G10 vs a590

[MdkSniper]

I've been diving with my Canon A80 for about five years and I think its time to upgrade. I've been researching the A590 and the G10. I understand that there are trade-offs with buying a G10 (No WA options, stuck with Macro, Large camera), but I have not heard too much about the a590. Now, I have a Canon 40D with 10-20 mm UWA, 60MM Macro, 18-55mm lenses and my plan was originally to buy an Ikelite housing for that, but I'm a college student entering Grad school and I never considered that I also have to buy strobes. Do you think it would be a good idea to go for a590 + Ikelite housing and buy nice strobes, so eventually when I want to buy a DSLR Housing, I will already have the strobes? Do you think the G10 would be the better option?

Thanks

 

[diver 85]

Isn't the G10 a much better camera ---for UW use--- than the 590??...But saying that, I have no hands-on experience with either(I have the 570---how much different is the 590 vs the 570?)...Also, would not "nice strobes" for a G 10 work with the 40D's UW setup??..

 

[Nemrod]

The 590 is the better camera for underwater use. The G10 is severely limited in it's ability to accept wide angle lenses and a few more mega pixels and RAW don't make up for that. If macro is the only interest then the G10 is a better choice. This mega pixel and RAW thing is beginning to take on shades of urban legend beyond simple physics and actual print requirements and most cameras today have vastly improved onboard processing. Unless post manipulation is a keen interest, RAW may not be such a big deal. IMO.

If you are getting the camera for underwater use the 590/Ikelite is the better choice. It accepts a range of underwater lenses. Think of the camera not alone but as part of a system. As part of a system the G10 flunks due to the limited options for wet lenses, the restrictive ports, the adequate but hardly wide angle and kind of weird dome on the Ikelite housing for it and the ridiculous and severely limiting square port on the Canon housing for the G10.

www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

By the time you save up money to get a housing for the 40D none will be available and it will be completely obsolete as a result. If that is your interest, get it now and bypass the 590 and the disappointing G10. Hire a couple of sherpas to tote it for you.

Also interesting, go to this fellow home page and then look at his tech articles:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

Oh, and this RAW crap:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

So, what makes the G10 better?

Not u/w but I took this pic when I was about six years old with a camera I got from coupons on a Rice Crispy box, I still think it is my best ever and it was my first:

You know what, G10 my a-----.

N

 

[Nemrod]

The Rice Crispy camera had more latitude, resolution than a G10 will ever dream of having, you guys are to fixated on RAW and pixels and what is currently "best." I studied photography formally, therein I learned I should take up some other line of work, but, some of it rubbed off.

N

 

[King Kong Matt]

I can't speak to the individual characteristics of the cameras you've mentioned, but I will see that the ability to shoot in RAW (and to subsequently make non-destructive edits, which is what I have always understood the real advantage of RAW to be) is invaluable.

Not to get into the age-old Ken Rockwell debate, but Mr. Rockwell, by his own admission (and on his own website), writes a lot of his material for his own amusement and without any factual basis. See his "About" page, in which he writes the following:

"I offer no warrantees of any kind, except that there are many deliberate gaffes, practical jokes and downright foolish and made-up things lurking. While this site is mostly accurate, it is neither legally binding nor guaranteed. The only thing I do guarantee is that there is plenty of stuff I simply make up out of thin air, as does The Onion" (my emphasis added).

I think his position on RAW is a good Exhibit A to this statement.

Just my opinion.

 

[MdkSniper]

Isn't the G10 a much better camera ---for UW use--- than the 590??...But saying that, I have no hands-on experience with either(I have the 570---how much different is the 590 vs the 570?)...Also, would not "nice strobes" for a G 10 work with the 40D's UW setup??..

Like I said.. I'm a college kid... G10 is $410.. A590 is $110... Ikelite housing for G10 = $600.. Ikelite housing for A590 is ~$250..
'

Therefore, if I get an a590, I can afford to buy a better strobe...

 

[MdkSniper]

The 590 is the better camera for underwater use. The G10 is severely limited in it's ability to accept wide angle lenses and a few more mega pixels and RAW don't make up for that. If macro is the only interest then the G10 is a better choice. This mega pixel and RAW thing is beginning to take on shades of urban legend beyond simple physics and actual print requirements and most cameras today have vastly improved onboard processing. Unless post manipulation is a keen interest, RAW may not be such a big deal. IMO.

If you are getting the camera for underwater use the 590/Ikelite is the better choice. It accepts a range of underwater lenses. Think of the camera not alone but as part of a system. As part of a system the G10 flunks due to the limited options for wet lenses, the restrictive ports, the adequate but hardly wide angle and kind of weird dome on the Ikelite housing for it and the ridiculous and severely limiting square port on the Canon housing for the G10.

The Megapixel Myth

By the time you save up money to get a housing for the 40D none will be available and it will be completely obsolete as a result. If that is your interest, get it now and bypass the 590 and the disappointing G10. Hire a couple of sherpas to tote it for you.

Also interesting, go to this fellow home page and then look at his tech articles:

A $150 versus a $5,000 Camera

Oh, and this RAW crap:

RAW vs JPG

So, what makes the G10 better?

Not u/w but I took this pic when I was about six years old with a camera I got from coupons on a Rice Crispy box, I still think it is my best ever and it was my first:

You know what, G10 my a-----.

N

I'm not too worried abou the 40D becoming obsolete.. It already is.. haha..

That's the nice thing about having all the lenses already. I only need to spend money for a body when I get a new DSLR in a year or two.... I'm more hesitant in buying dual strobes than a new body/housing.

 

[MdkSniper]

Isn't the G10 a much better camera ---for UW use--- than the 590??...But saying that, I have no hands-on experience with either(I have the 570---how much different is the 590 vs the 570?)...Also, would not "nice strobes" for a G 10 work with the 40D's UW setup??..

Plus, the camera does not mean anything. It's who is behind the lens that makes the pictures.

 

[Nemrod]

I'm not too worried abou the 40D becoming obsolete.. It already is.. haha..

That's the nice thing about having all the lenses already. I only need to spend money for a body when I get a new DSLR in a year or two.... I'm more hesitant in buying dual strobes than a new body/housing.

What I mean to be specific is that there will be no housing for it. If you hang around trying to decide for months or years you may find the decision made for you, no housing.

As to the Ken Rockwell and his zany disclaimer, that was just one web page of hundreds that popped into my memory. Like he said, do your own math, you don't have to believe him, mega pixels that are printed or displayed do not do you a lot of good. You don't have to do internet, the libraries are full of books on optical physics. Have at it.

The best camera in the world will not take a picture if you cannot mount the lens on it to get that picture. Pictures, photogrpahs, great ones, begin in the mind. It becomes art because the real world is filtered through the lens and the human mind's eye. Fixating, or shall I say, "pix"-ating on pixel counts and RAW will get you no better picture than the guy with the Rice Crispy camera, only you can do that, the human element.

The fact remains that no housing for the G10 mounts available wet lenses. The Fisheye unit does have their proprietary lens port and there are rumors of an ultra wide port. That housing and the two ports is going to run over 2,000 dollars. The Ikelite housing and the Inon lens set for it, one macro lens, 150 dollars, one ultra wide dome port combo with 100WAL, 725 dollars, one Ikelite housing, 250 dollars. If I am wrong please provide the links and info as it is not my intention to mislead. If you stay with just the Inon 100WAL and pass on the dome then that is just 300, not 700 and the 590 system still shoots a wider (or as wide) scene than the Fisheye with 15mm port.

Do the math, the 590/720 system just clobbers the G10 system for versatility and price.

N

 

[King Kong Matt]

Fixating, or shall I say, "pix"-ating on pixel counts and RAW will get you no better picture than the guy with the Rice Crispy camera, only you can do that, the human element.

No one is arguing that the person behind the lens is the most important piece in the equipment chain.

All I am saying is that, given two identical photographs, the one shot in RAW will ultimately offer more creative possibilities to the photographer in the post-processing phase than the one shot in JPG. From that perspective, its an important option - no, it won't fix your understanding of composition and there's only so much it can do to fix exposure, white balance, etc., but all things being equal, wouldn't you always want as many tools at your disposal as available?

Do you disagree?