Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon G11  (Read 8207 times)
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« on: August 21, 2009, 02:11:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Saw this link over on Mike Johnson's 'The Online Photographer'.  Anyway, here's the link:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...#ModelDetailAct

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Chris Pollock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2009, 04:48:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: wolfnowl
Saw this link over on Mike Johnson's 'The Online Photographer'.  Anyway, here's the link:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...#ModelDetailAct

Mike.
I thought it looked promising. I bought a G10, largely on the basis of Michael's favourable review, but I've never been all that happy with it. In direct sunlight, the limited dynamic range becomes a problem. In the shade, you need to use a higher ISO, and noise becomes a problem. (I bought it mainly for my wife to take pictures of the children, so lowering the shutter speed is not an option.)

It does work pretty well under a light to moderate overcast, preferably if the sky isn't in the frame, but days like that are a minority in Australia. Even at the best of times the pictures are none too sharp, and I doubt that many of them contain much more than 10 megapixels of information.

Reducing the resolution to ten megapixels would hopefully improve the noise and dynamic range, and would at least be guaranteed to reduce the file size if nothing else. The rotating display is a nice touch, even if it's a bit smaller.

I'm tempted to see what I can get for the G10 on eBay, and buy a G11 if it reviews well.
Logged
Chris Pollock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2009, 04:57:23 AM »
ReplyReply

I should mention that I love the G10 apart from the image quality problems. It's just the right size, has a solid, high quality feel, and nice controls.
Logged
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6875


« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2009, 06:26:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chris Pollock
I thought it looked promising. I bought a G10, largely on the basis of Michael's favourable review, but I've never been all that happy with it. In direct sunlight, the limited dynamic range becomes a problem. In the shade, you need to use a higher ISO, and noise becomes a problem. (I bought it mainly for my wife to take pictures of the children, so lowering the shutter speed is not an option.)

It does work pretty well under a light to moderate overcast, preferably if the sky isn't in the frame, but days like that are a minority in Australia. Even at the best of times the pictures are none too sharp, and I doubt that many of them contain much more than 10 megapixels of information.

Reducing the resolution to ten megapixels would hopefully improve the noise and dynamic range, and would at least be guaranteed to reduce the file size if nothing else. The rotating display is a nice touch, even if it's a bit smaller.

I'm tempted to see what I can get for the G10 on eBay, and buy a G11 if it reviews well.
My experience with a G10 is identical to yours. I was not too excited by the G10 and in the end decided to give it back to its owner. He'll need to find another buyer…
Logged

Francois
jasonrandolph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 554


WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2009, 11:02:39 AM »
ReplyReply

I bought a G9 as a nice walk-around camera that I could carry everywhere.  For that purpose, it served me well.  I got a few outstanding images out of it.  Like others have said above about the G10, noise at moderate ISO is an issue.  With Canon lowering the MP count on the G11, I think this one may be worth checking out.  If noise is controlled and ISO 800 images are fairly noise-free, this may be worth the upgrade.  It will never replace my DSLR, but when I need a "pocket rocket", it may fit my needs nicely.
Logged

Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2009, 11:12:13 AM »
ReplyReply

My interest is mainly for use underwater and the G11 may be a great choice.  The G9 and G10 certainly were.

Given that most of my shooting underwater is at base iso, I'm not sure whether the G10 or G11 will be better underwater.

That said, the G11 jpegs on the canon site look mighty fine ... I can't wait to play with some RAW files.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4056



« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2009, 11:57:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chris Pollock
I should mention that I love the G10 apart from the image quality problems.
Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

Jeremy
Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2009, 12:56:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Swivelling display !
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2009, 01:08:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: kikashi
Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

Jeremy
Personally, I got great images out the G9.

I even have a 30 x 40 inch print from my G9 that hangs prominently in someone's home and they are very happy with it and they apparently get compliments all the time.

I was amazed at how good the big prints looked.

Even at ISO 80, there was a bit of crunchiness to the images that appeared on screen at 100% ... but that didn't seem noticeable even on large prints.
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2009, 01:32:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Personally, I got great images out the G9.
I even have a 30 x 40 inch print from my G9 that hangs prominently in someone's home and they are very happy with it and they apparently get compliments all the time.
I was amazed at how good the big prints looked.
Even at ISO 80, there was a bit of crunchiness to the images that appeared on screen at 100% ... but that didn't seem noticeable even on large prints.

I have an 11x14 inch print from a Minox III (8x11 mm negative) that looks sharp and grain free.  So sure, you can do thnigs like that, knowing what the tricks are.
Logged
Chris Pollock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


« Reply #10 on: August 25, 2009, 09:50:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: kikashi
Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

Jeremy
Indeed. If only the G10 could take better pictures, it would be a great camera.

I'll be interested to see how the G11 compares. I don't expect miracles, since the pixels will only be about 47% larger than those in the G10, and technology can't have advanced that much in a year. I'm sure the G11 is a big step in the right direction though.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8202



WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2009, 11:29:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chris Pollock
Indeed. If only the G10 could take better pictures, it would be a great camera.

I'll be interested to see how the G11 compares. I don't expect miracles, since the pixels will only be about 47% larger than those in the G10, and technology can't have advanced that much in a year. I'm sure the G11 is a big step in the right direction though.

If the G12 gets down to 6MP, we might have something real nice!

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Pete Ferling
Guest
« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2009, 07:27:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
If the G12 gets down to 6MP, we might have something real nice!

Cheers,
Bernard

Well then, wait a just a while longer and the G13 will be the lucky number.
Logged
Chris Pollock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


« Reply #13 on: August 30, 2009, 12:37:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
If the G12 gets down to 6MP, we might have something real nice!
Six megapixels is enough for a good A3 print, or an excellent A4 print. It's ironic that manufacturers have been pushing consumer-level cameras with more than 10 million tiny pixels, when the people who buy them probably seldom print anything bigger than 4 x 7. A better dynamic range would be a lot more useful.

For me around 6-8 megapixels would be ideal for a small-sensor camera, but 10 million should be OK. If canon can just avoid the temptation to increase the pixel count again in future models, they can improve the other parameters as technology improves.

I hope we don't end up with a megapixel race in the opposite direction, with manufacturers competing to offer the camera with the lowest pixel count.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4056



« Reply #14 on: August 30, 2009, 02:11:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chris Pollock
I hope we don't end up with a megapixel race in the opposite direction, with manufacturers competing to offer the camera with the lowest pixel count.
Anyone remember this?

Jeremy
« Last Edit: August 30, 2009, 02:12:01 AM by kikashi » Logged
Chris Pollock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


« Reply #15 on: September 10, 2009, 08:40:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I've already listed the G10 on eBay. In a few days it will no longer be mine.

I don't think I'll buy a G11 though. Unless I read some bad news about the Panasonic GF1 in the next few weeks, I'll buy one the next time I'm in Japan. It looks like a good (almost) no-compromise compact camera, except for the rather limited lens choice. With the 20mm F1.7 it should be a killer combination. It will be bigger than a G11, but should be able to take pictures that I'll really be happy with, which is what really counts.
Logged
Tim Gray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2002



WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2009, 11:20:31 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm actually torn between the Panasonic GF1 and the G11 (just sold my G10) as my "always with me camera".  Certainly the GF1 is very attractive, with (even though limited) wider range of focal length options, and I expect better IQ.  OTOH, what I really liked about the G10 was the macro feature, and coupled with the articulated screen, that will be even more effective.  I suspect at the end of the day the higher cost of the GF1 will nudge me in the direction of the G11.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5163


« Reply #17 on: September 11, 2009, 12:20:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: kikashi
Anyone remember this?
But they got it completely backwards: in the photographic world the equivalent of "1-bit with massive oversampling" is a sensor with a vast number of photosites, each of which produces only 1-bit output: "light detected" or "light not detected". The excess resolution is then dithered to get a good dynamic range and such.

And such sensors exist: they are called film, with each of the billions of silver halide grains being a "chemical photosite".
« Last Edit: September 11, 2009, 12:22:18 PM by BJL » Logged
Chris Pollock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


« Reply #18 on: September 11, 2009, 10:04:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
But they got it completely backwards: in the photographic world the equivalent of "1-bit with massive oversampling" is a sensor with a vast number of photosites, each of which produces only 1-bit output: "light detected" or "light not detected". The excess resolution is then dithered to get a good dynamic range and such.
I don't think "dithered" is the correct term. What you're describing is the opposite of dithering. I think you should say "averaged" instead.
Logged
peterpix
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 12, 2009, 11:45:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Tim Gray
I'm actually torn between the Panasonic GF1 and the G11 (just sold my G10) as my "always with me camera".  Certainly the GF1 is very attractive, with (even though limited) wider range of focal length options, and I expect better IQ.  OTOH, what I really liked about the G10 was the macro feature, and coupled with the articulated screen, that will be even more effective.  I suspect at the end of the day the higher cost of the GF1 will nudge me in the direction of the G11.


What about the new Canon S90. Seems smaller than the G11 although a b it shorter in  focal length?  Seems like these little things keep getting better. especially when yiou domn'tr want to lug around a DSLR!
Peter
Logged

Peter Randall
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad