G11 Photos Thread.

I may be changing my view on the G11 - I need to get my hands on one.

The processor on G10 and G11 is the same - Digic IV.

I have yet to understand this "area of a pixel" issue. It goes against everything I have always understood pixels to be.

peter, it's all about quality over quantity. The 5D works so well because it's got 12mp in a FF 35mm film area. All the "croppers" are cramming in 8, 10 or 15 in a MUCH smaller area. To put it in reference for you, the 5Dii, if cropped down to the APS-C size would be 8mp. That's down from 21mp! So taking 33% of the MP out of the G series should help massively. It's still an uphill battle with the tiny space available and 10+mp, but it's a start.

I just found a german review.
Link to pictures:
http://www.dkamera.de …11/beispielaufn​ahmen.html

amoergosum wrote in post #8804942
I just found a german review.
Link to pictures:
http://www.dkamera.de …11/beispielaufn​ahmen.html

Less impressive than the pics Canon put out... more realistic performance I'm sure.

CJinAustin wrote in post #8806306
Less impressive than the pics Canon put out... more realistic performance I'm sure.

From my experience with G11 in last 24 hours I believe that person doing G11 samples for Canon pushed that camera as much as he/she could and that his/her skillset in the end played huge role in final perception.

I also believe that if same person did same job with G10 result from G10 would be at least equally good to one from G11, if not better.

I can't speak for the G11 (yet!) but in reasonably good light the G10 takes remarkably clear and detailed, and very croppable, pictures. I have photos taken with my G10 that are subjectively better than the same subject taken with my 5D.

in daylight, my G10 impresses every time. Pictures are great. In low light I've found it wanting. If the G11 is that much better, sounds real good. I hesitate to go over 400 ISO on my G10.

mark

ZoranC wrote in post #8807531
From my experience with G11 in last 24 hours I believe that person doing G11 samples for Canon pushed that camera as much as he/she could and that his/her skillset in the end played huge role in final perception.

Of course. If they're going to market a camera with officially sanctioned samples, they're clearly not going to put out only 'average shots'!

Here is agreat ISO comparison:
http://pixinfo.com …canon_powershot​_g11_pre.7

Collin85 wrote in post #8817059
Of course. If they're going to market a camera with officially sanctioned samples, they're clearly not going to put out only 'average shots'!

Of course. That is an upside of it (knowing what camera is capable of in competent hands).

Downside of it is that it misleads average consumers into thinking results will be that good all the time.

Even worse side of it is that subliminal motivation behind samples is to generate sales, so subliminally you want to make them look better than ones taken for previous model. Which is made easier by fact samples are not comparable between the two (differences in lighting distances etc).

That is how engineer would do it. However, no marketing department nor executive would do that or let it happen. Sales have to be made.

In the end my comment does not mean a put down of G11 when compared to G10. I actually have both and I love my G11 so far. It is just a comment on validity of using manufacturer's samples as a ground for any conclusion. Any conclusion should be made only from samples by unbiased 3rd party that is using both in the field.

Some G11 Grab Shots

Took the G11 for a walk yesterday at lunch time....

http://digitalman.smug​mug.com/Other/G11-Lunch/9959760_NZpAZ

Nice shots there. You can see how P&S cameras struggle with DR in image 18, and the clipped highlights of the water fountain, but overall the image quality looks really nice!

jimmyfingers and DitigalMan, those photos are simply excellent, it shows me that it's an excellent travel camera for starters.

I'm interested in the higher ISO's of course as well, the one the OP posted at 1600 ISO blows me away for a point and shoot, my G9 was useless at anything above ISO 200 and I used to think if they would just make it good at 400 ISO I could be happy, of course now I'm greedy because I think that even higher will be possible.

jimmyfingers did you shoot these in RAW or JPEG. I've been realizing that although I shoot RAW all the time, I recently shot some with my MKIII, having the CF card recording RAW and the SDHC card recording L JPEG and I'd swear the JPEG's were a tiny bit sharper than my RAW ones processed in LR2.5. What also blew me away was how great the color was on faces in JPEG, I didn't have to adjust skin tones at all on the one test I tried.

This idea makes me more interested in going back and getting another point and shoot, the idea of actually shooting in JPEG, for now it's just a thought but the 1600 ISO one from the G11 that jimmyfingers shot and the whole bunch of photos from DigitalMan for me is very exciting.

just straight out of the camera and cropped to roughly 100%. also included some G10 shots for comparison. first impressions, i preferred the power button on the G10. .2" smaller screen isn't that big of a deal. am totally bummed that my sweet G10 leather case won't fit the G11 because of the 'bump' where the screen rotates. looks like ISO performance is slightly better. still wish canon would get with the times and release a camera with a larger sensor.

these shots are nothing creative or artistic. just straight out of the camera in a dim room for sake of testing the camera out.

G11 80

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Jannie wrote in post #8821269
jimmyfingers and DitigalMan, those photos are simply excellent, it shows me that it's an excellent travel camera for starters.

I'm interested in the higher ISO's of course as well, the one the OP posted at 1600 ISO blows me away for a point and shoot, my G9 was useless at anything above ISO 200 and I used to think if they would just make it good at 400 ISO I could be happy, of course now I'm greedy because I think that even higher will be possible.

jimmyfingers did you shoot these in RAW or JPEG. I've been realizing that although I shoot RAW all the time, I recently shot some with my MKIII, having the CF card recording RAW and the SDHC card recording L JPEG and I'd swear the JPEG's were a tiny bit sharper than my RAW ones processed in LR2.5. What also blew me away was how great the color was on faces in JPEG, I didn't have to adjust skin tones at all on the one test I tried.

This idea makes me more interested in going back and getting another point and shoot, the idea of actually shooting in JPEG, for now it's just a thought but the 1600 ISO one from the G11 that jimmyfingers shot and the whole bunch of photos from DigitalMan for me is very exciting.

Jannie, many thanks for the kind words aout my images - but I haven't posted any lol. I think you have our names mixed up.

Thanks anyway!