Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon G10  (Read 21600 times)
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2859



WWW
« on: September 18, 2008, 08:31:28 PM »
ReplyReply

In case you missed it in all the 5dMk2 talk, new G10 announced.  I've been carrying a <G9> around since it was released, and been pretty happy with it for those occasions that I don't have my better gear.  I know quite a few on the forum have mentioned they like the G9 for this as well.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...4&modelid=17624

Nominal increase in pixel count to 14.7mp, with their new Digic4 processor.  Not sure if this will translate to any significant improvement in IQ, though I'm skeptical.  Hopefully it will not be worse.

Rear LCD moves from 230k pixel count to 431k pixels.  (pretty substantial ... should be a nice improvement).

The lens appears to be the biggest change to me, going from a 6x zoom 35-210mm equivalent to a 28-140mm 5x optical zoom.  Give up some telephoto to get a little wider angle.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2008, 10:25:14 PM by Wayne Fox » Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2008, 08:51:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Sample images look good.  There is another canon site with a lot more than three of them.  All of them shot at ISO 80.  None of them shot in conditions that would challenge my G9.  And there are a lot of conditions that challenge my G9.

At some point there will be enough pixels to completely capture all the lens flaws.  I wonder how far off of that we are.

Based on the few samples I've seen I wonder if the lens isn't a non trivial improvement over the G9.  But, again, nothing shot that should give it trouble.
Logged
BruceHouston
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308



« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2008, 09:02:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In case you missed it in all the 5dMk2 talk, new G10 announced.  I've been carrying one around since it was released, and been pretty happy with it for those occasions that I don't have my better gear.  I know quite a few on the forum have mentioned they like the G9 for this as well.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...4&modelid=17624

Nominal increase in pixel count to 14.7mp, with their new Digic4 processor.  Not sure if this will translate to any significant improvement in IQ, though I'm skeptical.  Hopefully it will not be worse.

Rear LCD moves from 230k pixel count to 431k pixels.  (pretty substantial ... should be a nice improvement).

The lens appears to be the biggest change to me, going from a 6x zoom 35-210mm equivalent to a 28-140mm 5x optical zoom.  Give up some telephoto to get a little wider angle.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222522\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Wayne,

Not sure from your post if you mean that you have been carrying around a G9 or a G10.  Could you clarify, please?  If a G10, how is the IQ, and can you post some shots?

Thanks
Bruce
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2859



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2008, 10:27:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Wayne,

Not sure from your post if you mean that you have been carrying around a G9 or a G10.  Could you clarify, please?  If a G10, how is the IQ, and can you post some shots?

Thanks
Bruce
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222533\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ah .. sorry about that.  Thanks ... corrected the post.  I was lucky enough to get a pre-release G9 last year, but no luck this year on a G10.   I' still working on my rep to see if I can score some pre-release versions of the new camera's,  but he's in Germany right now
« Last Edit: September 18, 2008, 10:27:59 PM by Wayne Fox » Logged

Gordon Buck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2008, 08:56:05 AM »
ReplyReply

I have a G9 and like it quite a lot.  It is a workhorse camera for me.  I carry it most of the time and use it in many different ways.  

My thinking has been that the G10 would be the end of the line for the G series or at least the end of the G7, G9, G10 variants.  So I expected only a sensor change and a few software tweaks.  The wider zoom was a pleasant surprise for me.  I wish my G9 had the wider angle but I doubt I'll be getting a G10.

This seems to be a time of rapid development for these "advanced" digicams and I'm very interested following the development a while longer before changing from the G9 to another small camera.  Actually, I still expect Canon to jump on the bandwagon of larger sensor (probably CMOS) for the "G11" -- or whatever it will be called.

(My intention is not to convert this thread into a rumors thread but to continue the reasonable discussion of the G9 and G10 line.)
Logged

Tim Gray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2002



WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2008, 09:28:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I'll do some test shots when it show up at the local dealer, but won't buy unless the noise is clearly better than the G9.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2859



WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2008, 10:54:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'll do some test shots when it show up at the local dealer, but won't buy unless the noise is clearly better than the G9.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Better noise performance would certainly push me to buying one, but  I must admit the wider zoom also intrigues me.  I'm wondering if the overall lens quality was a problem with the higher density sensor, so a complete new lens is the result.  Not sure how much a better quality lens design would help IQ (assuming it is better quality)... looking forward to trying one out.

Interesting, according to the spec page, they reduced the movie mode quality, max now is 640 x 480, down from 1024 x768 on the G9.  I've never captured a movie, so it's something I don't care about.  I guess it just seems an odd downgrade.
Logged

picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2008, 11:14:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This seems to be a time of rapid development for these "advanced" digicams and I'm very interested following the development a while longer before changing from the G9 to another small camera.  Actually, I still expect Canon to jump on the bandwagon of larger sensor (probably CMOS) for the "G11" -- or whatever it will be called.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I, too, have the G9 and don't plan to buy a G10.  The somewhat better (it seems) VF and wider lens interest me but there seem to be a lot of interesting developments in small cams (DP1, etc) so that I'll sit by and wait.  In truth, I'm actually using my recently bought used 400D as my small cam most of the time now and probably won't buy a small one again until there are some significant (for me) changes.

Diane
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2008, 08:54:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I think the wider-view lens is better, because truthfully the telephoto is terrible on the G9: I have yet to see a single clear shot on any telephoto attempt I have done.

Wider-angle makes better sense, as it is more likely to be a "travel camera" for most, and taking in city shots will probably be its greatest use.

Myself, I use my G9 mostly for macro and it does a wonderful job for me in this capacity, so I have no reason to change, as I scanned the site and didn't see anything said in the way of any macro improvements.

Jack



.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2008, 09:23:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Need to see it reviewed, tho.  The lens is obviously different.  No idea if it is better or not.
Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #10 on: September 19, 2008, 10:40:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Seems they took a page from the Panasonic LX2 and decided wide is better. Unfortunatley for Canon , the new LX3 is even wider at 24mm. Id pass on this and get the better camera...the LX3. The LX3 will probably cost less too...
Logged
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 516



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 20, 2008, 08:24:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I really liked the G9 a lot (as my somewhat controversial review here mentioned in  January), but in the end didn't buy one because it just wasn't responsive enough.

The G10 is exciting, if only for the 28mm capability, which really does make a world of difference and the claimed 1-1.5 stop improvement in noise.  

But what I really want to see, and which advertising and production claims rarely touch on and cannot substantiate, is whether the in-the-hand experience has improved: is the camera a quicker tool better suited for faster-moving professional needs?

Even if it isn't, the G10 is still a move in the right direction.

However, it is going to start to face some serious competition from the micro 4/3rds cameras.  I'm prepared to boldly predict that for many of us who have a whole in our camera-hearts somewhere between 35mm and sub-pocket digicam, these machines are going to be the answer. Shaving off the ridiculous size and weight which made 4/3rds cameras functionally indistinguishable from 35mm dslrs), the micro 4/3rds machines promise a really meaningful reduction in size to carry-all-day-in-a-pocket range, but with a chip many times larger than the thumb-nail sensors in the digicam crowd.  

These sensors are capable of truly excellent image quality at a wide range of ISOs.  Considering that I have an 11x14 print from a 660K medium jpeg shot on the G9!! on my wall (and it gets more comments than most of my pics),  I think a next-gen 4/3rds chip might well meet all my needs right up to the cusp of MF terrain.

Bring'em on!

- N.
Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
Gordon Buck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409



WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 20, 2008, 09:08:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I really liked the G9 a lot (as my somewhat controversial review here mentioned in  January), but in the end didn't buy one because it just wasn't responsive enough.   ...

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222859\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree, Nick.  I use my G9 almost every day.  Most of the time the hesitations and delays don't matter, especially since I tend to be a bit methodical (detractors would say slow) in my work.  Last night I was attempting to get pictures of my two year old granddaughter -- no camera is quick enough!

There must be technical reasons but I do not understand why the G9 is not instantaneous when placed in complete manual exposure, focus, LCD off, etc.  I wish there were a menu setting called "shutter button half pressed"!

... and thanks again for your review of the G9.  Sounds like I'll soon be reading your review of the G10.
Logged

NigelC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 515


« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2008, 03:09:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I now need a new pocketable camera as my Olympus C8080 has disappeared (yes I know it isn't a pocket camera which is why I'm glad to have the excuse to replace it with its many frustrations including 15 seconds between raw shots, and another 15 seconds to replay)

I cannot wait for a new generation of cameras using micro 4/3 sensors, and I don't know how compact these would be anyway if they have any sort of zoom to cover the larger sensor.

I can't see any alternative to the G10, given an essential criteria is a not too expensive underwater housing.

Given AF is next to useless underwater, how useable is the G9( (presumably same AF) manual focusing - what I mean is how convenient to set for zone focusing - the Olympus is useless
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1131


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 21, 2008, 03:38:45 AM »
ReplyReply

my G9 is my walkaround camera and i like it a lot. no problem with noise- i dont expect lonoise from tiny sensors, instead i even like the grungy look of it and dont care at all. same about resolution ... so little times i make really big prints from the g9.. 28mm ? i will miss the long end at least as i will win from the wide one. so what remains is a detail which i hate on the G9: the viewfinder, so tiny, so inaccurate framing.
 i was reading it will become better on the G10. is this is really getting significant better i probably will b uy one.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2008, 04:49:58 PM by rainer_v » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8077



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 21, 2008, 04:03:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I can't see any alternative to the G10, given an essential criteria is a not too expensive underwater housing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222988\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Can't you find under water housings for the Ricoh GX-200, Panasonic LX-3 and Nikon P6000?

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
NigelC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 515


« Reply #16 on: September 21, 2008, 05:32:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Can't you find under water housings for the Ricoh GX-200, Panasonic LX-3 and Nikon P6000?

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222996\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No - only Canon, Olympus and Fuji seem to make underwater housings

I just need to know that the image quality at 400ASA is not worse than the G9 -  28-140 is the clincher for me - 35mm was no good.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8077



WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 21, 2008, 08:34:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
No - only Canon, Olympus and Fuji seem to make underwater housings

[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It seems that, in Japan at least, Panasonic has also a wide range of housings available for different types. The LX-3 appears not to be supported yet as of now.

[a href=\"http://www.yodobashi.com/enjoy/more/productslist/cat_89_23951428_23951818/23952060.html]http://www.yodobashi.com/enjoy/more/produc...8/23952060.html[/url]

Nikon does have some too (no P6000 supported yet):

http://www.yodobashi.com/enjoy/more/produc...8/23951776.html

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Yoram from Berlin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101



WWW
« Reply #18 on: September 21, 2008, 03:10:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Seems they took a page from the Panasonic LX2 and decided wide is better. Unfortunatley for Canon , the new LX3 is even wider at 24mm. Id pass on this and get the better camera...the LX3. The LX3 will probably cost less too...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222811\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Bah, I bought the Leica D-Lux 3 a while ago (which is rebadged LX2) and it is TERRIBLE.

I recently bought the G9 and love it. I even bought the underwater housing, and had a great summer in the pool with the boys - the SDHC card has lots of room for fun video, too.

Wish it was wider, but will sit out this iteration.
Logged

mkravit
Guest
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2008, 04:19:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Iron Flatline
Bah, I bought the Leica D-Lux 3 a while ago (which is rebadged LX2) and it is TERRIBLE.

I recently bought the G9 and love it. I even bought the underwater housing, and had a great summer in the pool with the boys - the SDHC card has lots of room for fun video, too.

Wish it was wider, but will sit out this iteration.

Agreed, and I just can't understand how anyone can deal with the D-Lux or LX shutter delay. Absolutely awful!
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad