Jman13
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #1 · WOW! G9 Trounces F31fd. | |
Well, as some of you know, I was contemplating a switch from my 6 month old Fuji F31fd to a new Canon G9 as my compact in cases where I don't want to carry my SLR, and I finally went through with it. I did some tests this evening to compare the 'vastly superior' F31 noise handling capabilities vs. the G9.
Let me say, as you will certainly say after seeing this: the G9 is a FAR better low light hand holding camera than the F31fd.
Testing Methodology:
Now, this does not compare tripod mounted exposures at comparable ISOs. The reason? The G9 has an IS lens, better handling, and has a significantly faster lens at the comparable long end, as you'll see.
I wanted to test shooting static subjects, while hand holding, to see what ISO you would have to shoot at to get sharp shots, and compare the output of those worst case scenarios. This was most important to me, because I usually shoot static subjects (architecture, landscape, abstracts), and I bring my SLR whenever I need serious people shooting capabilities. Obviously, higher ISO will help with moving subjects, but if you're using a compact without flash to capture motion in the dark, neither camera will do squat for you. I also didn't want any special lighting...you rarely have perfect lighting when out and about...so this is just my overhead light.
All shots were taken from the same distance, hand held, with the camera braced with both hands, elbows tucked inward, trying as best as humanly possible to keep still and have a light shutter press. Multiple shots at each focal length and setting were taken.
So, here are the results. First, shrunken G9 RAW images to show you the testing scene. These are processed with Lightroom v.1.3, with all defaults (including 25 on the color NR slider, as that's a default in Lightroom), and just resized.
First, the wide end:
G9, 7.4mm, f/2.8, 1/15 sec, ISO 400:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_wideRAW.jpg
Now, the mid range (on the G9), roughly equivalent to full zoom on the F31fd:
G9, 18.9mm, f/3.5, 1/25 sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_midRAW.jpg
Now, just to see what the long end can do for you, here's the G9 at full zoom:
G9, 44.4mm, f/4.8, 1/20 sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_teleRAW.jpg
So, there's the full scene. Now...on to the meat of the matter!
Here are 100% unprocessed RAW crops (on the G9) and JPEG (on the F31fd), with no adjustments, and RAW conversion at Lightroom defaults. The crops are the sharpest available images from two to four shots, at the ISO that yielded the sharpest images.
First up: Wide End:
G9, 7.4mm, f/2.8, 1/15 sec, ISO 400:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_wideRAW_crop.jpg
Now, the F31fd yielded ZERO sharp shots at ISO 400, so on to 800:
F31fd, 8mm, f/2.8, 1/35sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/f31_wide.jpg
In my opinion, even at the per pixel level, a clear win for the G9.
On to the mid range (or full telephoto on the F31). Again, best shot out of those tried (two for the G9, SIX for the F31fd, at various ISOs). The G9 required ISO 800 to get a sharp shot, though ISO 400 was still sharper than the sharpest F31fd shot. There is a slight difference in focal length, due to the way the zoom stops on the G9, but it's not enough to make much of a difference, especially considering the shots AFTER these. For the F31, I am posting the best at ISO 800, and 1600:
G9, 18.9mm, f/3.5, 1/25 sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_midRAW_crop.jpg
F31fd, 24mm, f/5, 1/15 sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/f31_mid800.jpg
And the F31 at ISO 1600:
F31fd, 24mm, f/5, 1/30sec, ISO 1600:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/f31_mid1600.jpg
And finally, the G9 at full zoom:
G9, 44.4mm, f/4.8, 1/20 sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_teleRAW_crop.jpg
As you can see, the G9 resolves far more detail at the hand holding limit, even with the grainy output at ISO 800. The good news is, even though there is visible noise at 100%, the G9's high resolution means this noise will likely not even be visible until printed at 8x10 or larger. Not bad at all!
I also wanted to see a similar pixel count, and G9 JPEG processing...so here are the wide, mid range (F31 tele) and G9 telephoto shots from the G9 with unaltered JPEG ouput on the Medium resolution (8 megapixel) setting...these are 100% crops (I also got closer to the F31's tele end max here, at 22mm):
G9, 7.4mm, f/2.8, 1/15 sec, ISO 400, medium JPEG:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_wideJPEG.jpg
G9, 22mm, f/3.5, 1/13 sec, ISO 400, medium JPEG:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_midJPEG.jpg
And one at full zoom (only took one shot):
G9, 44.4mm, f/4.8, 1/20 sec, ISO 800:
http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/g9_teleJPEG.jpg
Conclusion:
Well, I think it's pretty clear to my eyes that the G9 trounces the F31fd in similar focal lengths, similar lighting, for hand holding. The 2 to 3 stops in IS, plus the faster lens at the long end (at comparable focal lengths, at the Fuji's maximum zoom, the Fuji is at f/5, while the G9 is at f/3.5, a full stop advantage!), more than makes up for the pure ISO advantage of the Fuji. The G9 is also easier to hand hold in my opinion, providing a much more stable shooting platform. I have to say, I was very pleasantly surprised!
Also, while I have only posted the best images here, the G9's 'camera shake' images were in many cases better than the best shots I could get under these test conditions!
Another thing...while this is personal preference, I much prefer the G9's noise to the Fuji's...it feels so much more natural and film like. The G9 also produces a much less processed image, handles better, and provides the shooter with more control. The Fuji does have better Auto white balance under flourescent (as in these, especially noticable in the JPEG shots below), but if you shoot RAW, you never have to worry about that. The G9 overall also appears to have more vibrance, and considerably better detail resolution, especially at ISO 800.
I have to say, I am extremely pleased with my upgrade. Of course, I still carry my 30D and full kit for 90% of all my shooting, so this will only see occasional use, but it is nice to know that in those situations where an SLR is impractical, I can still get fairly decent images. Outdoors, where shallow DOF isn't a requirement, it'll hold its own, I feel. In 2007, I shot about 800 shots with my point and shoot, and 8,000 with my 30D, but it'll be nice to know that those 800 for this coming year will be of higher quality.
Edited by Jman13 on Jan 02, 2008 at 10:18 PM GMT
Edited on Jan 02, 2008 at 10:18 PM
|
