Canon G10

[ScubaSteve]

I apologize first of all because I shoot Nikon and not Canon or S&S but all this talk about noise etc. and printing 4x6....I had to interject.

I agree with you Hammerhead....if you will never want a bigger picture, then you are probably JUST FINE with what you have. If a person is looking to get better shots that they can blow up and print....then it sounds like the 8000G should be reconsidered. FYI, it is obvious that I am FAR from a photographer and just love to play at it underwater. But, just to give you an idea of the difference Quality can make.....this picture is blown up to 20" x 30" and has been plaqued and is hanging on my wall. If I saw a lot of noise in the photo (it is also possible that my untrained eye just misses the noise) I would never have blown it up and paid to plaque it. But that is what I want....you are OK with 4"x6" which is great. The question becomes, what does the OP want from the camera.....because it sounds like they do not want the noise.

 

[rjsimp]

Nice picture and just to clarify, it is the Ricoh camera used in the S&S 8000G that has the horrible noise.. NOT all P&S cameras have the problem to this degree.

What we have been pointing out is that you can buy almost any other P&S camera commonly used by other forum members, house it, and get better quality pictures than the 8000G gives.

The OP has an issue with it as well as others, if you don't.. then that is great!

 

[hammerhead man]

Hmmmm, since I haven't seen it I guess I'm not sensitive to it at all. I don't intend to make prints greater than 5X7 and the ones that I have printed that large seem fine to me. I guess ignorance is bliss . Can you point out the noise in one of my uploaded pics? Some of the shark pics are grainy but the viz was not very good because of all the chum they put in the water.

Regards,

Bill

 

[ScubaSteve]

Nice picture and just to clarify, it is the Ricoh camera used in the S&S 8000G that has the horrible noise.. NOT all P&S cameras have the problem to this degree.

What we have been pointing out is that you can buy almost any other P&S camera commonly used by other forum members, house it, and get better quality pictures than the 8000G gives.

The OP has an issue with it as well as others, if you don't.. then that is great!

Agreed. I am shooting a Nikon Coolpix P5000 because I can hardly spell DSLR let alone operate one .

 

[rjsimp]

Okay.. I went back to a picture I had from the 8000G.. I had to find the original to work from so here you go. I am including a crop at 100% in both pictures to show the noise. Also, even at the smaller image size, you can notice the image without the noise is much cleaner and crisper. So, to say that the noise that can't be seen easily doesn't have an effect on the overal picture when viewed as small, I have to disagree with.

Everyone can judge what's best for them, but IMHO, even at reduced sizes the noise makes a difference and it is worth finding a camera that has little to no noise.

Image taken with a Sea & Sea 8000G

Image taken with a camera with little to no noise

 

[Gilligan]

From what I've been reading about the G10 you're probably better off with a G9. I've heard the housing will not accept any wet conversion lenses which limit your abilities with the camera. Why are you unhappy with the Sea&Sea?

I would not be too quick to write off the G10. It has a 28mm wide angle lens versus the 35mm on the G9. Underwater add-on lenses for the G10 may not be necessary for most people with that 28mm lens. One of the reasons I have not upgraded from my Olympus C4000Z is having to give up my wide angle lens. I am to the point I may be satisfied with the G10's 28mm lens thereby not having to carry extra lenses. I barely use my macro lenses and with the high megapixel of the G10 cropping photos to zoom in is no problem.

 

[hammerhead man]

Thanks rjsimp, I appreciate the difference. However, I'm still not sure if the noise would be noticable to the naked eye on 5X7 or 8X10 prints. I was happy with my shots with the 8000G and never noticed the noise even when displayed on a 19" monitor. Both of your shots look great on my computer and if you hadn't pointed out the difference I wouldn't have noticed any difference at all. Those are great pics. They are both clear, have great color, and nice composition.

Regards,

Bill

 

[rjsimp]

Thanks rjsimp, I appreciate the difference. However, I'm still not sure if the noise would be noticable to the naked eye on 5X7 or 8X10 prints. I was happy with my shots with the 8000G and never noticed the noise even when displayed on a 19" monitor. Both of your shots look great on my computer and if you hadn't pointed out the difference I wouldn't have noticed any difference at all. Those are great pics. They are both clear, have great color, and nice composition.

Regards,

Bill

I've done a lot with photos and have done many comparisons both on screen and printed. There is a significant difference IMHO.

As I said in previous posts, if you are okay with the noise, that is fine and if you are happy with the 8000G that is also fine. However, there IS a difference in quality and for the same money as the 8000G you can get a camera that will have significantly less noise, have better features, faster recycle time, etc, etc.. This has all been hashed in the past so we don't need to go there..

My only purpose in showing these examples was to help others understand one of the reasons why the OP and others (including me) why we were disappointed in the 8000G. I wanted to show what the noise does to a photo and in underwater photos especially since we like to see the blues and vibrant colors. I guess I am more sensitive to the noise because I can see it and when I look at a picture I see it almost immediately, whereas you may be able to look past it..

Hope the examples help others see the difference and make an informed decision when buying a camera set up..