant along with my film bodies:(
So time to look for a Dslr that I could use some of my lovely glass on.
Nikon D1 wow how much errrr I think not :eek:
A little bit more searching on the internet came up with Fuji S1pro Dslr a Nikon body and mount with Fuji electronics inside at half the price of the Nikon D1 and at the time pretty impressive images.
As luck would have it a local camera dealer was advertising a S/h one :)
A quick call and a visit and a deal was done letting my boxed spare Nikon F5 body go paid for the Fuji S pro1 .
And so my journey in digtal moved to Dslr territory :):fuji:& :nikon:
So as the heading asks Classics or Obsolete ?
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,481
Edit My Images
No
Although I shot Nikon I had an S5 pro for studio portrait work, skin tones were awesome, I believe a lot of the wedding guys favored them for that very reason, sold mine when I went Fuji X.
 
Messages
6,083
Name
Storm Trooper
Edit My Images
Yes
It's a back up....back up. My nephew used it when I took him to BSB/BTCC, he's doing a photography course now but needed a dslr that shoots video too so had to buy a low entry Nikon model.
 
Last edited:
Messages
11,175
Name
Garry Edwards
Edit My Images
No
I've had all of their models over the years, the S2 and the S3 are still in a cupboard, the S5 died, but got a lot of use so didn't owe me anything. In their day, they were great cameras in terms of image quality, but let down by the bodies, because as I understand it Nikon wouldn't make the pro bodies available to Fuji.

The history of my purchases is that I bought the Nikon D100 (I think) but found it virtually unsuable, so took it back and got the S1 Pro instead. I have a vague feeling that it cost me around £1700, about 15 years ago - we can get a lot of camera for that kind of money today. I always felt that the Fuji S series were under rated, they were never a commercial success but deserved to be.

I've never understood the "Classic" thing - to me, a camera is a tool and when it has been replaced by something better it either goes in the bin or goes into the cupboard as a backup. Some people of course sell their old cameras, but as a pro, I can't do that because by the time I'm done with them, my cameras look like they've been in a war or two and aren't fit for sale.
 
Messages
15,489
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
I rather suspect classic status denotes something that's been superceded for which people retain an affection, rather than something replaced by another something which worked better. There are probably few modern cameras that could be labelled as classic that way.
 
Messages
4,452
Name
Robert
Edit My Images
Yes
All digital cameras are like most things in a digital world. Like your CD collection you spent thousands on and collected for decades, worthless!

If you're lucky they may gain some value as a niche novelty item like a old games console.
 
Last edited:
Messages
15,489
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
It might have been somewhat different if the reviewer had played to the Nikon's strengths and the Fuji's weaknesses instead of the other way around. Someone above suggested that this camera/sensor benefited from being exposed far to the right as was done here, but if instead they had exposed far to the left and tried to recover shadows - where the Nikon sensors are very strong - then we would see a different take on dynamic range. But that is a very film-like response from the Fuji, and a shame that they don't seem to have pursued that sensor technology.
 
Messages
7,311
Name
Richard Alan Jones
Edit My Images
Yes
It might have been somewhat different if the reviewer had played to the Nikon's strengths and the Fuji's weaknesses instead of the other way around. Someone above suggested that this camera/sensor benefited from being exposed far to the right as was done here, but if instead they had exposed far to the left and tried to recover shadows - where the Nikon sensors are very strong - then we would see a different take on dynamic range. But that is a very film-like response from the Fuji, and a shame that they don't seem to have pursued that sensor technology.
Even if you did compare shadow recovery on a modern sensor to highlight recovery on a Fuji you'd still find the Fuji ahead. I've had the opportunity to try. I can't find the thread with the pictures I want to post, but these go some way to showing how much you can get from an SR sensor: Usually something like a 3 stop pull would bring everything back. The real hard part was knowing how far you could push your exposure off the scale when shooting and still be able to retrieve it in post as the camera previews used nowhere near the full dynamic range they could.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/editting-before-and-after-pics.470494/#post-5422524
 
OP
Phiggys
Messages
3,379
Name
Phil aka Phiggys
Edit My Images
No
Even if you did compare shadow recovery on a modern sensor to highlight recovery on a Fuji you'd still find the Fuji ahead. I've had the opportunity to try. I can't find the thread with the pictures I want to post, but these go some way to showing how much you can get from an SR sensor: Usually something like a 3 stop pull would bring everything back. The real hard part was knowing how far you could push your exposure off the scale when shooting and still be able to retrieve it in post as the camera previews used nowhere near the full dynamic range they could.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/editting-before-and-after-pics.470494/#post-5422524
Wow cheers Alan that's very impressive what you pulled out of that image before and after (n)
 
Messages
1,568
Name
Eloise
Edit My Images
Yes
If you can take photos with it that stand up as being "good" photos; then its a classic. Its obsolete only if (a) you can no longer get the companion parts to use it or (b) the photos you take with it go straight in the bin (IMO).

Of course some things can be obsolete AND a classic.
 
Messages
1,946
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
It still is a great camera, and I keep one for tethered shooting, as the Xmount stuff cannot do this well.
 
Messages
7,563
Name
Rob Telford
Edit My Images
No
I rather suspect classic status denotes something that's been superceded for which people retain an affection, rather than something replaced by another something which worked better. There are probably few modern cameras that could be labelled as classic that way.

The 5D was strictly not a Mk1, so the 'classic' tag became a useful way to distinguish it from the later models, but I think there is a lot of truth in your observation. Even though it is rarely used, I still have my 5D and there are a lot of people out there who continue to love it.
 
OP
Phiggys
Messages
3,379
Name
Phil aka Phiggys
Edit My Images
No
The 5D was strictly not a Mk1, so the 'classic' tag became a useful way to distinguish it from the later models, but I think there is a lot of truth in your observation. Even though it is rarely used, I still have my 5D and there are a lot of people out there who continue to love it.
Strangely enough I used my 5D on Saturday evening along with theEF135mm f2.8 soft focus lens :)
It was a friends 60th birthday celebration and hence the 135mm sf lens ;)
It’s the first time I’ve used it in over a year
 
Last edited:
OP
Phiggys
Messages
3,379
Name
Phil aka Phiggys
Edit My Images
No
Last edited:

AZ6

Messages
878
Edit My Images
No
I was thinking this, when perusing my film camera collection. I can't imagine keeping any digital camera as a 'collectors piece', the same way I will my film cams. I think the difference is; a 20, 30, 40 year old film cam, used properly, can take the same quality of pics that a brand new one can. There is a constance to them. In that respect, a Nikon EM is just as good as a Nikon F6. But a Fuji finepix S1 is not as good as a Nikon D5. There isn't that constance.
 
Last edited:

Nod

Krispy and Kremey
Messages
35,303
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
IF you still have the subject, it would be interesting to see the differences between the shot above and one from a more modern body (reduced down to a similar pixel size.
 
OP
Phiggys
Messages
3,379
Name
Phil aka Phiggys
Edit My Images
No
I was thinking this, when perusing my film camera collection. I can't imagine keeping any digital camera as a 'collectors piece', the same way I will my film cams. I think the difference is; a 20, 30, 40 year old film cam, used properly, can take the same quality of pics that a brand new one can. There is a constance to them. In that respect, a Nikon EM is just as good as a Nikon F6. But a Fuji finepix S1 is not as good as a Nikon D5. There isn't that constance.
I agree but it just goes to show my Fuji S Pro1 can still capture images 20years on as good as it did back then when it first came on the market and it certainly didn't cost what the D5 does.
 

AZ6

Messages
878
Edit My Images
No
I agree but it just goes to show my Fuji S Pro1 can still capture images 20years on as good as it did back then when it first came on the market and it certainly didn't cost what the D5 does.
No that's all fair enough. But it wasn't really aimed as the top 'pro' camera, was it? That was the Nikon D1. The S1 pro was more an 'enthusiast' type cam, although it probably was used by a lot of professionals. But the fact is; those images aren't generally in the same league as newer DSLRs. whereas you could take a pic on an original Nikon F, Nikkormat, EM etc, that would be every bit as good as images shot on an F6; the only limiting factor being the lenses, rather than the sensors. This is what makes film cams, to me, far more desirable.
 
OP
Phiggys
Messages
3,379
Name
Phil aka Phiggys
Edit My Images
No
No that's all fair enough. But it wasn't really aimed as the top 'pro' camera, was it? That was the Nikon D1. The S1 pro was more an 'enthusiast' type cam, although it probably was used by a lot of professionals. But the fact is; those images aren't generally in the same league as newer DSLRs. whereas you could take a pic on an original Nikon F, Nikkormat, EM etc, that would be every bit as good as images shot on an F6; the only limiting factor being the lenses, rather than the sensors. This is what makes film cams, to me, far more desirable.
I agree about film cameras a good quality lens on any Nikon Film body should produce the same results as with Digital but even then it's the glass that going to get the best out of the sensors as well . I have a D1 and know which one gives me the best images regardless of price and build quality!
And it was well under half the price
 
Messages
570
Edit My Images
No
whereas you could take a pic on an original Nikon F, Nikkormat, EM etc, that would be every bit as good as images shot on an F6; the only limiting factor being the lenses, rather than the sensors. This is what makes film cams, to me, far more desirable.
Not forgetting that the Nikon F etc have actually got better over time as the sensor (film) improved. Portra, Ektar and Fuji Pro are light years ahead of the colour neg film available during 60s
 
Messages
15,489
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
A camera that could take good pictures 20 years ago will still be able to take good pictures now, regardless of the tech provided it still works. If the pictures were only 'good for the time' then not so much. Film has something of an advantage there.
 
Messages
5,020
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
Yes
I still use my S5 Pro occasionally, but mainly because I have several Nikon lenses that I use with my Nikon film cameras. The size and weight remind me of why I moved to the Fuji XT-2 for digital!

I've got a dud S2 Pro that I might get round to listing as parts only sometime.
 

AZ6

Messages
878
Edit My Images
No
My two cents: cameras don't take photos. People do.
But people need cameras to take pictures with...


Not forgetting that the Nikon F etc have actually got better over time as the sensor (film) improved. Portra, Ektar and Fuji Pro are light years ahead of the colour neg film available during 60s
Very good point. A 50+ year old cam can take pics just as well as a brand new one (the F6 is still for sale new!). This, for me, gives old film cams value over any digital stuff, in terms of 'collecting'. I saw a SPro1 for about £80 on Ebay; I'd rather buy any film cam over that, tbh. An old digital cam has no 'value' for me whatsoever.
 
Messages
3,278
Edit My Images
No
I have a Leica from the 1930s that still works well and can be serviced. If you want to use a Leica DMR, the digital back for the R system discontinued in 2007, you may have quite a job finding working batteries (which are no longer sold new), and the low capacity (pre-SDHC) media cards it needs aren't too common either. I suspect a lot of digital cameras will be doorstops long before they are regarded as classic collectables.
 
Top