written by Pauly. on 27/05/2003
All in all thw Fuji Finepix 2400 is a good little starter cam. Looking forward to my S304 though, time moves on........ I will still keep the 2400 for snaps here and there, had good service from it for 2 years so can't complain. Fuji seem trouble free, touch wood lol.
written by Brian. on 05/04/2002
Got my Fuji Finepix 2400 digital camera from a high st/internet retailer last week. Grade A stock (whatever that means) I think it is either returned by a customer or a shop display model.
Pics are OK quality for a 2 MP CCD, I also use a Canon EOS30 and Ixus IX7 APS SLRs as well as a Fuji DL Super Mini compact, obviously the digital is no where near the quality of these cameras, but for playing around on the internet and messing around with your mates down the pub it's great.
Need to source some cheap NiMH batts and 64MB SM card now,
Brian.
written by John. on 26/01/2002
I recently bought my Fuji Finepix 2400 camera 'used' (actually, I think it was shop-soiled, but that's a different story) for a very reasonable price. I bought it specifically so that I can take periodic snaps of my soon-to-be-born twins and e-mail them to far-flung relatives without having to wait before I finish the film in my 'real' cameras. For that purpose, it's ideal. But if I'd just dropped 350 UKP on it to use as a main camera in preference to a 35mm-compact or even a low-end SLR (as many will have done, not much more than twelve months ago), I think I would have been disappointed.
Some weaknesses that other reviewers have pointed out are easily sorted. High battery drain? Buy yourself some NiMH rechargables. LCD screen useless in sunlight? Use the viewfinder: that's why it's there!
My biggest problems I think revolve around getting used to the various idiosyncrasies of (affordable) digital cameras that don't occur with film. For example, pictures containing areas of sudden contrast (say where the roof of a house meets a bright sky) always have a row of light-coloured pixels where the two areas meet. This sometimes sticks out like a sore thumb. Friends who are more experienced than myself with digital cameras confirm that this is a common failing, not easily addressed unless you're willing to spend the price of a good used car on a digital SLR.
Specific foibles of this camera that I don't like include its inability to save photos in any form of uncompressed mode; instead, three levels of JPG compression are offered, but even the most merciful JPG compression is going to loose some irreplaceable detail. And you can't afford to loose much when your maximum resolution is only 1600x1200 pixels! Neither do I care for how it insists on having the LCD panel switched on when the camera is hooked up to my PC with the USB cable. It's not like it displays anything useful; just the letters "USB", wasting valuable battery power. I could always drop another 35 UKP on the mains adaptor. Thanks, Fuji, for equipping the camera with a power-socket that few third-party (read 'cheaper') mains adaptors will fit. Very thoughtful of you. Not.
Don't get me wrong: I do like this camera. The software it comes with (PhotoDeluxe 4) is very capable and retails for £40 on its own. Unusually for a camera that is very much P&S, it also has an exposure-compensation feature that many compact 35mm cameras at this price lack, and the LCD screen takes the guesswork out of getting your exposures just right.
But, the bottom line is that the ultimate picture quality is not on par with what traditional compacts and SLRs at this price can offer. If you feel that the drop in ultimate quality is compensated by the undeniable convenience of having a digital camera then go ahead and buy it, or one of its many equally-specified contemporaries. But DON'T expect 35mm quality; you won't get it.
written by src. on 16/08/2001
good for general still images like buildings or landscapes at normal viewing or optical zoom other than that i am very disappointed.
Do you have a question about this product or company? Simply type it in the box below and one of our community will give you an answer
Once we've checked over your question we will put it live on the site and our strong community of experts will hopefully give you some great answers that you find useful.
We will email you when the question is on the site
As rated by our community of reviewers
13182_Sporren.'s Response to 3526_src.'s Review
Written on: 19/02/2002
When looking at product-review sites I steer clear of folks who give 10/10 or even as high as 8/10 and look at the ratings below that. These reviews usually highlight specific foibles and idiosyncrasies missed by those folks with rose-tinted glasses. It's up to me to decide if these problems will also be an annoyance to me, or I may decide that the review has been unjustly harsh and ignore it. John, in his review, at least pointed out that, aside from what he called "undeniable convenience" he felt pictures from the camera weren't on par with those from an slr of the same price. That's called 'constructive critisism' which helps folks like me decide whether or not that specific weakness is going to be a deciding factor for me or not. As it happens, it won't be because I'm just a point-n-shoot snapper looking to tinker with some fotos. Your comments, though, are not specific enough: 'blur on children' - what does that mean? Is it because the children were moving, or are you saying it couldn't focus properly? Etc. In essence, a poor review that tells us nothing of the camera's real weaknesses or qualities :-(