Which G series camera next?

[jamesbeat]

I recently bought a G5 in order to try a 'prosumer' compact for a low financial outlay, having realized that I never have my DSLR on me when I need it.

I love the G5, and using it has turned me back on to photography after a stale spell.
I'm now looking to upgrade to a newer G series model, but I'm having a little trouble deciding which one.
I've decided that although I have got very pleasing results from the G5, I'm not a very good photographer, and I need the extra cropping freedom of a higher MP camera.
I think 10MP should do just fine.

On the low cost end, there's the G7. I can get one used for under $300.
I also like the idea of the wider lens on the G11, and although it's not a deal breaker, keeping the flip screen would be nice.

Of course, there are the G9 and G10 to consider too...

I particularly enjoy available light photography, so the lower noise sensor on the G11 is appealing too, but the slower lens is offputting. But the slower lens is wider...
You can probably see that i'm going in circles here :D

i'd like to hear from people who have a lot of experience with the G series (maybe you owned them all?) and hear some opinions.

If you wanted a general purpose camera and weren't keen on flash photography or image noise, where would you have stopped on the upgrade path?

[audiosteve]

I've never had any 'G' but the G11. I love it and would recommend it highly.

[tmwag]

I’ve owned a G9 and G11 and they’re both good for different reasons. I like the longer reach of the G9 and macro is very good. It also has time lapse (which I never used) The G11 is outstanding for it’s high ISO performance and it’s very useful all around focal range, flip screen. If I had to decide on just one it would be the G11

[Ronnie H]

I like my G 9 ,Ron

[peterbj7]

I've only ever owned a G10 but I do regularly use a G11. Can't speak for the earlier ones. All I'd say is to make sure that whichever one you get has RAW - I believe one model dropped it (G7?).

As to G10 vs. G11. For low light photography the G11 is much better, with greatly less noise. But it still won't come near the best DSLR - it can't compare with my 5D, for example. For low light I simply use the 5D instead. That is a tiny proportion of the shots I use a compact for.

But on all other occasions the G10 is way better than the G11. It has a crispness and clarity the G11 can't touch. This is probably mostly the obvious difference in the sensor (15mp compared with 10mp) but perhaps also to the amount of noise reduction in-camera. The G11 photos seem to me to be quite heavily processed compared with the G10's.

I might get an S90 for its convenience and pocketability, and that of course has the same sensor and processor as the G11. But I won't ever change my G10 for a G11, and if I were buying now the G10 is what I'd get.

[jamesbeat]

Hmm, that's interesting.
I would have thought the image quality of the G11 would be better than on the G10 because why else would Canon lower the number of MP?
I had made the assumption that the 10MP sensor must have been capable of better quality with the tradeoff being smaller image size.

So, considering that I want low light performance if possible, but not badly enough that I'm prepared to sacrifice too much image quality to get it, I'd be better of with the G10?

I had wondered why the G10 is fetching similar prices to the G11, I guess that must be it.

To be honest, I'd be happy with my G5 if it wasn't for the low MP. The images are great, but trying to follow my 8 year old around the park yesterday showed me that I need cropping ability no matter how hard I try to compose properly!

One advantage that the G5 has over the newer models for me is the lens cap.
That may sound daft, especially as the lens cap falls off very easily, but I have an absolute loathing of the leaf type 'caps' on most compacts including the later G series models.
I have had nothing but trouble with this design of lens cover. All the ones I've had have either got stuck open or stuck closed at some point, never permanently, but enough to make me miss a shot.
If someone needed to design a device to efficiently trap dirt in front of a lens, they'd do well to copy one of those. They're impossible to clean too.

I'm pretty tempted to completely remove the vanes of the lens cover. I've done it before on an old point and shoot that got jammed.
Then I can just mount an adapter tube and plain glass filter on it and leave it there to protect the lens mechanism and enable me to use a real lens cap.

Has Canon solved the problem of the lens barrel being visible in the optical viewfinder that plagued the G3 and G5?

[audiosteve]

jamesbeat: re the 14 vs 10 MP of the G10 vs G11. It really doesn't matter unless you are really going enlarge your pictures or view them through a loupe. For most most people, 10 MP is more than enough to provide great detail. For me the better low noise performance and swivel LCD make the G11 a better choice. Honestly, my old trusty 6.3 MP 10D provides great pictures. But if you are a real pixel tweak and only shoot at the lowest ISO, then go for the G10. Also, the lens barrel is still visible in the viewfinder.

[jamesbeat]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I'll be happy with 10MP, the part I didn't understand was that peterbj7 said that his G10 produced way better images than the G11 he also used.

I would have thought that since Canon put a lower MP sensor in their latest model, they must have had a damn good reason for it, like some huge gain in image quality with only a small loss in image size or something.

Peterbj7's opinion seems to be that not only does the G11 have fewer MP, it also has lower image quality!

Well, since I'm not in the least bit concerned about getting the latest gizmo, and am purely interested in getting a camera that will do what I want, should I maybe go for a G7 or G9?

The G7 has my stipulated 10MP and I can get one for half the price of a G10 or G11.

What should I expect to gain from getting a G10 or G11 instead of a G7?
I know about the wider lenses and the G11's flip screen, but should I expect vast improvements in image quality?

Incidentally, I should mention that the lack of RAW on the G7 is not that important to me. I rarely use RAW, and if I decide I really need it, I can use CHDK.

[Jannie]

Is the macro on the G11 any better or worse than on the G9 and G10? That's one of the reasons I may get another G series camera is I loved shooting all the way wide (on the G9) and right up close using the amazing macro on my former G9 when shooting flowers.

Which would be better for this a new G11 or picking up a used G10? I'm hoping you will say G11 because I'd really like the flip screen.

[denncald]

Is the macro on the G11 any better or worse than on the G9 and G10? That's one of the reasons I may get another G series camera is I loved shooting all the way wide (on the G9) and right up close using the amazing macro on my former G9 when shooting flowers.

Which would be better for this a new G11 or picking up a used G10? I'm hoping you will say G11 because I'd really like the flip screen.

The G11 and G10 have the same lens, so the G11 should be your choice for the flip screen. I just got a G11, and have the G9. With the limited experience at the moment, I would have to say the G11 out shines the G9. Obviously, higher ISO and lower light moments will surpass the G9 capabilities, but overall I like the G11 too.

Dennis

[tmwag]

What should I expect to gain from getting a G10 or G11 instead of a G7?
I know about the wider lenses and the G11's flip screen, but should I expect vast improvements in image quality?


1) RAW is mute point...

2) Much better perfomance at high ISO. Great low light capability..=G11

3) Excellent low ISO performance=G10.. but not a huge improvement over a G11

[peterbj7]

RAW is invaluable to some people, including myself. I always shoot RAW.

If you want good (but not great) high-ISO performance or if the benefit of a flip screen is important enough to you to lose some area on said screen, then get a G11. You'll probably be very happy with it. If you want the best possible good-light performance, with pictures that are not only very croppable but also have the intensity and clarity that can only come from high pixel density, IMO the G10 will deliver that much better. At the cost of greatly poorer performance at high-ISO's to be sure, and a non-flip but larger screen.

Neither decision is wrong - it's horses for courses. As you can see by the ongoing demand and high prices for the G10 many people share my views. You can also read it in a number of reviews of the G11. I take few pictures with a compact in low light so for me the decision is simple.

Why did Canon drop the mp count so radically between the G10 and G11? Market forces. They're in the business of selling cameras, and enough people were openly criticising them for "constantly chasing mp" that they bowed to the inevitable, and obviously marketed their newer model according to its strengths. But the physics hasn't changed, and more mp produce a more detailed and crisper image - one with "pop". Obviously at the cost of (much) more noise when light is low. Wait to see how many pixels are on the G12.

[MikeFairbanks]

The drop to 10mp is part of the reason the G11 can do so well in low light. The sensor is the exact same size as the G10, but with only ten million pixels instead of 14 million, the pixels are larger and can gather more light without as much strain (noise). Plus the G11's processor is a newer generation than the G10.

LIke others said, they're both great cameras. I'd get a G11 if I had the choice, but right now I'm aiming for the S90. But if I get the G11 I'll be just as happy.

[tmwag]

Why did Canon drop the mp count so radically between the G10 and G11? Market forces. They're in the business of selling cameras, and enough people were openly criticising them for "constantly chasing mp" that they bowed to the inevitable, and obviously marketed their newer model according to its strengths. But the physics hasn't changed, and more mp produce a more detailed and crisper image - one with "pop". Obviously at the cost of (much) more noise when light is low. Wait to see how many pixels are on the G12.

Yes, Canon is in the buisness of selling camera's and compact's are the majority of sales. Why do they continually up the mp on the elph series? To sell more cameras of course..even though they retain the same 1/2.3 sensor. I mean 10mp is enough on those little sensors, maybe too much. Now they're craming 14 mp on that tiny sensor...Why? because the average camera buyer equates more mp with a better camera...and it works..more sales. Canon actually catored to the better than average camera buyer in reducing the mp on the G11 and S90 and it reduced noise at high ISO in a big way. I wish Canon would apply that same tecnology throughout the compact series ..not just the G11 and S90
__________________

[peterbj7]

But in the case of the G10 it works - the images are remarkably detailed and croppable. The downside is indeed low light performance, but in good light it's superb, way better than any other Canon compact I've seen.

I often hear people saying we've reached a particular natural limit, usually without any evidence whatsoever. Many Nikon users have said for some time that the current mp of most Nikon sensors (12-13) is the natural and logical limit for digital cameras, and Canon are absurd in trying to push that particular envelope. What will those people say when the new range of Nikon cameras with significantly higher mp are released?

[jamesbeat]

Yes, Canon is in the buisness of selling camera's and compact's are the majority of sales. Why do they continually up the mp on the elph series? To sell more cameras of course..even though they retain the same 1/2.3 sensor. I mean 10mp is enough on those little sensors, maybe too much. Now they're craming 14 mp on that tiny sensor...Why? because the average camera buyer equates more mp with a better camera...and it works..more sales. Canon actually catored to the better than average camera buyer in reducing the mp on the G11 and S90 and it reduced noise at high ISO in a big way. I wish Canon would apply that same tecnology throughout the compact series ..not just the G11 and S90
__________________

I keep a Digital Elph camera in my pocket as my 'EDC camera'.
It's the Canon SD400, which has 5MP. I recently dropped and broke it, and replaced it with...
Another SD400 (which I got for $25 on ebay)
For me, 5MP is easily enough on a tiny pocket camera. I get lovely photos from this little gem and it works perfectly for what I use it for, which is capturing memorable moments.
I don't really understand how it can be anything but marketing to make tiny cameras with enormous MP ratings.
With such a small camera, one loses out on manual controls, or the manual controls are buried in a menu system because there's no room for external buttons.
If I want superb image quality, I'll use one of my bigger cameras.

I agree with the idea that we have reached a natural limit, and I think that Canon reducing the MP on the G11 is a sign of that.
For a compact camera, high MP ratings begin to have diminishing returns- who wants a huge but horribly noisy image?
I think that for a compact camera, 10MP is about right. We're not trying to make billboard posters! 10MP allows plenty of cropping and still permits quite big enlargements.

I've read reviews of the various G series cameras in which the author was equating their low ISO performance to that of an entry level DSLR.
That's pretty amazing for such a small sensor. I think the manufacturers should leave MP of compact cameras at around 10-14MP and concentrate hard on reducing noise, increasing low light performance, improving dynamic range etc.

I think DSLR's should and will go higher than they are now though, but only because this will eventually enable them to fill the roles currently occupied by medium format cameras.



I'd like to thank everyone for their advice, and let you all know that I just bought a G7.

This may be surprising considering all the good advice I have received, and indeed I was considering the G10 and G11, but I got this G7 for $190!
The reason I got it so cheap was that it has the dreaded 'dust on the sensor' problem.
I have performed nearly a hundred IR conversions to date, so removing the dust will be no problem for me.

Once it's restored to its former glory, I'll probably sell it and put the money towards a G10 or G11

[peterbj7]

How can you get dust on the sensor of a compact camera?

[jamesbeat]

Well it's not as easy as cleaning the sensor on a DSLR, bit it's not rocket science.
Partially disassemble the camera to get to the sensor, remove the sensor, clean everything up, reassemble.
I believe there are sticky tutorials on IR conversion in this forum, the process is identical except i'll be putting the hot mirror back in instead of replacing it with an IR pass filter.

[jamesbeat]

Sorry, misread that!
Dust can get on the sensor because the zoom lens sucks air in and out as it extends and retracts.
Canon should have put better seals on the camera to prevent this really, but it does happen and it's well documented.

[peterbj7]

Presumably it's a problem with compacts of all brands?

[jamesbeat]

To a greater or lesser extent, yes.
I think it's probably worse with larger lenses, as they move more air, and I imagine the speed and distance the lens moves when the camera is turned on is also a factor.
It seems to be particularly common with the G7 and G9 though, judging by what I've read.
A quick Google search for 'Canon G7' and 'dust' turned up quite a few forum threads with people complaining about it.
Surprisingly, a lot of the people said that they had kept the camera in a case and avoided dirty environments too.

[peterbj7]

I'll have to inspect photos from my G10 very carefully. It's unbelievable dusty here all the time, but although I've had the G10 for over a year I haven't knowingly seen any dust specks on photos - yet.

[jamesbeat]

It would be interesting to see if this problem
has persisted in the G10 and G11...
Easiest way to check is close it down to f8, point it at something clean and white and take a photo.
It's a pretty easy fix for people who don't mind delving into the guts of a camera, but most people aren't comfortable with that or don't want to because yhe camera is still under warranty, so it can be a serious issue.
Maybe I should document the process with my G7 once it arrives and post a tutorial.