G Series with larger sensor

[digidog]

Just wondering if you guys think we'll ever see a G series camera with a larger sensor (and lens I guess?). I love the size of my G3 and the swivelling LCD and everything else about it but I wish the noise wasn't so evident at the higher ratings. I'd love to have a similar camera but with the EOS sensor. What do you reckon the chances of this happening are (is it possible) ? Are there any other-brand cameras like this?

Thanks

Daryl

[Belmondo]

Personally, I doubt it. Making the sensor larger would necessitate making everything about the camera larger, at least as they relate to sensor size. To me, that translates into a whole different camera

[Andy_T]

The Pro1 (8 MP) and the Leica Digilux 2 (5 MP) have a slightly larger sensor (8.8x6.6 mm) than the G series (7.18x5.32 mm) ...

... however, guess that this will not make much of a difference.

In addition to what Belmondo said, the camera will also be a lot more expensive, with sensor size being one of the major cost drivers.

This is how sensor sizes compare ...

http://www.bidencap.de/SensorSize.jpg

leading to pixel sizes of ...

http://www.bidencap.de/PixelSize.jpg

Best regards,
Andy

[bosamar]

Nice charts Andy!

[Superbaldguy]

When you look at that excellent graphic, it's truly amazing how high the image quality is with the G6 and it doesn't seem possible that you could make a sharp 16x20 from it..........It can be done!

[pradeep1]

Just wondering if you guys think we'll ever see a G series camera with a larger sensor (and lens I guess?). I love the size of my G3 and the swivelling LCD and everything else about it but I wish the noise wasn't so evident at the higher ratings. I'd love to have a similar camera but with the EOS sensor. What do you reckon the chances of this happening are (is it possible) ? Are there any other-brand cameras like this?

Thanks

Daryl

Why not? If sensor technology keeps improving and we hit the megapixel density limit, then where else the improvement come from? And how much bigger does the camera have to be to take a full frame sized sensor. Heck the diminutive Olympus Epic has a "full frame" 35mm size (it's a film camera) and easily is smaller than most digicams.

I think that with technology advancements and the need in the marketplace, we could see a larger sensor digicam coming to the market. Yes, it does not appeal to the mass market, but there just might be enough of a critical mass of target customers who'd put up money for that.

I would. If I could have the conveniences of the G3 with a slightly longer lens, snappy autofocus, and low noise, that would be a category killer camera.

There's a wish list of future G series on this forum. Check out that link.

[digidog]

Thanks for all your thought on this guys. Andy those pictures you posted really bring it home. Even an increase to double the current G-series size would probably bring significant quality improvements and as Pradeep mentioned I can't really see why a larger sensor can't be accomodated in a relatively small camera. I'm currently considering buying a Canon 20D (just for the image quality) but to be honest after owning a G3 for the past year or so I'm reluctant to go back to the SLR format. I find the G-series quite liberating in the sense that you have this dinky little bit of gear which can do so much and I find that I enjoy adapting my photography to the equipment I have rather than constantly thinking 'maybe if I tried that lens it would work better' which is what I used to do with my film SLR system (and end up spending loads of time faffing around with equipment and lugging loads of gear around that hardly ever got used). The Nikon Coolpix 8800 looks like an interesting camera. It's taken on board the Canon swivelling LCD (which I think is a major feature - allows you to shoot in all manner of ways not very easily done with an SLR) and brings with it a 10x optical zoom with image stabilisation. The sensor is a little bigger than the Canon G-series but not much so I expect image noise will still be a problem at higher ISOs but its definitely a step in the right direction (it'll be interesting to read the first reviews when they come out). If it had a larger sensor in it I'd have bought one already. I don't think the cost issue is a big one. I'd be prepared to pay as much for a G-series-like camera with the right sort of specifications (i.e. large sensor, good zoom lens) as I would be to buy an SLR system. SLR systems are only as good as their lenses and I suspect a lot of people actually spend more and end up with an inferior setup (although the sensor-size thing certainly weighs heavily in their favour at the moment).

Daryl

P.S. Nice portfolio Pradeep!

[dfrost]

The technical price for a larger sensor or larger pixels is lens size or lens speed (largest aperture). Remember that maximum lens aperture is a function of image size, so if the sensor (image) size increases, the lens must expand proportionately, the maximum aperture will be smaller (higher numerically), or both.

The Olympus (film) Epic is a lovely camera, but it is limited to a fixed 28 mm focal length f2.8 lens, albeit a very good one. Note that zoom lenses in P&S cameras tend to start at f4.0 or slower (bigger number), and have a largest aperture at maximum zoom of f10 or worse! They MUST use ISO 400 film to get hand-holdable shutter speeds. (Check out flash range at telephoto with these cameras for a shock.) So I would not use them as a comparison with the G series. And yes, I have several of the better (usually earlier) ones that served me well, but nothing like the G3.

In comparison, the G3/G5/G6 have that very nicely compact f2.0-3.0 4X zoom. That is amazing capability for low light and flash photography that is not available without huge cost, weight and volume in 35mm film or DSLR. I'd have preferred that the G-series and their competitors stayed with small 4-5 megapixel arrays and improved the focus speed, noise, chromatic aberration issues by product evolution. Obviously, the market doesn't agree with that suggestion, although I'm quite pleased with reports of improved performance in the G6 in all those directions.

[pradeep1]

The technical price for a larger sensor or larger pixels is lens size or lens speed (largest aperture). Remember that maximum lens aperture is a function of image size, so if the sensor (image) size increases, the lens must expand proportionately, the maximum aperture will be smaller (higher numerically), or both.

The Olympus (film) Epic is a lovely camera, but it is limited to a fixed 28 mm focal length f2.8 lens, albeit a very good one. Note that zoom lenses in P&S cameras tend to start at f4.0 or slower (bigger number), and have a largest aperture at maximum zoom of f10 or worse! They MUST use ISO 400 film to get hand-holdable shutter speeds. (Check out flash range at telephoto with these cameras for a shock.) So I would not use them as a comparison with the G series. And yes, I have several of the better (usually earlier) ones that served me well, but nothing like the G3.

In comparison, the G3/G5/G6 have that very nicely compact f2.0-3.0 4X zoom. That is amazing capability for low light and flash photography that is not available without huge cost, weight and volume in 35mm film or DSLR. I'd have preferred that the G-series and their competitors stayed with small 4-5 megapixel arrays and improved the focus speed, noise, chromatic aberration issues by product evolution. Obviously, the market doesn't agree with that suggestion, although I'm quite pleased with reports of improved performance in the G6 in all those directions.

I get what you are saying. But I wouldn't mind actually having a camera the size of a Sony F828 (which is considerably larger than a Pro1 or G6) if it came with a good sensor. Yes, having the smaller sensor does do wonders for the camera in terms of giving it nice wide apertures, but I'd prefer a larger sensor and slower lenses to go with it. Hey, you can always up the ISO to 400 or 800 (which still have very little noticeable noise on a camera like the 20D) and get away with the 2-stop loss you have when you have to use the slower lenses.

The ideal would be having a small sensor so you can get the aperture advantage, but also having little noise and good ISO response. But that is just not possible with the tradeoffs and physical limitations currently. Maybe some magical software solution can help in the future. Maybe the DiG!C III processor???

[sdommin]

The ideal would be having a small sensor so you can get the aperture advantage, but also having little noise and good ISO response. But that is just not possible with the tradeoffs and physical limitations currently.

I think if we're all patient for a little while, something like that will eventually come to be. After all, who would have thought 10 years ago, that consumers like us would be able to buy a G-Series or Pro-1 kind of camera for less than $1000?

[pradeep1]

Ten years ago, I thought film was it. Didn't even know about digital. :oops:

[Andy_T]

But I wouldn't mind actually having a camera the size of a Sony F828 (which is considerably larger than a Pro1 or G6) if it came with a good sensor.

Sony 828:
134 x 91 x 156 mm

Canon 300D with Tamron 28-75 XR DI:
142 x 99 x 164 mm

... pretty close, eh :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[sdommin]

Sony 828:
134 x 91 x 156 mm

Canon 300D with Tamron 28-75 XR DI:
142 x 99 x 164 mm


You have to compare apples to apples, Andy. Slap a high-quality, f2 - f2.8, 28-200mm lens (the Sony equivalent) on to the 300D and then see how heavy it is! :shock: