perspective wrote:
I took the camera back and here's why: This camera isn't worth $500 in my opinion. I think $399 would be more fair. It's too big to be a pocket camera so given that I couldn't keep it in my pocket and I could get the wonderful XTi for $700 ($200 more) I decided it was far better to get the XTi and use that as my "light" camera. The XTi pictures are far superior to the G9 pictures.
I currently have a 40D, XTi, and Fuji F31fd. I have been considering selling my XTi and picking up the G9. But, I have the same reservations about IQ that perspective described above and I have been hesitant to about the change. I suspect my best approach may be to buy a G9 and see if getting rid of the XTi is the right move. Do any existing G9 owners have any ideas on this trade-off?
Well. while the site was 'on vacation' I received my G9.
It really is rather good, I've been testing it today. Nothing decent enough to post but the image quality is very acceptable up to 400 ISO (especially with some Neat Image) and the camera is very well thought out, has a lovely screen and is truly a G series IMHO.
RAW files can be converted to DNG and worked on in PSCS2 which is a plus and, except for the lack of a 28mm lens, this could be the compact cam I keep, It's a heck of a lot smaller than my old G6
UCSB wrote:
Also, have any G9 owners run any tests against their Fuji F30 or F31fd cameras?
I did against my husband's F30 which I hate shooting with--though I bought it for him (and its great for him--just not for me).
At ISO400, the F30, as a jpeg only cam, had less noise, but that typical smearing if looking at it at 100% (which we don't, I realize, but....). With a one click Noiseware Pro at weak noise--or even ISO800---quite usable images. The ISO400 was at least equal to or better than the F30. Depends if you want to go this extra step.
All other things considered, I'd choose the G9 every time. I started with the original G1--and have had a number of DSLRs--and now the 5D. Today I had a shoot--and for fun (and because I had a bit of time) used the G9 on tripod (found an AS plate that I could use with it) for the same shots. Yes, I--that's I--could see a difference, but I really wonder if my client could. These were for a Powerpoint projected slide show for Int'l Furniture Show (High POint, NC)t-- groups of fabrics that I 'styled' and shot. At the resolution they need (though they will also use these same shots for magazine shots), the G9 did fine. Of course I preferred shooting with the 5D, but the G9 did fine---I shot in RAW, used the Whibal to correct WB--and they look quite good--of course not nearly as good at 100%, but certainly better than I expected from a small sensor cam.
UCSB wrote:
I currently have a 40D, XTi, and Fuji F31fd. I have been considering selling my XTi and picking up the G9. But, I have the same reservations about IQ that perspective described above and I have been hesitant to about the change. I suspect my best approach may be to buy a G9 and see if getting rid of the XTi is the right move. Do any existing G9 owners have any ideas on this trade-off?
-----
I'll try to elaborate more on my experience since I had the G9 and now have the XTi. What I disliked about the G9 compared to the XTi is as follows: Exposing to the right, I still saw nasty chroma type noise in shadows (so no lifting the shadows in Photoshop and getting clean results without serious NR filtering first) and this is the most forgiving exposure (shooting raw of course) whereas with the XTi the shadows are clean with the same exposures - making sure I expose so that the 12-bit data is captured optimally. The XTi produces cleaner images all throughout the ISO ranges. The XTi will produce ISO 1600 images that you can clean up and use (your mileage may vary here) whereas the 1600 ISO images from the G9 was mottled and had loss of detail.
Also, the circle of confusion on the G9 is so small that you're diffraction limited at f/5.6 whereas with the XTi you're probably ok going up into f/11 and might be able to squeeze by with f/13 before diffraction sets in with interference patterns across the sensor causing loss of fine detail. Therefore the G9 is no landscape camera whereas you can get very nice landscape shots with the XTi. Not as good as a 5D (had one of those too) but close. The G9 would doublessly work quite well for portraiture however as long as you didn't have to work the shadows too much.
I don't find the XTi very much bigger than the G9. The G9 isn't a camera that slips into a pocket unless it's a jacket pocket or baggy jeans pocket (where you will scratch it up with loose change, keys and like I did once with my cellphone: sit on it and crack the LCD).
I don't think the G9 is a decent backup to a DSLR. It's a point and shoot camera at best - if that's what you want, I think it's one of the better ones, just don't think it's going to bridge the gap into DSLR quality. If you want to backup a 40d, 5d or 1Dx camera then an XTi is a far, far better option and will produce clean, beautiful pictures.
I wonder if anyone would consider this as backup to a DSLR. I certainly don't. I have the 5D and a 10D--which works fine for my commercial work as backup--sold all my other bodies from D30 up when I bought the 5D and kept the 10D because its 'sufficient' for my commercial work.. I have the G9 strictly for those times I won't carry a DSLR--and 'social' occasions where I never shoot anyhow---its not what I like to photograph, but there are times that its nice with friends and family to just 'record' an event. I may also carry this on hikes where its not geared to photography primarily.
Fits in my pockets or in a small hip pack--much like a cell phone. I like it because its controls are usable similar to a DSLR--and I won't shoot over ISO400--I can't imagine normally shooting over this ISO_-though I have tried some low light ISO800 and found that you could get a 'usable' small print with RAW and NWPro--but I don't plan to use it myself. Its a very small cam--fun to shoot with, good IQ if you work with it---and shoot in RAW (though many will shoot only in jpeg which is fine for those funtime pics, but I'm so used to shooting in RAW after years---and the workflow, I just always will).
I have handled an XTi several times and thought about it with just some of my small fast primes--but its still too big for those times I don't want to deal with gear. Different strokes. If I'm going to shoot 'serious' ---then I will always carry the 5D and the needed lenses.
perspective wrote:
[
Also, the circle of confusion on the G9 is so small that you're diffraction limited at f/5.6 whereas with the XTi you're probably ok going up into f/11 and might be able to squeeze by with f/13 before diffraction sets in with interference patterns across the sensor causing loss of fine detail. Therefore the G9 is no landscape camera whereas you can get very nice landscape shots with the XTi. Not as good as a 5D (had one of those too) but close. The G9 would doublessly work quite well for portraiture however as long as you didn't have to work the shadows too much. ...Show more →
Diffraction limited at 5.6 yes, but not in regards to DOF. You're gonna have a huge amount of DOF because the sensor is so small and the focal lengths are that much shorter. With f/5.6 on the G9 and f/11 on the XTi with the same FOV, the G9's actually going to have slightly more DOF. Take a look at the info from dofmaster.com:
Thanks Jerryrock. Will give it a try. I have a 400D and the G9 doesn't compete but as a light travel camera, it will fill the bill perfectly as it is nice to have a camera again which I can hold with one hand and easy to take verticals because of its shape. I must add I am just an amateur and an old lady so my expectations are less than others perhaps.
picnic wrote:
I wonder if anyone would consider this as backup to a DSLR. I certainly don't.
I brought that up because I saw a lot of references on the net about it being good for that purpose. After using it though I found it inadequate as a backup to a DSLR. It doesn't quite scale that mountain.
picnic wrote
I have handled an XTi several times and thought about it with just some of my small fast primes--but its still too big for those times I don't want to deal with gear.
Granted for social gatherings it's still too big to be fashionable. I wouldn't want to go to a friend's party carrying one - I'd look like the hired photographer and feel funny. I'm thinking of picking up a Canon SD870is for the times when I want to take a photo but have no care about its quality - well, within reason.
perspective wrote:
I brought that up because I saw a lot of references on the net about it being good for that purpose. After using it though I found it inadequate as a backup to a DSLR. It doesn't quite scale that mountain.
Granted for social gatherings it's still too big to be fashionable. I wouldn't want to go to a friend's party carrying one - I'd look like the hired photographer and feel funny. I'm thinking of picking up a Canon SD870is for the times when I want to take a photo but have no care about its quality - well, within reason....Show more →
Yes, I saw that too--and I've been surprised. Its a nice complementary camera to a DSLR I think---but not a backup. It would have to be an extreme situation to use in place of a DSLR--and that's what I perceive as a backup--when I feel I might need a backup, I carry 2 DSLRs, comparable range lenses, extra lighting --that's backup. Still--I'm really surprised at how good the IQ quality is shot in RAW, shot and processed with care.
I have fiddled around about a small cam for a number of years--and am glad I bought it---but I still really do wonder how much I'll actually use it. Right now its fun to play with and say I'll use it for various situations---but I really wonder if I will .
Well, I have a 5D and plan to get a 40D, partly for backup, partly for the extra reach with long lenses, and partly for the live view. I have also sold my G7 and will replace it with a G9. This is to go everywhere, including parties. Maybe I'm just not sufficiently fashion-conscious
JohnLL wrote:
Well, I have a 5D and plan to get a 40D, partly for backup, partly for the extra reach with long lenses, and partly for the live view. I have also sold my G7 and will replace it with a G9. This is to go everywhere, including parties. Maybe I'm just not sufficiently fashion-conscious :D
John, I actually think it is pretty stylish LOL. I like the black matte finish, the very retro design----and though I'm not a party goer much, there are lots of dinners/groups at the pool, trips to wineries--places where my 5D is a pain and the pictures aren't meant to be big prints anyhow--just nice memories.
I think your idea to get a 40D for backup and with long lenses is a good one. I'm a WA person so a crop cam doesn't really benefit me at all in that way---but it makes a load of sense for all those who do. It sounds like a terrific camera--I haven't had my hands on one yet though.
Well, I've now had my G9 a full day and, weather being bad I've been playing with it and testing stuff.
It's very configurable, I really like the live histogram, I really like the ISO knob and it seems a lot faster in operation (and better laid out) than my previous G series (G2, G5, G6) even with RAW. It is one heck of a lot smaller than the G6. I can get in the same small pouch my S70 used to use, and that was small.
It doesn't quite match my F31fd at 400 ISO, but I can turn the sharpness off and shoot RAW, so with work the end result will probably be better. My first attempts at reducing noise on 400 ISO images were promising. 400 ISO is quite useable.
In good light at 80 ISO (& RAW) I am in 400D territory for image quality (almost) and the lens seems good, if slow at the longer end.
The absence of a 28mm wide end is a real, real shame. It would make this by far the best compact I know. As it is it is still probably the best I know (much more expensive than the f31 though) but if I did need a wideangle I'd still use my Pro1, with all it's many faults.
All in all it seems fast, well designed, has a great LCD, an average viewfinder, is hugely configurable and doesn't penalise the use of RAW, which is good.
They're only showing iso 80. Need to see 400 before I rush out and get one, though it looks like a very nice camera. Just picked up a G6 on eBay, the last of the twistable rear lcds, and after test driving it last weekend I'm pretty happy with it. It's nice that the new model has the large lcd, but it's being static makes me ambivalent.
calvillo wrote:
They're only showing iso 80. Need to see 400 before I rush out and get one, though it looks like a very nice camera. Just picked up a G6 on eBay, the last of the twistable rear lcds, and after test driving it last weekend I'm pretty happy with it. It's nice that the new model has the large lcd, but it's being static makes me ambivalent.
I just sold a G6 to make space for the G9 and I'm not disappointed. The LCD on the G6 looks minute in comparison and the G6 is only useable up to 200 ISO max, so the faster lens of the G6 loses a bit of it's specialness.
The G6 also seems very slow in comparison, not that I think it's bad - I bought one when the G7 had no RAW and have loved mine. But the G9 really suits me a lot better.
Kirk Enterprises is developing an L plate for the G9. I have their G7 regular plate and it provides full access to the battery / SD card door while mounted to a tripod. Both plates will work with either G7 or G9.
For me the BEST feature of my G9 is portability! I can take this camera with me just about anywhere and get "the shot" that would have been missed because I could not (or would not)carry my SLR with lenses and flash.
--that's backup. Still--I'm really surprised at how good the IQ quality is shot in RAW, shot and processed with care. 