Hi guys, picked up my new Powershot G5 a couple of days ago (I know its not an SLR but I feel more at home here )

Initial impressions are that I should have hung on to my G2 instead. There is quite bad CA evident too often and Canon have, astonishingly, taken away the ability to change the contrast, sharpness and saturation without using a special mode. All the images it produces look like they are watercolours, wildly over saturated and there isn't much I can do except change every frame in PS7. The 5 meg sensor doesn't seem any sharper either - more jaggies actually.

Does anyone know how the first frame taken with a brand new camera and CF card could be numbered IMG_0645 in the Canon 106 directory if someone hasn't taken 644 pictures before me??

Not very impressed!!

David

Sounds like you got a duff one --- also your pictures should have started in a folder called 100CANON and not begun with 600 or whatever. I wonder if your camera was a return that you have been sent instead of a brand new one.

I have the S50 which essentially uses the same chip as the G5 and the same digic processor as the D10.

Here's a SEVERE test I did for CA --- it doesn't come out too bad at all --- in fact for what it is I am very pleased with my S50. Lens was wide open at 2.8 as well.
Look at left hand top and areas bordering the bright sky. I think most P&S digicams would yield some CA with this type of shot as well as some of the cheaper lenses used on an SLR..


Note the number as well -- 0027 -- yours should have started from way below 600.


Picture shot in jpg (RAW is better believe me) and just reduced in size for web - no funny / complex PS stuff done at all.

I'm guessing that you re-used the CF card from your other Canon camera and the numbering continued from there. The only way to get around that is to reformat your CF card on your computer and then plug it into your G5 and format it in-camera. Numbering should start fresh from there (of course, change the numbering configuration settings appropriately in the camera's setup menu).

I agree Kyle, my son has an S50 & the results agree with yours.

I will say one thing however, my wife has a G3 & the images from that are pretty comparible to the S50(both of them shoot in RAW mode at ISO 50 most of the time)

-John

mflaherty wrote:
I'm guessing that you re-used the CF card from your other Canon camera and the numbering continued from there. The only way to get around that is to reformat your CF card on your computer and then plug it into your G5 and format it in-camera. Numbering should start fresh from there (of course, change the numbering configuration settings appropriately in the camera's setup menu).

I guess that is possible. The CF card was formatted before I put into the G5 though and immediately started in file Canon106 at frame 645. I thought it would strt from zero.

Is there any other way of telling how many shots a digicam has taken?

David

I made yesterday two photos with the camera, only to test the quality (i work with a 1Ds ) and the results are great. Low noise and great colors (i have a friend in a camera store )
Here are the images. The second is a 100% crop of the first, unretouched and no sharpen.

I have had a variety of canon PS cameras and they all suffer from CA (especially at the corners) and jaggies. Mark

My G2 was really good. I sold it on ebay just before the G5 came out so I could upgrade to what I thought would be the 'perfect' portable high quality travel camera - 5 megapixels should be enough I thought. I'm still testing but so far I'm unconvinced of much improvement.

At this point, I am not always sure that replacement and upgrades from canon are going to mean better image quality. There are three parameters: image quality (including resolution), options (controls etc), and price. An example that i have recently read about is the canon DV cameras. The canon optura 100MC was clearly felt to be one of the best single CCD DV video cameras on the market. The replacement was the 200MC. Most of the reviews, suggest that the video and audio on the 100MC was better. There was a bigger lens on the former and larger CCD. Thus, low light video was improved. Moreover, on the newer model they removed the hotshoe. What is the improvement in the replacement model --slightly smaller size and decreased cost. I think that now that the technology is leveling off we are going to see more upgrades that are not about image quality. Of course there may be new "revolutions" that will drastically change imaging (e.g. new sensors) but these will come more slowly. Mark

I think you are absolutely right Mark. Owning a 10D I decided 5 megapixel would give me just that little bit more to crop etc. and the longer zoom of the G3/G5 is useful too but to me there is no question the G5 is not as well made or brick-like as the ol' G2. It really was a classic.

I think part of the problem I am having (having spent all day testing) is the utterly cr#p Canon Raw convertor, which is clearly not as good as BB (which I use, can't afford £120 for Capture one) and is giving me rather duff results. Chris Breeze mailed me and said he was releasing a G5 Raw convertor on Tuesday so that 'should' help...I hope.