G11 screen; I don't like it

[marc515]

The G11 looks to be a nice camera, but personally, I don't like the articulating screen. While I'm sure there are many who do, I simply prefer the built in much better. Also don't have to worry about it loosening up in the future.

Can anyone explain why they lowered the pixels? If the concept is so good, will Canon do that on all their cameras?

marc

[Kevin B]

In general, the smaller the pixels the higher the noise. The issue is a smaller pixel size receives less light (compared to a larger pixel) so the signal to noise ratio drops. With the same sized sensor (and the exact same processing methods), a sensor with more pixels will have a smaller pixel size and therefore will have a lower signal to noise and thus lower performance at high iso settings. The hope is the drop in megapixels for the G11 will increase its high iso performance. Fewer pixels also means smaller file sizes and less time to process an image although I don't think these are major drivers.

As to what Canon will do, your guess is as good as anybody's. The new 7D has more pixels than the 50D (18 MP vs 15MP) although it's a new line not a successor to the 50D but both use the APS-C sensor size. The G11 is 10MP while the G10 was 15MP so I can't see a clear trend here. It's probably an issue where the market for the G11 was more concerned about low light/high iso than higher megapixels.



Can anyone explain why they lowered the pixels? If the concept is so good, will Canon do that on all their cameras?

marc

[CJinAustin]

Canon realized that the G-owners are very educated regarding the megapixel myth and don't fall for the normal marketing dung.

[mahanee]

what`s wrong with articulating LCD ??
have G3 since 2003 and love it`s swivel LCD .. never crossed in my mind to upgrade to G7 - G10 cause there`s no swivel LCD..

but, with horrible pic quality in G11`s Hi ISO,.. just cancel my willing to have it.

*as a traditional powershot G user, i think there are (should) 2 main things about Gs : Articulated LCD and fast 2.0-3.0 lens .. plus a cute design like G3 or G5 if it still possible

[CJinAustin]

what`s wrong with articulating LCD ??
have G3 since 2003 and love it`s swivel LCD .. never crossed in my mind to upgrade to G7 - G10 cause there`s no swivel LCD..

but, with horrible pic quality in G11`s Hi ISO,.. just cancel my willing to have it.

*as a traditional powershot G user, i think there are (should) 2 main things about Gs : Articulated LCD and fast 2.0-3.0 lens .. plus a cute design like G3 or G5 if it still possible

A faster lens is always nice...

[timnosenzo]

The G11 looks to be a nice camera, but personally, I don't like the articulating screen.

You're not alone :)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=740591

[BottomBracket]

Aesthetics vs function.

[timnosenzo]

Aesthetics vs function.

It's only aesthetics v. function if it's a function you will actually use.

If it's not a function you will use, it not only reduces the aesthetics, but also reduces function.

[CJinAustin]

It's only aesthetics v. function if it's a function you will actually use.

If it's not a function you will use, it not only reduces the aesthetics, but also reduces function.

The swivel screens are also smaller 2.8 vs 3.0 so it reduces function of those who won't use it in that manner as well. But it's not really a big deal either way.

[BottomBracket]

It's only aesthetics v. function if it's a function you will actually use.

If it's not a function you will use, it not only reduces the aesthetics, but also reduces function.

I don't get it. It is a function, yet since you don't use it, it reduces function? And how can you not use a swiveling screen on a G-series camera? You use the optical viewfinder? (I do). At the very least, the swiveling function serves to protect the LCD screen when you store the camera as you can face the LCD screen towards the body to protect it from scratches.

It's ok to admit that you don't like the camera because of aesthetics. But to claim that it has reduced function, because of the swivel screen? That is bewildering, to say the least.

[mahanee]

At the very least, the swiveling function serves to protect the LCD screen when you store the camera as you can face the LCD screen towards the body to protect it from scratches.
.
KUDOS for you.

yeah, and i just don`t get it why some say it`s articulating screen is fragile.
my G3 since 2003 still stands just like the way the first it came..

[puttick]

I don't get it. It is a function, yet since you don't use it, it reduces function?


The swivel screen is smaller - 2.8" vs 3.0". So if you don't use it for swivelling, you still have to accept the reduced size. It doesn't sound a lot, but it looks a lot smaller. And it makes the camera heavier and possibly thicker than it would otherwise need to be. Function therefore IS reduced.

Nigel

[timnosenzo]

I don't get it. It is a function, yet since you don't use it, it reduces function? And how can you not use a swiveling screen on a G-series camera? You use the optical viewfinder? (I do). At the very least, the swiveling function serves to protect the LCD screen when you store the camera as you can face the LCD screen towards the body to protect it from scratches.

It's ok to admit that you don't like the camera because of aesthetics. But to claim that it has reduced function, because of the swivel screen? That is bewildering, to say the least.

I'm sorry you have such a hard time understanding. I don't mean to make you so bewildered. :confused:

We've gone through this before, in the thread that I linked to above. Here's my reply to you last time:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=8503945&postcount=40

By reducing the size of the screen, by increasing the size of the camera, by including more moving parts, for something I would not use, for me, is a reduction in the function of the camera.

[c2thew]

swivel screen would be useful for macro photography. equip the lens tube + a raynox 250 and you are golden

[JimAskew]

I like it. I used the swivel screen on my G5 all the time. It is great for "stealth" shots and when you have to put the camera low to the ground to make the shot you want.

I am waiting on reviews of the noise reduction improvements before I make a decision to trade up to the G11 from myG10.

To me the swivel screen is a major step forward in "function" :)

[Telkin]

I've never used it but I already like it. The fact that I can protect my screen when not in use means I won't have to worry about what else I have in my bag to scratch it. Not worry about the perfect case which adds bulk and not worry about perfectly placing on a plastic protector.

[CJinAustin]

I've never used it but I already like it. The fact that I can protect my screen when not in use means I won't have to worry about what else I have in my bag to scratch it. Not worry about the perfect case which adds bulk and not worry about perfectly placing on a plastic protector.

I would worry,,, it's the front of the camera that is fragile.

[BottomBracket]

I'm sorry you have such a hard time understanding. I don't mean to make you so bewildered. :confused:

We've gone through this before, in the thread that I linked to above. Here's my reply to you last time:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=8503945&postcount=40

By reducing the size of the screen, by increasing the size of the camera, by including more moving parts, for something I would not use, for me, is a reduction in the function of the camera.

Wow snarkiness. Of course I remember that thread, where you initially stated that you don't like the articulating screen since it detracts from the overall build quality. I responded, as did others, that the build of G cameras with this feature are quite robust - I have 3 G cameras that I still use roughly and they have held up quite nicely up to now. Now you're saying it's a reduction of function, which seems like a paradox to me since it is an added function.

One thing is clear though, you do not like the look of the camera, because it is thicker by a few millimeters and has an ugly hinge. That clearly falls under aesthetics. And again, (I have said this before) it is perfectly OK not to like a camera because of aesthetics. It is your money, after all.

[Telkin]

I would worry,,, it's the front of the camera that is fragile.

Well then you'd be worried for any camera really, not specifically to one with an articulating screen. At least with the articulating screen you can focus all your efforts in protecting the front.

[WatchFan1]

wish it had the non-articulated screen as well, but will reserve the final judgment until I have it in my hands.

[xhack]

An articulated screen is as useful as an angle finder. In some circumstances (macro, low-level), VERY useful. Otherwise, in day-to-day usage . . .hmmm.

My (admittedly prejudiced) take is that anything protruding from the 'working' side of the camera is subject to casual dings and swipes of varying severity. So I prefer the minimalist profile of a flush screen.

YMMV - I don't proselytise one way or the other - but it rarely should it be a deal-breaker.

[timnosenzo]

Wow snarkiness. Of course I remember that thread, where you initially stated that you don't like the articulating screen since it detracts from the overall build quality. I responded, as did others, that the build of G cameras with this feature are quite robust - I have 3 G cameras that I still use roughly and they have held up quite nicely up to now. Now you're saying it's a reduction of function, which seems like a paradox to me since it is an added function.

I realize you're intentionally being obtuse. That's OK, happens a lot around here. We clearly have different opinions about this.

I know this is a paradox for you, it's quite clear. I've stated my opinions on how I feel this addition reduces the function for me. You choose not to accept my opinion, and that's OK, it really doesn't matter to me.

[BottomBracket]

I realize you're intentionally being obtuse. That's OK, happens a lot around here. We clearly have different opinions about this.

I know this is a paradox for you, it's quite clear. I've stated my opinions on how I feel this addition reduces the function for me. You choose not to accept my opinion, and that's OK, it really doesn't matter to me.

The swivel screen has been a historical hallmark of the G-series cameras. Unfortunately, it increases the width of the camera, in the case of the G11 it is 2mm thicker than the G10. I understand that this is unacceptable to some people.

As for not accepting your opinion, of course I do. As I said before it is your money after all. Trust me though, despite the swiveling screen, it is still a robust camera. By the way as I type this, I just realized that there are some keys on my keyboard that I haven't used at all and don't plan on using in the future. I'm beginning to think that it is not that functional at all!

[CJinAustin]

I guess what people don't realize is that functionality is a bit existential. It can be increased for one person while being simultaneous decreased for another.

If a guy permanently removes the spare tire from his Porsche in order to get better lap times he has improved his car's functionality on the track; although others may feel he has lessened the cars functionality on the road.

[BottomBracket]

I guess what people don't realize is that functionality is a bit existential. It can be increased for one person while being simultaneous decreased for another.

If a guy permanently removes the spare tire from his Porsche in order to get better lap times he has improved his car's functionality on the track; although others may feel he has lessened the cars functionality on the road.

Well said brother.