Canon Powershot G10 - pro or contra ?

[BrunoW]

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

[situgrrl]

Do you use your camera in a lab or in the field?  If it's a lab, listen to DP, in the field, Michael.  

[NikoJorj]

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 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, 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...

[BrunoW]

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

[BrunoW]

.

[BrunoW]

.

[BrunoW]

.

[BrunoW]

.

[BrunoW]

.

[BrunoW]

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

[BrunoW]

.

[Justin Berman]

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.

[Rob C]

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

[markhout]

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

[Paul Sumi]

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

[Khun_K]

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.

[Justin Berman]

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.

[thierrylegros396]

An excellent camera in good light conditions.

And it has a very useful ND filter !

Thierry

[jasonrandolph]

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.

[PetterStahre]

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