PowerShot G1, G2, G3, G5 and G6 since year 2000

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by per, Jun 5, 2005.

  1. per

    per Guest

    With that tempo a G7 will be out soon enough.
    What new gizmos could be hoped for this time?
    /per
     
    per, Jun 5, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. per

    Robert Barr Guest

    per wrote:
    > With that tempo a G7 will be out soon enough.
    > What new gizmos could be hoped for this time?
    > /per
    >
    >

    Focus that works. Flash focus assist actually used as focus aid.
     
    Robert Barr, Jun 6, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. per

    Pete Fenelon Guest

    Robert Barr <> wrote:
    > per wrote:
    >> With that tempo a G7 will be out soon enough.
    >> What new gizmos could be hoped for this time?
    >> /per
    >>
    >>

    > Focus that works. Flash focus assist actually used as focus aid.


    How about a Pro-1 clone that isn't noisy and works well in low light? ;)
    (*very nearly* a very nice camera!)

    pete
    --
    "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
     
    Pete Fenelon, Jun 6, 2005
    #3
  4. per

    per Guest

    My wife has a G5 at work, and it takes so very much better pics than my
    Konica KD-500Z, that I plan to get a Canon G series soon.
    It's interesting to see that the G6 takes e.g. better night shots, in the
    DCRP reviews, than the kit lenses for Canon Rebel XT and Nikon D70.
    A better lens than these kit lenses will cost nearly as much or more than a
    G6 camera. And the Pro-1 lens gives more purple fringe.
    What I would like to get in a G7 would be low noise at high ISO, with
    technology similar to the Fuji FinePix F10.
    Faster, better focusing is always needed of course.
    Somehow I believe the better Canon cameras give more "beautiful" colors than
    others. And it's not a question of "vivid" colors. It's something else.
    I really don't want to buy a G6 tomorrow, and then find the next day that a
    new G7 is out.
    /per

    "Pete Fenelon" <> skrev i meddelandet
    news:...
    > Robert Barr <> wrote:
    >> per wrote:
    >>> With that tempo a G7 will be out soon enough.
    >>> What new gizmos could be hoped for this time?
    >>> /per
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Focus that works. Flash focus assist actually used as focus aid.

    >
    > How about a Pro-1 clone that isn't noisy and works well in low light? ;)
    > (*very nearly* a very nice camera!)
    >
    > pete
     
    per, Jun 6, 2005
    #4
  5. "per" <> writes:
    > With that tempo a G7 will be out soon enough.
    > What new gizmos could be hoped for this time?


    - No perceptible shutter delay (when pre-focused).
    - Improved high-ISO noise.
    - 5 Mpx.

    I really hope that they use the advances in sensor design to
    give improved noise performance rather than more useless
    megapixels.

    The 5 Mpx in my PS G5 gives me nice prints up to A3. I don't
    see a need for anything bigger than A3 (and most of the time,
    I print a lot smaller).

    The optics of the Canon G-series so far has been astounding.
    I hope they keep that. If it had an useable ISO 800 and the
    same responsiveness as a DSLR, it would be just perfect.
    --
    - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Gisle Hannemyr, Jun 6, 2005
    #5
  6. per

    Roger Guest

    On 06 Jun 2005 12:53:52 +0200, Gisle Hannemyr <>
    wrote:

    >I really hope that they use the advances in sensor design to
    >give improved noise performance rather than more useless
    >megapixels.
    >
    >The 5 Mpx in my PS G5 gives me nice prints up to A3. I don't
    >see a need for anything bigger than A3 (and most of the time,
    >I print a lot smaller).


    Well said, I agree. I have a 5MP Canon S60 that I can't say enough
    nice things about. It does need better low-noise at high-ISO and
    low-light performance. But with the 28mm lens, small footprint, loads
    of features it is really a good current compromise for a travel
    camera. My wife recently stepped up to a used G3. What a nice camera!
    At the expense of some MP (G3 at 4MP, S60 at 5MP) she has gained a
    much better low-light lens and pretty acceptable low-light noise
    response at high ISO. However, it doesn't meet my 28mm WA
    requirements.

    I would really like to see a 5-6MP P&S format camera with a 28mm (or
    wider) fast lens and good low-noise at high-ISO performance. I'd like
    to see this much more than another 8MP wonder like the S-Pro1. When I
    saw this camera for the first time I thought I'd finally found a good
    compact, versatile travel camera. The first thing my photo dealer
    (also a photography cohort who knows my style very well) warned me of
    was the poor noise performance. It took one shot at ISO400 in a dark
    corner of the shop to see the problems in the shadow details.

    Given the two cameras we have, we won't be buying anything else until
    the low-light performance is improved or the G3/S60 dies :-(. Folks
    with 6MP DSLRs have been showing that 6MP is enough for a huge number
    of tasks. I'd like to see the P&S cameras benefit from some of that
    same design criteria. I know it's not a simple sensor replacement, but
    as long as the manufacturers are pilling there marketing dollars into
    multiple models in multiple formats, I'd like to see them get one
    model out there for those who take pictures indoors, travel, need
    dawn/dusk performance and a small footprint.

    Some of us like to turn the flash off at night and on during the day
    and don't want the heft of a DSLR. If I want SLR, I can carry any
    number of film cameras that will outperform the digitals in this
    arena.

    Regards,
    Roger
     
    Roger, Jun 6, 2005
    #6
  7. per

    DHB Guest

    On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 08:01:15 -0500, Roger <> wrote:

    >On 06 Jun 2005 12:53:52 +0200, Gisle Hannemyr <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>I really hope that they use the advances in sensor design to
    >>give improved noise performance rather than more useless
    >>megapixels.
    >>
    >>The 5 Mpx in my PS G5 gives me nice prints up to A3. I don't
    >>see a need for anything bigger than A3 (and most of the time,
    >>I print a lot smaller).

    >
    >Well said, I agree. I have a 5MP Canon S60 that I can't say enough
    >nice things about. It does need better low-noise at high-ISO and
    >low-light performance. But with the 28mm lens, small footprint, loads
    >of features it is really a good current compromise for a travel
    >camera. My wife recently stepped up to a used G3. What a nice camera!
    >At the expense of some MP (G3 at 4MP, S60 at 5MP) she has gained a
    >much better low-light lens and pretty acceptable low-light noise
    >response at high ISO. However, it doesn't meet my 28mm WA
    >requirements.
    >
    >I would really like to see a 5-6MP P&S format camera with a 28mm (or
    >wider) fast lens and good low-noise at high-ISO performance. I'd like
    >to see this much more than another 8MP wonder like the S-Pro1. When I
    >saw this camera for the first time I thought I'd finally found a good
    >compact, versatile travel camera. The first thing my photo dealer
    >(also a photography cohort who knows my style very well) warned me of
    >was the poor noise performance. It took one shot at ISO400 in a dark
    >corner of the shop to see the problems in the shadow details.
    >
    >Given the two cameras we have, we won't be buying anything else until
    >the low-light performance is improved or the G3/S60 dies :-(.


    Low light performance is largely limited by "physical" sensor
    size unless new advances are introduced. My G2 (4MP) has a 1/1.8"
    sensor & the successor to your S60, the S70 has the same "physical"
    size sensor but they have crammed (7.1MP) onto it. This results in
    less light per pixel if all things remain equal. Relatively minor
    advances is the sensor technology has allowed manufactures to fit more
    pixels into less space without a proportional drop in actual sensor
    size. This coupled to other advances such as cleaner pixel
    amplifiers, faster image processors & even in camera noise reduction
    processing has taken us to the 7 to 8MP cameras but as you know, you
    don't get something for nothing.

    Sadly, I suspect that the vast majority of P&S purchasers are
    ignorant to MP versus actual sensor size issues. To many, more seems
    better just as digital zoom may also sound like it should be better
    than optical zoom. Manufactures don't cater their P&S cameras
    primarily to the well informed consumer, they build them for the vast
    majority & know that the rest will likely buy a DSLR or the best P&S
    they offer that meets their basic needs best as you have.

    Recently I purchased an A95 (5MP) for general use when I want
    something smaller than my G2 or DSLR. The A95 is a fine camera for
    it's size & price, so like you I now await something better in a P&S
    but I don't think it's coming soon unless there is a considerable
    advance in sensor technology. So we may have a 2 or 3 year wait or we
    may be surprised by new advances, I think it's more likely that it
    will be 3 years before I see anything of significant advancement in a
    P&S to make me consider a new camera.

    > Folks with 6MP DSLRs have been showing that 6MP is enough for a huge number
    >of tasks. I'd like to see the P&S cameras benefit from some of that
    >same design criteria. I know it's not a simple sensor replacement, but
    >as long as the manufacturers are pilling there marketing dollars into
    >multiple models in multiple formats, I'd like to see them get one
    >model out there for those who take pictures indoors, travel, need
    >dawn/dusk performance and a small footprint.
    >
    >Some of us like to turn the flash off at night and on during the day
    >and don't want the heft of a DSLR. If I want SLR, I can carry any
    >number of film cameras that will outperform the digitals in this
    >arena.
    >
    >Regards,
    >Roger


    Same here, I go flashless 90% of the time but usually that
    forces me to take my DSLR or deal with the high noise in post editing
    as best I can. Wherever possible I try to keep the flash turned off.
    For slow of stationary subjects, long exposures work wonders but
    that's not always possible. Try getting a very young child to remain
    motionless of 1/4 or 1/8th of a second, rarely works for me. Now a 2
    to 15 second long exposure of the inside a building, such as a house,
    restaurant, bar, club or etc. works great!

    Respectfully, DHB

    PS I suspect that the A95 is the last of that line. The A530
    or A540 is likely to succeed it & it will certainly use SD flash
    memory, not CF, which is another reason I picked up an A95. Thus far
    all of my cameras use the same type of memory, CF cards.
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
     
    DHB, Jun 6, 2005
    #7
  8. per

    Dan Daniels Guest

    I just purchased a new G6 two months ago. Although I haven't had the
    camera long enough to really understand its full potential, my early
    experiences with the camera have been very promising.

    In particular, the twist-around display on Canon G series PowerShot
    cameras is very helpfully. I have already used it twice to take perfect
    shots of a crowd while holding the camera well above my head. You
    simply can't do that with most cameras.
     
    Dan Daniels, Jun 6, 2005
    #8
  9. per

    Owamanga Guest

    On 6 Jun 2005 12:54:38 -0700, "Dan Daniels" <>
    wrote:

    >I have already used it twice to take perfect shots of a crowd while
    >holding the camera well above my head. You simply can't do that
    >with most cameras.


    I can lift a D70 above my head for many minutes without tiring. I can
    even set the timer and throw it about 30ft in the air when situations
    require it.

    Of course, catching it again is a bit tricky, and *some people* in the
    crowd get a little testy when a heavy camera lands on them.

    Seriously though, I also have a G6, and the thing I find cool is being
    able to shoot from the ground without having to lie down, or shoot
    from the waist without people knowing a camera is pointed their way.
    Resolution exceeds that of the D70, but image quality is significantly
    inferior despite the resolution difference.

    It's also quite annoying that you can't shoot RAW when in 'Auto' mode,
    forcing the use of Program mode instead, which isn't as 'wife
    friendly'.

    --
    Owamanga!
    http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
     
    Owamanga, Jun 6, 2005
    #9
  10. per

    per Guest

    "Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
    news:...
    > On 6 Jun 2005 12:54:38 -0700, "Dan Daniels" <>
    > wrote:
    > Seriously though, I also have a G6, and the thing I find cool is being
    > able to shoot from the ground without having to lie down, or shoot
    > from the waist without people knowing a camera is pointed their way.
    > Resolution exceeds that of the D70, but image quality is significantly
    > inferior despite the resolution difference.
    > Owamanga!


    Would you honestly call this test pic:
    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G6/FULLRES/G6INMP3.HTM
    inferiour to: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D70/FULLRES/D70INMP5.HTM

    Or is this nightshot:
    http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_g6-review/nightshot.jpg
    really significantly inferiour to:
    http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d70-review/nightshot.jpg
    /per
     
    per, Jun 6, 2005
    #10
  11. per

    Owamanga Guest

    On 6 Jun 2005 23:33:27 +0200, "per" <> wrote:

    >"Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
    >news:...
    >> On 6 Jun 2005 12:54:38 -0700, "Dan Daniels" <>
    >> wrote:
    >> Seriously though, I also have a G6, and the thing I find cool is being
    >> able to shoot from the ground without having to lie down, or shoot
    >> from the waist without people knowing a camera is pointed their way.
    >> Resolution exceeds that of the D70, but image quality is significantly
    >> inferior despite the resolution difference.

    >
    >Would you honestly call this test pic:
    >http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G6/FULLRES/G6INMP3.HTM
    >inferiour to: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D70/FULLRES/D70INMP5.HTM


    Yes, there is a lot of color-noise on the G6 image that isn't present
    on the D70 (check the woman's neck). Also the leaves in the top left
    of the G6 image highlight contrast issues with the lens.
    (Unfortunately, the D70 image wasn't framed exactly the same to
    compare properly).

    >Or is this nightshot:
    >http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_g6-review/nightshot.jpg
    >really significantly inferiour to:
    >http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d70-review/nightshot.jpg
    >/per


    Yes, all bright lights in the G6 image show a purple halo, present in
    only a few of the brightest points in the D70 shot (both of which are
    over-exposed BTW, it's a lousy test this one).

    A mixture of a smaller noisier sensor, and inferior lens on the G6
    gives results you'd expect. Don't get me wrong, it's not terrible, and
    I'm sure with post-processing something could be done about the color
    noise - I just haven't had the inclination to investigate this yet.

    --
    Owamanga!
    http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
     
    Owamanga, Jun 7, 2005
    #11
  12. per

    per Guest

    "Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote:
    news:...
    > On 6 Jun 2005 23:33:27 +0200, "per" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>Would you honestly call this test pic:
    >> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G6/FULLRES/G6INMP3.HTM
    >>inferiour to:
    >>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D70/FULLRES/D70INMP5.HTM

    >
    > Yes, there is a lot of color-noise on the G6 image that isn't present
    > on the D70 (check the woman's neck). Also the leaves in the top left
    > of the G6 image highlight contrast issues with the lens.


    Is this really the opinion of all you guys? Do you seriously prefer that
    Nikon pic?
    I see no sharpness in the D70 picture at all, compared to the G6 pic.
    /per
     
    per, Jun 7, 2005
    #12
  13. per wrote:
    > "Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > news:...
    >> On 6 Jun 2005 23:33:27 +0200, "per" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Would you honestly call this test pic:
    >>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G6/FULLRES/G6INMP3.HTM
    >>> inferiour to:
    >>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D70/FULLRES/D70INMP5.HTM

    >>
    >> Yes, there is a lot of color-noise on the G6 image that isn't present
    >> on the D70 (check the woman's neck). Also the leaves in the top left
    >> of the G6 image highlight contrast issues with the lens.

    >
    > Is this really the opinion of all you guys? Do you seriously prefer
    > that Nikon pic?
    > I see no sharpness in the D70 picture at all, compared to the G6 pic.
    > /per


    I would agree that the D70 picture is better (fewer artefacts). What you
    are probably seeing is the smaller depth of field in the DLSR image,
    rendering the background and flowers more out of focus compared to the G6.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 8, 2005
    #13
  14. per

    dylan Guest

    "per" <> wrote in message
    news:42a365f0$...
    > With that tempo a G7 will be out soon enough.
    > What new gizmos could be hoped for this time?
    > /per
    >


    more Zoom, as long as it's a good one,
    B (Bulb) setting
    Connector for my TC-80N3 timer remote controller
    No more pixels if it's going to mean more noise
     
    dylan, Jun 8, 2005
    #14
    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. Finite Guy

    Canon Powershot A95 too much camera for a 14 year old?

    Finite Guy, Nov 15, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    389
    MBOSCHERT
    Nov 16, 2004
  2. Update for Powershot A510 next year?

    , Nov 29, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    564
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Dec 23, 2005
  3. greg3347
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    550
    Jim Nason
    Nov 17, 2007
  4. Au79
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    495
  5. smolderingwick

    2 year AAS degree (w/certs) vs. 4 year CIS degree

    smolderingwick, Feb 6, 2011, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,981
    smolderingwick
    Feb 6, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page