Canon G11 - Impressions

[ExpoMike]

Sucks that Canon is not using the standard .raw file and this new .CR2. I have Photoshop CS2 and would like to just open the raw files without having to put another application on to do so. I was really hoping to see what these pics look like as I am really considering the move to a G11 as my step into the higher end line of compact cameras.

Anyone take any pics in a jpg format, to see what the pics look like?

 

[theksmith]

can i ask what made you decide on the G11 over the latest Olympus and Panasonic Four-Thirds cams?

 

[Photog]

Sucks that Canon is not using the standard .raw file and this new .CR2. I have Photoshop CS2 and would like to just open the raw files without having to put another application on to do so.............

The RAW files from any of the cameras built since CS3 or CS4 came out, probably won't open in Photoshop CS2. The Canon Professional Photo software is free to download and use, and seems to work much better than PS ARC. You may need to have some other type of Canon software (from a previous camera) already on your computer, for it to install properly.

 

[Michael Slade]

can i ask what made you decide on the G11 over the latest Olympus and Panasonic Four-Thirds cams?

Sure!

My whole program is built around Canon cameras. From the simplest el-cheapo Powershot's to the highest end 5DmII, it is a system that I am growing familiar with.

I have always admired the Canon G-series, and we have several older bodies in our inventory. The controls are so similar to our other Powershot models that I haven't even felt the need to open the manual once.

We have almost 100 different digital cameras and at least 90% of them are Canon. I stuck with a known quantity.

 

[ExpoMike]

The RAW files from any of the cameras built since CS3 or CS4 came out, probably won't open in Photoshop CS2. The Canon Professional Photo software is free to download and use, and seems to work much better than PS ARC. You may need to have some other type of Canon software (from a previous camera) already on your computer, for it to install properly.

You are correct, from what I read on Canon's site, you need to have another Canon camera software to be able to install and use the Professional Pro software. I am not going to do this just to open the files above.

As for PS CS2, it does what I need it to and I haven't felt the need to buy 3 or 4.

So, can someone place a couple pics (full size) in a jpg format so I can see what they look like?

Thanks!

 

[Michael Slade]

So, can someone place a couple pics (full size) in a jpg format so I can see what they look like?

Thanks!

I have created two seperate folders here:

G11 CR2 FILES

and here:

G11 FULL SIZE UNRETOUCHED JPGS

These are processed through Lightroom v. 2.5 using Camera Raw v. 5.5. No adjustments from the RAW file were made. JPGS saved at 100 quality, 360ppi. No re-sizing done. No sharpening applied in either processing or exporting.

I think that the OJ should arrange to have a point-n-shoot camera test. Who would want to be in charge of that? I call 'not-it'! :victory:

 

[DrMoab]

Wow...is that your classroom? Glad to see all those tuition fee's go to something productive.

 

[ExpoMike]

I have created two seperate folders here:

G11 CR2 FILES

and here:

G11 FULL SIZE UNRETOUCHED JPGS

These are processed through Lightroom v. 2.5 using Camera Raw v. 5.5. No adjustments from the RAW file were made. JPGS saved at 100 quality, 360ppi. No re-sizing done. No sharpening applied in either processing or exporting.

I think that the OJ should arrange to have a point-n-shoot camera test. Who would want to be in charge of that? I call 'not-it'! :victory:

Thanks for posting those. I looked at a number of them but the one that kind of has me baffled to why it looks so bad is IMG 0021.jpg. Why is that one so grainy? I noticed the ISO was 3200 and since I am a newbie when it comes to better cameras and manual settings, if this is what is produced at ISO 3200 setting, why would anyone use it? I am trying to understand how the higher ISO setting would be useful, since I am clueless on this stuff.

Thanks!!!

 

[DrMoab]

Thanks for posting those. I looked at a number of them but the one that kind of has me baffled to why it looks so bad is IMG 0021.jpg. Why is that one so grainy? I noticed the ISO was 3200 and since I am a newbie when it comes to better cameras and manual settings, if this is what is produced at ISO 3200 setting, why would anyone use it? I am trying to understand how the higher ISO setting would be useful, since I am clueless on this stuff.

Thanks!!!

The higher the ISO the better the low light sensetviity is. This means that the higher you set the iso the faster your shutter speed can be.

Honestly that looks pretty darn good for a P&S camera set that high. Normally in most situations you would only shoot in the 100-1000 ISO range. Some cameras will not even go that high.

I use a high ISO setting to get low light campfire shots a lot of time. They are a little grainy but the effect is pretty cool.

 

[Michael Slade]

G11 review at the Luminous Landscape.

 

[Photog]

Dropped the wife off to get here nails done today, and saw an opportunity for a color photo, with the new G11.
Taken at ISO 400, f5.6, 1/8 second, hand held. Focused on the gold bottle with the chrome cap.
This G11 is great. In Manual mode, it now has a nice little exposure meter, on the right side of the screen. It's about time.!

 

[DrMoab]

I'm curious about one thing. Having several P&S cameras one of my big pet peeves is the fact that there is no options on where to focus the image. You said that you focused on that single polish bottle. Does that mean they have done a better job and they give you a multi-point focus area?

 

[Lost Canadian]

I can't imagine the G11 not having multi focus area, I mean heck, my iphone has it. LOL. But seriously, looking at specs it indicates multi focus, which I would expect, my G9 has it and I believe the earlier G models also had it.

 

[ExpoMike]

G11 review at the Luminous Landscape.

So, this was an interesting review. It almost makes it sound like the S90 is the better buy in the end.

What it did do for me is to get me looking at other cameras that end up getting listed in reviews. So now I am looking at these,

Canon S90
Panasonic Lumix LX3

I have to say, reading the review, http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/lx3.shtml I am serious leaning towards this model.

Any comments, reviews or comparisions?

 

[DrMoab]

I've heard nothing but good things about the LX3. The only negative things I have heard is the fact that it doesn't have a view finder unless you spend more on one that mounts to the hot shoe and that it's zoom is very limited.