I would second the (much) earlier advice about possibly hanging on to the 40D if you can afford to & adding a point & shoot for those moments when toting an SLR setup (however "disguised") is just not feasible or desirable. From my point of view, this is not the same as having the P&S as a backup but as an alternative to having no camera at all. I have a 5D & a 50D but often carry my SD950 (literally in my pocket) when it's not practical to lug the larger bodies & lenses - either for issues of safety, mobility, laziness or excessive eye-rolling from my spouse (at the prospect of having yet another outing turned into a photo shoot). It has meant that I've captured some great (jpeg) shots I wouldn't have had at all otherwise. Just my $0.02.
I'm having second thoughts since my last post. I have owned G7, G9 and now G10. I like the camera, even got an L plate and remote release with lightweight tripod for different field duties, but am tiring of having a point and shoot just 35% the size of my DSLR with a fifty mounted. Now I'm hankering for a slim, jeans-pocketable point and shoot instead to contrast with my DSLR. Figured I might as well go for extreme portability versus my larger camera. If quality matters, I'll bring the larger gear, instead of getting almost there with my G10.
Check out the SD990 - *very* similar specs to the G10, with the added advantage that it will fit in your jeans pocket (unless you're a "skinny-jeans" aficionado!). It's not an alternative to a DSLR but *way* better than having no camera at all!
All opinions on this post are not important. The only fact that matters is:
if you are a professional, you use a backup when a main fails. So, when your 5d fails, you use the lenses, flash, memory, and skills, options, that you had with 5d on another body. If you want something smaller, grab a XT for 450 new, and get the weight down to what you want retaining the ability to use majority of accessories.
patrickphoto wrote:
All opinions on this post are not important.
With the exception of yours?! It seemed to me the OP was precisely soliciting opinions. Presumably it's up to him (& other interested readers) to decide which are "important" and which can be ignored.
skid00skid00 wrote:
If you are genuinely a pro, and you are considering a (any) P&S as backup to your main camera, I will never hire you...
That's fine with me... you might turn out to be one of those clients who show up at the shoot with all of their own "pro" gear in tow and ask a lot of stupid questions about how to use it...
I now use a Nikon D300 as my main travel camera. I come from 10 years with Canon, most recently with a 5D and a 1 DMKIII, and 25 years of Nikons before that.
I have recently done a couple of extensive trips ( to Central Asia and the Middle East ) using the G10 as a backup. It has become so expensive to keep up with the advancing digital bodies every 18 months, I thought I would try the best of the point and shoots as a backup rather than buy a $2000-5000 backup dslr body. The G10 does as well as a P&S can be expected to do. In the right conditions it can produce great 13x19 prints.
However, a lot of why I take pictures is in the joy of using the camera and its abitilies to capture those memories and scenes. I switched from Canon to Nikon because the D300 is, to me, much more fun than any Canon camera to use ergonimically. Using a P&S, even the G10, turns into a clumsy exercize in frustration trying to capture exactly what I want. You can't clearly compose in the LCD in the daylight. That's the biggest problem. The typical P&S delay is also a big problem. If you happen to capture a worthwhile photo, the G10 will give you a great file in good light. But I always feel like the P&S cameras are fighting me the whole way.
Also, because P&S are so much easier to carry than a dslr, I find myself all too tempted to leave the dslr behind at the hotel. Only to be aggravated with myself that I didn't bring the "real" camera when a great photo op presents itself.
That's my story about the G10.
globalkiwi wrote:
With the exception of yours?! It seemed to me the OP was precisely soliciting opinions. Presumably it's up to him (& other interested readers) to decide which are "important" and which can be ignored.
Yes, it is up to a reader to decide what opinion is valid, and it is up to readers to understand what they are asking. "backup" is a thing or procedure, that, functioning as a copy of the original, can function as primary in case of a failure. With what the OP asked about regarding the flash, showing that s/he is interested in this specific function of a backup, it would be prudent to stick with the defining characteristics of a backup, instead of an emergency option.
If you understand that noise is a significant issue, in the shadows and even at modestly elevated ISOs, and if you are willing and able to live without a backup DSLR, then why not? Having an expensive DSLR sitting idle is a waste of capital unless it's serving as insurance against equipment failure. I myself am generally so dismayed by the noise in photos produced by small cameras (I have experience with the G9), that I just don't use them, but that's just me. I also believe there are superb photographers who do very nice work with such cameras, and I have seen some very fine shots taken with them, albeit in most cases in bright light.
kidding of course! I've been seriously considering a G9 or G10 (in addition to my 2, soon to be 3 DSLRs) for 2 reasons: first, to carry around every day in my pocket, and second for high-speed syncing with off-camera strobes.
I use a 5D to photograph events and have a Rebel XSi as backup and to have a lighter SLR. I also have a G10. I doubt I'd show up at a job with it as my backup camera, but it is a capable machine. I wonder how many of the folks concerned about the small CCD chip and noise have actually used a G10? It's quite an accomplishment, in my opinion.
You have to understand, I've been shooting since the '70s when film grain was a given. The noise in the G10 images, even at 400 ISO doesn't bother me. 400 ISO transparency film was grainier.
Here's a link to a site that was recently set up for G10 shooters:
TBannor wrote:
I wonder how many of the folks concerned about the small CCD chip and noise have actually used a G10? It's quite an accomplishment, in my opinion.
You have to understand, I've been shooting since the '70s when film grain was a given. The noise in the G10 images, even at 400 ISO doesn't bother me. 400 ISO transparency film was grainier.
The only complaint that I have, being one of the film shooters you are talking about
is that smaller chips have so little depth of field control. Well, that and I don't worry about how it compairs to past technologies, but if I am going to have a backup for a 5dII or 1dIII, it had better be able to at least shoot 6400
patrickphoto wrote:
Yes, it is up to a reader to decide what opinion is valid, and it is up to readers to understand what they are asking. "backup" is a thing or procedure, that, functioning as a copy of the original, can function as primary in case of a failure. With what the OP asked about regarding the flash, showing that s/he is interested in this specific function of a backup, it would be prudent to stick with the defining characteristics of a backup, instead of an emergency option.
Actually, I think the various interpretations of the word "backup" may be the source of some of the confusion here. We, for example, clearly have interpreted it entirely differently ...
Have a 5D that I am very happy with and use whenever I can, which is often, as I carry it around in a LowePro backpack. On the other hand, there are times (especially when going out for the day on leisurely weekends with my daughters), when I don't want to carry around the 5D tied to my wrist and have found that for casual shooting the G9 is a great camera, provided you know its limitations and do not try to use it in situations where it will perform badly.
Overall have caught a lot of moments on film (pardon sensor), that I would not have caught otherwise. As another poster said, the G9 is a great substitute for no camera at all and should the 5D fail it would allow me to bring back with me some memories from wherever I may have been.
A P&S can also be good in situations where you cannot take a SLR such as a concert where you are not accredited. I took the pictures visible at http://www.pbase.com/bluejaya/depeche_mode__zurich_2006 with a Sony DSC-W17 which does not even shoot RAW and I had to manipulate the JPGs. Still not bad - these were shot from very far away and handheld.
Overall, I can recommend the G9 a a second camera for all those situations where you can't be bothered to take or simply can't take the main gear. Not being a pro, I cannot comment on how I would feel if my main gear failed int he middle of a shoot and all I had left was the G9, so take my comment within context.
Bought the G7 years ago when did a trip to USA, and bringing the 1D2 was out of the question. Captured some very nice pictures, and they printed very very nice! But the huge DOF makes pictures look different different (from my SLR) in a way that I don't like! Very hard to isolate objects, which I like to do. The slow AF to boot makes the camera to stay in the bag most of the time.
I want to like it, but somehow find my feelings for this camera luke warm
