G11 Samples now on DPR

[denncald]

DPR has now added an image samples gallery for the G11 using a production model.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09092402canong11gallery.asp

Dennis

[stax]

very impressive. this camera will be mine ASAP.

[davidfig]

Even the ISO800 looks great.

[Jannie]

Ummmm, this for a point and shoot, looks quite exceptional, there are even a couple at 1600 that look pretty decent for 1600.

I clicked to see the originals and they look impressive, what I'd like to know is if the images were shot JPEG or RAW, my guess would be JPEG, obviously the images we are looking at are JPEG's.

[stax]

Ummmm, this for a point and shoot, looks quite exceptional, there are even a couple at 1600 that look pretty decent for 1600.

Dare I say as good as my 40D?

Maybe that's pushing it.

[Mountain Drifter]

I'm pretty impressed with the action shots of the bicycle race in daylight at ISO 400 , Froze the action good with an IQ that I wouldn't have doubted being a lower ISO.

Even the 1600 in pic #31, sure I can see the noise, but a very usable pic for capturing the moment and sharing.

[tkbslc]

Hmm, you guys must be looking at different pictures than me because all I thought was that they all look really soft and mushy even at ISO 80.

The ISO 1600 looks good for a compact, but the base ISO looks like a major step back. This is the same feeling I get when I look at the new Sony Exmor-R compact and S90 samples as well.

[not_this_punk]

Hmm, you guys must be looking at different pictures than me because all I thought was that they all look really soft and mushy even at ISO 80.

The ISO 1600 looks good for a compact, but the base ISO looks like a major step back. This is the same feeling I get when I look at the new Sony Exmor-R compact and S90 samples as well.

Wow man, you're shooting Canon SLR's and you're saying that those pictures are soft? Man, you should check out a 30D or something...now that's soft. Even ISO 400 makes it lose details...

Really, this is fantastic. I absolutely love it. Too bad it doesn't support optical zoom in movies (correct me if I'm wrong).

I'd buy one of these but I don't really know how big it is...I never had a G camera. Does it fit in a larger pocket?

[CJinAustin]

This iso 1600 shot is impressive... I really didn't think it would be this good. http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canong11_preview2/originals/img_0041.jpg

[stax]

Wow man, you're shooting Canon SLR's and you're saying that those pictures are soft? Man, you should check out a 30D or something...now that's soft. Even ISO 400 makes it lose details...

Really, this is fantastic. I absolutely love it. Too bad it doesn't support optical zoom in movies (correct me if I'm wrong).

I'd buy one of these but I don't really know how big it is...I never had a G camera. Does it fit in a larger pocket?

coat pocket, yes. pant pocket, not so much.

[CJinAustin]

Wow man, you're shooting Canon SLR's and you're saying that those pictures are soft? Man, you should check out a 30D or something...now that's soft. Even ISO 400 makes it lose details...

Really, this is fantastic. I absolutely love it. Too bad it doesn't support optical zoom in movies (correct me if I'm wrong).

I'd buy one of these but I don't really know how big it is...I never had a G camera. Does it fit in a larger pocket?

imagine a regular point and shoot and add about half an inch to the length, height, and depth.

[tkbslc]

Wow man, you're shooting Canon SLR's and you're saying that those pictures are soft? Man, you should check out a 30D or something...now that's soft. Even ISO 400 makes it lose details...
?

If you think any G-series compact has ever compared IQ wise to any SLR Canon has made, then you have been mislead.

But regardless, compare the base ISO outdoor images to some of Canon's older cameras. I feel like the base ISO on the g11 and S90 samples lack life and just seem, for lack of a better word, blah. I am feeling like Canon is starting to let base ISO quality slide in an aattempt to get workable high ISO out of a compact.

[CJinAustin]

Very very impressive for such a small sensor....

[Tee Why]

Is it me or does the s90 images look better?
Here is a similar shot at ISO 1600. The exposure is brighter but the resolution seems greater and the noise less.
http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canons90_preview/originals/img_0003.jpg

I would think the same sensor and processor should give the same results.

[CJinAustin]

Is it me or does the s90 images look better?
Here is a similar shot at ISO 1600. The exposure is brighter but the resolution seems greater and the noise less.
http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canons90_preview/originals/img_0003.jpg

I would think the same sensor and processor should give the same results.

Canon S90 at 1600

[CJinAustin]

G9 at 1600.... http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canong9_samples2/originals/img_1508.jpg

Like night and day....

[stax]

As between the S90 and G11, I think that once we see head to head comparisons in controlled conditions, they will both prove to be kicka** point and shoots. I prefer the G11 because of the view finder.

[tkbslc]

G9 at 1600.... http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canong9_samples2/originals/img_1508.jpg

Like night and day....

To be fair, the G9 listerine shot appears to be in genuinely low light, where the G11 portrait was in fairly decent light. I'd like to see side by side in same lighting.

[CJinAustin]

To be fair, the G9 listerine shot appears to be in genuinely low light, where the G11 portrait was in fairly decent light. I'd like to see side by side in same lighting.

Well in the G9 shot it was set at F3.5 at 1/80 sec
In the G11 shot it was at F4.5 at 1/30 sec.

Those are fairly close exposures,,, going off of those numbers I would say the G9 had more light but who knows....

[tkbslc]

Well in the G9 shot it was set at F3.5 at 1/80 sec
In the G11 shot it was at F4.5 at 1/30 sec.

Those are fairly close exposures,,, going off of those numbers I would say the G9 had more light but who knows....

Hmm, didn't check the EXIF even, so I guess you are right. Still want to see a real side by side test as there are a ton of variables. Would also like to see what a G9 shot with gobs of NR looks like in comparison.

[CJinAustin]

G9 at same settings G11 pic (1600)

[CJinAustin]

GLOBS

[arg245]

If you think any G-series compact has ever compared IQ wise to any SLR Canon has made, then you have been mislead.

But regardless, compare the base ISO outdoor images to some of Canon's older cameras. I feel like the base ISO on the g11 and S90 samples lack life and just seem, for lack of a better word, blah. I am feeling like Canon is starting to let base ISO quality slide in an aattempt to get workable high ISO out of a compact.

It's obvious that the higher ISO images are better than they have ever been on any G series camera. Aside from their usual marketing games, Canon should be commended for taking a step back in megapixels to extract better high ISO performance and dynamic range from a small sensor camera.

Why is it that everyone has to compare the G series to the DSLRs and always detract from a very fine performance by an excellent compact? Is it to justify to oneself the extra expense of the DSLR and the required lens investments? I shoot with DSLRs and compacts. Both have their place, but you have to admit, there are sometimes when the image quality from a compact, especially the G series, can rival that of even mid-level SLRs.

Accept it. There will be a time when the compacts will rival the quality of 35mm DSLRs, and the G11 is solidly well on its way.

As for the base ISO images appearing "blah", well that's easily dealt with by adjusting in-camera contrast and saturation. Something one should do anyway to achieve their favorite "look".

[tkbslc]

Why is it that everyone has to compare the G series to the DSLRs and always detract from a very fine performance by an excellent compact? ".

Why are you asking me, I wasn't the one starting the SLR comparisons. My comments were only about base ISO as compared to older cameras (that sucked at high ISO). I think they are just shifting sensitivity so that base ISO suffers so the high ISO can be better.

[arg245]

Why are you asking me, I wasn't the one starting the SLR comparisons. My comments were only about base ISO as compared to older cameras (that sucked at high ISO). I think they are just shifting sensitivity so that base ISO suffers so the high ISO can be better.

I'm not asking you. I merely quoted your comments. My statements are general in nature and not directed at you. At least, that was the intent.

That being said, I would agree with your comment about Canon shifting sensitivity in favor of higher ISO performance, but the fact that they have lowered the pixel density of the sensor would improve higher ISO performance to a much greater degree than shifting the sensitivity. I think it was a good move.

On another note, I still believe Canon is playing marketing games. I'll bet they could have moved the G11 to a CMOS sensor, and included high def video, but they are holding out on us. Like I said, marketing games. Guess we'll have to wait until the G12 or G13 comes out.

By the way, this statement IS directed at YOU: Nice job on your Zenfolio gallery. You have some excellent birding and landscapes shots. Love the B/W moon.

[denncald]

GLOBS

Sorry, I don't understand the GLOBS statement. I do notice the reduced noise, so is this a reference to the process you used??

thanks,
Dennis

[gotak]

Is it me or does the s90 images look better?
Here is a similar shot at ISO 1600. The exposure is brighter but the resolution seems greater and the noise less.
http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canons90_preview/originals/img_0003.jpg

I would think the same sensor and processor should give the same results.

s90 has the faster lens. So not surprised.

[gotak]

Guys, canon do not make their own P&S ccd sensors. Taking a step back on the mp is simply a matter of Sony releasing a new better CCD with a lower MP. Just watch next revision of this ccd will most likely have increased MP and you'd get a g12 released...



It's obvious that the higher ISO images are better than they have ever been on any G series camera. Aside from their usual marketing games, Canon should be commended for taking a step back in megapixels to extract better high ISO performance and dynamic range from a small sensor camera.

Why is it that everyone has to compare the G series to the DSLRs and always detract from a very fine performance by an excellent compact? Is it to justify to oneself the extra expense of the DSLR and the required lens investments? I shoot with DSLRs and compacts. Both have their place, but you have to admit, there are sometimes when the image quality from a compact, especially the G series, can rival that of even mid-level SLRs.

Accept it. There will be a time when the compacts will rival the quality of 35mm DSLRs, and the G11 is solidly well on its way.

As for the base ISO images appearing "blah", well that's easily dealt with by adjusting in-camera contrast and saturation. Something one should do anyway to achieve their favorite "look".

[tkbslc]

By the way, this statement IS directed at YOU: Nice job on your Zenfolio gallery. You have some excellent birding and landscapes shots. Love the B/W moon.

Thank you, that is very kind.

[CJinAustin]

Would also like to see what a G9 shot with gobs of NR looks like in comparison.

Sorry, I don't understand the GLOBS statement. I do notice the reduced noise, so is this a reference to the process you used??

thanks,
Dennis

Meant to say Gobs...

[TeamSpeed]

It almost seems like the 1600 shots are very close to the Rebel 300D. This is the first point and shoot that entices me with a pretty good higher ISO performance. I could see shooting at 1600 with some post proc. to clean it up. It might be time to step back into the G series (my last one was a G2), but the S90 looks good too.

[tkbslc]

It almost seems like the 1600 shots are very close to the Rebel 300D. This is the first point and shoot that entices me with a pretty good higher ISO performance. I could see shooting at 1600 with some post proc. to clean it up. It might be time to step back into the G series (my last one was a G2), but the S90 looks good too.

I think calling it DSLR good is a bit premature. They do look clean, but also very processed like a ton of NR has gone on. It is certainly better than what we have seen, but there are still not enough samples and fair comparisons to tell.

But, one thing to mention. The Lens in the S90 is f2 and the G11 is f2.8. COnsidering most entry DSLR lenses start at about f4, these compacts have a 1-2 stop advantage in ISO. So if you get an S90 and shoot it at ISO 400, you would have to be on ISO 1600 for the SLR with slow kit zoom. That may mean the S90 gives same or better IQ in those kinds of situations. Also, you can actually use f2 and have DOF indoors where on the SLR, you would be only having 1 person in focus at a time. That may mean the S90 gives same or better IQ in those kinds of typical indoor low-light scenarios. Certainly we are getting closer to being able to skip the SLR for most kinds of casual situations.

[CJinAustin]

I think calling it DSLR good is a bit premature. They do look clean, but also very processed like a ton of NR has gone on. It is certainly better than what we have seen, but there are still not enough samples and fair comparisons to tell.

All I know is at iso 1600 the G11 shots look better than anything my G9 has ever produced at that ISO.

[ZoranC]

Hmm, you guys must be looking at different pictures than me because all I thought was that they all look really soft and mushy even at ISO 80.
I feel same way too.

[KarlMarsh]

I'm very impressed with the high ISO images. That being said it is really hard to make any firm judgments based on Dpreview sample galleries. Most times it seems like their samples are a best case scenario and then when the camera is released nobody can match it.

I commend Canon for listening to what we have been saying on this board for years about trying to cram too many MP's on the little sensor.

I fear it is too little too late. I think most serious compact camera enthusiasts will go in the direction of the micro 4/3's rather than buy a G11.

[Jethro790]

I fear it is too little too late. I think most serious compact camera enthusiasts will go in the direction of the micro 4/3's rather than buy a G11.

I disagree. There are way too many Canon fanboys for that to happen.

[CJinAustin]

I disagree. There are way too many Canon fanboys for that to happen.

A G11 with a 4/3 sensor would be the ultimate...

[arg245]

I fear it is too little too late. I think most serious compact camera enthusiasts will go in the direction of the micro 4/3's rather than buy a G11.

I think I also have to disagree. Not because of the "fanboys", but because of the costs of the 4/3 system. The GF1 costs around $800, nearly twice of the G11. I think that if the performance of the G11 comes in as good as or better than the GF1, then the only advantage of the 4/3 system is the interchangeable lenses, not image quality. And I think when the reviews for the G11 come in, we're going to see some great performance.

I also agree with an earlier poster, the DPR images are not an accurate guage of the G11'e performance. There are way too many variables to judge
it's performance based on DPR images alone.

My money is on a G12 with a CMOS sensor. Like I said before, Canon could have done this with the G11, but they are probably holding out on us for marketing purposes. I sure wish they were a bit more like Nikon in that regard. I'm not a Noink fanboy, but it sure looks like when Noink has a technology ready, they don't hold back. They release it, and then follow through with firmware upgrades when necessary.

[tkbslc]

A G11 with a 4/3 sensor would be the ultimate...

We already can see what a G11 with a 4/3 sensor would be sized like. CHeck out what the 14-140 looks like on a GF1 - Not compact. If you want a zoom, and a reasonably fast zoom that is still compact, you can't get much bigger than the sensor in the G11. So you end up with a fixed lens camera - which will not please the masses, or a huge camera the size of a Fuji S100fs.

[CJinAustin]

We already can see what a G11 with a 4/3 sensor would be sized like. CHeck out what the 14-140 looks like on a GF1 - Not compact. If you want a zoom, and a reasonably fast zoom that is still compact, you can't get much bigger than the sensor in the G11. So you end up with a fixed lens camera - which will not please the masses, or a huge camera the size of a Fuji S100fs.

I know.... that's why it would be the ultimate... :)

[sunking39]

1. The ISO 1600 shots look a bit worse than ISO 3200 with a 40D. At 1600 most of the shots, specially the ones with lots of dark and black, look almost unusable.
Up to ISO 800 they seem amazing to me.
2.What's up with te pictures themselves? I think they're pretty bad, they look as if taken by a very bad amateur. I wonder what type of photographer(s) took them.

3. And whats up with all those ISO 80 shots?, they take up like 50% of the whole gallery.

All in all a great opportunity of seeing the G11 in action. I think I'll buy one.