Lets write Canon a letter for the G10...

[linuxguy]

Phil over at DPReview thinks that Canon listens to the cons he puts in his reviews. Why don't we write Canon a letter outlining all the things that we want in the G10 and sign it and send it to them ?

We'd have to keep the list of wants realistic so that they take it seriously.

Anyone interested ?

Can we agree what do we want to see in the G10 ?

[jrobert]

*** A quieter (larger?) sensor, even at the expense of resolution - 6 to 8 MPx would be plenty.
** A faster (f/1.4 - f/1.8 ) lens
* A sensible grip
* Alkaline cell compatibility

Give me the first one, and I'd buy today.

-jeff-

[Terrywoodenpic]

A 4/3rds sensor.
8 mpixels
usable iso to 3200 min.
better viewfinder with parallax control.
F2 lens
a release socket... electric. (essential for Panos)
swing view screen.
Camera can Can be bigger.
Retain raw
retain vibration reduction
lens could be an equivalent to a 28-110 mm or even a 28-90 I never use the tele end.

[linuxguy]

To be able to write the letter to Canon, we are going to have to agree on what we want for the G10. This could be an interesting exercise.

[Bryan Bedell]

Yeah, I'm already seeing this getting ugly and unrealistic. I'll throw in my two cents and then never look at this thread again. : )

-I like the size/grip/general design of the G9, i think it's important it doesn't get too big, and the aftermarket grip's there for people who want it.

-keep raw, IS, hot shoe, etc.

-give up zoom for tele, NO p&s has awesome tele, so it'd be a big selling point, and they've got zoom fans covered with the S2 series.

-I totally agree, a bigger/cleaner sensor is way better than more MP, I think 7/8MP is the sweet spot for a prosumer camera, for every photo you need to blow up to poster size, you'll have six thousand vacation shots clogging up your hard drive. I'd rather take a really clean 8MP photo at 400ISO.

-flipscreen, even if it's smaller, the G6 flipscreen is awesome.

-I disagree on AAs, the battery on the G6/30D is so freaking awesome, dunno if it's as good on the G9. I hate AAs, I only own two batteries and I've *never* been stuck without a charged one. Some sort of adapter might be a good third-party product. (it'd be nice to be able to plug the actual camera into a wall socket too, I do a lot of tabletop stuff, and it'd be nice to charge and/or not use the battery while I work).

-I really like the remote for the G6, at least as an optional accessory. (wouldn't that eliminate the need for a release socket, Terry?)

-Does the G9 have a live histogram? keep it. I wish my G6 had it.

I love my G6, and I love the G9 on paper (haven't tried one), I'd love to see something in between that's not the G7. (how about a G8?)

[KarlMarsh]

Only changes I would want are faster lens F/1.8 and a larger CMOS sensor.

[miguelmarcos]

In order of priority:
- Less noise/less megapixels
- Better viewfinder
- F2 lens

[bilposter]

All of the above ;) plus:
-auto exposure bracketing up to 2 stops and 5 frames per second.

[_aravena]

5FPS
Usable 3200 ISO/larger sensor
Less MP
F1.4 lens
10x Optical Zoom
IS

Oh wait, are we suppose to be realistic?

[thelightofsound]

faster lens
less noise

then i might not ever use my slr

[Padrino]

Faster and wider lens. Bigger sensor nice, but hard to get.

[S2000]

24mm please
XT sensor

call it a day

[d30gaijin]

Most of what the first half of the replies to this topic will be guaranteed to increase the size. With that said, here's mine:

#1: larger sensor.
#2: Fewer pixels (7 to 8 are plenty in a P&S)
#3: f/2 lens (or faster if it doesn't increase camera size)
#4: Non zoom lens (fixed 35mm equivalent is fine by me, wider would be good)
#5: Better built in viewfinder

Don

[cicopo]

I just got my G 9 a week ago but in my opinion it needs in order of importance.
MUCH less noise, and I am willing to give at least 50% of the megapixels for it.
Wider at the wide end, 20 to 24 mm equivalent would be great
Super clean up to ISO 800, no matter what, above that I will accept noise, but not below that number.
I am even willing to pay more for a camere JUST LIKE it that can deliver.

[Roger955]

Keep current features, but VERY low noise up to 400, low noise at 800.

Do not reduce 6X zoom, but maybe slightly wider angle. I wouldn't even THINK of buying a reduced zoom.

DO NOT make the camera bigger.

Flip out screen IF doing so doesn't make the camera fat.

[GordonSBuck]

If you/we say "fewer pixels" or set the number of pixels then we are assuming technology constraints that may not necessarily apply. At the product specification stage, we should rely on the engineers to apply the constraints. We should simply say something like ISO1600 in-camera jpg should be good for 8x10print (or 16x20, etc).

That said, it's pretty easy to imagine something like the XTi CMOS sensor in an enlarged G9 type body. An aperture of f2 would be great but the camera would begin to get a bit big; I'd settle for f2.8 with IS. I'd be happy with 28mme to 135mme zoom. Better optical viewfinder and manual focus should be high on the list. Articulated LCD screen is high on my list but highest is full ETTL capability for external flash in Manual exposure mode.

The marketing committee for this new product will have to think of a name; it probably won't be part of the G series. Probably call upon the old Canon rangefinders from the 50s. Also, the marketing committee will have to come up with a plan or rationalization so that the new product won't cannibalize the Rebel series. Therefore, it would probably have to sell for something similar to the Rebel or perhaps a little more since it won't have so many accessories.

On the other hand, the game is changing rapidly and Canon could just as easily choose to make a prestige digital rangefinder and sell it for several thousand dollars.

[openspace]

Remote release. Lower noise through ISO 800. Could care less about ISO 1600 - 3200. 10mp is fine. Wouldn't want them to go down to 8. Don't need a fold out display. Don't need a viewfinder either. You can't check focus or DOF with it, so what's the point? Seems to be pretty worthless if you ask me. The LCD handles these things well, plus its 100% coverage. The viewfinder is not. I would love to see Canon manufacture a collapsable hood of some sort for the LCD. Maybe a protective LCD cover that flips open and provides overhead shade. Something better than the Delkins, let's put it that way.

[Roger955]

Any guesses as to when Canon will announce the next G?

[pitslave]

I would like lower noise and faster glass. But most importantly a wider lens. I don't understand why cant they even take it out to 28mm. To carry extra lens attachments to make it wider defeats the purpose of a compact. I would have bought a G9 or a S5 if they came with a 28mm wide lens. Until then I'll have to pass.

[Padrino]

Pit, the thing is, if Canon gives us a 28 mm lens, we will ask for a 24mm. But, I WANT A 28mm LENS!!!!!!!!!

[d30gaijin]

Pit, the thing is, if Canon gives us a 28 mm lens, we will ask for a 24mm. But, I WANT A 28mm LENS!!!!!!!!!

But I want a 24mm!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can't people zoom with their feet? That's what I do.

Don

[Bryan Bedell]

Can't people zoom with their feet? That's what I do.

not if there's the edge of a cliff in front of you or a wall behind you. : )

I love wide angle indoor shots. I was actually looking at this thing marketed as a real estate camera, but it was like $300 for a 640x480 resolution 22mm equivalent and I don't think it had anything but an auto mode (IIRC it didn't even have an LCD). I remember thinking that it would actually be worth picking it up just for fun if it wasn't so expensive.

Not to hijack the thread, but it'd be neat to see some $50 .3MP fixed plastic-lens digital cameras in the Lomo/Holga vein, designed to do one thing (fisheye, wide, stereo, black and white) simply but reasonably well. I was looking for my daughter for christmas, and there are some kids' cameras in that res/price range, but they all have really bad reviews. Obviously you don't expect much for image quality, but they all seem to be pretty useless even for kids/art.

[Collin85]

Here's what I'd want, and I'm not holding my breath for it:

- 8MP on a larger sensor.. I want usable high ISOs.
- Higher resolution LCD (VGA+)
- EVF in viewfinder
- More programmable buttons (also the Direct Print button customization was nice on the G9, but not enough functions are available to be programmed, e.g no JPEG/RAW toggle)
- 3-4x optical zoom is fine, but I want a faster lens. F/1.4 would be (unrealistically) awesome.
- Swivel screen
- Better movie capabilities.. includes optical zooming and AF while recording.
- Dedicated AF joystick (just like on the xxDs).

Edit: Totally forgot about 28mm. Hell, give me 24mm!

All of these would pretty much kill any reason for me to consider say, an A650IS or S5. I'd pay over the roof for one of these too.

[openspace]

I love my G9. There I said it.

[Doug F]

1. Larger sensor with better image quality and I am willing to give up some MP to accomplish this.
2. 28 mm (ok, I really want 24 mm but I am trying to be realistic) on the wide end
3. Faster lens like the 2.0 they used to put on Gs. A 1.8 would be nice but I don't see it as realistic.

[RebelWithoutAClue]

I think we can come to the conclusion that Canon simply cannot produce a camera we can all be happy with... most of you have some pretty unrealistic requests and it would result in a camera that would NOT sell very well. (We all know that 6-8MP is good enough, but how many people not on these boards would realistically buy a $600+ camera with 'only' 6MP???)

Also, the cry for a bigger sensor in combination with a 1.8 lens would produce a pretty damn big camera, let alone for a lens that would be 10X zoom as well!!!

I think a little more realistically it would result in a couple of cameras in which case Canon would say, just buy the new 450D when it comes out with it's live view and decent viewfinder...

I know we're just applying wishful thinking here, but I give you the chance of much to any of this happening (especially larger sensor combined with a faster lens) to be really wishful thinking. ;)

Oh well... we can all hope and dream, me? I'm still stuck with a 300D and a Sigma 17-70, only drooling when holding a camera like a G9. (Blew my entire photography budget for this year on the lens.... will have to wait some time till I can get a G9/10)

What would I like? A VERY nice screen, like on the D300, wider lens and lower noise through some reduction in resolution... Stereo movie (wide screen) like the S5 would be nice as well cuz this would be my camera of choice when I'm at parties and don't want to lug around a DSLR.

Richard

[JBStitt]

I have to put in my desires too: I hate this in a way because there is so much on the G9 that is Very Good. Of the desires though, some are REALLY need and others would just be nice.

Really need:
Less noise at higher ISO (bigger sensor, better technology. I agree 12 mp is really not necessary. If 1600 was low noise then the current lens if fast enough. But 1600 low noise and f/2 would be really sweet!)

28 mm equivalent or wider. I agree the tele I do not use much. 28-135 would be good.


Better viewfinder. I find I rarely use this one because it is rather poor and not 100% coverage.

Would like to have:
Remote control
Threaded front of the lens for filters. I don't know why this can't be done. Put 39mm filters threads out there.
Lens that feels more substantial - doesn't seem to go with the rest of the camera.
Pop up bounce flash ala the Leica Digilux 2 - Great innovation for fill flash photography.

OK. NOW I AM GOING TO EMPHASIZE WHAT IS GREAT ABOUT IT.

Build Quality - almost feels like the old Leica CL

Controls on the top for EI - this is really good

Menu system is very good - easy to get where one wants

Assignable printer button - (why not on the 5D - PLEASE!)

Battery and Charger- Battery seems to never run out. I have two but have never run one down. Just change for prevention of run out. And the charger is great design- small compact, efficient. Fantastic design.

Image stabilization - this really works well! Hand hold at 1/8th!

ALL BLACK - much better for street shooting. Plus the camera looks as professional as it is.

Inherent depth of field of the small sensor - great for landscape and with the ND filter and longer focus one can get some selective focus for portraits.

Double custom settings. I use both allot!!! One for B&W and the second for high EI color street shooting settings. I wouldn't mind having a couple more of those though, but keep on the dial on top, not with a menu.


OK, in summary, to make it a classic camera all the G9 really needs is better high EI performance. How they get that, I don't really care, lower pixel pitch, bigger sensor, whatever. Good available light shooting

[twisted pixels]

Canon probably have already manufactured the G10 and the G11. They are just biding their time to put them on the market.
Then everyone will race off and have to buy the G10. It is being done with all electronic equipment. They are working on the theory that people today are never happy with what they have.So it will eat at them until they have to buy the new model, thus making the manufacturer wealthier. Their tactics are working a treat!
Canon will never give you all you want in one camera. They will just tempt you with small doses to keep people upgrading at rediculously short intervals.

[EORI]

I want the following:
24~200 range
f/1.8~2
6.5 fps
larger viewfinder
no shutter lag
noise-free images at up to 800 ISO
price of less than $250
fold-out 3" screen

:D

[linuxguy]

1) I am sure Canon DOES NOT have the G10/G11 built. I am sure they have ideas/prototypes, but the camera design will not be finalized until just before its release.

2) Canon can give us more in each release because the cost of building a camera is falling as time goes on. Lenses get cheaper, processors are cheaper, more powerful, etc. The more you build the more the price falls.

3) I do not want an EVF ! I hate them. Slow to react, grainy, etc. I want an optical viewfinder.

My requests for the G10 include:

1) lower high ISO noise. Not necessarily a larger sensor, because that would entail a larger lens, etc, which would mean a larger body. The G10 should NOT be larger than the G9.

2) A slightly better grip. Maybe Canon needs to offer an accessory grip like the one available for the G9 now.

3) E TTL flash control in manual mode. Right now you have to manually control the flash in manual mode.

4) Built in wireless flash commander, which allows one to use the built in flash and remote flashes.

5) A slightly faster lens would be nice. F/1.8 would be great for low light conditions and shallower depths of field.

6) A slightly wider lens would be nice too.

7) A much better optical viewfinder. I dare Canon to give us a knockout optical viewfinder such that we want to shoot half our pictures with it rather than the LCD. That would be a momentous change in compact cameras. Who wants to hold a camera a foot in front of their face to take pictures. GIVE US A REAL VIEWFINDER !

8) Remote control.

Its interesting to read people's ideas. It is going to take some work to draft a letter that satisfies what everyone wants. Funny that nobody has mentioned more fps ?


Do we have agreement on:

1) Less high ISO noise.

2) Wider lens.

3) Keep camera the same size.

4) Better viewfinder, but not EVF.

5) Remote control.

Yes or No ?

[frs]

28mm, f/2, larger optical viewfinder, flip-out screen

[scrumpy]

Just bring back the dear old Pro1, and all will be forgiven!

[linuxguy]

As outlined in another post, the 2004 rating at dpreview.com for the Pro1 was "Recommended". The 2007 rating for the G9 is "Highly Recommended".

The Pro1 has a number of significant negatives, not limited to "Visible noise from ISO 100 upwards."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonPro1/page20.asp

[Padrino]

Three years in digital imaging technology development is a very long time, though...

[openspace]

Canon probably have already manufactured the G10 and the G11. They are just biding their time to put them on the market.
Then everyone will race off and have to buy the G10. It is being done with all electronic equipment. They are working on the theory that people today are never happy with what they have.So it will eat at them until they have to buy the new model, thus making the manufacturer wealthier. Their tactics are working a treat!
Canon will never give you all you want in one camera. They will just tempt you with small doses to keep people upgrading at rediculously short intervals.

Twisted Pixels has a point. Its really no different than the planned obsolescence built into today's electronics. Right now we (sadly) embrace a throw away society where corporations like Canon make better money fueling the "gotta have it" tradeup frenzy rather than they do producing long lasting cameras with servicable parts.

It absolutely is a psychological play on supply & demand. Consumers demand, the manufacturer supplies, but only enough to get you to tradeup. Not enough to get you to stay put.

If they do produce that destined to be an heirloom quality compact I would guess it will be in the range of $2500 and up. Its gotta be expensive because if its too good it will undercut their mid and entry level dSLR sales, and more importantly the hyper lucrative SLR lens market.

No doubt we can't stop the march of technological innovation, but most of the stuff coming out now is bells & whistles. As this thread shows, serious photographers know exactly what they would like. And I have no doubt the large manufacturers could meet those needs. They just haven't figured out how to keep the revenue flowing if they do.

[twisted pixels]

Twisted Pixels has a point. Its really no different than the planned obsolescence built into today's electronics. Right now we (sadly) embrace a throw away society where corporations like Canon make better money fueling the "gotta have it" tradeup frenzy rather than they do producing long lasting cameras with servicable parts.

It absolutely is a psychological play on supply & demand. Consumers demand, the manufacturer supplies, but only enough to get you to tradeup. Not enough to get you to stay put.

If they do produce that destined to be an heirloom quality compact I would guess it will be in the range of $2500 and up. Its gotta be expensive because if its too good it will undercut their mid and entry level dSLR sales, and more importantly the hyper lucrative SLR lens market.

No doubt we can't stop the march of technological innovation, but most of the stuff coming out now is bells & whistles. As this thread shows, serious photographers know exactly what they would like. And I have no doubt the large manufacturers could meet those needs. They just haven't figured out how to keep the revenue flowing if they do.
I could not have said it better open space, I am in total agreement.
I was the last one to convert to digital SLR at the magazine I freelance for.
I just found it hard to get rid of the trusty old EOS 5. I am now going to hang on to my 20 D and G7 hopefully for a very long time to come.
I just don't see the need to upgrade when the upgrade will still only take photos using the same lenses that I have now. The other point is,I cannot bare to play the upgrade game and be sucked in to this materialistic and throw away society. It only fuels companies to keep this scenario going on.
Enough said!

[bobtodrick]

Uhhh...the G10 is already out there...
It's called an M8.
To me it seems the problem here is that what is on everyone's wish list just isn't possible at the price they wish to meet and the current technology.
To do so is you are going to have a $2000+ camera...low noise, resolution, hi speed glass, etc.
They know as well as I do that if they put all this stuff in a G series camera that most people (probably including most here) wouldn't ante up the price.

[Roger955]

A $6400 G10, with a fixed focal length lens, no significant telephoto avialable, no autofocus and poor jpeg images? Makes me even happier to have a G9. :)

[Padrino]

Impossible is nothing (where I heard that??). To get the perfect G cam, you need to mix the whole G models. You can get Raw + tilting LCD + f2.8 lens + wide angle (28mm) + Digic III + a price between 400 - 500 bucks. What I mean is that many of the things that we are asking for were at some point available in the G range. So, a camera that can get it all is achievable. Canon's will to build it is another story.

[bobtodrick]

Roger955...hahahahaha!
I love people that are blinded by there own purchases. I really like my G7...great little digital.
See here http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0709/camera-corner-the-leica-m8-on-assignment.html
The G9 is good little camera...with crappy low light performance.
It's resolution at 12mp is damn good...it color scale however pales in comparison to the M8 (or any full frame sensor).
And comparing the G7/9 lens to current M glass is ludicrous.
To some of us the quality of the PICTURE is what's important...not how close my budget camera can come.
As I said...I really like my G7...but if it was a once in a lifetime important shoot I'd be grabbing my M6.

[Doug F]

I think part of it may be a marketing move by Canon. They add a partial set of features from the wishlist and peope flock to upgrade. Now they will wait a year or so and upgrade more features. People (including G9 owners) will flock to upgrade. Then in a couple more years, another upgrade. They will have the killer camera design ready to slip into production in case anyone comes up with a challenger in this class but they have not really had much competition lately. Nikon keeps throwing out duds (e.g. 5100), so no real challenge from that front.

[linuxguy]

I was the last one to convert to digital SLR at the magazine I freelance for. I just found it hard to get rid of the trusty old EOS 5... The other point is,I cannot bare to play the upgrade game and be sucked in to this materialistic and throw away society. It only fuels companies to keep this scenario going on.

As far as throwing away goes, going digital is much greener than staying with film. With film there is the film, film housing, canisters, developer chemicals and film packaging going into the environment every time you shoot a roll. Added up over the life of a digicam (5000 to 100,000 shots) and it is a lot of trash !

As far as the keeps companies going, yes it does to some extent. Especially lately, for the last few years. But it is slowing down.

However, change is sometimes a good thing. It improves the breed. Certainly your 20D was a lot better (and cheaper) than the D30. Its not possible for companies to produce the perfect camera the first shot. They and the market and the suppliers need to learn and grow over time. I don't blame them for this, its a good thing.

I am now going to hang on to my 20 D and G7 hopefully for a very long time to come.

Sure... are you writing this from a 286 computer ? Wasn't it worthwhile to upgrade to a 486 and then a Pentium II ?

I just don't see the need to upgrade when the upgrade will still only take photos using the same lenses that I have now.

Even the best modern camera sensors are not near the resolving power of the lenses. So if nothing else changes there is room for improvement in the image sensor. To say nothing of focus speed, battery life, viewfinder quality, exposure/metering, camera size, weight, handling, shooting speed, etc. that can be improved on while utilizing your old lenses.

[linuxguy]

This thread has gotten way off topic.

The M8 is a darn poor excuse for a camera, especially given its price. The G9 isn't perfect but lets thank Canon for producing it so we have an alternative to the M8.

And speaking personally, if I really need to take the shot of my life, I'll use a DSLR. The G9 isn't about getting the shot of your life. Its about getting lots of shots of your life, conveniently.

[Roger955]

Bobtodrick, you said "the G10 is already out there - it's the M8".

My point was (is) the M8 (with lens) is a $6400 camera. The sales tax on it alone will pay for two G9's.

I don't doubt that the M8 is a great camera. But given the huge disparity in their respective cost, it's apples and oranges. I'm not interested in a $1000 G10, much less a $6400 G10

[openspace]

I'll give Leica kudos on low noise, that's for sure. If Canon could get ISO 1600 on the G to look like the M8's ISO 2500 I'd pay up to $1000 for that compact.

[Roger955]

ok, I'd go to $1000.00 too. But not $6400. :)

[Mike V]

Wider lens and/or bigger sensor.

[linuxguy]

I really don't understand what the M8's draw is. Its super expensive, has no AF, only very simple metering. Its NOT a compact camera in any regard, so I have no idea why it is compared to the G9.

Its the size of a 400D and costs 6x as much with about the same image quality and way less features. It costs twice as much as a 5D and it won't do nearly as much.

I don't get it !

[bobtodrick]

linuxguy...problem is you're the kind of guy who probably never saw the draw of the M series cameras...I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but you just don't get it.
Guys like Cartier-Bresson, Mary Ellen Mark, Elliott Erwitt, Tim Page...oh, the list goes on and on...do.
I can walk out with my M6 around my neck and two extra lenses in my jacket pocket...do that with your 5D and lenses.
I can shoot hand held quite easily at a 1/4 of a second...do that with your D200.
I can shoot unobtrusively in a quiet cafe with my M and not attract attention...do that with your...well hell, just about any current DSLR.
Ya know...we don't all shoot the way you do linuxguy...that's why there are apples and oranges.
Geeez
And by the way, my M6 is 20 years old, has probably 100000 frames on it and they still have repair parts and knowing Leica the same will hold true for the M8...lets see where your 5D is in 20 years.

[CaptainPete]

Good optical viewfinder.
Slightly larger to encompass the above and for better grip.
Wider lens angle.

In other words the industry requirement would be a pocketable camera built to pro standard for use in discreet locations often under difficult conditions.

Tell Canon that millions of press and photojournalists the world over would like one and money no object.

Pete

[linuxguy]

linuxguy...problem is you're the kind of guy who probably never saw the draw of the M series cameras...I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but you just don't get it.
Guys like Cartier-Bresson, Mary Ellen Mark, Elliott Erwitt, Tim Page...oh, the list goes on and on...do.

You've got a romantic view of cameras. I have a functional view. Its great those people used rangefinders. They could have gotten the same image quality from an SLR. And are these people using M8s now ? The competition to the rangefinder has changed... smaller SLRs, for example, aren't much larger anymore.

I can walk out with my M6 around my neck and two extra lenses in my jacket pocket...do that with your 5D and lenses.

We have these things called zoom lenses... and primes aren't that much larger on an SLR. A bit, but is it really that much of a difference ? If you really want small lenses, buy a Pentax and use their "pancake" lenses.

I can shoot hand held quite easily at a 1/4 of a second...do that with your D200.

a) I doubt you can shoot handheld at 1/4 second. Please post a sample and prove to us you didn't use a tripod.
b) mirror lock up is a wonderful thing on DSLRs.
c) modern lenses have IS which probably means I can shoot slower than you
d) I could bolt a couple pounds on the bottom of an SLR if that is the advantage you are referring to.
e) I don't own a D200. My 40D just arrived.
f) high ISO with low noise is a great innovation... decreases the necessary shutter time for a given light level.

I can shoot unobtrusively in a quiet cafe with my M and not attract attention...do that with your...well hell, just about any current DSLR.

:rollseyes: A camera is a camera. You hold it up in front of your face and people notice you are taking pictures. Stealth ? Hardly. Not to mention you will probably need to use a flash unless your subject is stationary.

Ya know...we don't all shoot the way you do linuxguy...that's why there are apples and oranges.
Geeez

Its not about how one shoots, its about this romantic notion that rangefinders are such great cameras. They used to have their place, ie size, but that's about it. And even that is kind of gone. Honestly, I think its ludicrous to spend $6000 on an M8. Its your money... do what you want.

And by the way, my M6 is 20 years old, has probably 100000 frames on it and they still have repair parts and knowing Leica the same will hold true for the M8...lets see where your 5D is in 20 years.

I would retire a 5D long before 20 years from now. Not because I have to but because newer cameras will allow me to take better pictures !

Other things...

a) The D300 is rated for 150,000 frames and they will put a new shutter in it for $300. The 40D is rated for 100K frames. Taking 100K images isn't a big deal anymore. BTW: How much does film and processing cost for 100K images ? ($25K ?)

b) Lets not even begin to discuss the environmental implications of shooting 100,000 frames of film. I know people do it, but I think its time to move to digital for the green factor.

c) Digital cameras now have better image quality than film cameras did.

d) What is the deal about keeping a camera for 20 years. People still have their D30s. They will continue to work for many, many years, until the shutter mechanism wears out or you can't get batteries for them. When that happens, it is time to move on.

Cameras are just light capturing boxes. We needn't fall in love with them or hold them in a romantic light.

[openspace]

This whole argument is the classic argument between the the technologist and the artist. One looks at his camera and sees limitations. The other looks at his camera and sees uniqueness. The technologist pushes innovation in equipment. But it is the artist that expands our perceptions. Don't get me wrong -- both matter in their own way. But it seems to me of the two it is the technologist that never seems to be happy with what he has.

[linuxguy]

Its more the argument between the realist and the romantic. Spend $6K on a camera without AF ? You must be kidding ! What year is it ? When you can buy 2 5Ds or 5 40Ds for the same price ?

Techies not ever happy ? That is a blanket statement ! My last camera was a D50 and I loved it. Doesn't mean that I shouldn't adopt better equipment/ techniques when they become viable, nor that I shouldn't be aware of and comment on changing technology.

Here is an interesting take on modern day equipment.
http://planetneil.com/tangents/category/wedding-photography/

Ansel Adams took great pictures with his equipment. But don't think for a second he couldn't have done more with our modern equipment.

[openspace]

Pick whatever terms you need, linuxguy. Even the best of tools create the worst of garbage in the hands of the man who does not see. You think Ansel would have done "more" (whatever that is) with AF? I like to think he would have laughed at our crutch.

[Bryan Bedell]

This whole argument is the classic argument between the the technologist and the artist. One looks at his camera and sees limitations.

I think Linuxguy's point is that when one looks at his camera and sees a price tag that says "$5,500 (body only)" he'd expect it to have fewer "limitations."

You're both wrong, and off-topic, ha. Please stop bickering, youv'e made your points. You're both giant camera snobs, just different types. : )

Bb.

[linuxguy]

You think Ansel would have done "more" (whatever that is) with AF? I like to think he would have laughed at our crutch.

Do you think the man was stupid ? Did he drive a car or use a horse and buggy ? Did he use a telephone or a telegraph ? Did he use a flash or flashpowder ?

Don't you think he might have left the tripod at home once in a while and relied on modern things like IS ? He was, after all, hiking up mountains. And carbon fiber wasn't yet invented !

As far as AF is concerned, maybe he would have shot action if he had it ! Who knows ?

Did you know that AA used Polaroid film as a media ? Very innovative for his time !
http://www.amazon.com/Polaroid-Land-Photography-Ansel-Adams/dp/0821207296/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1198102489&sr=11-1

Maybe we should start carrying a dark room around with us ?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/ansel/sfeature/sf_packing.html

[linuxguy]

I can't believe some of the "technology is bad" replies in this thread. From people who apparently own G9s !

Someone else can take it over. I'm out.

[Collin85]

Bobtodrick's main argumentative flaw is the fact that the M8 costs $6400.

If Canon made a G10 which retailed at that price, I'm pretty sure it would be alot more functional than the M8. But it's obvious through the context of discussing the G-series cameras that price is a factor.. thus the M8 cannot be seen metaphorically or in any other paradigm of thinking, a 'Powershot G10'.

I personally think the M8 is a neat little niche.. the error is asserting it as a 'G10', which undoubtably will bring on the flames.

[bobtodrick]

linux guy...you really don't get it.
For years I used an M6 along with my F4 Nikon and lenses.
This is one example...a few years back I was asked to do a documentary series on 'cafe culture'...unposed images of daily life in cafes.
If you think there was any way in hell that I would be able to sit in quiet cafe and bang off unobtrusive shots with an F4 and glass you are delusional.
The only way those images were going to be natural was with something like an M camer...a and I'm not romantic about Leica...a Hexar AF, Contax G...any number of cameras would have worked...but not a big honkin SLR.
I feel you are the one who is under the romantic notion...that your 'do all' SLR can do anything...in actuality they are like 'all season radial' or the home 'mechanic' who has that cool Canadian tire 'do everything' wrench for $24.95.
I wouldn't want to be in a winter snowstorm on those tires and I wouldn't take my car to your garage.
Different tools for different jobs my friend...that's what ensures you will get the image you want...which is what it is all about.
Again...where this thread got redirected...the G7/9 are great cameras.
They don't do it all, NONE DO...and the features that some of you are asking for just is not going to happen in a sub $500 p&s.
And this is from our local Canon rep. A number of people have brought up the features of past G cameras (raw, fast lenses, swivel LCD, etc). It's a fact that Canon very nearly didn't bring out either the G7 or G9...primarily because they lost money on all the previous G cameras...they didn't sell in enough numbers to make a profit. The only reason they have continued is because they took some of the expensive features off (F2 glass) and added the kinds of things that the MAJORITY of people want (6x instead of 3 or 4x zoom).
Unfortunately Canon is in the business to make money...not do us favors...the price of the M8 proves that.
And by the way, my order is already placed for the M8.

And one final note and then I'll forever leave (yay) your little forum of techie snobs...and this is being petty...'I'm published internationally, worked for years as a photographer in the fashion industry, have shown at galleries throughout North America have two books published...a few more credentials than most here I'll wager.
They're tools folks...and if any of you thing that your G camera or your do-everything DSLR is the only camera you ever need...I hope to god I don't ever have to sit through one of your slide show/powerpoint presentations.
Ta-ta

[miguelmarcos]

I own a 400D and will be getting a G9 (tomorrow, as a matter of fact).

I do see the attractiveness of a Leica. The superb lenses, the form factor, the unobtrusiveness of the camera because of it's design and size (making it a "friendly" camera), the quietness. I've never handled one for a length of time but I think I might love it as well because of how well built it is. (I remember when I was young and getting into photography, I was trying to figure out how I could buy a Leica CL, just so I could try out a Leica, any Leica...)

The price is stratospheric, however. It would never make my list, certainly not in my current financial circumstances. If it didn't make much of a dent in my finances, I might consider the M8 (I won't go back to film) though the initial sensor problem with the M8 wasn't very encouraging.

It's useless to argue about. The G9 is a great $500 P&S with raw and some nifty manual capabilities. The Leica is a great camera as well, but at $6K for the body only, it's useless to compare to the G9.

[Bryan Bedell]

It's useless to argue about.

That's never stopped anyone! C'mon, this is the internet.

Bb.

[openspace]

LOL Bob. I hope you don't leave us. I appreciate the powerful opinions on both sides. In a civil society we can agree to disagree, and both contribute to the whole. Just like the artist & technologist. Or realist & romantic (to steal linuxguy's words).

Different tools for different jobs. That is spot on. But most of us can only afford one good tool at a time, and that's why I think the search for the end-all-be-all swiss army knife of cameras will continue in perpetuity. And most likely it will never ever be found.

Exactly like Plato's archetypal table & chair. :)

But in the meantime we must not forget that great tools that are already here before us. Like the 40D. And the M8. And the G9. And the pinhole camera.

[Bryan Bedell]

Right on, O-space. And I'll leave, I've done it before, but I always come back. I'm a sucker for camera drama. I was losing interest in G6 nerdery until it was cruelly taken away by fate and Canon Service, and someday, hopefully before the end of 2008, I'll get it back and love it more than ever. Absence makes the heart grow fonder.

[CJinAustin]

I've got to agree with everyone else...

I am totally happy with my G9 for being a point and shoot and all....

But if I were to have a couple wishes it would be for a larger sensor and a wider lense... But if this meant the price would rise above $600 retail I think I would rather deal with the current version of the G9. I use this as a travelling camera and the noise at iso 400 and below is not bad and if I am wanting a really good shot I can usually get the shot at 100 or 80 without a problem in daylight. If Nikon can sell the D40 for $500 then I would think 12 months from now Canon could sell the G10 for $500 with a Larger 8mp sensor.
(Question, if taking a landscape photo through G9 glass at iso 80,, what would look better 12mp on small sensor or 8mp on larger sensor???

[jrobert]

I'd have to say, all else being equal, that fewer sensels (sensor corresponding to one pixel) in a larger sensor area would have to win, simply because each sensel is larger, so less noisy.
The assumption "all else being equal" includes the print size being compatible with 8MP resolution and the light & ISO being compatible with the 12MP sensor's noise limitations. As you increase the ISO, the small 12MP sensor will get noisy sooner. Or as you increase the print size, the 8MP image will show pixelation sooner.

[beaufortman]

Bigger sensor, less noise

Less highlight clipping

Better viewfinder WITH DIOPTER ADJUSTMENT

Keep raw

Keep zoom as is

Overall: get rid of some of the bells and whistles and make a better basic camera (Canon could eliminate the movie mode completely for all I care)

[Jannie]

To keep with the G-Series market I'm fine with the lens as it is now, love both the wide and long end.

I want a better/cleaner image at higher ISO's
No shutter lag
Okay to get rid of the useless viewfinder, I can't use it anyway.
Get rid of movie mode, I can buy a movie camera if I want one of those.
And keep the price under $650

For a completely new camera, one I would excitedly spend my money on:

My highest desire is for a fixed 35mm f2 or faster lens on a solid camera body like the G9 that can be even a half inch thicker and an inch wider and maybe a half inch taller. It might be NASA image quality when it comes to lack of noise and fantastic sharpness and clarity. RAW, 3 1/2" screen, full screen on/off histogram, clear and usable viewfinder, larger wheels for manual exposure, macro same as G9 (yes it's fantastic on a wide angle), keep ISO wheel on top and the camera needs to be able to shoot ISO 1600 as well or better than my 5D and have absolutely no shutter lag, must be able to shoot 5-7fps . The clarity of the images must be at the level of what you would expect from the finest designed "L" macro lens but appropriately designed for general use including portraits. I would like the camera to be everything proof, water/humidity/dust proof. It might have two SD cards capable of one recording as a back up or as an additional card. I would like to be able to take this camera around the world, on my person through every airport, be able to publish books with it's images and use it as a primary as well as back up camera to my entire kit if that's how I make my living. No I am not asking it to replace my DSLR but to augment it and be able to stand on it's own without compromise hopefully on a level of quality not yet achieved at this time.

I also wouldn't mind that the base of the camera also have indentations front and back to fit a Wimberley, RRS,Acratech type ball head without adding an adaptor, this would entail I think just a groove in the front and one in the back and Canon could market a head for monopods/tripods that you could get for it as well.

This camera could have a retractable lens shade that does does not leave the camera and the lens should be threaded for filters. The lens since it is fixed which means it should be able to be fitted initially with the utmost accuracy, would most likely be sticking out in front of the camera and that's okay. This is not a G9, I'd keep the G9 or 10 but this would be somewhere between a G9 and DSLR but of the highest quality image possible.


If megapixels were the measure of quality, this one would have the same as Canon's high end 21MP+ camera on a FF. And it'd be nice for this extremely high quality camera to be in the range of $2,500-$3,500.

[GordonSBuck]

Better viewfinder WITH DIOPTER ADJUSTMENT



Although many complain about the G9 viewfinder, it already has diopter adjustment.

[Canon_Owner]

They stopped doing classic G cameras because their competition to their dlsr cams..

[scd]

Less noise at higher ISO ranges.
For the preview mode button to stick out more!
Larger viewfinder
Keep the movie mode
put a cover onto the hot shoe! (yes I know you can buy them now.. but it should be included)

[Jannie]

Okay, okay scd you can keep your movie mode and get a cover for the hot shoe if I can have a bigger or somehow more usable dial on the back to adjust my manual settings with, that one that comes with it is a little cheesy compared to the dial on top for ISO.

[Jannie]

Canon_Owner I guess I understand the logic but I already have a fortune tied into a Canon DSLR setup that I purchased after I bought the G7 and then I moved up to the G9 after I bought the 5D, I don't think the two cameras are mutually exclusive at all, we all expect different qualities from each kind, I'm just wishing they'd raise the bar on the point and shoot qualities recognizing that it can be a professional camera too, just different in the way you use it. Yeah I think pretty much everyone here gets it, at this point I suppose it's little more than venting to the choir, and I am lucky that I have what I feel already is the best point and shoot made in the G9, and actually if they came out with a higher end point and shoot, there would be no reason to stop making it with all the bells and whistles that it offers now and with the full zoom capabilities there would no reason to stop owning and using the G9 as well.

To the people at Canon if you are reading any of this, imagine you are sent to Brazil on a photography assignment and you've got your full setup of DSLR equipment in baggage. You get there, you go to a meeting and your cameras have not all arrived, something goes wrong and they were shipped in the next plane and you meet with the advertising agency about what you are going to shoot and need to do some test shots of wardrobe on the people who are going to be in the shot. You've carried your point and shoot on the plane and have it with you. You're gear will arrive safely but in the mean time you want to impress people that you still can produce-no worries!

Or you've dropped down into a journalistic setting just as it's happening and you gotta be cool with the gear and not too obvious with the big lenses, you probably would pull out a G9 but wouldn't you feel a little bit more secure if it had better detail as you were going to be shooting into the night and would "have to" shoot at ISO 1600 or 3200.

Or your are taking the company Lear Jet to the Virgin Islands for a corporate board meeting on a beautiful boat and sailing around for three days. You know darn well when you pull out your trusty camera that you're going to have to be sending them really high quality photos to remember the fun time when they decided to invest a few billion here and there; did you bring along your DSLR in your carry on or suiter, or did you bring your G9 and is it's good enough. Yes they want photos but it's a fun and friendly setting, lets not make a big deal of this but remember, whatever you shoot better be really good.

Can a journalist tell their client that it's okay, relax, you can walk into the village with your point and shoot and bring back the kind of quality that will bring in the money?

Of course you'll grab the best gear for the job and in most cases that will be what you've always used, the DSLR with all the lenses but sometimes it's nice to have that confidence right there on you to just pick up and shoot while your sitting there having lunch and the camera backpack is setting at your feet with the shoulder strap slipped around your leg so no one can take it. Yeah been there and I had to do this with motion picture gear, back then a 16mm, it weighed 17 pounds and yes I'd take it in the restaurant with me and it'd get it's own chair and yes the f stop was already set and ready to go- if it takes time to think about should I or should I not go ahead and start putting things together from the kit, maybe it's too late. But not if it's in your pocket or a small pouch on your belt.

All my life as a photographer and working with motion picture gear, I was so envious of the still photographers because their flash units were so incredibly powerful for being so small and their cameras so light that they didn't destroy your back but now I realize the cameras are not small, not light and not convenient most of the time.

But the image still has to be able to be sellable to your client.

I'm tired, I'm done! Gnight!

[Bob_A]

My list:


8MP sensor for lower noise
Ability to have autoflash while the camera is in manual. This is my biggest disappointment with this camera.
Proper exposure compensation in Av and Tv modes (i.e., program shift) instead of the useless "sensitivity" style compensation they provided. Canon shouldn't allow their engineers to smoke wacky tabacky at work.
Ability to use the Canon RC-1 wireless remote
F/2 lens
Improved viewfinder that displays the focus point and confirmation (I'm dreaming with this one I know)

[Trelawney]

Wider lens - 24mm or 28mm
Socket for cable shutter release
Less MP for less noise
Flip out screen would be great
Keep RAW

[Brand_X]

refine the sensor rather then building a brand new one. They can decrease the price if the keep the same build process and tweak it here and there reducing noise. Too bad most consumers only look at MP. Switching the factory to build a larger/smaller or different MP process is expensive.

I see all cameras need this. not just the G

STOP the PIXEL WARS!!!!!!! I want image quality wars!!!! :)

[baw5t0n]

refine the sensor rather then building a brand new one. They can decrease the price if the keep the same build process and tweak it here and there reducing noise. Too bad most consumers only look at MP. Switching the factory to build a larger/smaller or different MP process is expensive.

I see all cameras need this. not just the G

STOP the PIXEL WARS!!!!!!! I want image quality wars!!!! :)

100% AGREED!!!
I think if the new one had wider/ faster lens/ less noise/ auto flash in manual mode, and kept Raw, custom white balance, full manual mode, Av, Tv, i'd be very happy. I'd sacrifice all the other functions for the aforementioned ones.

[rkamarowski]

1. larger sensor
2. better viewfinder
3. better viewfinder
... better viewfinder

[Jannie]

Better image
No shutter lag

[mattjs]

Love a bigger sensor with less noise. F2 lens with the IS. 28MM. I'm not willing to sacrifice size though. I can carry my G7 in my pants/shorts pockets ,and want my G10 the same way.

[peddle4ever]

Interesting thread. I went a little crazy and posted the lengthy dissertation below. I recently took around 30,000 pics with my G9 on a 4-month backpacking trip (yea, I'm nuts). I carried that little tank with me constantly (in pocket or around neck, under shirt)....mtn bikes, motorcycles, planes, trains, boats, taxis, busses, hiking, etc. Situations I never would take an SLR.

I'm thankful I found a sufficiently small and rugged point-and-shoot that met my performance requirements. For me, size and stealth were the key features. I truly loved the camera. But there were moments when I cursed Canon's marketeers. I mostly agree with the others. Here's my wish list, for what it's worth:

* Faster: much faster *everything*! I'd like speedy fast and responsive menus, faster zoom, focus, higher fps, no lag in resuming after "hold". The auto white balance takes up to 5 seconds - too slow.
* Sensor: better, larger sensor for better low-light sensitivity and lower noise. Hopefully without increasing the size of the lens or body.
* Smaller size, lighter weight. Other than stabilization, I see no reason for heaviness. The idea of this camera is it approaches (some) SLRs in quality...yet is stealthy and compact to carry in a pocket or around your neck.
* Shutter button: needs better tactile feel when pressed "halfway" (like other cameras provide), IMHO. With the G9, to press "halfway" you must press it around 90% and there's no significant "click" or detent position (with hysteresis). With most other brands/models I've tested this isn't a problem. It's possible they've since fixed this, I dunno.
* Threads: Sturdier threads for external lens adapter. The G9's are plastic and mine cracked within two weeks.
* Viewfinder: An optical viewfinder that actually works. The current one only displays around 60% of the image and it's angled downward (around 25%) so it far off center (duh!). It shows the lens in the picture, too. If they can't make a reasonably fuctional viewfinder they shouldn't include it. Perhaps Canon is intentionally steering pros to more expensive SLRs...?
* Strap: A carrying strap like smaller point-and-shoots have (neck loop with single clip). I had to make my own - worked great. So much more compact than the gigantic strap that came with it.
* Add slightly larger hook holes on the sides, large enough to accomodate various kinds of clips, rings, etc. The current ones are just too small.
* Sealed optics. Mine got so much dust in it I had to send it back to Canon for cleaning. And I always kept it in a clean camera bag or under my shirt at all times. The seals are so bad that if you breathe on the lens to clean it, the optics inside instantly fog up. I believe Canon put out a maintenance bulletin regarding this. Not a recall, but Canon did replace my whole lens assembly for free just because it got dirty inside.
* Larger joypad (the four-button one). Mine is marginal and difficult to press accurately and not much tactile feedback. I want to feel a nice satisfying click.
* Wheel: decrease the friction on the rotating control wheel. Mine is difficult and frustrating to rotate. The G9s I tried in stores were similarly difficult. The wheel should be smooth and frictionless other than the detent positions. The finger grip should be rough enough so the finger doesn't slip. The syndrome is that the more it slips, the harder you press. The harder you press, the more friction is created. And I think the ring diameter should be increased by around 25%. Not every customer has the same size hands as Japanese marketing people (nothing personal ;)
* Add one or two more Shortcut Buttons
* Manual focus: faster wheel action required. It can take a long time to crank that wheel around.
* Stereo mics and/or external mic jack. I had to lug around a separate stereo audio recorder.
* Increase zoom to 10x or 12x. Yet about 25% wider-angle (24mm equivalent) (5mm-80mm range?).
* f2 lens or better
* Better color range
* Eliminate the horizontal line artifacts in low level areas. Not sure if these are JPG artifacts or CCD noise. But it's a problem when I bring up very dark areas of an image.
* If I had to choose between 8MP and 12MP versus half the noise (ie, 400ISO = 200ISO) I'd go with lower noise. I do love shooting 12MP at appropriate times. It allows me to crop without feeling guilty the next morning. But the noise levels kinda suck currently.

Firmware only. This is a separate wish-list containing just firmware improvements. These won't increase parts cost so no reason Canon couldn't implement them.
* Faster menus like SLRs have (see above)
* The panorama feature is currently next-to-useless IMHO. It displays a tiny postage stamp sized image so you can't see what you're doing. I've taken hundreds of G9 panoramas and I've never used it successfully. I always end up doing it manually because at least I can see what I'm doing.
* Remember ALL settings when powering off. Like Macro mode, for example. This could be a menu option called "Remember Macro setting after power down" or something. In an afternoon of shooting wildflowers I may power cycle 50 or 100 times. It takes several button presses to change to macro mode each time. I wish it would just remember the setting.
* External lenses: allow user to specify the focal length (in mm). The menu should support several such user-defined lenses. Currently you have a choice of only two standard "Canon" lenses. This seems like a poor way to push Canon's proprietary lenses. Allow switching back and forth using a programmable Shortcut Button. And display the setting as an icon. This is very important otherwise you forget which lens you've set it for. Granted, this is a work-around for not supporting an electronic lens ID system. But better than nothing. Also, this is strictly for data purposes (EXIF tags), especially for stitching panoramas.
* Add more function options to the Shortcut Button. Such as switching lenses, toggling image stabilization, Macro
* Support RAW in all shooting modes
* More steps on the optical zoom (not sure if this a function of firmware)
* Allow user to specify EXIF fields like "Artist Name", "Author", besides just "Owner's Name".
* For shooting video: please, oh please display the amount of time remaining while shooting. Currently the camera doesn't tell you. So you end up unexpectedly filling the card. I need my camera to shoot good video (I travel light ;)
* Support optical zooming while shooting videos. Canon's firmware disables this because they claim the sound of the zoom lens is picked up by the mic. Personally, I don't care in many situations. I'd much rather have some noise than no zoom. They could make it selectable in the menus. Also, an external mic jack would solve the noise problem.
* Support the display of externally processed images. I'm talking about putting processed JPGs onto SD cards for slideshows. Currently it throws an error ("Unidentified Image") if you try to display an image that was processed, renamed or otherwise changed (even with Zoombrowser).
* Have the option to store portrait images properly rotated. Not merely with the EXIF rotation flag set.
* A user selectable feature to AUTOMATICALLY disable image stabilization for exposures above a certain time threshold. The problem is the IS system is too noisy (hunts and seeks). Time exposures longer than a second or so become blurred significantly. I sometimes forget to shut off IS so auto shut-off would save many shots.
* The MF "focus check" feature is great but still not useful enough. It needs to zoom in even more (25% to 50%). Otherwise you really can't tell if the image is sufficiently focused, even with a magnifying glass.

Good things I hope Canon DOES NOT change:
* The power-on speed is quite fast, thank goodness (IMHO). This is so important I hope it stays fast.
* Screen size is very good. Bigger would be even better but it's still beautiful as-is. Smaller would suck.
* Screen quality, dot pitch, viewing angle and resolution are very good, too, IMHO. I hope they don't cost-reduce it by sacrificing the screen.
* A flip screen would be awesome, especially for live video and macro. But NOT at the expense of smaller screen size, IMHO. I think we're lucky the G9's screen is so big and gorgeous. I hope it stays that way.
* The flat black color is nice. This camera must remain stealthy.
* I think the existing so-called "grip" is OK. Even after taking 30K shots with it, some with a broken finger.
* Power consumption is OK. Worse would be unacceptable.

So how do we get Canon to listen to us? Maybe have a moderator send Canon Marketing a wish list with all our names on it. And threaten to forward it to their competitors if they don't reply with an acknowledgement, at least indicating that they read and considered every suggestion.

ps. in case anyone's curious about what the G9 can do (in the hands of a dedicated amatuer)...I posted 2,500 "best of's" last night at www.pbase.com/cjmichael (http://www.pbase.com/cjmichael) ("Round the World" gallery). Enjoy!

[AngryCorgi]

G10 wanted list:

*Finally use a CMOS chip (of decent size) that can perform on par (at least) with the old EOS D60, in terms of sensor noise up to at least ISO800. We have heard that Canon is investing in the idea of migrating CMOS into the consumer cams, now show us already!!

*Give us a good quality lens with mechanical (not electric) zoom, and maybe mechanically linked MF ring. Make it a 28-200mm/F2.5-F4.5 (35mm equiv) with optical IS.

*RAW option

*Keep it under $900 and you'll sell plenty of them!

:D

[jsahar]

First of all I should confess that I am a Canon fans also I thought that
less MP less noise
But few days ago I found that a much higher MP can undertake a fine image quality if it is incorporated with some state-of-the-art noise reduction algorithms.

For instance, review some photos taken by sybershot dsc-w300 a 13.6 MP compact camera. There are really fine IQ photos like what are captured by full frame or APS-C sensors while charged by Super HAD CCD and a competitive NR.

Theoretically to a have a 30cm x 45cm print by 150 DPI we have to have an image of 2700x1800 pixels that is about 5 MP. Well all we feel like compact cameras. If there is not any way to get better IQ else increasing MP so more noise reduction is necessary. Other words, information theory tell us that increasing 5 MP to 8 MP or 10 MP just improves a factor of 1.26 or 1.41 data redundancy to error correction, both of them are really inadequate.

Near lossless error corrections apply with the data of 2 times or more redundancy. However I think that to start toward this limit at least a 13.8 MP sensor is required (4500x3000). Note that again it means that the effective image size should be down sampled to 5MP that is well enough for a small poster. That reduce 5 pixels to 3 pixels.
Yet 15.3 MP could charge better IQ (4725x3150 pixels). Roughly, after applying the hybrid down sample / noise reduction algorithm each 7 pixels are reduced to 4 pixels.

[vwjoe76]

First of all I should confess that I am a Canon fans also I thought that
less MP less noise
But few days ago I found that a much higher MP can undertake a fine image quality if it is incorporated with some state-of-the-art noise reduction algorithms.

For instance, review some photos taken by sybershot dsc-w300 a 13.6 MP compact camera. There are really fine IQ photos like what are captured by full frame or APS-C sensors while charged by Super HAD CCD and a competitive NR.

Theoretically to a have a 30cm x 45cm print by 150 DPI we have to have an image of 2700x1800 pixels that is about 5 MP. Well all we feel like compact cameras. If there is not any way to get better IQ else increasing MP so more noise reduction is necessary. Other words, information theory tell us that increasing 5 MP to 8 MP or 10 MP just improves a factor of 1.26 or 1.41 data redundancy to error correction, both of them are really inadequate.

Near lossless error corrections apply with the data of 2 times or more redundancy. However I think that to start toward this limit at least a 13.8 MP sensor is required (4500x3000). Note that again it means that the effective image size should be down sampled to 5MP that is well enough for a small poster. That reduce 5 pixels to 3 pixels.
Yet 15.3 MP could charge better IQ (4725x3150 pixels). Roughly, after applying the hybrid down sample / noise reduction algorithm each 7 pixels are reduced to 4 pixels.
I concur.

[rdc640]

first of all, theres some ABSOLUTE DREAMERS on here

realisticly...
xti sensor. that is all.

everything else comes MUCH further behind.

[Bob_A]

First of all I should confess that I am a Canon fans also I thought that
less MP less noise
But few days ago I found that a much higher MP can undertake a fine image quality if it is incorporated with some state-of-the-art noise reduction algorithms.



Software has improved, however using the same "state-of-the-art" noise reduction algorithms will still result in lower noise and less smearing of an image with a lower MP camera.

The G9 noise reduction works better than most of the competition IMO, but I still don't like the results above ISO 400. I'm confident a 6-8 MP camera with the latest software and sensor technology could do much better.

[ilcounican]

As a pro shooter who keeps the G9 around for snapshots when I want images, but not the weight of my SLR's around, I agree with the posts calling for larger sensor, better noise control and such like WITHOUT sacrificing size. Is that realistic for a compact camera? Don't know. Would be interested to find out.

Granted, if I want superior quality, then I'll lug an SLR around. Truth be told, I've put the G9 through some paces with surprisingly good results. The question isn't, then, about being realistic or idealistic with a new G10, but about how much more do you want your manufacturer to pack into a compact camera?

[sando]

Sounds like what you want Canon to do is build an SLR with the G10.

Just go buy an SLR. Or a DP1 or something.

You think Canon care what an online community want?!

[MLphoto]

When your done righting the letter about the G10 under the letter put this please:

P.S. We wan't a 50D!!! :)

[thelightofsound]

When your done righting the letter about the G10 under the letter put this please:

P.S. We wan't a 50D!!! :)

50D? we are due for the 5DmkII first!

[MLphoto]

50D? we are due for the 5DmkII first!

More then few people on this board already said that Canon will release a 50D around Febuary 2009, i hope they do.

[wesnin]

Just to keep this thread alive, and hopefully someone at Canon actually reads it too:

-Wider lens, it is difficult to get good photos inside a car or similar with the lens of the G9, it crops too much. I can accept losing some of the tele end of the zoom if that's necessary to get wider. At least 28 mm instead of the G9's 35 mm, or even 24 mm if you can manage that!

-Faster lens, at least f=2.0 or f=1.8 instead of the G9's f=2.8. This would give more bokeh too, nice!

-Less noise would be nice.

-Do not change anything else, I love the G9 except the above! Do not make the G10 bigger than the G9. The whole point of a compact is that it is... well, compact. Keep it small! If it gets any bigger, I can just as well buy a dSLR. And the way the G9 works, the layout of the buttons, the easy switch to Manual Focus, the easy changing of Exposure Value, things like those are excellent. And the full Manual mode, I like that one a lot. The G9 is good, I just want it tweaked a little!

[tonnes]

I want a dual card slot. CF plus SD.
28mm lens.
Articulating screen.
Larger sensor, keeping the 12mp.

[tdodd]

If a 40D and 1D III have 10MP, which is plenty, who on earth would think that a P&S should have even more? It is stupid. It is insane. Stop the megapixel madness and give us IQ back. 8MP is all we need at the very most. I'd be even happier with 6 MP if it meant clean 800 ISO images. 8MP was good enough for the 30D and 1D IIn. Invest the advances in technology into IQ.

The marketing pi55ing contest should be about performance - operational speed, IQ and ergonomics - not some futile pursuit of screwing things up with silly numbers.

If they want to start with a wider angle - 24-28mm - then I would be happy with that too.

p.s. Any chance of a 3:2 sensor rather than 4:3?

[ducko]

I own the G9 and love it! I still have the 870IS because of the wide angle lens though. If the G10 could be the G9 with an articulating back screen and a wider angle lens, maybe a larger sensor (unless it makes the camera bigger, it's important to me that it stays small) then it would be great!

[madalin]

I own a G9 and it's a great little camera
Here's what could be done better on the next model (G10):

#1: larger sensor
#2: faster lenses
#3: wide angle lenses
#4: swivel lcd
#5: faster fps

- keep - RAW format

[ptomsu]

1) Larger Sensor bringing ISO 6400
2) Faster lens (2/28 - 3.5/140) for example
3) faster processing from RAW
4) a bit more ergonomic (like the Nikon P series)
5) higher resolution swiveling LCD
6) better optical finder

This all could cost a bit more, but would really be worth it!

[ilikecats]

I gots an idea, how about a viewfinder that zooms and shows shooting info, and has dedicated prongs that mount it, so the hot shoe is free? Why not? Also a lens and sensor like that of the Panny LX3, good battery, good screen, keep the iso wheel, give us an aperture ring on lens with manual focus ring, and a shutter speed dial. Build it well, all black and I would really buy it!! Also about 120mm on the tele end for portraits if need be.

[JLukeW]

Only two things, which have been mentioned by everyone so far:

Bigger sensor, and
Faster lens.