Best of the 'G' Series

rowdyred94 wrote in post #2630884
Isn't the G5 identical to the G3 except for a denser ccd?

They are very similar. That's why I wrote about their "level of beauty". It's black and I like black.

http://www.digitalkame​ra.de …as/Canon/PowerS​hot_G3.asp
http://www.digitalkame​ra.de …as/Canon/PowerS​hot_G5.asp

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_revi​ews/g3.html
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_revi​ews/g5.html

Carsten

Pekka wrote in post #2631346
G1 and I have pictures to prove it

Without your note, one might think that Sibelius Monument or
Two Ladies, One Chair were shot with a fine DSLR. Wonderful G1 gallery!.

Pekka wrote in post #2631346
G1 and I have pictures to prove it

need to add the G1 to the poll and remove the G4 . . . who voted for that?

I voted G4 as a joke.

G3 by far hated my g6 just couldn't rely on it for quick shots,G3 could throw in auto and pictures came out great and have a 16x20 on my wall that even shocked the photo lab.I had so many bad pictures with the 6 that I gave up on it and bought a 30d love this camera but I really want my 3 back,maybe can pry it out of my cousins hand that I sold it to.It has shot over 12000 pictures between us and still going strong.Thanks

I agree with Pekka,

At the time Pekka was taking pictures with the G1 and helping
me learn how to handle that camera nobody know that a Canon
G series will create such a change in the world of photography.
Later I got the G2, G3, (I was waiting for G4 but superstition
intervened) so G5 came out. Sadly G7 has no RAW option, no
swivel LCD so I stopped buying the G series.
Maybe future will bring another G1 and we go from there
(who knows... maybe G9 because I afraid G8 can be twice as
unlucky as G4)

Pekka, thank you for helping me and so many others
taking great pictures, showing with your own example
how a solid digital camera (with only 3Mpxl) can make
great pictures.

__________ L I N E A _____________

PS... here are some older picture archives...
http://209.15.128.64 …phy/body_photog​raphy.html

I love my G1's (I have two ). Then I jumped to G7. I take the latter everywhere and have gotten some great shots with it. It may not fit the 'G' original design concept and it may not do RAW, but it is a heck of a camera with little to compete in it's price range that I could find. I voted G7, but only because G1 wasn't on the list.

Stew

I didnt vote above but Id have to go with the G7, of course its my first and only canon Ive used, but I really like it

Since I have never handled any G series other than my G3 I can't say one is better than the other. However, I can say that the G3 is a great camera.

I used to own a G1, fantastic little camera and if it hadn't been stolen by a scumbag burglar I'd still be using it. Tried my father in law's G2, and played with a friend's G5. Of the G series, I still think the G1 was incredible and would vote for it if possible.

I now own a 350d, still learning how to use it properly and (often) miss my G1.

Unfortunately in this world, consumers are basically stupid about what real quality is and believe advertising. Plus, Canon doesn't care about the consumer just the bottom line. I'm sure they could easily make a camera that performed like an SLR but with the size and convenience of the G series cams. Imagine a G6 with the focusing speed of a pro SLR, swivel screen, RAW capabilities, hot shoe and all the other features of the G line. People would buy them but it would cut into their sales of SLRs and lenses so you'll never see it. Pity, I really like the size of my G6 and it would be awesome for weddings if it did low light better and focused quicker. It's dead silent with all the noises turned off. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon already developed one but marketing canned it.

They need to do a Heroes episode where they force Canon to make what we want, not what they want to sell us. Come on Hiro.

The next G series will see the return of RAW and Swivel screens I think the G7 is less like a a G Series and the Powershot A640 is more (well sort of). But no RAW? Come on.

I voted G6 simply because its has a f2-3 lens, has RAW, is somewhat compact, takes a 20D battery that lasts 18 millionbazilion images, has a swivel screen, etc. Bad thing going for it is its silver and can have high noise if you use it wrong. I waited for the G& to come out, then when I saw how much it has changed into an advanced powershot I decided to hunt a G6 down. It took me 3 months to find a good one, for a good price.

I have owned both the G5 and G7. I cast my vote for the G7 because after using it extensively, I have found that it does a better job meeting my needs than the G5 did. I use the G-series camera when I do not want to lug my 20D and lenses around. The useable high iso in the G7, the build quality, smaller size, built-in lenscap, extended zoom, image stabilization, and the controls/ergonomics are what sets the G7 over the top. I don't really use raw, so its exclusion from the camera was not that big of a deal to me. But, to each his or her own.

woffles wrote in post #2706072
Unfortunately in this world, consumers are basically stupid about what real quality is and believe advertising.

Let me start by saying that I really appreciate your position
Are you not a consumer, then?

I disagree with you here.

Yes, there are quite a few loyal G-series fans.

But I don not assume it is all an evil ploy of Canon to keep us, the consumers, from getting what is RIGHT ... the ultimate G series.
Just consider what you are asking for ... that camera would be very nice ... but also quite expensive.

And I, for one, don't think that A LOT OF PEOPLE would buy it if you offer it for, say, 700$. Hell, when I showed my G2 to people owning an S40 or similar, most asked me 'Why do you spend so much money for a camera? It's not that much better than (insert whatever popular model they had)...'
If you can't get a lot of people to buy a high-tech product (that had a certain development cost), then it will be quite expensive.
If it is quite expensive, then even less people will buy it. Unfortunately, it's that easy. Marketing 101. And believe me, Marketing is NOT about educating/brainwashing​/whatever the customer. It is mainly about giving the customer the product that he thinks he wants.

Consider the fate of the Sony R1. It even had a large sensor, so image quality and low light capability was a lot better than from P&S cameras.
Everybody loudly applauded Sonys move to bring a large sensor to the compact camera world. A few enlightened people even bought it.

So ... was it no success because Sony deviously killed it in order to keep the millions of prospective buyers from buying this instead of a dSLR?

No. Those millions of buyers just chose to not buy it.

Many of them presumably went for an SLR, as this has a lot of advantages at about the same price. I chose the 800$ G2 over an 1800$ 10D plus money for lenses (that was the price at that time in Europe). But I certainly would not choose a G7 over a 700$ DRebel, as - to me - the only advantage of the G7 is compact size. And I noticed A LOT of improvements by going from my G2 to the 20D. Not the least of which is having an 'open system'.

Let me finish by telling you that people still ask me 'Why do you spend so much money?' when they see my camera. The difference, however is, that now ... when I show them an image from my 20D ... they understand. I don't have to explain anything about aperture, sensor size, RAW format, High ISO noise performance ... I just have to show them an image. They immediately see the difference, even though everybody and his grandmother nowadays has some kind of P&S that is capable of getting 'OK' images.

Just my 2C...

Best regards,
Andy

chris clements wrote in post #2625996
Before I vote, 3 questions:-
Why have you excluded the one truly groundbreaking G camera?
Why have you included one G that never actually existed?
Why have you included one camera that is a G in name only?

Why have you excluded the one truly groundbreaking G camera? = G1
Why have you included one G that never actually existed? = G4
Why have you included one camera that is a G in name only? = G7

My vote from firsthand experience is the G3. I would probably buy a G6 today, and maybe a G9 when it comes out in the future. If Canon really did produce the dream G series camera with all the features we loved in the G1-G6, but with fast focussing and great high ISO, I'd buy one in a heartbeat, even if costs more than a dSLR (up to say $1000). I believe many pros would as well, unfortunately, POTN users and pros are a small market.