G9 vs G10

Hello,
I use a telephoto lens for landscapes much more than a wide angle. I term my landscapes as intimate landscapes as opposed to grand landscapes. Having said that, Which of the 2 cameras is likely to yield higher resolution images? Are the features in the G10 worth the give up in telephoto power compared to the G9? I currently use Canon film gear and this will be my first digital camera. Thank you.

Tim

I'd get whichever one was cheapest.

Even with the built in 2X teleconverter plus a Lensmate or Canon adapter and an external Telephoto lens...I don't think you can get the G10 out as far as the G9 with the same setup ...in 35mm terms.

So if that is right...and you like to shoot long...you would probably like the G9 for reach.

However in terms of resolution as pixel count per image...you have more pixels in the G10 so at it's farthest reach...with the G9 at the same point...you could probably crop both images the same amount and get more pixels in the G10 shot.

But...if you are shooting long in conditions other than bright light you need to
keep in mind the physical size of that G chip is tiny compared to an SLR.

If you shoot with a film Canon SLR now; you are used to two things that you probably won't like in the G series...noise and a crummy view finder display for composition. Plus I bet you may not like using an LCD for composition vs. tradional viewfinder ...YMMV
In fact I'd bet you wouldn't be happy with anything *other* than a full frame DSLR. Especially if your "initimate landscapes involve cropping the shot.

Welcome raven4ns,

I shoot with a G10 and the 140mm long end is a bit limiting at times but I like the 28mm short end of the G10 vs the 35mm short end of the G9. As always......it depends......

Just a thought.......If size is not one of your top concerns, then you may want to check out the the canon powershot SX10is with its equivalent of a 28-560mm. A bit larger but does offer very similar features to the G10/G9 plus the flip out rear LCD plus that reach. I had a S3is (older version) and loved it!

Good luck with your research and camera search.

Regards,
mteetank

I currently use a pair of EOS3's but am trying to convince myself to look at a digital P&S zoom. Most of my images are B&W landscapes using long lenses so am concerned about the G10's lack of a long zoom. Are there accessories that would add to the range without blowing the image quality? I also tend to use f-stops in the f-11 to f-16 for maximum DOF and sharpness. What could I expect from the G10 or the G9 as regards to sharpness etc? Thank you.

Tim

Here's a review of the G10, which includes a comparison to the G9. The reviewer shows side-by-side 100% crops of a shot that shows the G9 a little sharper, due to less noise reduction.

I have the G9, and also have the Canon wide and tele converters. Both lenses on the camera provide me with high quality results, but both are larger than the camera. The G9 only requires one adapter tube to use the lenses or filters, while the G10 will require up to three adapter tubes to cover your needs.

The Canon wide converter gives me the equivalent zoom range of 26 - 159mm, while the tele converter takes me out to 420mm.

Dennis

Thanks Dennis, I take it you are happy with the G9? I'm looking for a P&S with extended zoom to give me an opportunity to continue shooting some landscapes. Because I use a telephoto for 99% of my landscapes I use the term "intimate landscapes" to define them. Having an extended zoom (560mm)on the G9 do you find this a significant advantage over the shorter zooms like the G10? Thanks again.

Tim

denncald wrote in post #8493452
Here's a review of the G10, which includes a comparison to the G9. The reviewer shows side-by-side 100% crops of a shot that shows the G9 a little sharper, due to less noise reduction.


Dennis

Tim,

My background of cameras and lenses leads me to want longer zoom reach than that of the G10, or that offered by other brands. However, I don't want the camera size of the Canon SX10 (or the new SX20). The SX10 has the 20x zoom range of 28 - 560mm equivalent. The G9 has 6x of 35 - 210mm, and the 2x tele conversion lens takes that out to 420mm equivalent.

My old film SLR was a Nikon FTn, with three lenses; 28mm, 50mm, and 135mm. I used to think that was adequate, but often wanted more reach, but not another lens.

My first digi-cam was a Kodak DC4800 with a 3x zoom of 28 -84mm. It was nice, but the reach was too short. I also used a Kodak tele conversion lens with it, but the quality was not good. My next was the Canon A620 with 4x zoom of 35 - 140mm, still too short. I did not get any conversion lenses for it. Then I moved to the G9 taking me out to 210mm. This works for me most of the time, but when I want more, I use the 2x converter.

I can also use the built-in 2x Digital Tele-Converter (or the 1.5x), and take a must-have shot, but the quality is not as good as using the tele conversion lens. I can also take the shot at full 6x optical (12MP) and crop at home, with fairly good results, but not as good as using the lens. If I am at maximum zoom with the doubler, then I will get a better, sharper image if I also use a tripod. The image stabilization can do only so much.

Dennis

Dennis, what kind of pictures do you get at max zoom using the doubler? If you printed them would you be able to enlarge them only to an 8x10 or smaller to get a sharp, grainless pic? I shoot mostly b&w and little color for my landscapes and need good DOF as well as sharp pictures.

Tim

Tim,

I shoot only color. This is one of my favorites with the doubler lens attached. It was a shot to test it for sharpness and an attempt at some creativitiy. Here is the original, and then two crops.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR