Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon G-series Digital Cameras
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #1
orfeo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Default canon g5 vs sony dsc v1

Howdy,

OK, sorry to ask such a repetitive question for yall, but i'm about to get a
digital camera and need the pro's advice

OK, going travelling around the world so need something small but are
experience with slr photography so want something with manual options. And
of cource every penny counts for my trip so it needs to be cheep.

I've boiled it down to the sony and the cannon, the sony has the size going
for it, but has a washed out colour sensor (apparantly all the colours are
cooler when taken on the sony). The cannon however has a nice
vivid/saturated colour palet, but also suffers from bad optics cause they
sqeezed all the sensors onto the same chip as the G3 (i've read). Also the
cannon is bigger but has a faster widers lense.

The way i see it is the sony's cooler colour bias can be fixed up in
photohop later? yeah?, but the canon's lense problems can't? The size is a
big plus for the sony and i figure i can get away with a slower lense (only
f2.8 vs 2.0 for the g5 i think) and i'm prepared to give up the wide angle
lense in favour of a smaller camera in the sony. So i think the Sony wins
out hands down (also cheaper).


But is there anything you guys could add that i'm missing??

thanks heaps for any feedback, i know how many of these sorta of questions
you get

orfeo

ps: has anyone had any experience with the Belkin Digital Camera Link for
the iPod?? any advice?
orfeo is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #2
Rich_F
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 35
Default

Hi there,

I had the same decision as you, and went for the G5. My reasons were
- I thought that the image quality looked superior
- I wanted the larger aperture
- I preferred the feel of the G5 - more like a "real" camera!

Of these, I think that the aperture is the most significant. Small cameras like these get very noisy if you need to increase the ISO number. If you think that you might want to take non-flash pictures in low light (especically if hand-held), you want all the aperture you can get.

I'm sure that you'll have fun with whichever you go for.

Rich

PS FWIW, I've never found the CA to have spoilt a picture.

PPS Can you fit external lenses to the Sony? I'd not be without my telephoto lens!
Rich_F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #3
orfeo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Default

yeah you can get attachments for the sony, not sure the details, re the canon quality, i heard that from a dig cam mag, which said the camera suffered from noise in bright situations, and from fringing...or whatever it is when purple and like colours creep into the image....

i think i just have to have a good play and decide wether i can deal with the size, and price...

thanks

orfeo
orfeo is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #4
orfeo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Default

hey again

just reading moreo into the purple fringing of the canon g5,

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...hot_g5-review/

and basically its saying the the fringing occurs with the wide apature, but you can get rid of it by closing down the apature to say 4.5, which brings me to the question is the canon's faster lense any use if it introduces problems of fringing?

i'm not trying to be harsh, just probing you


orfeo
orfeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #5
Rowboffin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6
Default

Before finally settling on the G5 I too considered the Sony DSC-V1. The Sony does seem to have a better reputation as far as fast auto-focus goes, which is a plus in its favour but there were several issues that swayed me against the Sony:

1: Restricted to proprietary Sony memory stick storage that is relatively more expensive.

2: The battery life is very limited in comparison to the G5. The Canon is a champ in this regard, the battery never having run out of juice during a days shooting (the battery life indicator sucks, though).

3: The LCD is smaller and its sometimes difficult enough to see detail on the G5's bigger LCD, nevermind something smaller. Also the G5 has the flip out LCD that the Sony lacks: a very useful feature.

4: The Sony is too small to be ergonomic for my purposes.

5: The G5's faster lens.


I'm surprised that the Sony is described as giving a "cooler" representation of colours because the shots I have seen taken with it seem to tend towards the more vibrant end of the scale. And i've seen chromatic abberation occuring in those shots, too. Check out the shot of the London Inn pub here: http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/?gal...dscv1_samples/

Look at the flag and the bracket at the top.

The truth is that the majority of compact digicams are going to have failings that you'll have to work around and you shouldn't expect the Sony to be immune to issues like CA either. Strongly backlit scenes have caused some CA in my shots with the G5 but that's something you just have to be aware can happen and take the appropriate action to avoid it (i.e. close down the aperture a stop or so).

Noise: the stats show that the Sony is better and I wouldn't shoot anything at above ISO100 with the G5 cos of the grain that results. Remember though that the G5 is actually more sensitive than the ratings suggest. I use an external flash for indoor shots so I very rarely, if ever, find myself using anything but ISO50.

I think which you choose is very dependent upon what you intend to use the camera for.
Rowboffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #6
Rich_F
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 35
Default

It's true; the purple fringing (also known as Chromatic Aberration, or CA) is worst when you have both a wide aperture, and very high contrast areas in the image.

I never seem to want to take pictures with these characteristics! It may be more of an issue if you aim to do lots of architectural photography, with bright skies behind.

Coming from a film background, you may not be aware that high contrast images are a big problem for digital photography in any case. The sensors are not forgiving about over-exposure - they simply saturate, with no scope for post-processing correction. To avoid this, you need to under-expose such photographs (ie, expose for the highlights), and then brighten them in post-processing. The problem here is that digital doesn't capture as much detail as film in the shadows, though using RAW files will improve this. Does the Sony do RAW?

Rich
Rich_F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #7
Rowboffin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orfeo
hey again

just reading moreo into the purple fringing of the canon g5,

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...hot_g5-review/

and basically its saying the the fringing occurs with the wide apature, but you can get rid of it by closing down the apature to say 4.5, which brings me to the question is the canon's faster lense any use if it introduces problems of fringing?
Whether CA is problem depends upon the situation. There is nothing wrong with the G5's optics in themselves; the question is whether they're a good fit for the 5 MP sensor that the G5 has. So in many situations the faster lens is a great deal of "use" (for depth of field control for one thing) and won't result in CA.

The Sony doesn't shoot RAW, BTW.
Rowboffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #8
ScottK
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oceanside, CA, USA
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orfeo
hey again

just reading moreo into the purple fringing of the canon g5,

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...hot_g5-review/

and basically its saying the the fringing occurs with the wide apature, but you can get rid of it by closing down the apature to say 4.5, which brings me to the question is the canon's faster lense any use if it introduces problems of fringing?

i'm not trying to be harsh, just probing you


orfeo
Just to expand on what's already been said, the fringing does occur in very specific, and even predictable, situations, specifically with very bright white spots in a shot. A good example that I had to deal with a couple of nights ago: we went to see a Drum Corps International (drum and bugle corps - scaled down marching bands) exhibition, which I tried photographing. It took place at night, in a stadium under bright lights. I haven't sorted through all my shots yet, but I consistently got CA from two conditions: the bright white uniforms and the shiney brass instruments. Both reflected the lighting to the point of completely overwhelming the sensor. Yet, overall, even with the bright lights, the scene was generally too dark overall, so I fought all night between wanting a wider aperature for the light vs. wanting to control CA and DOF and keep the ISO low.

However, this is just one situation where it was a problem, and I don't know that many point-n-shoot digicams, even at the prosumer level, wouldn't have the same problem to some extent in this extreme condition.

And, it doesn't make the wider aperature useless overall. In an indoor setting with less harsh lighting and/or no harsh reflections, the 2.0 aperature is an excellent feature, and CA is no problem at all.
ScottK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of August 2004 (Thu)   #9
nitewulf
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19
Default

when i was shopping for a digi cam, my main contenders were the powershot G5, the DSC V1, the F717 and the nikon coolpix 5700.
ultimately the f717 dropped out because it was too expensive, yet was in the same class. same goes for the nikon. i finally chose the G5 over the DSC V1 because of similar reasons to rich. the G5 has more manual controls, plus i have a background with canon (used my brothers rebel slr for years). and also, i really love the robust feel, i cant take stable shots with small digi cams.
but one major reason was the flip out lcd, you can not believe how intuitive it is once you start taking pictures. now i fear i can never go back to static lcd screens. its just so easy to try out weird angles, take pictures of yourself etc. i mean i went to chicago and on my trip took some pictures with whacked out angles...you really cant do those shots with a static lcd screen.
just my 2 cents.
nitewulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of August 2004 (Fri)   #10
Andy_T
Compensating for his small ... sensor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,860
Default

Just another thought ...

the G3 should be available relatively cheap now ... it has all the G5 has apart from the extra Megapixel (4 MP sensor).
However, because of that lower resolution, the noise of the G3 is supposed to be less than the G5.

If you get a used one in good condition, it might be even cheaper.

As to your original question, I'm pretty sure that you have already checked out DPReviews review of the Sony and Canon with the respective comparisons:

Noise:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/page13.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong5/page12.asp

Picture resolution
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/page16.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong5/page16.asp

Best regards,
Andy
Andy_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of August 2004 (Fri)   #11
orfeo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Default

hey guys,

thanks for all the feedback, alot of good insight in there , i still haven't decided on which one it will be, i'll have to sit down with them for a long time in a shop and play i guess, but thanks heaps for the help. I think if i can deal with the size of the g5 i'll get it otherwise it'll be the sony. I would get the g3 if i could but there aren't many around and the ones that are, are surprisingly expensive.


thanks again

orfeo
orfeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th of August 2004 (Mon)   #12
Andy_T
Compensating for his small ... sensor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,860
Default

So, did you play on the weekend?

Best regards,
Andy
Andy_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th of August 2004 (Mon)   #13
Andy_T
Compensating for his small ... sensor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,860
Default

So, did you play on the weekend?

Best regards,
Andy
Andy_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon S3 IS vs. Sony DSC-H2 Ephily Small Compact Digitals by Canon 20 1st of March 2007 (Thu) 19:22
Canon SD-630 VS. Sony Cybershot DSC T-9 Toadly Small Compact Digitals by Canon 1 9th of May 2006 (Tue) 15:14
Sony DSC-F828 and Canon 350D alfa Canon EOS Digital Cameras 29 23rd of July 2005 (Sat) 01:36
Canon PowerShot A310 or Sony DSC-P32? dmiljan9 Small Compact Digitals by Canon 0 31st of May 2004 (Mon) 06:12


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:07.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.