How can you compare an S2 and the 1Ds. Not even in the same ball park. There is a major price difference for a reason.

michael,

I think you are wrong to refuse a comparison between 1Ds and S2pro. Though you are right, that there is major price difference, it depends, what your goal is. Probably you haven't worked with those DSLRs.
I can tell you from a personal experience, that with ISO 800 and 1600 the S2 is at least as good as the 1Ds, to my opinion even better in certain circumstances.

There is a very interesting ongoing discussion about this comparison
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums....5417674
There is a further a very interesting comparison on a russian site (there is link for an online translator)
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums....5425245

Albert

Thanks for these comments Hank,

   it is nice to get occasional professional reassurance that serious photographers judge (digital) equipment by adequacy to their needs, rather than always demanding the absolute maximum resolution as some net pundits do ... and for those of us who only expect to be able to afford a 5 or 6 MP camera in the forseeable future (and do not expect to make any prints larger that 30 by 40), it is nice to know that some of the more afordable DSLR cameras fit into the range of "professional grade" equipment.

Reviewing posts here from 4 - 5 months ago, seems like some loved the S2 & some complained. The photographers who liked it seemed to be in the majority. Now that a quarter of a year has passed, would you still recommend it? I'm a few days away from making a decision to buy one. The price differential is so great between the Fuji and a Canon 1Ds that I'm swaying toward the Fuji, but would love to hear current opinions. Thanks!

PCG-

We've been extremely happy (and well paid) in our use of the S2.  The 1Ds examples I have tried are without question superior in all mechanical features.  For our needs business realities have to intrude however, and dictate what features are needed and when enough is truly enough.  I haven't taken enlargements out to the "nth" degree to compare them because I haven't needed to do so.  I'm sure there is an extra margin of "quality" there too, but in terms of our clients' needs, so what?  They are thrilled with the enlargements we have made up to 30x40 to date, so we haven't yet found a reason to invest in the 1Ds.  For the price of a single 1Ds we could buy three S2's and have a little left over for media.  Even if we had the discresionary funds to buy the three 1Ds bodies we would really need in our business we still wouldn't do it, rather we would put the money against the principal of our studio mortgage- a much more sound business decision.

If you can afford the 1Ds, by all means buy it and use it with joy.  If you have to make business decisions, buy the S2 and a whole bunch of lenses for the same money.  Image quality is there, but the question is whether or not you can contend with somewhat inferior mechanics compared to the 1Ds to achieve it.

Hank

Hank, Albert--many thanks for your comments. Exactly the feedback I was seeking.

Would I recommend it?  Yes, I would.  Mine is seeing a lot of use.  Image quality is exemplary.  No doubt the 1Ds is better, but the difference is less than you might think.

It is very sensitive to lens quality.  Budget lenses produce soft results.  Great high ISO performance.  Of course, its not perfect.   But use Raw, with the Fuji EX converter, and be assured of near medium format quality in most situations.

Quentin