Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: BrunoW on March 04, 2009, 09:09:09 am
-
Hi
I feel confused and would appreciate your comments.
I own a D300 and would like to add a compact with RAW capability.
When I look at Michael Reichman's posts he seems to be very enthusiastic about the G10. However, when I look at dpreview.com I feel like reading more or less the opposite (well, not exactly, there are a lot of pros listed, but when I see "recommended" instead of "highly recommended" and read that image quality is a concern I don't feel at ease). When I read at dpreview that the G10 seems to be okay for web and smaller prints, I don't feel that this camera is what I am looking for. However, when I go back to LL I understand that Michael does not share these concerns - or have I missed something?
I am fully aware that I need to compromise as there is no such thing as a compact with all the features of a DSLR (even though the price is quite close).
Any thoughts?
Bruno
-
Do you use your camera in a lab or in the field? If it's a lab, listen to DP, in the field, Michael.
-
When I read at dpreview that the G10 seems to be okay for web and smaller prints, I don't feel that this camera is what I am looking for.
Keep in mind that most of DPR's conclusions are based on jpeg and jpeg alone, which is not always the most relevant information, especially when pretending to measure some sensor characteristics (see this thread (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=32112) eg ).
The main concern in their review is a too heavy noise reduction at high ISO. Possible solution? Simply shoot raw.
To make yourself a better opinion, go to this page eg (http://www.seriouscompacts.com/2008/11/canon-g10-panasonic-lx3-high-iso.html), download the provided ISO800 raw samples, process in LR2 or whatever and draw your own conclusions.
The former reply applies also in a more global point of view! Because in low light conditions, if you've got a DSLR, it would be a pity not to use it... These little cameras with tiny sensors are not the right tool for that.
And you can also read other serious reviews (http://bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm)...
-
Thanks for these interesting points. They make sense to me as
- I'm interested in good pictures rather than in gear science.
- I assumed that, if the G10 is good enough for Michael, then it might be good enough for me as well ;-)
- I hardly ever shoot jpg
Another concern of mine is about shutter lag (I own a Minolta X50 which does not excel in this regard; of course, it's old). Can anyone comment from own experience?
Bruno
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
sorry for the mess
I repeatedly got an error message, so I thought I had to resubmit
when I eventually noticed what had happened I could not delete
Bruno
-
.
-
I own and use a D300 for the majority of my work right now. I also have the G10 as a sort of pocket camera. Its definitely a good little camera, but I would not call it a replacement for anything. It helps me gauge exposure for medium format film which is nice and it is small and portable so I can take it anywhere. At only 500 dollars, its also cheap enough that I am not afraid of what happens to it in the field.
I do think it is worth using, I don't think its a godsend as such, but it is a useful little guy.
-
I own and use a It helps me gauge exposure for medium format film which is nice and it is small and portable so I can take it anywhere. At only 500 dollars, its also cheap enough that I am not afraid of what happens to it in the field.
On that basis, a Minolta exposure meter might be far more useful.
Rob C
-
I own and use a D300 for the majority of my work right now. I also have the G10 as a sort of pocket camera. Its definitely a good little camera, but I would not call it a replacement for anything. It helps me gauge exposure for medium format film which is nice and it is small and portable so I can take it anywhere. At only 500 dollars, its also cheap enough that I am not afraid of what happens to it in the field.
I do think it is worth using, I don't think its a godsend as such, but it is a useful little guy.
Second that word for word.
In addition: One might be tempted to compare G10 11x14 prints with D300 11x14 prints. Don't do it - that's not what the G10 is for.
Also note that the G10's RAW files require serious attention at first in Camera RAW or LR. Once you understand how different they are in terms of DR and brilliance, you get to tweak your shooting style and improve results dramatically.
This is an example of one of my first shots with the G10.
Mark
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/3166137347_05c4f6185c_b.jpg)
-
Another concern of mine is about shutter lag (I own a Minolta X50 which does not excel in this regard; of course, it's old). Can anyone comment from own experience?
I've owned a G10 since last fall, to complement my DSLRs when they are too heavy or obvious to carry around. It's not a DSLR replacement.
G10 still has noticable shutter lag - much faster than older digicams I have owned or used but not DSLR-quick. Candid (particularly kids) or street photography are challenges, but do-able. IMO, YMMV.
Paul
-
Hi
I feel confused and would appreciate your comments.
I own a D300 and would like to add a compact with RAW capability.
When I look at Michael Reichman's posts he seems to be very enthusiastic about the G10. However, when I look at dpreview.com I feel like reading more or less the opposite (well, not exactly, there are a lot of pros listed, but when I see "recommended" instead of "highly recommended" and read that image quality is a concern I don't feel at ease). When I read at dpreview that the G10 seems to be okay for web and smaller prints, I don't feel that this camera is what I am looking for. However, when I go back to LL I understand that Michael does not share these concerns - or have I missed something?
I am fully aware that I need to compromise as there is no such thing as a compact with all the features of a DSLR (even though the price is quite close).
Any thoughts?
Bruno
G10 is a very nice camera for what it is, image quality certainly among the better ones of the same level but it is not close to DSLR, not as good as Sigma DP-1 and its focus is not better than G9, but apart of that, it is a good improvement over G9. For its size and capability, it i certainly worth to have one to keep it at hand all the time.
-
On that basis, a Minolta exposure meter might be far more useful.
Rob C
A minolta exposure meter won't let me really SEE what the results of a given composition and exposure will look like. I don't like wasting film.
-
An excellent camera in good light conditions.
And it has a very useful ND filter !
Thierry
-
I don't have the G10, but I use its predecessor, the G9, as my carry-everywhere camera. It's a fun little camera, but it will never replace my D200 or D300. For times when you can't or don't want to carry a DSLR, it's a nice alternative. And since it shoots RAW, it leaves the door open to decent processing before printing for output.
-
I bought the camera and returned it after testing. It looks right, feels right but lacks two major features for me:
1) Usable high ISO-images. Yes, "usable" is a relative concept, but for me I felt ISO 400 and beyond was way to blotchy.
2) The lens... I would have prefered a larger & heavier lens if it would give me f2.8 (or larger) over the whole range. Since I usually zoom in on things&people the lens often left me with f4.5 as the largest aperture. Not funny when you have to use slow ISO settings. But when using the camera I also got reminded of the small imaging sensor and the fact that shallow depth of field is more or less impossible - specially if you haven't got f2.8 in reach all the time.
I really wanted to keep the camera but felt these "issues" would keep me from using it as much as intended.
Regards,
Petter
-
I have a G10 and I love it... within limits.
It is good for landscapes and outdoor scenes in good light. If you can stay at ISO 100, you're fine.
The optical viewfinder is worse than useless. This bothered me at first, since I have almost always used SLRs or view cameras. But once I realized I could brace the camera using the neckstrap and use the lcd on the back, things were much better. This is especially important for closeups, and the G10 does amazing work on things that are absurdly close to the lens -- but only if you frame correctly (the optical finder is useless for anything closer than ten feet or so.)
When I don't want to lug around a tripod and my 5D, it lets me get shots that I would otherwise miss. And image quality (at ISO 100, in good light, without too great a contrast range, with subjects that aren't moving around too much, etc., etc.) is excellent for prints up to 13x19".
Thus, within its limitations, it's a fine camera. But you can't expect good results at high ISO. It's no substitute for a good DSLR.
That's my take on it.
-
The G10 is better than the G9, which was a wonderful camera. The lens is outstandingly sharp and the camera is much faster than the G9. I have one, and love it. That said, it simply does not replace a dslr.
I would note, however, that while the files from the G10 don't look nearly as good as those from a dslr on-screen, in print up to about 13x19 they hold up very well indeed.
The IS is also rather brilliant, allowing one to shoot far longer in lower light (at lower ISOs) than with an equivalent dslr.
If you want a big-ish RAW-capable compact, there's nothing better.
- N.
-
i think the g10 is the best in its class....mostly because it is a very small class....
we don't have to mention the positives, but the problem is that the negatives really come to the front every time i use it....and all have been mentioned here....
the problem is the small sensor....that in combination with the slowish lens makes it a 80 or 100 asa camera which is annoying...a snapshot camera should really be useable 400 with a faster lens....
the other thing is: i never use the zoom.....i shoot 99% wide.....so maybe the sigma would be better for me anyway and i should just shut up....
i really really love the leica m8, although slowish as well, it provides much better images...much better...no comparison....so is the price...and no af and so on.....
but i guess that is the difference...the m8 is a camera capable of amazing images...the g10 really isn't....it really comes down to the size of the sensor....any olympus or contax film p&s was smaller and totally capable of amazing images....these small sensors just don't do it....in a way i use my iphone camera (with all the funky apps) more...and i always have that with me...and it gets the job done....the same image with more resolution does not make it any better in most cases....
the second panasonic (or olympus) come out with their pancake 20mm for the gh1, i am getting that kit....larger sensor, wide fast lens, smaller then g10?....and HD video.....
this is where canon really dropped the ball...no hd video is just a joke....
i guess i would like to see a pancake lens for my 5DII....now that would be a p&s! definitely not small, but MF quality!