I preordered mine today from Amazon. I've got a powershot TX1, which is more of a toy than a serious camera. Really - anything above ISO 100 is super noisy. The 720p is cool, but it encodes it in a weird format and so I have to transcode it to something usable. If the G10 had 720p, I'd think it'd be awesome (it's nice to shoot video clips) but I'd be happy for something I can put in my pocket and get awesome shots at higher ISO.
I don't like the image quality of my G9. I have to work a lot on those raw files in order get decent pictures. So, unless the G10 has better high iso performance, it's not for me. I do like the idea to have a 28mm at the low end, but I can bet that I could get that + better high iso performance in other P&S. I will also look into the new Canon P&S that has the CMOS sensor. I know it has no raw possibility, but for P&S purpose I would trade it off for better IQ.
UCSB wrote:
If you call on the phone ... they will sell the black model for $419.
Bill, I'm curious as to why you went for the LX3 without having seen the G10 samples? I'm on the fence between both models too, and am waiting to see more high ISO samples from both.
Valerie S wrote:
Bill, I'm curious as to why you went for the LX3 without having seen the G10 samples? I'm on the fence between both models too, and am waiting to see more high ISO samples from both.
J&R had the LX3 on sale for $399 plus they were also offering 15% back through live.com cashback that brought my cost down to $339 (with free shipping). I felt (with J&R's 30 day return policy) that it was worth a look and if it started to look like a bad decision I could return it or sell it. So I felt I had to act on the deal.
But, here is my logic.
1. I like the G9 and use the higher end of the 35-210mm range more than I expected. So I considered the LX3 as camera that I would use in combination with the G9.
2. I felt the LX3 offered a very flexible option with the f/2 lens and good ISO performance. My testing has confirmed this. For indoor shooting the f/2 allows you to balance the room light and your flash to get nicer results. Plus you can shoot without a flash in many cases. My LX3 is sharp at f/2.
3. 24mm is very useful for close in social shooting and in general. The LX3 has a nice flash and the wider angle allows you to make better use of the flash in group pictures (because of distance limitations with these small flashes).
4. Both the G9 and G10 have f/2.8. - f/4.8 lenses. With the shorter FL of the G10, you are up into those higher aperture settings faster. This mean that you are at a 1 to 1.5 f-stop disadvantage over the LX3 ... this is apparent when you look at your images.
Other considerations:
1. LX3 is smaller and lighter than the G9 (G10). I actually like the G9 (G10) weight and size, but the LX3 is more of a compact.
2. G9 (G10) is compatible with all of my Canon accessories (430EX, ST-E2, remotes).
3. The higher MP count on the G9 (G10) will give you slightly more detail in your images. But, since most of the time P&S images are not printed that big and just shared on the internet, final images will look the same. This MP advantage disappears rapidly as you increase ISO from 80; when compared to G9. LX3 is at least one f-stop better in ISO performance in comparison to G9.
4. 24-60mm range on LX3 is somewhat limiting for general use.
At this point in time it is best to wait and see what the G10 ISO performance is like. If it is good and you are going for a single camera, then I think the G10 has a lot to offer. I'm not sure I where I am going to end up ... I've only had the LX3 since Friday, so it will take me a little while longer before I decide what makes sense for me. I will be following the G10 results carefully ...it will need to get a one stop improvement in ISO performance at ISO400 over the G9 or I will stick with the LX3/G9 combo
Also ... I should add that the LX3 allows you to make 720P (16:9) HD movies ... I'm still exploring this option. Plus it offers 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 aspect ratio shooting. The 3:2 option made sense for me when I was going to be adding the P&S shots into a sequence with my Canon DSLR shots. If I was just shooting something little that I wanted to show people on my 1080p HD TV, I could shoot RAW + JPG in 16:9 and take the images straight to the HD TV. I haven't connected the LX3 directly to my TV yet ... but, Im going to give this a try.
I got my G10 today from Amazon.com (I love you Amazon)
A few notes:
*Having never handled a Powershot G camera, I didn't know what to expect, but it feels like a real point and shoot versus a toy (I had a TX1 before, and it was a toy).
*Que surprise: Lightroom and Photoshop can't recognize it the raw files.
*Why can't Canon stick with the same batteries for different models? I was looking at getting a spare battery, until I saw that they were $70. hahah on me.
*The solutions disk (v38.1) came with DPP 3.5, Zoombrowser EX 6.2, Photostitch 3.1 and EOS Util 1.1a.
*With quick snaps, I shot my messy apartment at 400, 800 and 1600 ISO. The 400 noise wasn't that bad. 800 it was noticeable and 1600 it was pretty bad. I'm pretty sure you can clean some of it up, but it was in your face. I'll try to take some better pictures tonight, but I have to be out the door at 5am tomorrow. Plus I've been drinking and watching the Sox game.
*The Canon RAW codec software for Vista is being nice and popping up and saying "Canon RAW Codec found a new CR2 file that is not supported by the installed version." with a link to click to check the update (which, of course, isn't there).
The G9 used the same battery as the XT, XTi. You could buy them from 3rd parties for about $15 ... so it is easy to get an extra battery.
It would be great if you could post some images and links to the original full size images. For these to be really useful, you will need to post ISO 80, 100, 200 and 400 minimum. ISO 800 and 1600 would be great, but things are usually falling apart by then. The reason you need to have the same images at ISO 80 is that these cameras start losing resolution almost immediately and can show noise as low as ISO 80 (noise will become more noticable through this range). It is really important to understand how the image starts to break down at each stop between 80 and 400. IMO, the ISO 400 images are very critical because this is a very common ISO setting for indoor shots.
I think people are too hard on the G-series noise. Yes, it gets noisy at ISO 400-1600. Sometimes it's objectionable. Still, at 400, it's good for pretty much any normal sized print. It won't make a great 20x30, but it'll still be a good print. 800 I think is definitely doable for 8x10. 1600 is good for 4x6 shots. Yes, per pixel, it's much noisier than a DSLR. No doubt, but I've had no problems with my G9 and ISO 400-800. I try and stay away from 1600 if I can.
I thought the G9 was going to be the right compact for me (and I've had loads of them) but I just couldn't get on with it. I didn't like the grip, the viewfinder (if you can call it that) or the files in anything other than perfect light.
I doubt very much the G10 will be that different, sadly.
I got a G9 sitting in my glove compartment almost unused. The damn thing is too heavy to easily slip into a pocket, but not good enough (slow, bad ISO, bad VF) to use for real shooting. So, my current move is to put a 50D into the car, with some of my cheaper lenses (50 1.8, 85 1.8, Sigma fisheye) and see if that encourages my activities regarding spontaneous photographic opportunities.
BTW, I most definitely will NOT buy another Point&Cr#p, and if anybody wants to buy a mint G9 with WA Raynox lens, and aq handy Lowepro carrying baggy, email me
I want a decent compact camera, just like my old film Ricoh GR1.
Unfortunately no one yet makes a good quality APS-C sensor based compact although Sigma haved tried hard with the DP1 and DP2.
Options for me are ;
Panasonic LX3 - f2.0, 24mm-60mm, HD video, very compact
Ricoh GX200 - f2.8, 24mm-70mm, very compact, good controls and focus modes, DNG raw format
G10 is a bit too big, 28mm is a step in the right direction, zoom range is too great. 24-100 is the perfect zoom range. f2.8 is ok although this is usually only on the wide end, the telephoto aperture is often less (Ricoh is f4.4, LX2 is f2.8)
I guess the best ultimate image quality comes from the G10 but the LX3 or GX200 win in other ways.
Hopefully next year Canon or Nikon will really make a quality rangefinder with specs along the lines of ;
APS-C, 24-80mm, f2.8 throughout the zoom range, HD video 720p, DNG raw, 10 megapixels, good ISO 800/1600 performance, 5+ RAW buffer, 3fps.
Are you kidding? With that who would buy the Low EOS range. If that happened the camera market would take a change for the benefit of the consumer but to the demise of the camera manufacturers
I’m still waiting for a P&S with 24 or 28mm WA, 720 or 1080 30p HD video, and Underwater housing. Too bad Canon SX1 IS and Panasonic LX3 don't have waterproof option.
Panasonic LX3:
US$500
24-60mm
RAW
10MP CCD sensor
1280X720 HD video
Canon G10:
US$500
28-140mm
RAW
CMOS sensor
640X480 video
Underwater housing
Canon SX1 IS:
Not for US market
28mm WA
10MP CMOS sensor
1920X1080 HD video
One thing I like about my DSLRs is the nearly instant response to a shutter press. I couldn't stand my old Powershot hesitation (a Powershot S200 elph :-)
I know these new P&S's being discussed are in another league..What is the delay like on these high end P&S's?
