Are people happy with their people pics taken with the G6?

[Superbaldguy]

After shooting film for 20 years, I'm still trying to find my satisfaction with digital prints of people. I simply find the traditional method of shooting a quality, lower-contrast film like Fujicolor NHP400 with my EOS gear yields much better people images than that of the G6.

Sure, sheer image quality is superb with the little cam - I can easily make tack-sharp 16x20's - but there's something aloof with the skin colors or maybe it's the greater DOF that irks me. It doesn't seem quite right, or I'm not used to it.

If I use the b/w setting on the G6, I am happy with the results - shooting color is disappointing. No, I do not use the Vivid setting, either, for people.

I find the lack of lattitude with digital imaging a bit disconcerting, unless I shoot RAW files and spend hours with post-processing.

Anyone else know what I mean?

[kraterz]

After spending a few weeks working with JPEG and raw, I've found that jpeg works much of the time, but I've faced many situations where jpeg was not an option. Now I've learnt to live with it, shoot raw and post process. If I am to get the kind of control I want, then jpeg is definitely not an option for me.

When I don't have the time to spend, I am back to my trusty NPS and the local lab does an excellent job. However, I've been playing with a 20D for a while (not mine) and the results are definitely more pleasing than the G6. Even with JPEGs, skin tones are very good and the images almost never needed much post processing, just a quick curves / levels and I was done. This was with the 28-70L.

[Andy_T]

Most likely the 'magic' you are missing in the G6 is the shallow DOF that is possible with a SLR or DSLR, but not with a small sensor digicam.

For me, that was the main reason to get the 20D after 2 years of using my G2.

Snapshot I did with my G2...

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/2795402-lg.jpg
Don't remember the settings, but most likely ISO 50, f/5.6

Also just a snapshot, but I am a lot happier with it ... taken with my 20D:

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3052498-md.jpg
20D+Tamron 28-75/2.8
Shutter speed: 1/250 sec Aperture: 5,6 Exposure mode: Av Flash: Metz MZ40i (manual) bounced ISO: 100 Focal length: 75,0mm

So - if you think that this might be the explanation - my suggestion would be to get a used 300D with some decent glass (50/1.8 for starters).

Best regards,
Andy

[Superbaldguy]

Hmmm..........Getting a sense that a DSLR would give me more pleasing results and I could shoot ISO 400 without any worries, if need be. I'll have to check this out with my banker.

[Andy_T]

Addition ... I routinely use ISO 800 on my 20D for normal shots in not-so-good lighting conditions (200 or 400 in bright sunlight). The occasional 1600 or 3200 ISO image is definitively usable (3200 after noise reduction).

This is an image where I set the camera to ISO 1600, as it was indoors and I had given the camera a friend who did not really know it (wanted to get decent shutter speeds to avoid blur, but not use flash on the other hand).

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3060110-md.jpg

Shutter speed: 1/50 sec Aperture: 3,5 Exposure compensation: +2/3 Flash: Off ISO: 1600 Focal length: 30,0mm Crop, resized, USM applied
No noise reduction applied.

Best regards,
Andy

[Superbaldguy]

Nice shot - more than acceptable as far as noise goes. If I ever get back to shooting weddings and events stuff, I really need to look at a DSLR.

[dehrle]

Got a G6 for my daughter. I am VERY happy with the picture quality. The quality compares with my 10d (except the pictures seem a little flater - hard to explain).

[Andy_T]

(except the pictures seem a little flater - hard to explain).

With 'flatter' ... are you referring to a similar effect as is visible in the first two pictures I linked in this thread?

- First picture (G2) ... very large DOF, everything is somehow in focus
- Second picture (20D) ... selective DOF, person is in focus, but background is slightly blurred

That would be what I (and others) have observed in small sensor digicams.

Best regards,
Andy

[Superbaldguy]

With the G6, you can achieve some degree of selective focus if you use wide apertures (f/2) and are less than 5 feet away; the DSLR has obvious advantages, here, allowing you to isolate your subject from the background.

In all honesty, I don't think these smaller cams were designed to be nothing more than a traveller's tool or for recording snapshots. The advantage of the G-series and a few other maker's high-end compacts is you can actually do more than that with them. If not for the fast lens on the G6, it would an otherwise a PS camera with overrides. Yippeee.

[Mr. Twister]

This is an image where I set the camera to ISO 1600, as it was indoors ... USM applied, No noise reduction applied.


Hey Andy,
That's a helluva shot at 1600! Man, on my G6 the ISO 400 is totaly useless! I guess that's why they are priced diferently ;)

BTW: what's USM applied?

[AndreyD]

After spending a few weeks working with JPEG and raw, I've found that jpeg works much of the time, but I've faced many situations where jpeg was not an option. Now I've learnt to live with it, shoot raw and post process. If I am to get the kind of control I want, then jpeg is definitely not an option for me.

When I don't have the time to spend, I am back to my trusty NPS and the local lab does an excellent job. However, I've been playing with a 20D for a while (not mine) and the results are definitely more pleasing than the G6. Even with JPEGs, skin tones are very good and the images almost never needed much post processing, just a quick curves / levels and I was done. This was with the 28-70L.

Just wondering, what about skin tones here, seriously, what could be wrong there and would be better with, say D20? I just novice with RAW, should try, I have to see the difference, everybody talking about. I am not meaing that this is a perfect picture but want to hear what could be done better, I want to be better :-)
Maybe it's not enough focus on eyes?
And ..... wait a second, where is ISO in exif data? It's missing because Auto mode?
This is a picture:
http://ibi2.photofile.ru/bozo/9580582BJU.jpg
exif:
Camera
Make Canon
Model Canon PowerShot G6
Exposure time 1/320 s
F-number f/2.5
Component config YCbCr
Compressed BPP 5
Shutter speed value 1/318 s
Aperture value f/2.5
Exposure bias value 0.00 EV
Max. aperture value f/2.5
Metering mode Pattern
Flash Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal length 17.5938 mm
Pixel X dimension 3072
Pixel Y dimension 2304
Focal plane X res. 3072000/284
Focal plane Y res. 2304000/213
Focal plane res. unit inch
Sensing method One-chip color area sensor
Custom Rendered Normal process
Exposure mode Auto exposure
White balance Auto white balance
Digital zoom ratio 1

[Roumen]

After shooting film for 20 years, I'm still trying to find my satisfaction with digital prints of people. I simply find the traditional method of shooting a quality, lower-contrast film like Fujicolor NHP400 with my EOS gear yields much better people images than that of the G6.

Sure, sheer image quality is superb with the little cam - I can easily make tack-sharp 16x20's - but there's something aloof with the skin colors or maybe it's the greater DOF that irks me. It doesn't seem quite right, or I'm not used to it.

If I use the b/w setting on the G6, I am happy with the results - shooting color is disappointing. No, I do not use the Vivid setting, either, for people.

I find the lack of lattitude with digital imaging a bit disconcerting, unless I shoot RAW files and spend hours with post-processing.

Anyone else know what I mean?

G6 is a nice camera and could give nice results. Using Raw is only a possibility it has also very good jpeg. Some people have the opposite opinion - DSLR could give a nice result only after postprocessing (check the link below).
I don't understand why is necessary to make several Jpeg shots while one Raw image could spend a lot of time in shooting - later on the computer the perfect result could produced using converting to Tiff and several possible WB settings.
A DSLR camera with all the accessories is not so convinient in use. Example - shooting a macro with a DSLR:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/135270194/370097989gvLoRM
http://community.webshots.com/photo/370098019/370098019UKtCAx

Regarding the G6 - some examples from me:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/356157118/356158704seGxER
http://community.webshots.com/photo/366898454/366902179CXpzGi
http://community.webshots.com/photo/358861580/358864867wQhKck

Greetings,
Roumen
----
"A DSLR doesn't make you a good photographer." Phil Askey
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=5976145

[RAW]

Have you tried to play with your white balance?
Have you used your Manual Focus?
Have you tested the diferent processing of the images that the camera provides?
What time of a day and what kind of a light is aplied on the subject that you are shooting?
Do you keep the camera steady and does the subject remains steady even after you take the shot?

Try to answer those questions to yourself and maybe something will change. I like the results I get from the G6, but not if I leave everything auto.

Here are some examples of portrait photos with a G6:


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=79446
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=77363 http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=74294
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=71921
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72158


Regards,
Artan