Direct Comparison - Canon G9-G10-G11
Image by Boogies with Fish
www.messersmith.name/wordpress/2010/01/28/direct-comparis...
This post may cause some of you to reboot. Sorry for that. Not everybody is a photography geek. However, since I find myself today with all three of my Canon G series cameras at the office, I decided to make an extremely unscientific comparison of them. Canon has been all over the map with megapixels in the G series. The G9 was 12 and shot pretty good pictures. The G10 went to 15 and gave amazing detail in good light conditions, but was too noisy for the low light levels that make such sweet available light shots. The G11 gives you 10 megapixels. Why the backtracking? To give you a better all-round experience. Fifteen megapixels are overkill for most uses. And, the "buckets" are too small to catch enough photons to keep the sampling fair. Remember, all this dancing around of pixel counts was done without changing the size of the sensor.
Anyway, that's way too much detail for most folk and the geeks already know what I'm talking about. Here's a series of three shots at my bolted-to-the-wall computer in my office. All were shot at ISO 1600, which is adequate for most indoor shooting without flash as long as there are no kids or pets in the shot and you can brace a little to avoid motion blur. Just the ticket for those romantic, candle-lit dinners. All of these are a small portion of the centre of the frame - about a 300% enlargement:
Here's the G9:
It's noisy, no doubt, but it's not unmanageable. I've made no compensation for megapixels here and the shots are compressed with JPG, so it's not a technically sophisticated comparison, to say the least. Non-photographers probably won't even notice the differences.
Here's the G10 image:
We have to click all of these to really see the detail. If you do, you will probably note much more noise and a generally poorer image. That's because of trying to cram 15 million pixe3ls on something smaller than your little finger nail.
Here's the G11 image:
I would certainly call this better than the G9 or G10. There's less noise and it is of the manageable kind, using a good noise filter such as Noise Ninja Pro. The detail level is better and the whole thing simply looks better.
So much for low light. How about normal shooting? I grabbed this image in front of my office today on the G11: Nice and clean for a snapshot, but it doesn't tell us much.
Here's a blowup from the G9:
Pretty crisp. You can read the PNG on the plate.
Here's the G10:
Not so hot. I didn't get the apparent size the same, but you an still tell that it appears a bit blurry compared to the G9. Again, more pixels doesn't necessarily make a better camera.
Here is the shot from the G11: Frankly, I can't see a lot of difference here. That's to be expected. At high light levels, we shouldn't expect to see much, although my imagination whispers that there is more detail in the shadows and highlights for the G11. This is is one of the Holy Grails for point and shoot cameras - low noise, high dynamic range. The extra detail in the shadows and highlights make a huge difference when you're trying to achieve magnificence on a budget.
So, what does MadDog think?
Well, first MadDog wonders if anybody cares. I took this shot with the G11 in miserable lighting conditions at ISO 1600. The G11 has a swivel screen, so you can do all of those exciting things with a camera that you've only dreamed about. Just don't tell me about them. I'm as happy as a clam. I can't wait to get it into its UW housing and take it diving on Saturday.
I'm probably going to start carrying my G11 as my daily camera, though I'm a bit nervous about that, given the security situation here. When my G9 was stolen and thrown to the pavement, it still worked, except in the UW housing, Still they are tough cameras. I can't think of many cameras with which you could club a thug unconscious and then take his picture.
I'll still use the G10 when I need massive detail. Good light and lots of pixels can't be beat for some jobs. But, my new sweetheart is the G11.
I'm so fickle.
Direct Comparison - Canon G9-G10-G11
Image by Boogies with Fish
www.messersmith.name/wordpress/2010/01/28/direct-comparis...
This post may cause some of you to reboot. Sorry for that. Not everybody is a photography geek. However, since I find myself today with all three of my Canon G series cameras at the office, I decided to make an extremely unscientific comparison of them. Canon has been all over the map with megapixels in the G series. The G9 was 12 and shot pretty good pictures. The G10 went to 15 and gave amazing detail in good light conditions, but was too noisy for the low light levels that make such sweet available light shots. The G11 gives you 10 megapixels. Why the backtracking? To give you a better all-round experience. Fifteen megapixels are overkill for most uses. And, the "buckets" are too small to catch enough photons to keep the sampling fair. Remember, all this dancing around of pixel counts was done without changing the size of the sensor.
Anyway, that's way too much detail for most folk and the geeks already know what I'm talking about. Here's a series of three shots at my bolted-to-the-wall computer in my office. All were shot at ISO 1600, which is adequate for most indoor shooting without flash as long as there are no kids or pets in the shot and you can brace a little to avoid motion blur. Just the ticket for those romantic, candle-lit dinners. All of these are a small portion of the centre of the frame - about a 300% enlargement:
Here's the G9:
It's noisy, no doubt, but it's not unmanageable. I've made no compensation for megapixels here and the shots are compressed with JPG, so it's not a technically sophisticated comparison, to say the least. Non-photographers probably won't even notice the differences.
Here's the G10 image:
We have to click all of these to really see the detail. If you do, you will probably note much more noise and a generally poorer image. That's because of trying to cram 15 million pixe3ls on something smaller than your little finger nail.
Here's the G11 image:
I would certainly call this better than the G9 or G10. There's less noise and it is of the manageable kind, using a good noise filter such as Noise Ninja Pro. The detail level is better and the whole thing simply looks better.
So much for low light. How about normal shooting? I grabbed this image in front of my office today on the G11: Nice and clean for a snapshot, but it doesn't tell us much.
Here's a blowup from the G9:
Pretty crisp. You can read the PNG on the plate.
Here's the G10:
Not so hot. I didn't get the apparent size the same, but you an still tell that it appears a bit blurry compared to the G9. Again, more pixels doesn't necessarily make a better camera.
Here is the shot from the G11: Frankly, I can't see a lot of difference here. That's to be expected. At high light levels, we shouldn't expect to see much, although my imagination whispers that there is more detail in the shadows and highlights for the G11. This is is one of the Holy Grails for point and shoot cameras - low noise, high dynamic range. The extra detail in the shadows and highlights make a huge difference when you're trying to achieve magnificence on a budget.
So, what does MadDog think?
Well, first MadDog wonders if anybody cares. I took this shot with the G11 in miserable lighting conditions at ISO 1600. The G11 has a swivel screen, so you can do all of those exciting things with a camera that you've only dreamed about. Just don't tell me about them. I'm as happy as a clam. I can't wait to get it into its UW housing and take it diving on Saturday.
I'm probably going to start carrying my G11 as my daily camera, though I'm a bit nervous about that, given the security situation here. When my G9 was stolen and thrown to the pavement, it still worked, except in the UW housing, Still they are tough cameras. I can't think of many cameras with which you could club a thug unconscious and then take his picture.
I'll still use the G10 when I need massive detail. Good light and lots of pixels can't be beat for some jobs. But, my new sweetheart is the G11.
I'm so fickle.
Lombard Picture Frame
Image by el frijole
these are the other two modifications I had to make to the enclosure, one on the left for the backlight cable to pass through, and another on the right so it had a more direct connection to the inverter
Frame Corner in Sunlight
Image by Mr. T in DC
Corner of picture frame in our guest bedroom. The print is a watercolor from Prague, a cityscape scene. I was just playing around with the new camera - the blinds are usually closed to protect the print from direct sunlight.
2009_05_12
Image by DennisSylvesterHurd
May 12, 2009 (Tuesday) - I took the SkyTrain to Metrotown to purchase a digital picture frame.
Since the fall of 2003, the daily focus of my eJournal and images blog has been on text. Later in July 2005, because of Flickr, I've been able create something which emphasizes a daily image or video clip. I'll shoot and add one each day. Doing so will remind me to constantly carry a camera and it'll be a more direct record of current, personal experiences.
No comments:
Post a Comment