linuxguy
12th of December 2007 (Wed), 12:23
I want high quality images from a compact camera. I'll have a 40D when Dell decides to ship it, so I am not looking for a DSLR. I wanted a camera that I can take with me on my daily journeys that will give me high quality images.
By compact, I mean something that I can have on my person or in my space every day. Like in my briefcase, in a fanny pack, in the fold down console of my truck, in my shirt pocket in a pinch, in my coat pocket, etc. I don't need a tiny camera, just something that I can take with me every day without weighing me down.
For a while I thought I might buy an older 35mm compact camera and shoot film. 35mm film, after all, is very high quality.
I looked at a number of compact bodies and came to the conclusion that something like a Pentax 90WR would work. I used to own a 90WR so I went back and looked at the images. Certainly nothing special. Downright yucky at times.
Then I noticed the lens was slow. And it didn't zoom very much. And there was no way to view the images I just shot. (!) And it doesn't have multiple focus points or multiple metering modes, nor manual controls, nor a whole bunch of features we now TAKE FOR GRANTED with modern digicams. Like IS, for example.
And then I noticed that I couldn't change the ISO on the 90WR ! If I loaded it with ISO 100 film, it would be set at... wait for it.. ISO 100 ! There would be no way to change that ! No problem, just run ISO 400 right ? So I went and looked at my ISO400 film prints... YUCK ! And the thing is that I wouldn't be able just shoot a few ISO400 shots, I'd have to shoot a whole roll (24 or 36 !) before I could change back to ISO100.
So I decided compact film cameras were out.
Then I started reading about compact digicams. I went through the DP and IR reviews, one by one. I read about cameras with really slow response times, lack of manual controls, flimsy bodies, lots of in camera processing, etc.
I read about the famed Fuji cameras and their outstanding high ISO performance. And then I saw that they didn't provide raws and the bodies seemed way behind the times in terms of features, LCD size, manual controls, etc. So they were out.
Then I went to the camera shops and started handling various cameras. And I took test shots and compared them.
At the end of all this I was left with the G9. Why ?
1) Excellent image quality at low ISOs. Probably as good or better than 35mm film in a similar sized film camera. When were we capable of making 8 x 10 or 12 x 16 prints from compact 35mm film cameras ? Yet we seem to be able to do that with a G9. And before you tell me about your beloved rangefiner, let me ask you if it had AF and a zoom lens. Did it ?
2) Excellent feature and controls. Full manual controls, exposure bracketing, excellent LCD, decent lens, a nice control wheel for changing settings, etc. The G9 is a real camera, not a dumbed down image taking fashion accessory.
3) It has an optical viewfinder. Sure its like looking through a tunnel. Umm... ever looked through the viewfinder on the 90WR ? It isn't much better. But at least the G9 has one ! I hate EVFs ! I'll probably be using the LCD for 90% of the shots. And the optical viewfinder will do just fine for the other 10% of the shots.
4) Outstanding macro capabilities. I don't have a single macro lens in my DSLR kit. And even if I did, then I would have to have the 40D along every time I wanted to do a macro shot. Not to mention that the G9 costs only a bit more than a single SLR macro lens and its a lot more versatile. And did I mention that not many of the smaller compact digicams do decent macros.
5) Video capabilities ! The G9 is not a videocam, but 640x480 @ 30fps is pretty good for what I need. And it records sound too ! So I now have a camera, a digital audio recorder and a video recorder in my briefcase !
6) Build quality and the right size. I'm handy with electronics and I've fixed 3 of those tiny cute cameras because they are so small and slippery that people frequently drop them.
There is just something wrong about holding a camera with the thumb and forefinger on each side. Cameras are meant to be gripped by a hand, not pinched with fingers.
I know people buy those tiny cameras because they fit so nice in a purse, but really there should be a size limit on how small these things are made for decent handling.
The G9 feels good in my hand, although I will probably buy the aftermarket grip to further improve the feel.
7) It has a flash hotshoe and even supports wireless flash control !
Yeah putting a big flash on the G9 kind of defeats the compact part of the camera. But is it still smaller than a 40D with 2 lenses and a flash ? Yes. So in a pinch I can take the G9 and a flash and it might be a pretty neat way to take pictures at a party without intimidating people the way a DSLR might.
And I can bounce with an external flash ! Not only can I bounce but I can use the STE2 I'll have for 40D and I can do remote wireless flash ! Very versatile. Finally I can get good quality indoor shots from a compact camera !
8) It has IS ! Only a few years ago cameras didn't have this. We gained two stops or more in low light capabilities in some situations !
9) It does raw ! Without taking 3 seconds to write the file ! So I am not stuck with the artifacts and noise and softness and colors that the in camera processor gives me. I can bypass all that and do things my way to my preferences. Not that the Canon in camera processor is terrible - unlike some of the other cameras I looked at.
I guess that last point about sums up the G9. Its a camera that allows the user to take control of the process. Its a versatile picture taking tool. Its the mountain bike of cameras. Its not perfect, it doesn't do everything as well as other cameras do. But it does a lot in a lot of situations.
I didn't get that feeling from a lot of cameras. Cameras that had 2 aperture settings in Av mode- full open and full closed ! Cameras that lacked manual controls. Cameras that didn't have an optical viewfinder. Cameras that lacked raw. Cameras that didn't have AEB. Cameras that didn't have a control dial. Cameras that didn't have a hotshoe. Cameras that didn't do macro. The list goes on and on.
The G9 gives a user everything they need to make good images in a wide variety of situations the way they want. The way they want, not the way the camera thinks they should want. Big difference. People that complain about the G9 should spend more time looking at the other compact cameras.
So is the G9 a perfect camera ? Nope. It has too much noise at higher ISO settings for my liking. It shoots and focuses too slow as well. It needs a better optical viewfinder. It needs a better grip. Battery life could be better.
Can I live with these shortcomings ? I think so. What choice do I have ? Its not like I found a better camera anywhere.
This was an interesting process because it really opened my eyes to how far camera technology has come in the last 10 years.
For example, the G9 has a better metering system and focus system than my EOS Elan SLR film body. (Focusing speed excluded.) At one time the ESO was a very highly regarded camera.
The G9 has compable IQ at low ISOs too. Its smaller and lighter. It does video. It does macro. It has a 6x zoom. It has way better flash metering/control. It has IS. And it has adjustable ISO. Sheesh, what more do we want ?
The problem is that we are comparing the compact cameras to DSLRs. Modern DSLRs are, frankly, outstanding. Just look at the 40D compared to Canons best film SLRs. It kills them in just about every category !
The high ISO performance of modern high performance DSLRs is nothing short of amazing. That we can take good quality enlargeable images at ISO1600 was unthinkable not long ago. We need to start appreciating that for what it is - phenomenal. And we need to appreciate that while the G9 can't match a modern DSLR in this regard, with some PPing as good as the best film cameras ever were.
This invites an interesting question - does high ISO performance matter ? Are we being too nitpicky in this regard ? In my eyes it does matter and we aren't being nitpicky because there are lots of situations where I would like to take images with reasonable shutter speeds in low light. And that takes high ISO settings. So this isn't just something that we should write off as fanciful. In my books good high ISO performance is highly desireable.
In spite of that, at the end of the day I bought a G9, arguably an otherwise outstanding camera, for $400.
But the story doesn't stop here. I'll use the G9 for what it is. I'll complain about the high ISO noise, wishing it was as good as the 40D. Knowing full well that the G9 is better than we ever had with film cameras.
In the meantime Canon is going to innovate. Maybe it will increase the sensor size on the G series or produce its own CMOS sensors or adapt some of the Fuji technology. And Canon will probably increase the processing speed, the ergonomics, the screen, the IS, etc.
So in a year or two I'll be looking to upgrade to the G10 or G11. The G9, as good as it is, is but a temporary solution to my compact imaging needs.
But what about the $400 I invested in my G9 ? Aren't I wasting a bunch of money updating cameras ? Well... I'll either hand the G9 down to a budding photographer in my family or I'll sell it and recoup some of my investment so it isn't a total waste.
But aren't I still wasting $400 ? Hmmm... 10 years ago I would have bought a 35mm compact without batting an eye. Then I would have spent 25 cents an image for film, processing and getting the negatives converted to digital files. So after 1600 images with say a 90WR, I would have spent $400 on film and processing. Would we say that I wasted that $400 ? Nope. So why am I wasting $400 spent on a G9 to get the same 1600 images ? The only difference is that the next 1600 images on the G9 are free, whereas on the 90WR they cost another $400 ! The difference is we are now spending our money on cameras instead of film. And spending way less to boot.
So after all this I think the G9 is the best compact camera available period. And it has all the limitations of a compact camera, ie its nowhere near as good as a modern DSLR. But it is way, way better than we ever could have imagined 10 years ago and it does mostly everything I need and then some.
And cameras will continue to evolve and sooner or later Canon will hear and understand that we want better high ISO performance on these compact cameras and they will respond with a better product. And when they do, I will buy that camera without hesitation.
But until they do the G9 is the best available. So I bought it and I will happily live with its limitations because it is so much better than we ever could have imagined just a few years ago.
We need to understand this perspective and appreciate what we can do with a G9 rather than fuss about what it doesn't do. Yes it would be great to have a G9 with the high ISO performance of a 40D. And someday we probably will have that. But in the meantime we need to use the best of what is available. And that would be the G9.
Happy picture taking !
By compact, I mean something that I can have on my person or in my space every day. Like in my briefcase, in a fanny pack, in the fold down console of my truck, in my shirt pocket in a pinch, in my coat pocket, etc. I don't need a tiny camera, just something that I can take with me every day without weighing me down.
For a while I thought I might buy an older 35mm compact camera and shoot film. 35mm film, after all, is very high quality.
I looked at a number of compact bodies and came to the conclusion that something like a Pentax 90WR would work. I used to own a 90WR so I went back and looked at the images. Certainly nothing special. Downright yucky at times.
Then I noticed the lens was slow. And it didn't zoom very much. And there was no way to view the images I just shot. (!) And it doesn't have multiple focus points or multiple metering modes, nor manual controls, nor a whole bunch of features we now TAKE FOR GRANTED with modern digicams. Like IS, for example.
And then I noticed that I couldn't change the ISO on the 90WR ! If I loaded it with ISO 100 film, it would be set at... wait for it.. ISO 100 ! There would be no way to change that ! No problem, just run ISO 400 right ? So I went and looked at my ISO400 film prints... YUCK ! And the thing is that I wouldn't be able just shoot a few ISO400 shots, I'd have to shoot a whole roll (24 or 36 !) before I could change back to ISO100.
So I decided compact film cameras were out.
Then I started reading about compact digicams. I went through the DP and IR reviews, one by one. I read about cameras with really slow response times, lack of manual controls, flimsy bodies, lots of in camera processing, etc.
I read about the famed Fuji cameras and their outstanding high ISO performance. And then I saw that they didn't provide raws and the bodies seemed way behind the times in terms of features, LCD size, manual controls, etc. So they were out.
Then I went to the camera shops and started handling various cameras. And I took test shots and compared them.
At the end of all this I was left with the G9. Why ?
1) Excellent image quality at low ISOs. Probably as good or better than 35mm film in a similar sized film camera. When were we capable of making 8 x 10 or 12 x 16 prints from compact 35mm film cameras ? Yet we seem to be able to do that with a G9. And before you tell me about your beloved rangefiner, let me ask you if it had AF and a zoom lens. Did it ?
2) Excellent feature and controls. Full manual controls, exposure bracketing, excellent LCD, decent lens, a nice control wheel for changing settings, etc. The G9 is a real camera, not a dumbed down image taking fashion accessory.
3) It has an optical viewfinder. Sure its like looking through a tunnel. Umm... ever looked through the viewfinder on the 90WR ? It isn't much better. But at least the G9 has one ! I hate EVFs ! I'll probably be using the LCD for 90% of the shots. And the optical viewfinder will do just fine for the other 10% of the shots.
4) Outstanding macro capabilities. I don't have a single macro lens in my DSLR kit. And even if I did, then I would have to have the 40D along every time I wanted to do a macro shot. Not to mention that the G9 costs only a bit more than a single SLR macro lens and its a lot more versatile. And did I mention that not many of the smaller compact digicams do decent macros.
5) Video capabilities ! The G9 is not a videocam, but 640x480 @ 30fps is pretty good for what I need. And it records sound too ! So I now have a camera, a digital audio recorder and a video recorder in my briefcase !
6) Build quality and the right size. I'm handy with electronics and I've fixed 3 of those tiny cute cameras because they are so small and slippery that people frequently drop them.
There is just something wrong about holding a camera with the thumb and forefinger on each side. Cameras are meant to be gripped by a hand, not pinched with fingers.
I know people buy those tiny cameras because they fit so nice in a purse, but really there should be a size limit on how small these things are made for decent handling.
The G9 feels good in my hand, although I will probably buy the aftermarket grip to further improve the feel.
7) It has a flash hotshoe and even supports wireless flash control !
Yeah putting a big flash on the G9 kind of defeats the compact part of the camera. But is it still smaller than a 40D with 2 lenses and a flash ? Yes. So in a pinch I can take the G9 and a flash and it might be a pretty neat way to take pictures at a party without intimidating people the way a DSLR might.
And I can bounce with an external flash ! Not only can I bounce but I can use the STE2 I'll have for 40D and I can do remote wireless flash ! Very versatile. Finally I can get good quality indoor shots from a compact camera !
8) It has IS ! Only a few years ago cameras didn't have this. We gained two stops or more in low light capabilities in some situations !
9) It does raw ! Without taking 3 seconds to write the file ! So I am not stuck with the artifacts and noise and softness and colors that the in camera processor gives me. I can bypass all that and do things my way to my preferences. Not that the Canon in camera processor is terrible - unlike some of the other cameras I looked at.
I guess that last point about sums up the G9. Its a camera that allows the user to take control of the process. Its a versatile picture taking tool. Its the mountain bike of cameras. Its not perfect, it doesn't do everything as well as other cameras do. But it does a lot in a lot of situations.
I didn't get that feeling from a lot of cameras. Cameras that had 2 aperture settings in Av mode- full open and full closed ! Cameras that lacked manual controls. Cameras that didn't have an optical viewfinder. Cameras that lacked raw. Cameras that didn't have AEB. Cameras that didn't have a control dial. Cameras that didn't have a hotshoe. Cameras that didn't do macro. The list goes on and on.
The G9 gives a user everything they need to make good images in a wide variety of situations the way they want. The way they want, not the way the camera thinks they should want. Big difference. People that complain about the G9 should spend more time looking at the other compact cameras.
So is the G9 a perfect camera ? Nope. It has too much noise at higher ISO settings for my liking. It shoots and focuses too slow as well. It needs a better optical viewfinder. It needs a better grip. Battery life could be better.
Can I live with these shortcomings ? I think so. What choice do I have ? Its not like I found a better camera anywhere.
This was an interesting process because it really opened my eyes to how far camera technology has come in the last 10 years.
For example, the G9 has a better metering system and focus system than my EOS Elan SLR film body. (Focusing speed excluded.) At one time the ESO was a very highly regarded camera.
The G9 has compable IQ at low ISOs too. Its smaller and lighter. It does video. It does macro. It has a 6x zoom. It has way better flash metering/control. It has IS. And it has adjustable ISO. Sheesh, what more do we want ?
The problem is that we are comparing the compact cameras to DSLRs. Modern DSLRs are, frankly, outstanding. Just look at the 40D compared to Canons best film SLRs. It kills them in just about every category !
The high ISO performance of modern high performance DSLRs is nothing short of amazing. That we can take good quality enlargeable images at ISO1600 was unthinkable not long ago. We need to start appreciating that for what it is - phenomenal. And we need to appreciate that while the G9 can't match a modern DSLR in this regard, with some PPing as good as the best film cameras ever were.
This invites an interesting question - does high ISO performance matter ? Are we being too nitpicky in this regard ? In my eyes it does matter and we aren't being nitpicky because there are lots of situations where I would like to take images with reasonable shutter speeds in low light. And that takes high ISO settings. So this isn't just something that we should write off as fanciful. In my books good high ISO performance is highly desireable.
In spite of that, at the end of the day I bought a G9, arguably an otherwise outstanding camera, for $400.
But the story doesn't stop here. I'll use the G9 for what it is. I'll complain about the high ISO noise, wishing it was as good as the 40D. Knowing full well that the G9 is better than we ever had with film cameras.
In the meantime Canon is going to innovate. Maybe it will increase the sensor size on the G series or produce its own CMOS sensors or adapt some of the Fuji technology. And Canon will probably increase the processing speed, the ergonomics, the screen, the IS, etc.
So in a year or two I'll be looking to upgrade to the G10 or G11. The G9, as good as it is, is but a temporary solution to my compact imaging needs.
But what about the $400 I invested in my G9 ? Aren't I wasting a bunch of money updating cameras ? Well... I'll either hand the G9 down to a budding photographer in my family or I'll sell it and recoup some of my investment so it isn't a total waste.
But aren't I still wasting $400 ? Hmmm... 10 years ago I would have bought a 35mm compact without batting an eye. Then I would have spent 25 cents an image for film, processing and getting the negatives converted to digital files. So after 1600 images with say a 90WR, I would have spent $400 on film and processing. Would we say that I wasted that $400 ? Nope. So why am I wasting $400 spent on a G9 to get the same 1600 images ? The only difference is that the next 1600 images on the G9 are free, whereas on the 90WR they cost another $400 ! The difference is we are now spending our money on cameras instead of film. And spending way less to boot.
So after all this I think the G9 is the best compact camera available period. And it has all the limitations of a compact camera, ie its nowhere near as good as a modern DSLR. But it is way, way better than we ever could have imagined 10 years ago and it does mostly everything I need and then some.
And cameras will continue to evolve and sooner or later Canon will hear and understand that we want better high ISO performance on these compact cameras and they will respond with a better product. And when they do, I will buy that camera without hesitation.
But until they do the G9 is the best available. So I bought it and I will happily live with its limitations because it is so much better than we ever could have imagined just a few years ago.
We need to understand this perspective and appreciate what we can do with a G9 rather than fuss about what it doesn't do. Yes it would be great to have a G9 with the high ISO performance of a 40D. And someday we probably will have that. But in the meantime we need to use the best of what is available. And that would be the G9.
Happy picture taking !