Canon G11 and S90

[JeffKohn]

I don't see the lack of 720p video on these models as having anything at all to do with DSLR's and their feature sets.

- 720p video has been common in many P&S models for quite some time, well before HD video showed up in DSLR's in fact.
- P&S video doesn't have the shallow DOF that you get with a DSLR and that is so attractive to many
- P&S video doesn't have the high ISO capability or general image quality of a DSLR.

And since these are the top-of-the line P&S models from Canon, this seems like a pretty significant oversight. I can't say that's it's necessarily a feature that I would use a lot, but it might be nice to know that it's there. After all for me a P&S is more for family snapshots and capturing moments, than serious photography.

[narikin]

the more it settles in the more disappointing the G11 is - its a reduction in MP which is good, BUT without making the sensor any bigger, so they could save money and use the exact same lens/body as the G10.
 
Canon simply don't seem to get the idea of a pro level p/s, which is shocking when all they need to do is put in one of their class leading larger chips with a good appropriate lens, and that's it.
(ps Canon - it really doesn't need a superzoom - do you really think this is a selling point for pro's?)

the reduction in Mp is a good sign, but sticking with the exact same body/lens/sensor size is not.
thank goodness Panasonic and Olympus are showing us a way forward.
my next pocket camera will be one of theirs

[JeffKohn]

the more it settles in the more disappointing the G11 is - its a reduction in MP which is good, BUT without making the sensor any bigger, so they could save money and use the exact same lens/body as the G10.
 
Canon simply don't seem to get the idea of a pro level p/s, which is shocking when all they need to do is put in one of their class leading larger chips with a good appropriate lens, and that's it.
(ps Canon - it really doesn't need a superzoom - do you really think this is a selling point for pro's?)

the reduction in Mp is a good sign, but sticking with the exact same body/lens/sensor size is not.
thank goodness Panasonic and Olympus are showing us a way forward.
my next pocket camera will be one of theirs

Well, maybe a slightly larger sensor would be nice. But I don't want an APS or even 4/3 sensor, because at that point the camera will no longer be pocketable. You need a much bigger lens to produce a big enough image circle to cover the larger image circle. I just don't have any desire at all of a P&S that I can't fit in the pocket of my cargo pants or shorts. Otherwise I'll just use my DSLR.

People ooh and ahh about how the EP-1 is smaller than traditional DSLR's; but put it next to an S90 and suddenly it doesn't look so small.

[Ray]

The G11 is certainly an impressive P&S. The sample images at  http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...mpleimages=true look terrific for a P&S camera.

However, the G11 is a rather heavy and bulky P&S. The major flaw in my opinion is its slow continuous frame rate. Long shutter lags and slow frame rates have been the bane of P&S cameras since they first appeared.

I use Photoshop CS3 Extended for my image processing. A couple of exciting features of CS3 Extended, for me, is its ability to stack multiple shots of the same scene and create a composite using only the best pixels from each frame. This has the effect of reducing noise by 1 to 2 stops. The auto-alignment feature of CS3E seems good enough to take care of any slight movement between the hand-held shots of a burst of at least 3 frames per second. My 5D at 3 fps is able to use this feature without tripod.

However, I'd be very dubious about the 1 fps of the G11, hand-held, for either stacking purposes or merging to HDR. If you are carrying a lightweight camera for convenience purposes, it doesn't make much sense to also carry a tripod.

Interestingly, the latest announcement from Ricoh, describes a camera, the CX2, with a frame rate of 5 per second, at full resolution. That would be tremendously useful for me, although I appreciate the fact that probably most people who buy P&S cameras do not then go on to spend even more than their camera cost them, on software to process their images.

I guess one can't have everything. Compromises always have to be made. The maximum quality achievable with the G11, in ideal conditions at base ISO with moderate DR scenes, might well be better than the Ricoh CX2 can produce. Perhaps the Canon lens is better. Also the G11's RAW capability is an advantage for those seeking the maximum quality of which the camera is capable.

[Paul Roark]

I find the use of a CCD as opposed to CMOS an interesting change.  This is reversing the trend.  CCD was originally considered a lower noise technology, but lacking in other areas.  I'm guessing Canon has pulled out all the stops to produce a very low noise chip, even if it is small.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Pete Ferling]

Pro is a misused term.  It's more correct to say the right tool for the job.  I still use my G5 for serious work.  It's small, doesn't call attention to itself in concerts or crowds.  Shoots raw, and at 5MP, makes suitable 8x10.  The articulating screen allows me to shoot hip to over heads.  In short, I get the shot with that one.  After years of constant use (my wife uses it as the family camera) It's also bullet proof.  I'm certain my shutter usage is well into six-figures.  Until the announcement of the G11, I have had no need to considering upgrading or replacing.  I'm not surprised to read that many others also use the G's for serious or paid work.

Michael, do you have a G11 test on your list of things to do?

[BJL]

I find the use of a CCD as opposed to CMOS an interesting change.  This is reversing the trend.

There is no move back here: the Canon G series has never used CMOS sensors. In fact almost all compacts still use CCD's. The handful of compacts with CMOS sensors so far have rather small sensors, like 1/2.3". Nikon, Pentax and Sony still use CCDs in their lower priced DSLR models too, like brand-new Nikon D3000. Only Canon DSLRs' and FourThirds use CMOS/NMOS sensors exclusively.

[Jeremy Payne]

There is no move back here: the Canon G series has never used CMOS sensors. In fact almost all compacts still use CCD's. The handful of compacts with CMOS sensors so far have rather small sensors, like 1/2.3". Nikon, Pentax and Sony still use CCDs in their lower priced DSLR models too, like brand-new Nikon D3000. Only Canon DSLRs' and FourThirds use CMOS/NMOS sensors exclusively.

In fact ... it is the opposite ... there has been a persistent rumor since the G9 that Canon was considering a CMOS-based top of the line G camera.

[DarkPenguin]

In fact ... it is the opposite ... there has been a persistent rumor since the G9 that Canon was considering a CMOS-based top of the line G camera.

How is that the opposite?  BJL is correct whether or not canon was considering changing.

[Jeremy Payne]

How is that the opposite?

I really don't feel like arguing over nothing ... but I was actually responding to the comment that they had switched from CMOS to CCD, reversing the tread.

A) The potential direction was CCD -> CMOS ... the opposite of CMOS -> CCD

 The 'action' take was not a switch, but the opposite - no switch

Ok?

[Jeremy Payne]

A rumor being wrong is not a reversal of the trend in sensor choices ... it is not even a reversal of the trend in internet forum rumor accuracy!

Indeed ... another opposite - a trend that continues ...

We are really going in circles.

[Jeremy Payne]

Indeed ... another opposite - a trend that continues ...

We are really going in circles.

Weird ... where did that post go?

[250swb]

agree, fair points, I prefer the E-P1 sensor, but Olympus dont seem to have the controls/ AF/ shutter lag/ burst worked out at all, (lots of complaints on that) whereas Canon has all that brilliantly sorted in the G series.



 Unicorns and Mermaids.

Thats not really true. There is no shutter lag on the E-P1, or at least it is as fast as a DSLR. The AF can take a moment, but no longer than the G10 which then adds on shutter lag, and to top things off takes an age to process the image (even with a fast card). In all respects the E-P1 acts like a DSLR aside from focus speed. And if you set focus for the AEL button you have no focus lag, no shutter lag, and can blast away to your hearts content. The difficulty the E-P1 has is that people expect it to be 'like their other camera', and its not, read the instruction book and unlock its potential. As an aside, fit the Panasonic 14-45mm m4/3 lens to the E-P1 and even the 'slow' AF is banished, so its not the E-P1 body that is slow, its the way Olympus have implemented AF on the lenses.

And its going to be a big problem for the G11, the new larger sensor small cameras like the E-P1. I wouldn't be surprised to see the G11 as the last gasp fully functional P&S from Canon as already the S90 looks like a better P&S proposition. There will not be a G12 because it won't sell except to a loyal band of dedicated Canon users. By then the Panasonic GF-1, the Samsung, the Olympus E-P2, plus others, will be on the market, offering better spec, with interchangable lenses, for not much increase in size or weight. They will also cause a drain to the lower end of the DSLR market that the G11 may have once overlapped.

Steve

[BJL]

Weird ... where did that post go?

Sorry: I deleted it quickly when I realized that I had misunderstood your post, but you must have already replied.

But to recap, I give no credence to "persistent rumors" on the internet when they are not backed by any hint of real evidence.