Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: Dan.W on November 04, 2008, 10:33:00 pm
-
Hi, this is my first post! Sorry I know someone had started a similar thread to this (LX3 vs. G10), however I didn't want to hijack their thread as mine is slightly different. Also sorry if this should be in the “Beginner’s Questions” area, Mods feel free to move if required. I just figured this would be more appropriate as my topic is more about equipment…
I don't have much experience with cameras and photography in general. I just know I love it. It fascinates me knowing that with the right skills, talent, and equipment, one can capture amazing images whether they are landscapes, portraits, or urban art, etc. The only experience I have is with old cheap film cameras back in the day, and recently in the last 2 years with my Panasonic FX01 (the first camera with a 28mm wide lense...). Also I recently got married and we skimped on everything else to do with the wedding, but paid top dollar for a really good photographer. The photographer's were really good in letting me have a bit of a say (not too much cos' after all they were the professionals) in the style and type of photo's/composition that we preferred. Anyhow I enjoyed that very much and then being able to work with them to organise our wedding "storybook" (we opted for this rather than the traditional album).
Anyway, that's basically the extent of my limited experience with photography. I feel that I'm currently using my little Pana to it's max capacity and I think it has been a pretty good P&S compact camera, however I want to take my photography to the next step. Also not quite wanting to go the DSLR route just yet.
I've narrowed my selection down to x3 cameras: Canon G10, Panasonic LX3, and Panasonic FZ28.
Here's my dilemma:
G10:
Classic styling, robust, great dials etc. 1/1.7” CCD (34 MP/cm²). Proven Canon brand/product. RAW shooting and buffer. 3" LCD with great visibility. 5x optical Zoom (f2.8 – 4.5). However: poor video quality, 28mm wide lens compared to LX3.
LX3:
Compact design, robust, fairly easy to operate (i.e. accessing MF via joystick). 1/1.63” CCD (24 MP/cm²) = extremely sensitive. RAW shooting and buffer. 3” LCD with great visibility. 24mm wide lens (f2.0 – f2.8). 720p HD video rec. However: 2.5x optical zoom compared to G10 or FZ28.
FZ28 (superzoom):
DSLR/traditional design, good build quality (not metal though), easy operation. 27mm wide lens (f2.8 – f4.4). 18x optical zoom. 720p HD video rec. RAW shooting and buffer. However: 2.7” LCD with average visibility. 1/2.33” CCD (36 MP/cm²) = less sensitive.
As far as I can see the LX3 is a beautiful camera and that would be the one I’d choose hands down except for the lack of optical zoom. I struggle to think that 2.5x would be enough in most circumstances. Whatever camera I purchase will be my primary camera, not one to compliment a DSLR as a P&S compact.
That’s why the FZ28 is still a consideration for me, as it has 18x optical zoom, decent lens, 720p HD rec (not a top priority, but a nice addition to have), and a half decent CCD (until the LX3 came along).
However the G10 seems to somewhat fit in between the 2 Pana’s with it’s 5x optical zoom (I’d still like more), half decent CCD, half decent lens, but then doesn’t rec in decent video quality and costs roughly the same as the LX3…
Is there another camera I should be considering? Is there another camera about to be released that I should wait for? I know some people say the menus and user interface of the Pana’s are sometimes not the friendliest, however this doesn’t bother me as I should be able to work it out given my experience with my FX01.
I’d like to hear what experienced photographers have to say about the various pros and cons, it seems to me that each camera excels in one area, are where the other’s don’t, and I’l like to know if these features are really that important. And all the reviews on each camera I’ve read are positive, so I’m absolutely torn between the 3 of them.
Thanks for your comments.
PS. Please forgive me for writing such a long post
Dan
-
Have you checked out MR's reviews of the LX3 and G10 on this site?
I'd get either the LX3 or G10 based on lens range or pocketability. Whichever is more important. Superzoom point and shoots are pretty iffy.
-
Have you checked out MR's reviews of the LX3 and G10 on this site?
I'd get either the LX3 or G10 based on lens range or pocketability. Whichever is more important. Superzoom point and shoots are pretty iffy.
Yes thanks. I checked out MR's reviews before creating this topic, and found them very informative, which confused me even more because the G10 and LX3 are such good cameras in their own right... And had the LX3 come out with 5x optical zoom and a CCD with 14.7mp (although keeping with the 24 MP/cm² density), the LX3 would be undoubtedly the clear winner (LX4 maybe ?), so I find it hard to justify paying roughly the same amount for the G10 as the LX3 when most of it's features aren't that groundbreaking, apart from a 14.7mp CCD (which doesn't necessarily improve image quality). I would definatley buy the G10 over the LX3 and FZ28 if it was priced $150 - $200 (AUD) less.
Whereas the FZ28 costs consideranly less than either the G10 or LX3 (probably becasue it's about 10months old now), yet comes equiped with fairly decent lens (f2.8 - f4.4) and CCD (density) which are both comparable to the G10's specs... Plus 720p vid quality (with the ability to zoom while filming). On a side note: I would imagine that the image quality of a superzoom at the tele end (in the FZ28's case, 18x) wouldn't be all that special, however wouldn't it be quite comparable to these compact P&S at the wide end or even at say, 3x? Having the flexibility to zoom 18x is just a bonus, on the other hand being limited to only 2.5x or maybe even 5x might be a bit too restrictive...?
Thanks, Dan
-
Thom Hogan, who is an expert on all things Nikon, compared the G10, LX3 and the P6000.
http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm (http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm)
His bottom line is that he liked both the G10 ("Surprisingly good update to the G9, with excellent image quality at low ISO") and the LX3 ("The sensor and in-camera processing holds this camera back in all respects. Otherwise, it would have been my top choice.").
I find him one of the more thoughtful writers on digital photography equipment and think his comparison is a must-read for anyone considering any of these cameras.
Paul
ps: full disclosure: I bought a G10 last weekend (in part due to Michael's review) and am seriously in the honeymoon phase. But I think the camera is a great complement to my DSLRs.
-
Thom Hogan, who is an expert on all things Nikon, compared the G10, LX3 and the P6000.
http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm (http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm)
His bottom line is that he liked both the G10 ("Surprisingly good update to the G9, with excellent image quality at low ISO") and the LX3 ("The sensor and in-camera processing holds this camera back in all respects. Otherwise, it would have been my top choice.").
Thanks for that link.
I enjoyed reading Thom's review, however his conclusions about the LX3's image quality and noise levels at ISO 400 seemed to contradict a review performed by dpreview ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page12.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page12.asp) ) recently - pitching once again the LX3, G10, and P6000 against each other. Concluding that at ISO 400 the G10 and P6000 had to work harder to reduce noise whereas the LX3 kept image quality closest to it's original pic taken at ISO 100. And if you read further on, they claim this remains true as you increase ISO further (obviously ISO 400 would be the absolute max one would want to reach with these P&S).
Dan
-
I have a lot of experience now with the LX3, and while it's OK in good light, the detail turns to total smear in low light. The Canon will produce vastly better images.
-
It's not clear to me from your original post just what your FX01 is not giving you that you want. An itemized list might help focus the responses you get. I could say: go with camera X, avoid camera Y, but in saying so I'd unconsciously be making assumptions based on my own wants/needs.
Actually, I really want to say: avoid all three cameras and all pocket cameras period, if the goal is to buy one camera for all one's photographic needs. But that involves presumptions about image quality and subject matter that most likely do not apply. You may actually get better feedback on one of the dpreview fora than here, because most of the regular posters here will likely have a hard time adopting the requisite mind set.
-
However I want to take my photography to the next step. Also not quite wanting to go the DSLR route just yet.
In the previous post, Dale Cotton 2 makes a good point about asking what is it about the FX01 that "is not giving you what you want." And I'd like to extend that thought to your comment about wanting to take your photography to the "next step."
First, what sort of photography do you currently enjoy (e.g., candid, landscape, etc)? Does the "next step" mean doing these types of photography better (more easily, higher image quality, etc), or extending to other kinds of photography (for example, sports), or both?
If you can help us with your thoughts, it might make giving recommendations easier.
Paul
-
Two skills you will want to develop as a serious amateur would be RAW conversions and ETTR (Exposing To The Right) Both of which are easy to master on the G10 (when ACR supports the G10!) I owned a LX1, G9 and now a G10, the exposure compensation dial on the G10 is invaluable.
My 2 cents
Marc
-
Marc wrote:
ETTR (Exposing To The Right) ... the exposure compensation dial on the G10
Not to hijack Dan's thread, but, Marc: you're talking my language. Do I understand that with the G10 you would work in perhaps Av or Tv, take a test shot, then compensate for blown highlights? Or perhaps even compensate in real time off a live histogram and/or blinking highlights? Incidentally, I can do this on my LX1 too (with live histogram) using just the 4-way with my right thumb, so it will apply to the LX3 also.
-
Marc wrote:
Not to hijack Dan's thread, but, Marc: you're talking my language. Do I understand that with the G10 you would work in perhaps Av or Tv, take a test shot, then compensate for blown highlights? Or perhaps even compensate in real time off a live histogram and/or blinking highlights? Incidentally, I can do this on my LX1 too (with live histogram) using just the 4-way with my right thumb, so it will apply to the LX3 also.
The answer is yes. You can dial in plus/minus 2 stops of compensation in 1/3rd stop increments. The G10 also has a live histogram (luminance only, not RGB), and shows flashing highlights and histogram in review mode.
Paul
-
I enjoyed reading Thom's review, however his conclusions about the LX3's image quality and noise levels at ISO 400 seemed to contradict a review performed by dpreview ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page12.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page12.asp) ) recently - pitching once again the LX3, G10, and P6000 against each other. Concluding that at ISO 400 the G10 and P6000 had to work harder to reduce noise whereas the LX3 kept image quality closest to it's original pic taken at ISO 100. And if you read further on, they claim this remains true as you increase ISO further (obviously ISO 400 would be the absolute max one would want to reach with these P&S).
Dan
DPR tests ISO based on in-camera JPEGs; go back and read Thom's article and you will see that he evaluates a camera based on its RAW files, so there is no contradiction since they are looking at different things.
-
Actually, I really want to say: avoid all three cameras and all pocket cameras period, if the goal is to buy one camera for all one's photographic needs. But that involves presumptions about image quality and subject matter that most likely do not apply. You may actually get better feedback on one of the dpreview fora than here, because most of the regular posters here will likely have a hard time adopting the requisite mind set.
I'd second this recommendation. The Rebel XS or similar are hardly any more heavy but offer vastly better choices and results. For not a whole lot more money.
Specs on the G10:
14MP
4.3x3.1x1.8
14.5 Oz
$499
Specs on the XS:
10MP
4.96x3.8x2.4
15.9 Oz. (plus 6-8 for a compact lens)
$599(note below)
Given the better lenses, you'll likely never see any difference between the two. Half a pound more for the XS with a lens is a very good deal(IMO).
Here's a basic Canon AE1 for comparison:
Size: 5 9/16X3 7/16X 1 7/8
Weight: 20 13/16 ozs. body only. 27-7/8" ozs. with the 50mm f/1.8 S.C. Iens.
Smaller and lighter than even a basic old manual camera. I'm a big fan of the Digital Rebels for low cost shooting.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...shs=canon+1000d (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sq=desc&Q=&sb=ps&pn=1&ci=0&A=search&shs=canon+1000d)
$506 for the black one with the basic compact zoom lens. At this price, the G10 isn't such a miracle.
edit: the XSi is about $150 more and is 12MP plus has a few more features. 10 with good lenses vs 14 with one lens... kind of a wash.
edit 2 (sorry - heh):
The Olympus E420 also is a decent choice. It's very small and light and still has roughly the same features as the rebel XS.
5.1X3.6X2.1 inches
13.4 Oz.
$447 at B&H Photo for the basic camera and lens.
-
It's not clear to me from your original post just what your FX01 is not giving you that you want. An itemized list might help focus the responses you get. I could say: go with camera X, avoid camera Y, but in saying so I'd unconsciously be making assumptions based on my own wants/needs.
In the previous post, Dale Cotton 2 makes a good point about asking what is it about the FX01 that "is not giving you what you want." And I'd like to extend that thought to your comment about wanting to take your photography to the "next step."
If you can help us with your thoughts, it might make giving recommendations easier.
Sorry, thanks for the tip.
What I mean by the term, take my photography to the "next step", is: experiment with RAW, higher resolution (FX01 is 6mp) for larger than 6x4 prints, increased low light image quality, and definaltely want the ability to use everything from 'full auto' to 'manual' settings. The FX01 I believe has been a great performer in the compact P&S category, but I definaltey want to step up to something with RAW, manual controls, larger (or higher quality) CCD, and better lens (although the FX01 has Leica 28mm - 102mm, f/2.8 - f5.6 - so with my next camera I'd like to improve on this, at least at the wide end).
As far as style or what I like to shoot, and excuse me as I am a newbie, it is hard to say. But i definatley like shooting landscapes and have a fascination with urban photography/art. It might sound silly, but I also very much like night shooting, but have pretty much given up on that becasue my FX01 isn't very good at all. However I have had fun with it's 15, 30, and 60s shutter speeds...
Dan
-
DPR tests ISO based on in-camera JPEGs; go back and read Thom's article and you will see that he evaluates a camera based on its RAW files, so there is no contradiction since they are looking at different things.
Thanks, Tony, for clearing that up.
-
Marc wrote:
Not to hijack Dan's thread, but, Marc: you're talking my language. Do I understand that with the G10 you would work in perhaps Av or Tv, take a test shot, then compensate for blown highlights? Or perhaps even compensate in real time off a live histogram and/or blinking highlights? Incidentally, I can do this on my LX1 too (with live histogram) using just the 4-way with my right thumb, so it will apply to the LX3 also.
Yes the G10 has a dedicated knob on the top left for exposure compensation in Program, Av, Tv and probably others and a luminosity histogram with blinkies in the display mode, a luminosity histogram in live view. easy to get it right
Marc
-
I'd second this recommendation. The Rebel XS or similar are hardly any more heavy but offer vastly better choices and results. For not a whole lot more money.
Specs on the G10:
14MP
4.3x3.1x1.8
14.5 Oz
$499
Specs on the XS:
10MP
4.96x3.8x2.4
15.9 Oz. (plus 6-8 for a compact lens)
$599(note below)
Given the better lenses, you'll likely never see any difference between the two. Half a pound more for the XS with a lens is a very good deal(IMO).
Here's a basic Canon AE1 for comparison:
Size: 5 9/16X3 7/16X 1 7/8
Weight: 20 13/16 ozs. body only. 27-7/8" ozs. with the 50mm f/1.8 S.C. Iens.
Smaller and lighter than even a basic old manual camera. I'm a big fan of the Digital Rebels for low cost shooting.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...shs=canon+1000d (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sq=desc&Q=&sb=ps&pn=1&ci=0&A=search&shs=canon+1000d)
$506 for the black one with the basic compact zoom lens. At this price, the G10 isn't such a miracle.
edit: the XSi is about $150 more and is 12MP plus has a few more features. 10 with good lenses vs 14 with one lens... kind of a wash.
edit 2 (sorry - heh):
The Olympus E420 also is a decent choice. It's very small and light and still has roughly the same features as the rebel XS.
5.1X3.6X2.1 inches
13.4 Oz.
$447 at B&H Photo for the basic camera and lens.
I think it comes down to a choice between volume, picture quality and $$$ as an example I lined up my choices
G10, Xsi/18-200 OS, 5D 3 lenses/flash, Mamiya AFDII/PhaseOne P30 and lenses etc
[attachment=9492:P1010337.jpg]
From left to right the volume, price and image quality go up. If you have the space and budget by all means BTTR (Buy To The Right!)
Marc
-
First: thanks, Paul and Marc, for clarifying re the G10 exposure controls.
Dan: given your new input I'm pretty confident we can now rule out the FZ28. Just as there is a strange scarcity of trucks and semis competing in the Indy 500, so there is unfortunately no single camera that does everything well. The FZ28 superficially seems to contradict my statement; it has a 27mm-e to 486mm-e zoom, 10 mp, macro, IS, video, raw, etc., all weighing in at less than 1 lb (1/2 kilo). It certainly does everything; but the question is whether it does anything well, let alone everything well:
Problem 1. Experienced photographers are skeptical of mega-zoom lenses because the optical compromises involved in combining both wide angle and telephoto in one package may well be permanently insurmountable. In contrast, the LX3 design team didn't limit the lens to 24-60 out of some perverse masochism, they did so because any greater range would have adversely impacted image quality. I assume the trade-off was between adding more telephoto as the G10 designers opted to do or going for a faster maximum aperture (f/2). The only real solution to endless zoom range is an interchangeable lens camera, in spite the downside of having to swap glass.
Problem 2. 10 mp is more than enough for all but the largest prints of many types of subject matter, but at 36 MP/cm² density they become something of a joke. There is lots that manufacturers can do to disguise this fact but none of it is good news for image quality. As physicist Emil Martinec recently pointed out in another thread on this forum, the G10 at its lowest ISO has as much noise in its output as a good dSLR at (if I remember correctly) 1600 ISO. [His testing shows that the LX3 is somewhat cleaner (http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=141021&start=32) than the G10.]
The above two factors alone are enough for me to rule out recommending the FZ28 for anyone who wants to take a step up above the FX01 if image quality is a factor. As to the other two cameras, I've been following the G10 and LX3 quite closely, but so far haven't seen anything decisively favouring one over the other for my own needs, let alone for anyone else's. The 24-60/f2-2.8 lens of the LX3 is designed for a combination of low light and up-close photography, including interiors, snapshots, and what we call street. For landscape many would be happy being limited to 24-60 and just as many would not.
You also ask whether there are any other cameras you should be considering. The Ricoh GX200 comes to mind, but I've seen no objective data on it's noise levels, so I can't comment further. Look at Marc's BTTR line-up in the previous post. The G10 (which could have been the LX3) is left-most for a reason. The most glaringly obvious set of cameras you should be considering are the small dSLRs and the new Panasonic G1, but you've ruled that out. To me that's like saying: I want to find a better job but I absolutely refuse to consider one that pays more money.
Your call... ;)
-
I think it comes down to a choice between volume, picture quality and $$$ as an example I lined up my choices
G10, Xsi/18-200 OS, 5D 3 lenses/flash, Mamiya AFDII/PhaseOne P30 and lenses etc
From left to right the volume, price and image quality go up. If you have the space and budget by all means BTTR (Buy To The Right!)
Marc
Obviously. But the E420 is just a few ounces heavier than the G10 and is the beginning of a real SLR system. The Canon XS(XSi isn't really needed, IMO - save money. 10MP is plenty with a good larger sensor) is light and has a zillion of the options he wants and a sensor that is enormous as well. Same price as the G10.
If the G10 was $300 or $400, sure. But when you can get the Canon or similar for $500 as a kit with a better lens, it's penny-wise and pound foolish not to just go up a step. Doubly so since his stated desire to do street and lower light/urban photography means he's going to be sticking a prime F/1.4-1.8 or similar on it ASAP. Or want to.
-
Obviously. But the E420 is just a few ounces heavier than the G10 and is the beginning of a real SLR system. The Canon XS(XSi isn't really needed, IMO - save money. 10MP is plenty with a good larger sensor) is light and has a zillion of the options he wants and a sensor that is enormous as well. Same price as the G10.
If the G10 was $300 or $400, sure. But when you can get the Canon or similar for $500 as a kit with a better lens, it's penny-wise and pound foolish not to just go up a step. Doubly so since his stated desire to do street and lower light/urban photography means he's going to be sticking a prime F/1.4-1.8 or similar on it ASAP. Or want to.
The G10 is more compact, however. Even if the weight is similar. So more likely to be carried with you.
-
The G10 is more compact, however. Even if the weight is similar. So more likely to be carried with you.
True. But there is something to be said about a real SLR. The E420 has no major hand "growth" on the right side of the case, so it's really about how much the lens protrudes. I simple 35mm or 50mm equivalent lens is very low profile. It's obviously aimed at the prosumer crowd that wants a SLR but one that's more the size of their old 35mm film cameras of the 70s and 80s. But you are limited with Olympus a bit more, of course, on lens choices. this is why I like the slightly larger Canon or Nikons.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0803/08030501olympuse420.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0803/08030501olympuse420.asp)
It's not a great camera, but it's better than most pocket cameras.
edit:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e420-review/ (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e420-review/)
Here is a review with the better but larger 14-42mm zoom (other kit option - less expensive). It seems to have better optics than the 25mm.
-
The Panasonic G1 has started to ship. It is smaller than the 420. (Barely.) Its lenses are smaller. Plus they should work on the really small Oly mFT body due next year.
Still, it is the lens that screws you. Kills any chance of putting the camera in your pocket.
-
I don't think it is smaller, because of the handle and how to protrudes. The E420 is a uniform surface like say, an old AE1. So the lens sticking out, if it's the only thing, isn't always so bad.
I'd still go for the Canon, but that's just me. I don't really see the problem with carrying a small camera in my jacket pocket or around my neck.
-
Thanks to everyone that replied.
Your replys have been very helpful, and it has given me a lot to think about that I wouldn't have on my own. Much appreciated.
I can safely say that I've ruled out the FZ28, and I'm heavily leaning towards the G10 (thanks to this topic and a few others on this forum at this time...).
I know some of you recommended DSLR's, however I just want to stress I'm not a proffesional, and I am just looking for a camera that'll help me to understand more about photography in the areas and styles that I mentionaed earlier without confusing the hell out me everytime I get the camera out (then when I finally get my head around it, the moments' probably gone). For me the camera has to be P&S with great flexibility, ie compact, wide, tele, macro, low-light, video, and RAW, as it'll be my only camera. And not to mention, my budget won't allow for a DSLR and all the extras to make it do what I want.
For these reasons I think the G10 will be a solid choice (must admit I am disappointed about not having 720p HD video rec). I'll be ready to get one within the next month or so and can't wait! Hopefully pricess drop a little by then too
Dan
-
Dan: I think the G10 is a fantastic camera for what it is, a great compact that when used with particular awareness of its limitations can -- at iso 80, 100, and perhaps also at 200 -- produce prints up to 18" or even in some circumstances 24" in the long dimension that can equal those from a top quality 12 megapixel DSLR, i.e. produce fine art quality prints. This assumes that you shoot in RAW, process your images carefully, and make use of the extended depth of field. If you see my posts in the other thread in this forum, you'll see that I think the G10 is better than entry level DSLRs in some respects -- primarily its size and arguably its superior resolution.
That said, if your objective is to understand more about photography and not to be confused everytime you get the camera out, I would definitely go with a DSLR. I am a very experienced photographer and digital photographer, having use view cameras extensively, a Canon 5D, and, years ago, a Canon G2. The G10 is not easy to use well. It is much more confusing than a DSLR where what you're doing is fairly transparent, and it's easy to check settings. A G10 is also not an ideal learning tool because it is extremely difficult to vary depth of field and even if you want to do that there are only a few limited circumstances in which you can have a thinner depth of field, and even then it's not very thin.
If your goal is to learn more about photography, I would look into a DSLR that has a good prime lens selection. Probably the best for smaller sized cameras and lenses right now is Pentax because of their 5 or size "limited" lenses that are especially compact.
I am amazed by the G10 for what it is, and in its areas of strength (compactness, high resolution, and a very good lens), it is especially successful.
Thanks to everyone that replied.
Your replys have been very helpful, and it has given me a lot to think about that I wouldn't have on my own. Much appreciated.
I can safely say that I've ruled out the FZ28, and I'm heavily leaning towards the G10 (thanks to this topic and a few others on this forum at this time...).
I know some of you recommended DSLR's, however I just want to stress I'm not a proffesional, and I am just looking for a camera that'll help me to understand more about photography in the areas and styles that I mentionaed earlier without confusing the hell out me everytime I get the camera out (then when I finally get my head around it, the moments' probably gone). For me the camera has to be P&S with great flexibility, ie compact, wide, tele, macro, low-light, video, and RAW, as it'll be my only camera. And not to mention, my budget won't allow for a DSLR and all the extras to make it do what I want.
For these reasons I think the G10 will be a solid choice (must admit I am disappointed about not having 720p HD video rec). I'll be ready to get one within the next month or so and can't wait! Hopefully pricess drop a little by then too
Dan
-
Dan: I think the G10 is a fantastic camera for what it is, a great compact that when used with particular awareness of its limitations can -- at iso 80, 100, and perhaps also at 200 -- produce prints up to 18" or even in some circumstances 24" in the long dimension that can equal those from a top quality 12 megapixel DSLR, i.e. produce fine art quality prints. This assumes that you shoot in RAW, process your images carefully, and make use of the extended depth of field. If you see my posts in the other thread in this forum, you'll see that I think the G10 is better than entry level DSLRs in some respects -- primarily its size and arguably its superior resolution.
That said, if your objective is to understand more about photography and not to be confused everytime you get the camera out, I would definitely go with a DSLR. I am a very experienced photographer and digital photographer, having use view cameras extensively, a Canon 5D, and, years ago, a Canon G2. The G10 is not easy to use well. It is much more confusing than a DSLR where what you're doing is fairly transparent, and it's easy to check settings. A G10 is also not an ideal learning tool because it is extremely difficult to vary depth of field and even if you want to do that there are only a few limited circumstances in which you can have a thinner depth of field, and even then it's not very thin.
If your goal is to learn more about photography, I would look into a DSLR that has a good prime lens selection. Probably the best for smaller sized cameras and lenses right now is Pentax because of their 5 or size "limited" lenses that are especially compact.
I am amazed by the G10 for what it is, and in its areas of strength (compactness, high resolution, and a very good lens), it is especially successful.
I recently bought a G10 and I love it! That being said, I think httivals is right on the mark about learning photography. I have used all sizes of film cameras from 35mm to 8x10, and my main camera now is a Canon 5D. I bought the G10 as a pocket, walk-around camera to have with me when I don't want to carry the 5D, and it is superb for that. But learning to use it well is a substantial challenge, and I agree strongly that a Pentax DSLR with one good lens (to start with) would be a much better learning tool.
-
I dunno. A DSLR forces you to learn about DOF right away and it is harder to see your composition when looking through a viewfinder. (At least when starting out. Although that is easier with some of the better view finders.) With a device like the g10 nearly everything is in focus from one angstrom to Andromeda and what you see on the back is pretty much what you'll get. OTOF a single focal length does help one to see in that focal length.
-
Dear Dan W.
You're way over-thinking this. Buy one and start shooting.
My vote is for the G10, which not only a tremendous picture-taking engine (great lens/sensor combo - they've hit some kid of sweet-spot), but also because I find it handles so well. It is responsive, fast to focus, fast to shoot, and very intuitive to control (exposure comp, modes, metering, etc).
You probably owe it to yourself to also handle the Panasonic G1 before you buy, unless you've ruled-out a camera that costs that much. It is functionally a small dslr and handles beautifully. Image quality is excellent, and it is more of a "real camera" than the G10 which is still a P&S at heart.
The G1 also offers expandability in lenses, which the G10 does not, and comes in red, blue and neon yellow duck feather-finish
- N.
-
Yep - I vote for the G10 or LX-3.
I know the arguemtns for a small DSLR are decent ones, but lets face it, Dan: if you really get into photography in a big way then you will want a compact and a DSLR like many here. So you may as well start down your chosen route of a compact and learn about RAW etc on your preferred camera style and expand to DSLR later. Portability is obviously important to you and you need to consider that if you do get a DSLR immediately will you take the camera out with you as often as you do at the moment - I suspect: in which case how much experiemting with RAW will you really do?
And besides with the prices of DLSRs dropping like a stone you can get a decent second hand one for a fraction of current prices in about a years time (just because better cameras will continually come along does not mean that models currently a year old are bad cameras). I don't think G10 prices will change anywhere near as much.
So get the G10, let the bug really bite, get infected with enthusiasm and then spend wisely on the DSLR later.
-
Although DP Review do test JPegs, I would be surprised if the LX3's internal processing is that much better than the G10,s given Canon's abilities in this field, ergo it should be possible to have roughly equal effect on chroma noise in both Silkypix and DPP. I've read several other reviews that give the advantage to the LX3 at 400ASA and over - don't think there is much dispute that G10 has more resolution at 100ASA.
However, for those of us looking for a "carry always" backup to an SLR (rendering discussion of EOS1000D and E420 irrelevant) I'm prepared to accept both have a useable if not outstanding 400 ASA level, although for me, F2 and 24m is more useful than the G10's additional 60-140 range. What is really crucial is the ergonomics and for me ability to gain instant access to change shutter speed, aperture and exposure compensation, with ISO a close second. Before I had an extensive play with the LX3 and G10 side by side I assumed; a) the G10 was just as pocketable because of it's simple brick like shape ( no sticky out lens) and; would be quicker for me to operate having used Canon SLRs/DSLRs for more years than I care to own up to. However, big surprise, I found the top dials/command dial on the G10 didn't work so well with the completely different ergonomics of using the rear LCD rather than the (useless) optical finder. The G10 needs two hands, but its not long enough, and the dials aren't quite in the right place for my hands. On the other hand the LX3 is perfect for one handed operation and the joystick enables quick changes to the important controls. Also, there is no doubt the LX3 is more pocketable. If I had to have one as my only camera it would be game set and match to the G10, but as my 5D back up I'm pretty convinced LX3 is the way to go.
-
I purchased the LX3 3 weeks ago. I love it. For the size of the G10, I might as well carry my 40D.
Bud James
-
I'd also add the Sigma DP1 to the short list. The sensor really blows compact cameras away and makes for very good landscape and around-town type photography.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/page20.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/page20.asp)
This page shows how resolution charts are worthless unless we're also comparing color. Even 10-12MP cameras aren't as clean and free of artifacts when it comes to color images. (I'm figuring the last gen DSLRs are roughly equal to the best compact zooms of today)
It'll make a 5*7 print that is nearly indistinguishable from 35mm film.(about 4.5x6.5 inches@400 DPI - most people don't notice. Blown up, things start to look grainy at about 200dpi(IME). So figure good for enlargements up to about 9x13. Since the input if fairly clean, pixel blurring software when your printer enlarges the image(or via Photoshop) tends to make for a blurred look like film as opposed to making the noise and moires look larger.
Not so bad for a pocket camera. I just with Foveon/Sigma would DO something new with their larger sensor/DSLRs. But for a pocket camera, it's a compelling choice, even today.