Canon Powershot G10

[Michael Slade]

David,

Yeah, I guess you're probably right about going and checking it out. I am in tight with the local Canon guys, so I can probably get one for a week.

I was actually suprized at how much I liked the G6, so was thinking that anything G-ish that was newer would be worth getting.

I shot most of the early shots on my Creche-a-Day blog with the G6 in RAW mode, and was pretty happy.

HERE'S THE CRECHE BLOG.

 

[sinuhexavier]

I recently picked up the G10 as well as the 5D Mark II.

I echo David's sentiments in that it is a great P&S but a far cry from a compact range finder. It's to bad Canon hasn't figured out it's high ISO problem, because it is the G10's biggest drawback.

When I get back from Southern Utah next week I'll be sure and post up some results from both cameras.

 

[FurthurOnTheFly]

I also have the G10 and although I haven't had time to sit down and go through the manual and learn everything about it yet I'm very very happy with it. After going from SLR to pocket point-n-shoot I wanted to go back to something that took better pictures but was still portable and thats how I ended up with the G10. I'm no professional photographer thats for sure, but I enjoy taking pictures and documenting things.

To me this camera is the best of both worlds. The pictures are a huge step up from the point-n-shoot and the portability really proved itself to me a few weekends ago out backpacking the AZ Trail as it fit perfectly in my side leg pocket making it available for quick shots with an un-noticeable weight. As Doug stated the battery life is awesome, especially coming from a Canon Powershot in which I had to always carry a backup battery with me...this thing hasn't died on me yet.

I haven't messed around with the RAW feature yet and am still learning to make my way around this thing but here are some of the better photo samples I've managed to take in the last couple of months:

To me the zoom on it is pretty amazing as well. Here is a shot from our camp on ECD a few weeks ago, you can see the little speck of Steve at the top of the mountain:

And here is Steve with the zoom from the same position. Like I said I'm no camera expert but I think is pretty good for a pocket camera:

Overall I'm extremely happy with this camera. Please let me know if some of the pictures don't show up, I'm using Picasa to link and it tends to make them disappear from time to time.

 

[sinuhexavier]

That's my neighborhood!

 

[dhackney]

I agree that like any camera, you can catch some good shots with it.

The challenge lies in what you are then able to do with those shots. Although the G10 has a lot of resolution, I'm not sure if it is 'usable' resolution, if there is such a concept.

Here's an example.

Click here for the full resolution file: http://www.hackneys.com/travel/photos/2009-02-01-G10-0931.jpg

1/320 sec @ F / 4.5, ISO 400

Both images cropped for composition (full frame, uncropped: 4416 x 3312, this full frame crop: 4398 x 2634).
No processing (no alteration of any kind).
No sharpening.


Take a look at the pixel / grain structure of the image in the full resolution version.

My biggest concern with the camera is the overall noise in the images. Look carefully at the flat/even tone areas in the following example.

Here's the overall shot. No processing/adjustments and no sharpening.

1/100 sec @ f / 2.8, ISO 400
6.1mm (6.1 - 30.5mm)

And here's a full pixel size portion of the image.

1/100 sec @ f / 2.8, ISO 400
6.1mm (6.1 - 30.5mm)


Here are two more examples, this time comparing ISO 125 and ISO 400. Again, there is no processing/adjustments of any kind and no sharpening.

1/250 sec @ F / 2.8, ISO 125
6.1mm (6.1 - 30.5mm)

1/640 sec @ F / 2.8, ISO 400
6.1mm (6.1 - 30.5mm)


Here are two full pixel size sections of the two images.

ISO 125

ISO 400


I think if you keep the ISO low, you will still be able to crop in and use a section of the image, or make large prints. 250 starts to get pretty grainy and 400 looks like sand. Anything higher is an art effect.

I was surprised and, I admit, disappointed that in this stage of digital photography's evolution that this camera had such poor image quality.

We'll just have to wait for a rangefinder 50D, or, even better, a rangefinder 5D. Now that would be something. But why stop there? Why not a rangefinder 1Ds?

 

[FurthurOnTheFly]

That's my neighborhood!

It is??? Sweet you live near that awesome vegan ice cream place then! And Kid Robot! Lucky you!:bike_rider:

I agree that like any camera, you can catch some good shots with it.

I think if you keep the ISO low, you will still be able to crop in and use a section of the image, or make large prints. 250 starts to get pretty grainy and 400 looks like sand. Anything higher is an art effect.

I was surprised and, I admit, disappointed that in this stage of digital photography's evolution that this camera had such poor image quality.

We'll just have to wait for a rangefinder 50D, or, even better, a rangefinder 5D. Now that would be something. But why stop there? Why not a rangefinder 1Ds?

I suppose you are correct...but like I said I'm not a professional photographer, nor do I play one on tv. :elkgrin: I don't do prints or anything special other than archive, post to our blog and maybe print some smaller versions out for home framing on the inkjet. If I wanted something fancy or super high crazy quality I would have just gotten the SLR...but I think myself, like others out there, just want something that is a good compromise between a DSLR or a point-n-shoot...and in my opinion the G10 fills that void.