Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon G9 owners still happy? Any thing better?  (Read 8817 times)
rogerxnz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 244


« on: July 18, 2008, 06:02:00 AM »
ReplyReply

A while back, some forum members extolled the virtues of the G9 as a pocket-size fun/casual camera.

Just interested to know if they are still happy--I want to upgrade from my G1!

I have always been concerned at the low pixel pitch (1.9 microns, compared to 9.2 for an Aptus 17 and 8.2 for a Canon 5D).  Does that cause problems in practice?

So, are Canon G9 owners still happy with their G9?  Any thing better out there?
Roger
Logged

Roger Hayman
Wellington, New Zealand
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 484


« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2008, 06:52:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A while back, some forum members extolled the virtues of the G9 as a pocket-size fun/casual camera.

Just interested to know if they are still happy--I want to upgrade from my G1!

I have always been concerned at the low pixel pitch (1.9 microns, compared to 9.2 for an Aptus 17 and 8.2 for a Canon 5D).  Does that cause problems in practice?

So, are Canon G9 owners still happy with their G9?  Any thing better out there?
Roger
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209091\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I had mentioned before that in March 08, I got G9 for my wife, neither of us are happy with IQ coming out of it. Have been shooting RAW, still the final quality is not that great. She'd prefer her old Kodak 5MP & I agree with her, waste of money.
Logged
bdp
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2008, 06:57:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Your concern about pixel pitch is justified. I own a G9 as well as a 5D and an MF back, and at anything over 100 ISO it is very noisy. I only shoot in RAW. I wish there was a compact camera that approached the Leica M8 quality for a reasonable price, with autofocus. The G9 does not do it, although it is an admirable camera in other ways.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2008, 06:58:40 AM by bdp » Logged
picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2008, 07:19:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A while back, some forum members extolled the virtues of the G9 as a pocket-size fun/casual camera.

Just interested to know if they are still happy--I want to upgrade from my G1!

I have always been concerned at the low pixel pitch (1.9 microns, compared to 9.2 for an Aptus 17 and 8.2 for a Canon 5D).  Does that cause problems in practice?

So, are Canon G9 owners still happy with their G9?  Any thing better out there?
Roger
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209091\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think many are happy with it for some purposes.  I just found that every time I carried it I wish I had a DSLR (for both the IQ and the shooting experience).  I hated using the LCD for composition--fine on a tripod (who uses a tripod for a small cam), but in the real world I really disliked using it.  I added a Voigtlander 35mm VF which was fine at 35 and 50, but sort of went against the idea of a 'pocketable' cam.  I was frustrated at lower light shooting.  There were many things I DID like about it, but in the end, the shooting experience left me unhappy.

Then I started to follow a Sigma DP1 forum--the camera isn't for me--yet, but it put the larger sensor/single FL lens back into my head.  I had considered a Rebel prior to buying the G9 (first small cam I've owned since the original G1, altho' I 'tried' my husband's Fuji  F30--which I really disliked shooting with LOL)but decided it was not for me.  To make a long story shorter---I tried handling the new 450D locally but in the end I bought a very well priced nice used 400D/XTI, added my 28 f/1.8 and 50 f/1.4 (and the Sigma 15 FE also adds a light WA--whether defished or not) and I'm much happier.  Its not pocketable, but it makes for a very nice light small kit in the very small Domke bag (forget its number) and I'm much happier.  It doesn't displace my 5D--but there are times for each.

BTW, I still haven't sold my G9 but I suspect it may never get used or, if so, very lightly.  And, no---I don't think there is really anything better out there in terms of the size of the G9 except for the Sigma DP1--but it appears to have a number of frustrating issues (altho' its afficianados discount them and like the camera).

Diane
« Last Edit: July 18, 2008, 07:22:46 AM by picnic » Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1120


WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2008, 08:38:10 AM »
ReplyReply

great camera. like and use it a lot.
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1322


« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2008, 09:24:38 AM »
ReplyReply

While I am not thrilled with having to use the LCD for composing, I have got some very good 12"x16" prints with good color and dynamic range, and nicely sharp, shooting in RAW at ISO 80-200.  Beyond that, I use Noise Ninja and have managed to balance detail vs. noise reduction up to ISO 400-800.

For an almost-pocket camera on the days when I don't have the big stuff with me, it is adequate and even fun.

Right now, however, it is at the Canon shop because, surprisingly, it developed dirt on the sensor.  And you can't blame it on sloppy lens-changes!

Quote
A while back, some forum members extolled the virtues of the G9 as a pocket-size fun/casual camera.

Just interested to know if they are still happy--I want to upgrade from my G1!

I have always been concerned at the low pixel pitch (1.9 microns, compared to 9.2 for an Aptus 17 and 8.2 for a Canon 5D).  Does that cause problems in practice?

So, are Canon G9 owners still happy with their G9?  Any thing better out there?
Roger
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209091\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Gordon Buck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409



WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2008, 09:28:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I still like my G9, use it regularly, continue to learn about it and write about it a couple of times a week on my blog, http://lightdescription.blogspot.com/

I almost always shoot in raw and try to use ISO 80 most of the time.  Coming from raw through ACR and using Noiseware I am happy with 8x10 prints, even slightly cropped,  at ISO 400.  Using the same process, even ISO 800 is OK for some scenes and lighting, especially for snapshots and web images.  But I fully understand that G9 noise is considered too much for some people.
Logged

Tim Gray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2002



WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2008, 09:39:46 AM »
ReplyReply

It's my "always with me camera".  I acknowledge the shortcomings noted by the previous posters, but I view it as the "best of a bad lot" - for an "almost" pocket camera that I pretty well always carry it beats any alternatives, particularly the 2mpx iPhone
Logged
bryanyc
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2008, 09:43:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I like composing on an lcd with the g9.  The image quality is good for the size of the camera.  I really don't think you can get a better camera around its price point.  I depends on what you want from the camera (and in general what you are looking for quality wise).
Logged
DavidB
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 241


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2008, 10:11:19 AM »
ReplyReply

My G9 is still a nice camera, but like every camera out there it has its own set of shortcomings.  FWIW, my other cameras are EOS DSLRs, and my wife uses a Panasonic LX1.

Once you start boosting the ISO, obviously the noise becomes an issue sooner than it does with any of the Canon DSLRs.  But even at ISO 1600 I've captured important images.  Sure they're noisy, but clean them up a bit and they're still useful images (not necessarily fine-art material: think birthday-candle photos as an example).
The lens does exhibit chromatic aberrations (although with the corrections available in RAW processors such as ACR/LR make this an annoyance rather than a problem).

It has the major advantage of being small enough that I'm more likely to have it with me all the time!
The shutter lag isn't in the same realm as a DSLR, but if you're used to the "half-press shuffle" it's a whole lot better than many P&S cameras I've used.  And the delay between RAW shots isn't too painful either (something the G series has always been good at).
I've used all the G series cameras (except the G7) and in terms of functions and use this is definitely my favourite (moving LCD would be nice, but I'm prepared to compromise on that).

It also has a very convenient waterproof case (WP-DC21) which lets me capture snorkelling pictures as well as photograph in heavy weather (inc. on the decks of wave-swept boats).  With the WP-DC21 it's no longer a pocketable camera, but it's less hassle than trying to waterproof a DSLR (I'm not a $erious-enough underwater shooter to go down that path).

The only other contenders in the G9's category (from my point of view and for my uses) at the moment would be the Ricoh GX cameras.  Who knows what options will be available next year, but for now I'm still happy with the G9.  And my wife still loves the LX1: she likes the aspect ratio.  We each have our own preferences.
Logged

rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1120


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2008, 10:31:46 AM »
ReplyReply

i like b+w....
so if i raise the iso over 200 i usually use the images in b+w where the noise is not longer an iso for its own aestethic quality.
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2008, 06:00:03 PM »
ReplyReply

In good light it takes nice pictures but in tough situations (low light and wide dynamic range) the photo sites are just to small to be happy with it. It will become the family camera and a Xsi will become my travel camera. Too many shots early in the morning or into the sun that are not good enough.
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
erictoddjohnson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2008, 11:06:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I've had my G9 for about two months, and have used it primarily as  a travel camera, most recently on a busuness trip to Belgium and a cross-country road trip with my girlfriend, i.e., occasions when photography was not the primary objective of the trip, and there was a premium on traveling light.  

When used within its limits (decent lighting, not too much contrast in the scene), it can produce images that are as good or better than my 20D when printed at 12x18, but there are definitely compromises made.  The optical viewfinder is pretty useless, so I've had to adapt to composing on the LCD.  But at least it is a large and bright LCD, so it's not as bad as it could be.  On the plus side, the controls and menus are well laid out, and similar enough to the 20D that one can transition between the two without much confusion.  As nearly every reviewer has pointed out, high ISO images get pretty noisy, but since I work mostly in B&W that noise looks similar to grainy film, and isn't quite as obtrusive as it would be in color.  The IS function works really well, so I can hand hold at a lower ISO to minimize the noise issues.

Overall, I like the fact that I can get great images from a camera that fits in my pocket, but I'm always happy to get back to my SLR when size and weight are not a consideration!

Eric Johnson
Logged
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 722


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 25, 2008, 04:16:17 PM »
ReplyReply

We just returned from Alaska where we had several Camera types and formats among then the Canon G-9.  We used this camera more than I had originally thought we would and for the most part am very pleased with the images we got.

[attachment=7604:attachment]

don
Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #14 on: July 25, 2008, 04:34:08 PM »
ReplyReply

I still like it.  Tho I'm less and less interested in dealing with its noise issues.  So if I can't shoot around 80 or 100 I tend to not shoot.

Lets you grab things you wouldn't otherwise shoot in horrific 12mp detail.  (For good or ill.)

Logged
peteh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201


WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2008, 06:40:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I still like it.  Tho I'm less and less interested in dealing with its noise issues.  So if I can't shoot around 80 or 100 I tend to not shoot.

Lets you grab things you wouldn't otherwise shoot in horrific 12mp detail.  (For good or ill.)


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210695\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I love my G9.Even at 200 ISO,beyond that,it could get iffy.But that is fixable.The battery seems to last a long time even with the back LCD in use.I use both the viewfinder and the LCD.You will see part of the lens with the viewfinder.
Logged
peteh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201


WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2008, 06:42:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I still like it.  Tho I'm less and less interested in dealing with its noise issues.  So if I can't shoot around 80 or 100 I tend to not shoot.

Lets you grab things you wouldn't otherwise shoot in horrific 12mp detail.  (For good or ill.)


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210695\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I love my G9.Even at 200 ISO,beyond that,it could get iffy.But that is fixable.The battery seems to last a long time even with the back LCD in use.I use both the viewfinder and the LCD.You will see part of the lens with the viewfinder.
Logged
DaveL
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 26, 2008, 12:57:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Appreciate your posts. Considering a G9...July '08

Regards,
DaveL
Toronto
Logged
LARRYWESTBROOK
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2008, 03:01:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I bought a G9 recently after borrowing one from a friend.As everyone has said, it is a compromise, but probably the best in class. I just used it for a birthday in a restaurant and would not have taken or used my bigger cameras. Suggest the grip and lenshood from Lensmate to give it "holdability". Shop around to find the best price.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad