Serious photographers buy which point 'n shoot?

[SeanPuckett]

I posted a review of the G9 here.  
I've shot many more frames since then, and the review still holds water.
I'm quite satisfied with it as a carry-everywhere camera.  Indeed, with the LowePRO Rezo 50 case protecting it, it lives around my neck or on my belt or in a cargo pocket.

[DonWeston]

Just got back from Portugal with a 5D and G9. I had done Paris last year with an xti and g7. These G series cameras are both great if you can live with the tradeoffs as others have mentioned, i.e. speed and noise. They are great for handing over to someone to take a family shot, when anything bigger will be inappropriate, but in NO way are they a dslr replacement for image quality overall. There is NO XA replacement in the digital world, well maybe the DP1, but haven't used one yet, and frankly do not want to be limited with just one focal length, for me, that just doesn't work. When Canon or other company will come out with a decent P&S with an APS size chip or larger then it will work, but until then we have to accept the tradeoffs or compromise with an D60 or XSi size slr body and a large range zoom lens, not the size of a P&S but as close as we can get yet.

My trade off will be to use my 5D or 40D and one or two small primes like a 24 and a 50mm lenses... I have had to accept that  I do not want to sacrifice image quality for convenience until someone makes a camera where I won't have to...YMMV....

[marcgoldring]

The G9 surpasses many of the lower-end prosumer cameras in some of its abilities, and it pretty much is a prosumer camera in a P&S body. And at $450 I don't believe is is exactly "expensive" for what you get.

Just my $0.02 ...

Jack
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191020\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just curious how you deal with the limitation of the viewfinder. I had a G7 and it drove me nuts...

Marco

[idenford]

G9 G9 G9,
No contest

[mrleonard]

Iwould say the Panasonic LX2 is the winner so far.
I also have the G9....but given the LX2 fits in a pocket this is what distinguishes it as a LEADER. The best picture you can take with these P&S cameras is the one you take with whatever camera you have with you at the time.
Because of its portability, I always have it with me.
 Also, it shoots 28mm....and I think most would agree that P&S are mostly used,and benefit from more on the wide end, then on the tele end. Street shooting and interiors definatley benefit from its 28mm as opposed to the G9's 35mm.
 There may be those G9 users that disagree... they dont know Jack.

[JohnKoerner]

Iwould say the Panasonic LX2 is the winner so far.

LOL, here we go again

In what way is it the winner, independently, in the real world outside Leonardville?

I also have the G9....but given the LX2 fits in a pocket this is what distinguishes it as a LEADER.

So fitting in one's pocket constitutes leadership? You probably have one old condom in your pocket too, which for you probably consititutes a whole year's supply. Does this pocket-placement make said prophylactic a "leader" too?

The best picture you can take with these P&S cameras is the one you take with whatever camera you have with you at the time.

True, and I always have my G9 with me as well.

Because of its portability, I always have it with me.

Which? The condom or the LX2?

Also, it shoots 28mm....and I think most would agree that P&S are mostly used,and benefit from more on the wide end, then on the tele end.

Maybe in Leonardville "most" people do, but in the rest of the world most people use P&Ss at the other end, to zoom-in, for family shots, and for handy macro, not for trying to do landscapes.

Street shooting and interiors definatley benefit from its 28mm as opposed to the G9's 35mm.

Again, you speak as if Leonardville is where everyman resides. In the real world, the sales volume, the reviews, and the general consumer and professional purchase decisions say otherwise, that the G9 meets the needs of most users better.

There may be those G9 users that disagree... they dont know Jack.

LOL, that was cute

Jack

[Ray]

John.
I know we've already had an instance of a thread being closed by Michael on this issue, so we have to keep it civil. But I tend to agree with mrleonard here, that given the choice of two cameras that produce very similar image quality, both having a RAW mode and manual functions, I would opt for the lighter and more pocketable camera.

Without having done an exhaustive comparison of the features of these two cameras on dpreview, I would say that after fundamental image quality and compactness, the features that might sway me in favour of one camera over another are features such as wide-angle capability, macro capability (how close can one get?), frame rate in RAW mode and shutter lag.

I think both cameras are probably lousy above ISO 400. The fact that the LX2 might produce better results in the 16:9 aspect ratio is a plus. On the other hand I expect the G9 would probably produce slightly better results in the 4:3 aspect ratio.

I own a Sony T30. I'm very happy with its compactness (internal zoom) and its macro modes, but I'm less happy with the unavoidable image smearing that results from its jpeg output and noise reduction. It has no RAW output.

I look forward to the day when we can get small, lightweight P&S cameras with negligible shutter lag, fast frame rates and large buffer to accommodate at least half a dozen RAW images before slowing down.

[DarkPenguin]

Is that a G9 in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

Now that it has gotten warmer my G9 is the leader in being left at home.  My G9 is fine in the winter or any time I have a coat (read: big pockets) with me.  I'll be buying a fuji f100d soon to replace my late fuji f10 to have a small camera to have with me in the summer.

[Nill Toulme]

I still don't understand why we can't have the equivalent of the XA with something like the 400D sensor in it.  What's the big problem?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Nill Toulme]

...or, for that matter, a G10 with something like the 400D sensor in it.  If they can sell the 400D for 600 clams, they could certainly sell a G10 with the same sensor for the same 600.  What am I missing?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[DarkPenguin]

The G9 is pretty big.  With the lens you'd need to support a 1.6 crop sensor it would be huge.  Easier to just get a Oly E-420 at that point.

[JohnKoerner]

Is that a G9 in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

That was funny

I guess the flipside to that would be "no thanks I don't smoke" when you give her your LX2 under the table, LOL

Jack

[mrleonard]

Hey Jerk..er.. Jack..tone down the crap please. State your own point of view rather than ride off of others. You DO know your avatar is a pic of you...right? With your simian-like features that  only your mama would love, I doubt even the leadership winner G9 in RAW could help that mug. You dont need to carry around a condom in your wallet...ever.
 Fortunately the compact LX2 does allow me to carry all the daily dozens of prophylactics  I need, thx for asking.

[JohnKoerner]

John.
I know we've already had an instance of a thread being closed by Michael on this issue, so we have to keep it civil. But I tend to agree with mrleonard here, that given the choice of two cameras that produce very similar image quality, both having a RAW mode and manual functions, I would opt for the lighter and more pocketable camera.

Sure, and that's a personal choice. I opted for the more rugged camera with more options, better macro, and better zoom.

Without having done an exhaustive comparison of the features of these two cameras on dpreview, I would say that after fundamental image quality and compactness, the features that might sway me in favour of one camera over another are features such as wide-angle capability, macro capability (how close can one get?), frame rate in RAW mode and shutter lag.

It would be interesting if you or Mr. Leonard would do such a review ... but I know one thing, the G9 lets you get closer for macro than just about any camera I can think of. I myself have no use for wide-angle, only macro and zoom.

I think both cameras are probably lousy above ISO 400. The fact that the LX2 might produce better results in the 16:9 aspect ratio is a plus. On the other hand I expect the G9 would probably produce slightly better results in the 4:3 aspect ratio.

I only use the 4:3 for what I do and I have a need to convert RAW files to .tiff files for book publication, for the printing company, on a project I am working on.

I own a Sony T30. I'm very happy with its compactness (internal zoom) and its macro modes, but I'm less happy with the unavoidable image smearing that results from its jpeg output and noise reduction. It has no RAW output.

Yes, for me, RAW is imperative as it converts to .tiff easily in PS. Compactness is not an issue for me, as I have a belt case for my G9 that I prefer to having anything in one of my pockets.

I look forward to the day when we can get small, lightweight P&S cameras with negligible shutter lag, fast frame rates and large buffer to accommodate at least half a dozen RAW images before slowing down.

I am pretty happy with the way the camera is right now, really, but maybe the G10 will incorporate still more convenient features ...

Jack

[JohnKoerner]

Hey Jerk..er.. Jack..tone down the crap please. State your own point of view rather than ride off of others. You DO know your avatar is a pic of you...right? With your simian-like features that  only your mama would love, I doubt even the leadership winner G9 in RAW could help that mug. You dont need to carry around a condom in your wallet...ever.
 Fortunately the compact LX2 does allow me to carry all the daily dozens of prophylactics  I need, thx for asking.

LOL, I musta hit the bullseye

Take care,

Jack

[JohnKoerner]

Just curious how you deal with the limitation of the viewfinder. I had a G7 and it drove me nuts...
Marco

Honestly Marco, I have never used the viewfinder

[michael]

This thread has been closed.

Come on folks. Cut the petty personal attacks or go play at DPreview. Not here.

Michael