Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: DaveL on August 19, 2010, 10:14:08 am
-
From another Canon forum...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=919311
Photo if real shows a dial below the shutter release...
DaveL
Toronto
-
I haven't seen real notice of the G12 yet.
Interesting that the S95 is out, and companies are taking orders.
Surprised that it beat out the G12.
At POTN an owner started a long thread about selling her G11 because of ergonomic issues.She's a working photographer, and has sold her G11.
I've had 2 G11's; first one the internal battery failed. Every time I started the G11 up, it would prompt for date/time reset. Yes, I did follow the manual instructions about charging the removal battery for an extended period of time. This was a pain in a tender spot; eventually replaced the camera.
DaveL
hidden message--I havent' warmed up to the G11 because of these problems.
-
Owning both an S90 and a G10, I would most definitely go for the s95 instead of the G12.
After a round of DxO, very similar performance in a smaller and cheaper package that is a much better complement to a DSLR IMHO.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
and LR 3.2 supports lens correction for the S90 so presumably there'll be an update for the S95
-
My wife is very happy with the G10 if the G12 has HD video (it will) she will like an upgrade and I'll get the G10 as a very nice backup camera.
;D
-
Hello Bernard,
I have a Canon G10 and I'm giving some thought to picking up a Canon S90/S95 because of the more easily pocket-able size. With the G10, I've become fairly adept at adjusting exposure values and raw processing to maximize the available dynamic range--how does the S90 compare to the G10 on dynamic range? Also, I see that the S90 is still available on Amazon for considerably less than the S95--are there any of the announced features on the new S95 that seem particularly compelling to you based on your experience with the S90, or would the S90 still be a good choice?
-
John, I don't own an S90. However I see posts at potn about ergonomics--the wheel on the camera back is easily moved upsetting workflow. Didn't Michael review this camera here? I can't remember....
Also--it's a slippery camera; hard to hold onto for some; no viewfinder.
I understand those issues may be resolved with the S95--except for the viewfinder of course.
Richard Franiec makes a grip for the S90. Perhaps he will for the S95.
Looking forward to seeing the S95...
Regards,
DaveL
Toronto
-
I have not done any comparison between the S90 and G10 from a DR standpoint, but I seem to have overall many more usable images with the S90, which includes more DR I guess.
It is correct that the one ergonomic flaw of the S90 is its rear wheel that appears to have been improved/fixed with the S95. That alone might justify going with the newer camera although most of the other enhancements appear to be focused more on video.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Thanks Bernard.
There are some posts at potn about resolving the issue with the wheel on the back of the S90. Some have become very good at removing it and shimming it so it doesn't spin so freely. Talk of voided warranty...
I regret buying a G11--but that's just me. I like the articulating screen.
I wish I had bought an S90 instead with a Freniec (sp?) grip.
POTN is a Canon forum with many active participants. They're very tolerant. (Nikon user for a long time, but solely for fun now.)
Regards,
DaveL
-
i bought the s90 with the grip after reading reviews and think it's necessary
-
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_g12
Re: G12 vs S95: They're different types of camera, despite their similarities. Yes, the S's are smaller. No, that's not always a good thing, even as a complement to a DSLR. For a lot of people the ergonomics of the G series help them take better pictures. If you use a DSLR, the likelihood of getting good shots is enhanced by a real-life viewfinder so you can steady the camera next to your face rather than holding the camera at arm's length. Don't underestimate this advantage. Also, shooting in bright backlight using only an LCD is an exercise in frustration. A lot of people will like the S's for their compact dimensions and "simpler" interface. Many will not.
-
The wheel on the back of the S90 is a non-issue for me (with my setup it toggles between f stop and EV adjustment); I just check the aperture/EV adjustment when I take the picture (you have to look at the LCD anyway), and the value hardly ever get inadvertently changed anyway. But the LCD sucks, if the thing had even a crappy OVF like the earlier Elfs, it would be a huge improvement. If it had an OVF of the quality of the G series it would be a dream.
-
There is a video about this camera..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3MkfFzTAwk
-
I have a G2 (yeah) , and I love the ergonomics. Used to, actually, as I haven't been using it in the last few years.
My first camera with a swiveling display, no way back.
My problem with the Canon P&S cameras is the tiny sensor; both the G11 and S90 deliver only mediocre image quality, even at low ISO .
In case of the G11/12, the low quality even comes in a comparatively large and heavy package, so I'm wondering what Canon is doing here.
-
I have a G2 (yeah) , and I love the ergonomics. Used to, actually, as I haven't been using it in the last few years.
My first camera with a swiveling display, no way back.
Our first digital camera was also a G2. The images we have from then hold up pretty well, even if the resolution is very much lower in comparison to recent cameras. The lens was excellent, and I still do not understand why it has taken so long to get DSLRs with live view and flip-out screens.
My problem with the Canon P&S cameras is the tiny sensor; both the G11 and S90 deliver only mediocre image quality, even at low ISO .
In the end, I went with micro 4/3 rather than a G11. At the time, neither the price nor pocketability (with 20mm) was that different - but I get much better images as a result.
-
I bought a G11 after seriously considering the S95, side-by-side. I decided based on two qualities -- pocketability and the flip-out screen. For the kinds of clothes I wear, the pockets take or reject either camera. That is, I can get either in a jacket pocket, but neither in a jeans pocket. So, that took care of the pocket issue. I *really* like flip-out screens, and do not understand why all larger cameras don't have them (I understand why super-compact cameras don't.) Resolution, etc., as between 10 and 14mp, just doesn't make too much difference for my uses; where it does, I've got a two-camera m4/3 system and a D300/D3 Nikon system, though I haven't used the Nikons much in the last year. I have to say that I am anxiously awaiting reviews on the Nikon D7000, especially at higher ISOs. If it has really terrific high-ISO response, I may step away from Nikon's heavier gear.
-
For me the problem with the G11 and G12 is that they offer what appears to be all the tempting specifications to make you think its a 'serious' camera, but you end up using only a fraction of those functions anyway, and when you want speed its slow to respond, and its image quality is no better than the S90 or S95. Its not a pocketable DSLR substitute, its a pain, neither fish nor fowl.
I'll never buy another G camera (if they make any more, it seems like its a dead end to me) and my G11 is now being used by my pal, because I got an S90 and this is a delightful camera to use. It does need a grip, but I made my own in ten minutes and stuck on with trim tape. So I'd say look at the S95 instead and embrace the fact thats its a small P&S because the next small type of camera on the next step up for IQ is something like m4/3, not the G11/12.
Steve
-
My problem with the Canon P&S cameras is the tiny sensor; both the G11 and S90 deliver only mediocre image quality, even at low ISO .
In case of the G11/12, the low quality even comes in a comparatively large and heavy package, so I'm wondering what Canon is doing here.
[/quote]
You must have very exacting standards if you think the image quality is mediocre on the S90. What are you comparing it with?
-
My problem with the Canon P&S cameras is the tiny sensor; both the G11 and S90 deliver only mediocre image quality, even at low ISO .
In case of the G11/12, the low quality even comes in a comparatively large and heavy package, so I'm wondering what Canon is doing here.
I'm inclined to doubt that you have actually used these cameras. The on-print image quality is really surprising, I have printed the S90 at up to 17x22, and as long as you don't have your nose to the print they look very nice. See also: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
-
My problem with the Canon P&S cameras is the tiny sensor; both the G11 and S90 deliver only mediocre image quality, even at low ISO .
In case of the G11/12, the low quality even comes in a comparatively large and heavy package, so I'm wondering what Canon is doing here.
I don't know the G11 but I have sold the G10 after 3 months , as you say even at 100 ISO the quality is very poor
-
I'm inclined to doubt that you have actually used these cameras. The on-print image quality is really surprising, I have printed the S90 at up to 17x22, and as long as you don't have your nose to the print they look very nice. See also: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
I've used an S90 for some testing, and it's great for what it is.
What it is is a low-quality P&S camera, a G11 in a small package .
Printing: 17x22 prints are clearly not possible without making it a case study on why it's better to use a larger sensor.
That said, I think I still have a print in my portfolio of a shot taken with a G2, size is about 5x7 , plus extensive retouching .
-
I printed 10x8's out of my G2 camera that were good enough to win camera club competitions. If your standards are that exacting why are you using small sensor cameras? Are you sure you know the process involved in all of this or are you simply being provocative? ::)
-
I am sure one can win a competition with an iPhone
-
I got my G12 yesterday, got the battery charged and played around a bit with it. So far, so good. I've had good experiences with a G3 and G9 (still have both) and I'm about to take the G12 out for a walk.
-
I am sure one can win a competition with an iPhone
Which make would you suggest? The image quality obviously differs? Some might be terrible. :) ;D
-
Printing: 17x22 prints are clearly not possible without making it a case study on why it's better to use a larger sensor.
This must explain why I have twp 17x22s on my wall side by side, one shot with an S90 and the other shot with a cropped sensor DSLR, and at a normal viewing distance of say 8 feet, the S90 print does not really give anything up to the DSLR (urban scenes full of detail, low ISO, high shutter speed, sweet spot aperture). From a foot away, a different story, but the S90 holds its own amazingly well -- sort of the difference between a kit lens and high end glass on the same body. Admittedly, the shooting conditions were not particularly challenging. I suppose that now you'll say that I either don't know how to use a camera or don't know how to print . . . .
-
Here's a G10 sample. ISO 200. Printed just dandy at 11x17 and could certainly go larger. I have many, many others in widely differing styles that work just as well. There is no doubt there are some things you just can't do with G10-style cameras but they can produce really satisfying images and the camera does fit in your pocket. I saw an S95 the other day. Unbelievably small and deeply tempting.
Dave
-
I have the Canon s90 and I have a Nikon d300 and Nikon d700. The images IMO from the s90 compares favourably with the Nikon's but they are different. Anyone who has seen Canon images and Nikon images will know what I am talking about. All of this is subjective but what I don't accept is that the Canon's image quality is terrible or a similar adjective. The difference between the cameras is that the handling from the Nikon's is a lot better and flexible and the lenses are obviously better. The Canon is fiddly to use and the options are more limited. Regarding images posted on the web to show image quality between two or more cameras is meaningless. You can't judge them in this way. 8)
-
I just found what I hope is a firmware bug in my new G12. When used with non-Canon flash or wireless trigger, the LCD goes blank when the shutter button is half-pressed to focus -- makes it a bit difficult to compose. My G9 worked fine with the same equipment. Does anyone use the G10 or G11 this way?
-
I've had some correspondence with Canon by email and just got off the phone with their technical support regarding the screen blanking when using non-Canon accessories in the hot shoe. (The screen really doesn't go blank, it shows the manual exposure effect which is often dark.) Apparently I'm the first to complain and, basically, they are not responsible. No firmware updates are scheduled at this time. Although I understand, I don't like it and will be returning the G12 because I use flash triggers and off-camera flash quite a bit. I still think this is a firmware bug and will be fixed with an update. If so and soon, perhaps I'll give the G12 another try.
-
I suppose that now you'll say that I either don't know how to use a camera or don't know how to print . . . .
Far from it.
I merely assue you have little experience with using FF cameras and DB cameras.
And are not in an environment that encourages you to try harder for decent prints.
No shame in that.
-
What I like about these cameras is that you can put them in a pocket and if you find a scene worth a photo you can take a panorama and create a super-resolution image with plenty of detail and amazing IQ. It's a great compromise solution between carrying all the "working" equipment and being able not to miss a great scene.
With good light a 4 or 5 shots pano with a G camera is very very similar to a DSLR shot. With low light the DSLR always wins.
-
Far from it.
I merely assue you have little experience with using FF cameras and DB cameras.
And are not in an environment that encourages you to try harder for decent prints.
No shame in that.
If you had bothered to read my post, you will see that I was talking about crop sensor DSLRs and the S90. I'm not sure where FF and DB figure into the equation. And if you have to have FF or DB gear to get "decent prints," then I guess I'm just screwed. In any event, neither your comments nor your derogatory tone add anything useful to the discussion here, which is about a pocket camera, after all.
-
Owning both an S90 and a G10, I would most definitely go for the s95 instead of the G12.
After a round of DxO, very similar performance in a smaller and cheaper package that is a much better complement to a DSLR IMHO.
Cheers,
Bernard
Thanks Bernard.
If I had it to do again, I would go with the S95 too.
I truly enjoyed my G9 with Franiec grip as reported by Michael here.
I've regretted my G11 purchase. Twice. (I've had 2, making it a too expensive camera.
So it would be S95 with a Franiec grip, if I were starting over.
DaveL
-
I would take the Soney NEX 5 which is much more better than a Canon powershot
-
I would take the Soney NEX 5 which is much more better than a Canon powershot
But not a pocket camera, even with a pancake prime on it.
-
not a pocket camera but good camera for a very small size, I shall never buy again a compact with a so small sensor
-
If you had bothered to read my post, you will see that I was talking about crop sensor DSLRs and the S90. I'm not sure where FF and DB figure into the equation. And if you have to have FF or DB gear to get "decent prints," then I guess I'm just screwed. In any event, neither your comments nor your derogatory tone add anything useful to the discussion here, which is about a pocket camera, after all.
I just so happen to do a little comparing the past few days, between FF (Canon 5DII), APS-C (Sony R1), and my new Samsung TL500 (same sensor as S95/G12, afaik, 1/1.7 size ).
The APS-C sensor is a little less than half the size of FF, the 1/1.7 about an eighth the size of the APS-C (!).
The Sony and Samsung have the same resolution at 10MP, both have supposedly good lenses, the Sony is a couple of years old, the Samsung arguably one of the best current compacts .
After a lot of huffing and puffing, I managed to squeeze a tiff image out of the Samsung, via Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop, which actually looked surprisingly good, all things considered.
Almost as good as the out-of-the-camera jpg from the Sony. ;)
Ok, better than the Sony jpg re. dynamic range, which I had tweaked heavily in ACR ; but detail, tonal range, gradients , no contest at all.
CA of course always an issue with tiny sensors, don't get me started on the noise .
And that is just one example out of many tests I made, judging the images only on the monitor ; I can't be arsed to waste ink and paper on prints.
Now those are just my personal impressions and my 'testing' is certainly flawed somehow, but the differences still seem to be massive between APS-C and pinky-nail sized sensors .
You can see and sense how hard the in-camera-processing is trying to put out a decent result from those small sensors.
I bought the Samsung cause I'm a sucker for articulated screens, it's smaller than the G12, with a fast Schneider lens, but I think I take it back .
-
I've had some correspondence with Canon by email and just got off the phone with their technical support regarding the screen blanking when using non-Canon accessories in the hot shoe. (The screen really doesn't go blank, it shows the manual exposure effect which is often dark.) Apparently I'm the first to complain and, basically, they are not responsible. No firmware updates are scheduled at this time. Although I understand, I don't like it and will be returning the G12 because I use flash triggers and off-camera flash quite a bit. I still think this is a firmware bug and will be fixed with an update. If so and soon, perhaps I'll give the G12 another try.
Others are beginning to report and complain about the G12 screen blanking so my copy is not defective. I decided to keep the G12 and hope that Canon will issue a firmware patch -- they will, won't they? Even if there is no firmware patch, I can work around or tolerate the problem. It's a good little camera, a minor upgrade from the G11 but a more significant upgrade from the G9.
-
I got a G12 a few days ago. My main camera is an XTi with the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS and an EF 70-300 IS. Image quality is very important to me, so I shoot in RAW.
Before I had the G12, I had a G9 for a few years before I dropped it on the sidewalk. My initial reaction with the G9 was that its image quality was disappointing - until I learned to avoid shooting wide open. That, plus avoiding high ISO settings (EV -1 does a better job, since RAW has the range to rescue the low midtones in computer) began to give me decent results before I turned it into a rattle.
My experience with the G12 over the past few days has been eye-opening. I carried forward the "stop it down" principle for good sharpness, but I've found that the lower MP count (10 instead of the G9's 12) makes a real difference in noise and sharpness in low light situations. I keep it in my front pants pocket - it fits easily - with a small keyring through the right-hand strap slot and a larger keyring as a step-up to anchor it to a belt-clip. The larger ring also doubles as an index-finger mount while shooting.
What I found at a jazz jam Tuesday night, sitting in the front row when I wasn't playing, was that the angled screen allowed me to shoot from my lap. Not only was that inconspicuous, it also helped considerably with steadying the camera.
I've attached two shots from that evening, one at ISO 800 and one at ISO 1600. (With the G9, ISO 400 was pushing it!) The focus is a bit off on the brighter one because the camera apparently locked on the contrasty background rather than the guitarist - since then I've figured out how to make the focus point smaller and make it follow what I locked it on while I reframe. Both were shot using EV -1.
These might not blow up to poster size, but they'd work on a 12" album cover.
No fancy tricks: opened them in DPP, had it save them out as 16 bit TIFFs, had Photoshop "Save to Web." No noise reduction applied.
PS Don't know why I can't make the forum show them as more than thumbnails - they look great full screen in Irfan View (they were saved out at the 50% size setting).
-
. . .
The APS-C sensor is a little less than half the size of FF, the 1/1.7 about an eighth the size of the APS-C (!).
. . .
Actually, an APS-C sensor is nearly 2/3 the size of full frame.
To compute it, just take the reciprocal of the crop factor, which for Canon is 1.6:
1 / 1.6 = 0.625 = 62.5%
(I don't know how to compute the size of the G series sensor since I don't know what those numbers mean, so I can't comment on how it compares to APS-C.)
-
Actually, an APS-C sensor is nearly 2/3 the size of full frame.
To compute it, just take the reciprocal of the crop factor, which for Canon is 1.6:
1 / 1.6 = 0.625 = 62.5%
You're simply looking at a linear dimension. Multiply your 0.625 by itself and you'll find that an APS-C sensor covers only 41.4% of a full frame sensor.
Bob
-
You're simply looking at a linear dimension. Multiply your 0.625 by itself and you'll find that an APS-C sensor covers only 41.4% of a full frame sensor.
Bob
True, if you're talking about surface area, but that's not the way most people hear the word "size."
I realized a few years ago that the megapixel race is deceptive for exactly that reason - to double the resolution you have to quadruple the number of pixels, so the much smaller increases in pixel count being boasted about were insignificant: you'd have to take the square root of the ratio to get the actual boost in resolution. Since the first credible APS-C DSLRs were around 5MP, it would take 20MP to double the resolution - and we're not there yet!
Getting back to the original point: I did understand your response, but it took a few moments of reflection. Imagine how someone who's not mathematically inclined would react:
Tell most folks (yes, even me) that a sensor is "only 41.4% the size" and they'll think you're saying it's 0.414 times as wide and 0.414 times as high - in terms of surface area, only 17.1% the size. Size and area are almost, but not exactly, synonymous. Area is a much more advanced concept than length - in fact, it's the beginning of calculus. There's enough ambiguity in the meaning of the word "size" to have allowed the linear meaning to dominate unless the area meaning is explicitly referenced, so clarity of expression is essential.
-
True, if you're talking about surface area, but that's not the way most people hear the word "size."
Look, digital sensors didn't change the basic measuring of things.
Size of a sensor means length x height , surface area in other words.
No ambiguity possible, as a sensor has a 2D surface , and there is one way to measure it .
I can't believe I'm typing this ... ;)
-
Look, digital sensors didn't change the basic measuring of things.
Size of a sensor means length x height , surface area in other words.
No ambiguity possible, as a sensor has a 2D surface , and there is one way to measure it .
Sorry, size alone doesn't tell the story, one needs to specify the dimensions (hence the confusion).
Size is not necessarily area.
- Are you telling us that e.g. the size of a cube is the area of its six sides? In most contexts it would be more useful to know its length/width/height (from that the surface and volume can be derived).
- What's the size of a cylinder? Usually diameter and length are used to describe it, all other meaningful quantifications can be derived from that.
- What size suit do you wear? Surface area? No!
What's more, sensor arrays are sometimes decribed by a larger diameter than they actually have, e.g. 1/1.8". That practice dates back to the video tube era. Here (http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/sensor_sizes_01.htm) is a useful summary of that confusing subject.
Cheers,
Bart
-
So I kept the Samsung TL500 - and darn, I love it - so i stand (partly) corrected . ;)
The Raw files take a lot of work, the jpegs are useless as soon as you start working on them, but the handling is superb .
-
I can't believe it either! ;)
Eduardo
Look, digital sensors didn't change the basic measuring of things.
Size of a sensor means length x height , surface area in other words.
No ambiguity possible, as a sensor has a 2D surface , and there is one way to measure it .
I can't believe I'm typing this ... ;)
-
Can anyone comment on the noise level at ISO 400 or 800 when comparing the G10 (which I own) compared to the new G12? If I upgrade will I see an improvement in noise levels or detail/resolution?
-
Can anyone comment on the noise level at ISO 400 or 800 when comparing the G10 (which I own) compared to the new G12? If I upgrade will I see an improvement in noise levels or detail/resolution?
I don't have a G10 but made a comparison between my G9 and G12, see http://lightdescription.blogspot.com/2010/10/g12-and-g9-in-noise-modes.html
My conclusion is that the G12 is about one stop better than the G9 with respect to noise.
-
I went from a G9 with grip to a G11 to get the articulating screen.
I don't have a '12.
I believe that Michael has posted reviews here at luminous landscape of the '11 advising promoting benefits and comparing it to the '10.
The articulating screen makes more of a difference for me than the extra stop. But that's just me.
Hope this helps,
Dave
-
Anyone get their hands on a G12 yet? Or should I ask after Christmas? :)
I still have, use and love my G5. Seven-years and running on it's third battery and it still works, that in itself is a feat.
Even at 5MP and a noisy 400 ISO limit, it's a workhorse of a PS take anywhere camera. The flipout LCD, OVF, and sharp/fast f2-f3 lens are worth it.
To me, all the arguments over A3 prints from a PS is not a factor, as I have much larger gear to lug around if I want to send something to a 44" printer. A lot has to do with the message in the image itself, despite being noisy and only going to 8x10. In regards to that, usability ala accessible manual controls is more important to me, as in getting the shot and not fighting the camera.
Would it be safe to say that a G12 is the smallest form factor available today that allows for professional use? I think that's the logic behind Canon's marketing. Where do you draw the line? The one obvious caveat is the shutter lag, even in manual, that I have with the G5 and I hope the G12 is much faster. I also like the onboard HDR mode (bracketing shots) for increased DR. The shops in my local do have these in yet.
-
I've had a G12 for a month or so and I love it. My big box is an EOS XTi (400D) with the f/2.8 17-55 lens - but I'm not gonna carry that rig around all the time!
The G12 fits in my front pants pocket clipped to a belt-mounted keyring hanger with a pair of steel split-rings - a small one to go through the right-hand strap slot, a larger one through the small one to step it up to fit over my index finger or clip to the belt hanger.
I had a G9 for several years before dropping it on the sidewalk - the G12 is far superior.
The only thing the G9 had over the G12 was a longer zoom range. Balanced against that is much better low light performance from the G12 - I find it useful up to ISO 3200, though 1600 is better - and the wonderful physical knob for tweaking exposure (Ev +/-) while you look at the effect on the Live View screen, which was great this fall for taking foliage shots. (The virtues of the articulating screen you already know about. It makes taking candids a lot easier - I can shoot from my lap.) The 720 p - stereo - video is much better than it has any right to be. (That the G9 did have, but I hardly used it. The articulating screen also makes a difference there.)
I run it in Av mode, with the new front wheel - similar in feel to the "main dial" on an EOS SLR - used to adjust the f-stop. When you move that dial, you get a popup on the screen showing the available f-stop range at your present focal length and where you are in that range. Very nice. Use that to make sure you're always stopped down at least a stop and your shots will be sharp. (Wide open tends to be soft.)
I'm also just getting the hang of the Tracking AutoFocus - instead of manually moving the focus point, you put the center of the screen over your target and half-press the shutter (which has always been the way to avoid shutter lag) and then you can re-frame. The focus point will try to follow the target around the screen, whether because you've re-framed or because the target has moved!
And use RAW capture with it! Right now the choices for doing that are the included Digital Photo Professional disk or Lightroom 3.3 (downloadable from Adobe's website), both of which have profile-based lens aberration correction for the G12. Either one can act as a RAW translator for Photoshop. DPP sends to PS as a TIFF, LR gives you the choice of TIFF or PSD. Both also have the ability to copy tweaks you've worked out on one image to others you select.
-
That's for the detailed reply, Phil. I played with a G10/11 (no G12 available yet). Liked the external knobs for manual control. However, the articulating screen is deal maker for me. I kept the G5 for that, and the f2 lens and a very useful zoom range. It's enough tool for story telling and snap shots, and the wife appreciates me not having to carry a 40D, or that noisy T70 on family outings. I've been hinting on getting a G12... see what happens this weekend... :)
-
Pete did Santa bring a '12?
;)
Best,
DaveL
-
Philnick, welcome to the forum.
I've taken to using a sling strap to hang my G11 safely. It allows me to keep my camera under my coat when the weather is bad. Open the zipper, and stash the camera away. Worked for me in Quebec City in October where it rained a lot.
I bought the fittings from OpTech and they were really quite inexpensive.
I can see myself dropping m camera too. Not good. :(
Best,
DaveL
-
Dave,
I saw the OpTech fittings after I had rigged up my G12 with the split rings. The small OpTech fitting would do the same job as the smaller split ring, which was a bit of a bear to get threaded through the strap slot.
When I dropped the G9, Canon wanted $350 to fix it, so I didn't. To be fair to Canon, a few years ago they brought it back from the dead for no charge when it stopped working while still under warranty - they replaced just about all of it except for the bottom plate with the serial number.
Update to my last post: Now that Adobe has updated its DNG converter and RAW file filter to version 6.3, the choices for RAW capture with the G12 have increased:
For users of Photoshop 5, RAW filter 6.3 allows direct import (or through Bridge).
For users of older versions of Photoshop, you can sidestep DPP and Lightroom by using the free DNG converter 6.3.
This transition period has introduced me Lightroom 3.3 - I bought it at version 1 and wasn't impressed, but 3.3 is pretty slick. I particularly like its noise reduction.
A few cautions about Lightroom, however:
(1) If Lightroom's catalog file gets corrupted, it freezes my whole XP machine! I'm going to start having it make daily backups of the catalog file. - CORRECTION: Corruption of the catalog wasn't the source of the freezes. it turned out that the problem was my old nVidia Desktop Manager, which provides manipulation of multiple monitors and its own GUI for the basic nVidia video driver. nVidia Desktop Manager has been giving Lightroom fits for years. Disabling it stopped the freezes. I don't use multiple monitors, and the Windows controls are sufficient for me, so I'm satisfied - except that my free trial of Lightroom has expired and I'm having trouble coming up the the money to buy it!
(2) To keep the catalog file in synch with the locations of files, the recommendation is to do file management through Lightroom - but be careful about deleting images through Lightroom. I saw that a small folder and its subfolder had the same images, so I deleted the ones in the folder - which took out the ones in the subfolder as well. (Fortunately, I had let them go to the recycle bin.) Apparently, Lightroom shows all images in subfolders in their parent folders.
-
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG12/page9.asp
Coles notes...ISO 400 and below to keep noise levels down. Not in the review, but some users report ergonomic issues when they push buttons on the camera back with their right thumb.
I've found a solution that may work for this camera and my G11...
Hardware store--little stick on rubber bumpers that you stick on cupboard doors to quiet them when closing. Perhaps 3/8 inch in diameter. Perhaps 3/32nd inch thick with adhesive back.
The ones I bought are brown, but I'm colourblind. :)
Best,
DaveL
(Just returned from the camera store where I contemplated trading my G11 on:
* P7000
* LX5
* S95
Yes I was serious!)
-
With my G9, staying at or below ISO 400 was standard operating procedure, but shooting RAW and using Lightroom 3.3, I find that even 3200 looks nice.
This is a second camera, after all - it's for the unexpected shooting opportunity. If you can plan for a shoot, bring your DSLR.