Canon G10 vs. G11

[M_Bipartitus]

Sounds more like "Canon 1G". I don't see Canon releasing an expensive camera like photog310 mentions as it would be hard to market. Pros who need most of those features use the 1D series and amateurs who won't understand the value of color and dynamic range over MP count.

 

[Nemrod]

The information regarding a lack of the G10 lens' resolution to match the tiny pixel pitch on the sensor is spot on. In addition, with tiny photosites, everything becomes more critical - movement, camera component alignment etc. Personally, I am very disappointed that Canon dod not make the G11 camera a 6mp camera, and using the advanced sensor technology from the new EOS iD Mk4. There is no substitute for a pure analog/digital signal originating from the photosite when it comes to dynamic range, color fidelity, and tonality. Noise reduction solutions inevitably just smear the artifacts and also degrade the fine image details, as well. So in the end, all you end up with is a bigger megapixel number on the box that means very little in terms of real life benefits. And of course, more megapixels (many of which are going to be meaningless crud) means more hard drive space, and slower processing times. In the event one needs a bigger print than 8x10, Genuine Fractals can be used to up size the image up to 4x with great results (as long as the original file is clean). Therefore, on the rare occasions you want to print a 13x19 or 16x20 print, you could do so from a clean 6mp file, and not have the overhead of tons of larger files of everything you shot hanging out on your hard drive. Someday, maybe Canon will give us the dream point-and-shoot G12, which to me is as follows:
a) 6mp for great tonality and color fidelity up to 8×10
b) Same sensor technology as used in 1D Mk4
c) Same sensor size as on current G10/G11
d) Clean ISO 3200, 12 stops of dynamic range
e) RAW only - no jpeg, no picture styles
f) Sturdy weathertight sealed body for use in driving rain
g) 4x Optical zoom, f/2 - f/4 aperture range
h) Upgraded lens quality with L coatings for flare control
i) In-body IS, like the G10/G11
j) No fragile swivel screen to get ripped off body, thus rendering camera useless
k) G10 body style, not G11 body style
l) Upgraded low light auto focus sensitivity
m) Faster responsiveness, reduced shutter lag
n) 640×480 video, but with AF during video
o) No camera buzzing to degrade audio
p) Built-in wireless file transmitter with 300’ range and encryption
q) GPS geotagging
r) Price point: $1500 - $2000
I need wireless transmitting so that in the event I am forced to hand over my camera, an assistant 300’ away will have already transmitted my images via a satellite phone.

Canon or Nikon simply needs to make their version of a M4:3. Stick an APS sensor in a sleek non reflex metal body, put a small pop up flash, a simple optical finder for bright days on the beach, make it weather, shock resistant, able to use the full range of APS-C lenses like the Tokina 10-17 or whatever floats your boat.

I don't see any point in continuing with the tiny sensors in the G series, especially, as you say, at a 1,500 dollars price point.

It seems 10Bar has a housing for the EP-1/2 and it sounds like Ikelite may release one also.

I would rather have a digital Nikonos III.

N

 

[M_Bipartitus]

There have been some rumors about something like this coming out. It would only have the LCD as a viewfinder. But it's only rumors at this point.

 

[photog310]

I should have probably mentioned that I am a photojournalist working in war zones throughout the world. In many situations, if I were to pull out a DSLR like a Canon EOS 1D, I would be shot dead by a sniper. Pros in my field need a discreet point-and-shoot style camera that produces image files that are high quality but that are only 6 - 8 mp to facilitate being instantly transmitted via satellite, and out to the free world. Large image files are useless because they take so long to transmit that they are easily intercepted by the enemy, along with your triangulated location - not a good thing! Mounting and unmounting lenses in dirty and dusty environments, especially on the run, poses its own set of problems, eg. dust on the image sensor. For me, I need a zoom lens that is sealed onto the body, not removable lenses. The Canon G10 form factor "reads" like a point-and-shoot camera, and that is why I am here and able to type out this post. Photojournalists, like me, who put their life on the line to bring images to the headlines that show the atrocities of the world, need a specialized camera system to address our needs, yet so far none is available. Our own US government could work with Canon or Nikon to develop such a system, but unfortunately, in some cases our own government does not want the truth to be shown to the public, and therefore they have been less than cooperative.

 

[Nemrod]

I should have probably mentioned that I am a photojournalist working in war zones throughout the world. In many situations, if I were to pull out a DSLR like a Canon EOS 1D, I would be shot dead by a sniper. Pros in my field need a discreet point-and-shoot style camera that produces image files that are high quality but that are only 6 - 8 mp to facilitate being instantly transmitted via satellite, and out to the free world. Large image files are useless because they take so long to transmit that they are easily intercepted by the enemy, along with your triangulated location - not a good thing! Mounting and unmounting lenses in dirty and dusty environments, especially on the run, poses its own set of problems, eg. dust on the image sensor. For me, I need a zoom lens that is sealed onto the body, not removable lenses. The Canon G10 form factor "reads" like a point-and-shoot camera, and that is why I am here and able to type out this post. Photojournalists, like me, who put their life on the line to bring images to the headlines that show the atrocities of the world, need a specialized camera system to address our needs, yet so far none is available. Our own US government could work with Canon or Nikon to develop such a system, but unfortunately, in some cases our own government does not want the truth to be shown to the public, and therefore they have been less than cooperative.

I don't think the US government has or wants control over Canon or Nikon. I am not sure a "war zone" press camera would necessarily make a good camera for sport divers?

N

 

[chachee99]

I am in the same boat. I want to get either the g10 or g11. I can find a g10 and housing about 250 dollars cheaper than the g11 camera with canon housing. Is the g11 worth an extra 250 dollar investment?

 

[slowhands]

I am in the same boat. I want to get either the g10 or g11. I can find a g10 and housing about 250 dollars cheaper than the g11 camera with canon housing. Is the g11 worth an extra 250 dollar investment?

I think it is. The camera plus housing is usually only a small portion of the total cost of an underwater system. To get good photos in many situations, you must add 1-2 strobes ($800-up), a tray with arms ($200-?), and a focus light if your strobe lacks one. A price difference of $250 is not much from that perspective. Get the best you can afford.

As for me, I would buy neither. The Canon S90 is better for my purposes. But choosing between the two, I would get a G11, because you can buy it new with a warranty. The G10 is discontinued and harder to get service for. If you can afford to wait a couple months, the G12 will be out, a slight improvement on the G11 by all accounts.

Having said that, I see folks getting far better photos than I do with the G10 (Gilligan), with the venerable Olympus SP350 (Wisnu). They simply have better skills, technique, experience than I do. In the end, your camera is not nearly as important as your skill as an underwater photographer.

 

[slowhands]

Canon or Nikon simply needs to make their version of a M4:3. Stick an APS sensor in a sleek non reflex metal body, put a small pop up flash, a simple optical finder for bright days on the beach, make it weather, shock resistant, able to use the full range of APS-C lenses like the Tokina 10-17 or whatever floats your boat. ...

N

Back in the early 90s, there was a "new" film size by Kodak called APS. SLR Cameras for it were made by Minolta (Vectis), Nikon (Pronea) and Canon (IX Lite). The camera bodies were smaller than the 35mm cameras of the day, and the lenses from Nikon and Minolta were tiny too (canon used standard EF lenses). These cameras were just shrunken versions of 35mm film cameras, and had reflex mirrors, real viewfinders, and interchangeable lenses.

It only lasted a couple of years, when it was eclipsed by digital. The size of the film was the same as the "APS-C" sensor used by Nikon in its current DSLRs.

The point is that much of the design work for the lenses was already done by Nikon, Minolta and Canon. It should be relatively easy to launch a new body for each family that is digital. Sony, successor to Minolta, has already decided not to, instead going with the NEX family. But I wonder why Nikon would not re-release the "Pronea DX"?

I actually used this format briefly and like the compactness. And, all the Nikon IX lenses will mount on and communicate with standard Nikon bodies - same mount, same contacts. On some zooms there is mechanical interference with the mirror, but most are tiny cute alternatives to the standard lenses.

I doubt Nikon will re-release this, it's too logical. But it sure would be nice for those of us who invested in it back in the day....

 

[chachee99]

Yeah, you're right that the g12 will be released soon.

I am already reading some information on it. However, I cannot tell you if it is accurate or not.

 

[Puffer Fish]

Boy, not sure where to start. The technology of digital camera's has gotten so complex, that not having the right setting is common place, and having someone that knows how to set the camera seems to be rare.

Having a G10 that was broken, I am sure that happens, having two...pretty unlikely.

Here is an image I shot on a bet, that one cannot control the focus and depth of field like a DSLR...

This was done in one shot. So was it a DSLR (I have several)... a point and shoot?

This is a very down sized image (not cropped).

It was shot with a G10..which has a far better focus system than most P&S do (including the S90), but you also have a lot of choices to make, in order for it to work correctly.

If you are using auto... well auto was made for taking snap shots.. so expect snap shot quality. There are lots of "auto" setting that do not use "auto"

P&S cameras are not DSLR's (thankfully)...you have to use different setting... different methods to get the results you want. You can alway shoot in manual.. and use manual focus...I don't, but you could...or, you could take the time to learn what those hundreds of setting do, and pick the right ones, and then go have fun.

Here is a down sized G10 image.. which I have in a 13 x 19 inch print...

and this one:

or this, where you just want the head with the just swallowed fish still in it's mouth:

In your defense,the manual sucks, and they don't tell how all the setting should go together to make a shot.

If you have a strobe (and you should), then you need to understand the following:

1. Anti-shake does not work with macro..use a faster shutter speed.

2. This camera has amazingly high flash syn... which you can use to replace the f stops it does not have.

3. Use the zoom to give yourself working space and control depth of field.. sounds odd to a DSLR using, but it is all you have, and it works.

4. Ignore the F stops for the most part.. you only have a couple at each setting.

5. Use spot focus...the smallest one, as there are several

6. Have focus magnify on.

7. Have spot exposure on or center dominate.

8. Have the half depress exposure lock on.

There are a bunch more, but that is a start.

Regarding image quality... if and only if, you shoot in ISO 80 or 100, and if you leave the f stop wide open, and if you zoom to about the middle of the zoom range.. you have slightly better resolution than say a Nikon D3S and about the same as a Canon 1D... don't believe it? Just download the resolution chart images for those cameras at Dpreview.com and look for yourself. Now shoot under different setting, and that is not true..The G11 is no where near to that, but it does have better low light performance.

The first day I bought the camera I studied the manual, went out in the yard and tried to take closeups of flowers and other detailed foliage. I tried all the automatic settings, both macro and non-macro. Sometimes the pictures would be in focus but usually not. I then went back to the camera shop where I purchased it and one of their employees who gives their class on macro photography took me and the camera outside to a flower bed and tried to take closeup pictures of the blooms. Same result, sometimes they came out OK, but usually not. We then went inside and got anouther brand new G10 and tried it. Same result. He finally gave up and just said some cameras were better than others at this. Needles to say I wasn't very happy with this after the money I spent on the camera and the UW housing. Off to Cozumel I went. Used the automatic settings for underwater and tried both the macro setting and just staying further away and zooming in. Spotty results in both shallow, well lit conditions and deeper, not so well lit conditions. I tried both with the diffuser and without it. I found without it for some reason half the picture would have a dark shadow acroos the bottom. With the diffuser the shadow went away. I don't believe the focus problem was necessarily related to lighting as it didn't work in very good light either. Meanwhile my buddy was happily snapping macro pictures of Nudabrachs, seahorses and other fine detail objects with my old Olympus C-4000. His pictures came out beautiful. The G-10 did beat the Olympus in taking long range pictures of Barracuda, turtles, etc. It seemed to make better use of ambient lighting at a distance. I guess my next approach will have to be to use all the manual settings and set each shot up myself. That's the professional approach and I was hoping to avoid that. I was specifically attracted to the G-10 because it featured an automated program specifically for underwater. Unfortunately, it only works if you're not taking closeups.
ImageDescription:
Make: Canon
Model: Canon PowerShot G10
Orientation: top-left
XResolution: 180.0
YResolution: 180.0
ResolutionUnit: inch
DateTime: 2009:10:26 13:53:17
YCbCrPositioning: datum point
ExifOffset: 240
ExposureTime: 1/60 second
FNumber: 2.8
ISOSpeedRatings: 250
ExifVersion: 2.21
DateTimeOriginal: 2009:10:26 13:53:17
DateTimeDigitized: 2009:10:26 13:53:17
ComponentsConfiguration: YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel: 5/1
ShutterSpeedValue: 1/60 second
ApertureValue: 2.8
ExposureBiasValue: 0.0
MaxApertureValue: 2.8
MeteringMode: multi-segment
Flash: 73
FocalLength: 6.1 mm
MakerNote: 0|"B 4I&0$$ED"#n'v(-` $w_ @@+D'&_#aWIMGowerShot G10 JPEGFirmware Version 1.04%@u%s|%|#`-0nAnI'dR%s@|4S@Tfjjjghiefcu(Rmc9`@dd $0{II*
UserComment:
FlashPixVersion: 1.00
ColorSpace: sRGB
ExifImageWidth: 4416
ExifImageHeight: 3312
ExifInteroperabilityOffset: 3232
FocalPlaneXResolution: 15123.3
FocalPlaneYResolution: 15123.3
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit: inch
SensingMethod: 1 chip color area sensor
FileSource: digital camera
Tag #41985: 0
Tag #41986: 0
Tag #41987: 1
Tag #41988: 4416/4416
Tag #41990: 0
And here is a very similar picture taken with the Olympus