Canon G7

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Me, Apr 9, 2007.

  1. Me

    Me Guest

    I'm thinking about buying the G7, but I'm wondering how users of this camera
    like it. I'm also wondering about other, comparable cameras.
    I used to have the Nikon 990 and felt it was adequate.
    I'm a fan of Canon, but if others think other brands are as good or better
    for the same amount of money, or less, I will definitely check them out.
    Thanks...
    Me, Apr 9, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Me wrote:
    > I'm thinking about buying the G7, but I'm wondering how users of this
    > camera like it. I'm also wondering about other, comparable cameras.
    > I used to have the Nikon 990 and felt it was adequate.
    > I'm a fan of Canon, but if others think other brands are as good or
    > better for the same amount of money, or less, I will definitely check
    > them out. Thanks...


    I would approaching a choice of camera by trying to define what my
    photographic needs were. In no particular order:

    - wide-angle or telephoto?
    - movies mode?
    - image stabilisation?
    - candids?
    - do size and weight matter?
    - swivel LCD?
    - image quality?
    - choice of power source (AAs or Li-ion cell)?
    - cost?

    For various reasons, I ended up with three cameras:

    - Nikon 8400 for high quality and wide-angle
    - Panasonic FZ5 for lightweight image-stabilised telephoto
    - Ricoh Caplio R5 for smallest size (but poorest image quality)

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp8400/

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz5/

    http://www.digicamreview.co.uk/ricoh_caplio_r5_review.htm

    Your choices will doubtless be different - when a friend wated a camera
    the handling of the Canon A630 suited him very well - and that's an
    important factor.

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a630.asp

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Apr 9, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Me

    SMS Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > Me wrote:
    >> I'm thinking about buying the G7, but I'm wondering how users of this
    >> camera like it. I'm also wondering about other, comparable cameras.
    >> I used to have the Nikon 990 and felt it was adequate.
    >> I'm a fan of Canon, but if others think other brands are as good or
    >> better for the same amount of money, or less, I will definitely check
    >> them out. Thanks...

    >
    > I would approaching a choice of camera by trying to define what my
    > photographic needs were. In no particular order:
    >
    > - wide-angle or telephoto?
    > - movies mode?
    > - image stabilisation?
    > - candids?
    > - do size and weight matter?
    > - swivel LCD?
    > - image quality?
    > - choice of power source (AAs or Li-ion cell)?
    > - cost?


    Well stated.

    I'd add "hot shoe" to my list.

    Sad to say, but the high-end compact market is not very active at this
    time. The G7 was a step down from the G6, and Olympus appears to not be
    coming out with a successor to the C-8080 or C-7070.

    It was inevitable I guess, with the prices falling so much on D-SLRs. A
    two lens E-500 isn't much more than a G7, and not all that much bigger.
    SMS, Apr 9, 2007
    #3
  4. Me

    Summer Wind Guest

    "SMS" <> wrote in message
    news:461a7c3f$0$27219$...
    >
    > Sad to say, but the high-end compact market is not very active at this
    > time. The G7 was a step down from the G6, and Olympus appears to not be
    > coming out with a successor to the C-8080 or C-7070.
    >
    > It was inevitable I guess, with the prices falling so much on D-SLRs. A
    > two lens E-500 isn't much more than a G7, and not all that much bigger.


    Not much bigger!? You must be kidding.

    Sales of high-end DSLRs are indeed up, but compact digital cameras sales
    have also increased, including the high-end. The high-end compact market is
    active. Nikon just released a new camera to compete with the Canon G7.
    It's the COOLPIX P9000 and it's a camera you should consider.

    http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=2&productNr=25565

    There are many reasons to choose a high-end compact rather than a DSLR.
    Canon is increasing production in the compact category and there are no
    signs that sales of the high-end models will slow down.

    http://www.theedgedaily.com/cms/con...e.Article_bbe4087a-cb73c03a-b5ad6800-74ff8019

    SW
    Summer Wind, Apr 9, 2007
    #4
  5. Me

    SMS Guest

    Summer Wind wrote:
    > "SMS" <> wrote in message
    > news:461a7c3f$0$27219$...
    >> Sad to say, but the high-end compact market is not very active at this
    >> time. The G7 was a step down from the G6, and Olympus appears to not be
    >> coming out with a successor to the C-8080 or C-7070.
    >>
    >> It was inevitable I guess, with the prices falling so much on D-SLRs. A
    >> two lens E-500 isn't much more than a G7, and not all that much bigger.

    >
    > Not much bigger!? You must be kidding.


    Once you start adding the lens adapters on to the compact camera in
    order to get a wide angle lens, it's not worth going the compact route.
    SMS, Apr 9, 2007
    #5
  6. Me

    John Bean Guest

    On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:04:52 -0700, SMS
    <> wrote:

    >Summer Wind wrote:
    >> "SMS" <> wrote in message
    >> news:461a7c3f$0$27219$...
    >>> Sad to say, but the high-end compact market is not very active at this
    >>> time. The G7 was a step down from the G6, and Olympus appears to not be
    >>> coming out with a successor to the C-8080 or C-7070.
    >>>
    >>> It was inevitable I guess, with the prices falling so much on D-SLRs. A
    >>> two lens E-500 isn't much more than a G7, and not all that much bigger.

    >>
    >> Not much bigger!? You must be kidding.

    >
    >Once you start adding the lens adapters on to the compact camera in
    >order to get a wide angle lens, it's not worth going the compact route.


    Nonsense. Look at the Ricoh GX and GR cameras with their
    28mm equivalent lenses and tiny and excellent WA adapters to
    make 21mm equivalent. No SLR can compete on size and weight.

    And don't forget cameras like the Panasonic LX1/2 which with
    their 16:9 aspect ratio give a *horizontal* FOV of about
    25mm equivalent without any additional lenses and are tiny
    compared with any SLR.

    SLRs have many advantages over compact cameras but size (and
    weight) isn't one of them.


    --
    John Bean
    John Bean, Apr 9, 2007
    #6
  7. Me

    SMS Guest

    John Bean wrote:

    > Nonsense. Look at the Ricoh GX and GR cameras with their
    > 28mm equivalent lenses and tiny and excellent WA adapters to
    > make 21mm equivalent. No SLR can compete on size and weight.


    Yes, the Ricoh Caplio GX100 is probably the best you could do for a
    compact. Adorama has it on their web site, but it hasn't arrived yet.
    Ricoh doesn't sell in the U.S., so it'd all be gray market.
    SMS, Apr 9, 2007
    #7
  8. Me

    John Bean Guest

    On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:48:57 -0700, SMS
    <> wrote:

    >John Bean wrote:
    >
    >> Nonsense. Look at the Ricoh GX and GR cameras with their
    >> 28mm equivalent lenses and tiny and excellent WA adapters to
    >> make 21mm equivalent. No SLR can compete on size and weight.

    >
    >Yes, the Ricoh Caplio GX100 is probably the best you could do for a
    >compact. Adorama has it on their web site, but it hasn't arrived yet.
    >Ricoh doesn't sell in the U.S., so it'd all be gray market.


    I'm in the UK so I tend to forget that Ricoh is not well
    known in the US. Shame, they offer solutions that other
    compact camera manufacturers seem to ignore.

    --
    John Bean
    John Bean, Apr 9, 2007
    #8
  9. Me

    SMS Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > John Bean wrote:
    >
    >> Nonsense. Look at the Ricoh GX and GR cameras with their
    >> 28mm equivalent lenses and tiny and excellent WA adapters to
    >> make 21mm equivalent. No SLR can compete on size and weight.

    >
    > Yes, the Ricoh Caplio GX100 is probably the best you could do for a
    > compact. Adorama has it on their web site, but it hasn't arrived yet.
    > Ricoh doesn't sell in the U.S., so it'd all be gray market.


    See the GX100 at "http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07032801ricohgx100.asp"

    One of the most interesting aspects is the power source: DB-60 Li-ion
    battery (380 shots) or 2 x AAA cells (35 shots). So you can enjoy all
    the advantages of Li-Ion batteries, but still buy batteries out in the
    boonies, LOL.
    SMS, Apr 9, 2007
    #9
  10. Me

    SMS Guest

    John Bean wrote:

    > I'm in the UK so I tend to forget that Ricoh is not well
    > known in the US. Shame, they offer solutions that other
    > compact camera manufacturers seem to ignore.


    My first digital camera was the Philips relabled Ricoh (Philips ESP
    80=Ricoh RDC-4300), which was a good competitor to the Nikon Coolpix 900
    at the time.

    I guess the U.S. was too competitive for Ricoh to keep marketing their
    camera products here. They do sell their copier and scanners here.

    You can still get the Ricoh cameras here through some gray market stores
    in New York, but you'd better hope that you never need service, either
    in or out of warranty.
    SMS, Apr 9, 2007
    #10
  11. Me

    JohnS Guest

    On Apr 9, 10:55 pm, "David J Taylor" <-this-
    bit.nor-this-part.co.uk> wrote:
    > Me wrote:
    > > I'm thinking about buying the G7, but I'm wondering how users of this
    > > camera like it. I'm also wondering about other, comparable cameras.
    > > I used to have the Nikon 990 and felt it was adequate.
    > > I'm a fan of Canon, but if others think other brands are as good or
    > > better for the same amount of money, or less, I will definitely check
    > > them out. Thanks...

    >
    > I would approaching a choice of camera by trying to define what my
    > photographic needs were. In no particular order:
    >
    > - wide-angle or telephoto?
    > - movies mode?
    > - image stabilisation?
    > - candids?
    > - do size and weight matter?
    > - swivel LCD?
    > - image quality?
    > - choice of power source (AAs or Li-ion cell)?
    > - cost?
    >
    > For various reasons, I ended up with three cameras:
    >
    > - Nikon 8400 for high quality and wide-angle
    > - Panasonic FZ5 for lightweight image-stabilised telephoto
    > - Ricoh Caplio R5 for smallest size (but poorest image quality)
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp8400/
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz5/
    >
    > http://www.digicamreview.co.uk/ricoh_caplio_r5_review.htm
    >
    > Your choices will doubtless be different - when a friend wated a camera
    > the handling of the Canon A630 suited him very well - and that's an
    > important factor.
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a630.asp
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David


    To my mind the optical viewfinder on the G7 and the A630 rule them out
    of contention.
    They only show about 80% of what your final photo will contain as well
    as a slight parallex error. This makes them useless for framing and
    composing a photo. This applies to all current optical viewfinders
    not only Canon's. What is so difficult about making an accurrate
    optical viewfinder?

    If you happy holding the camera at arms length while composing the
    photo then the above doesn't apply.
    JohnS, Apr 10, 2007
    #11
  12. Me

    SMS Guest

    JohnS wrote:

    > To my mind the optical viewfinder on the G7 and the A630 rule them out
    > of contention.
    > They only show about 80% of what your final photo will contain as well
    > as a slight parallex error. This makes them useless for framing and
    > composing a photo. This applies to all current optical viewfinders
    > not only Canon's. What is so difficult about making an accurrate
    > optical viewfinder?


    Nothing, when you don't have a zoom lens. With a zoom lens, it's very
    difficult.

    Once you get used to how the optical viewfinder relates to the final
    photo it's okay. Certainly better than the plethora of compact cameras
    with no optical viewfinder at all.
    SMS, Apr 10, 2007
    #12
  13. Me

    sw2U Guest

    On 9 Apr 2007 19:14:24 -0700, "JohnS" <> wrote:

    .. . .
    >To my mind the optical viewfinder on the G7 and the A630 rule them out
    >of contention.
    >They only show about 80% of what your final photo will contain as well
    >as a slight parallex error. This makes them useless for framing and
    >composing a photo. This applies to all current optical viewfinders
    >not only Canon's. What is so difficult about making an accurrate
    >optical viewfinder?
    >
    >If you happy holding the camera at arms length while composing the
    >photo then the above doesn't apply.



    Any more, you are lucky to get an optical viewfinder at all. And if
    you do, it's often so tiny that it's a challenge for anyone with less
    than perfect vision to use.

    Still, I like using an optical viewfinder. It doesn't have to show 99
    percent of the final photo view and I understand about parallax. With
    use, you can become able to compensate without even thinking about it.

    Please, don't say things to discourage camera makers from including
    them.
    sw2U, Apr 11, 2007
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    428
  2. David J. Gilmour

    Canon ixus 400 or canon ixus 2 ?

    David J. Gilmour, Jul 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    546
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    844
  4. zxcvar

    Difference between Canon G5 and Canon S50

    zxcvar, Jul 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    409
    Roland Karlsson
    Jul 23, 2003
  5. Canon SD100 or Canon 400 ?

    , Jul 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    365
    Lucas Tam
    Jul 29, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page