G7–> G15?

When the G6 was announced in 2004, I already had a G3 and, although tempted, decided not to upgrade to the G6. After a while, it seemed that the G6 was the end of the line for the G series but then the G7 was a surprise announcement in 2006. The G7 has been followed by a new G series every year from 2007 through 2010 when, once again, there was a two year gap and rumors of the G series coming to an end. Those rumors ended with the announcement of the G15 a few weeks ago.

(As a side note, the G4 and G8 model names were skipped in the past just as the G13 and G14 names have been skipped most recently. That is, there was no G4 or G8. Amusingly, the G4 and G8 are sometimes praised on Internet discussion forums for their quality and features. I expect the same praise to eventually be awarded to the G13 and G14.)

The G7 was a nice looking compact camera but did not have the articulated display screen featured in previous G series models. To my further disappointment, the G7 did not produce RAW image files.  To many people, these shortcomings meant that the G7 was not a “real G”.  All G models after the G7 have included RAW image capability but the articulated display screen did not return until the G11. I passed on the G7 but bought a G9, then a G12 and most recently a G1X.

My point (and yes, there is one) is that there was a two year gap between the G6 (which had an articulated display screen) and the G7 (which did not). There was also a two year gap between the G12 (which had an articulated display screen) and the new G15 (which does not). The G7 was viewed as a test of the compact camera enthusiast market. Is the G15 also a test of the market?

Fortunately, the G15 can produce RAW image files. In fact, the G15 seems to be more like a G12 that has been made more compact (by eliminating the articulated display) than it does an updated G7.

Will there be a G16? Who knows? My thinking is that Canon currently offers too many enthusiast compact cameras (G1X, G15, S110, EOS-M and an advanced EOS-M essentially announced). I expect that, depending on sales volume (of course), either the G1X or G15 will be dropped. But, as Canon has shown in the past, “dropping” a product may really mean a two year gap until the next model is announced.

Oh yes, I eventually bought a used G6 just to complete the “set” (G3, G6, G9, G12). Does that mean I’ll someday have a G15?

G12 Gallery

I’ve added a Canon G12 portfolio to my SmugMug galleries to complement the existing G9 and G3 portfolios.  The G12 portfolio contains 20 pictures (so far).  Interestingly, 28 of the 52 pictures designated “Picture A Week” were made with the G12 and many of these also were selected for the G12 portfolio.

The G12 is a better and more versatile camera than the G9 just as the G9 is an improvement over the G3; however, little technical improvement can be noted by flipping through those portfolios – especially at the viewing resolution.  If anything, the G3, G9 and G12 portfolios are more of an indication of my own interests and skills than the particular camera that was used. 

YN565EX and the G12

The G12 and any large flash become an ungainly, but sometimes useful, combination.  In my introductory remarks about the YN565EX, I noted that it was not purchased for use on the G12 and implied that there were problems. Indeed, the YN565EX should be considered as incompatible with the G12; however, it does work on the G12 in certain modes. Let’s get the bad news out of the way first.

The YN565EX does not work at all – that is, does not even flash – when the G12 is in manual flash mode. This was completely unexpected. I expected some kind of odd ball behavior but it never crossed my mind that the YN565EX would not fire at all when mounted on the G12. Curious, I tried the YN565EX on my G9 only to find the same behavior (after changing batteries in the G9). Next, I tried the YN565EX on the G6 and G3 and discovered that the YN565EX is completely incompatible with those older G series cameras.

On the positive side, the YN565EX does work on the G12 when the G12 is in P, Tv or Av mode. The YN565EX zooms with the G12 zoom and Flash Exposure Compensation can be controlled either by the YN565EX or by the G12. The YN565EX seems to work in either direct or bounce orientation (I say “seems” to work because I did not attempt to check the accuracy of the flash exposure). Again, I’ll comment that the YN565EX is noticeably louder than the 580EX II when flashing. Also, to my eye, the YN565EX produces a more noticeable pre-flash when used on the G12. I would not be confident in using the YN565EX mounted on the G12.

But I didn’t get the YN565EX for direct mounting on the G12; I got it for use in the Canon wireless system. The G12 does not have its own internal wireless controller as does the 7D but the 580EX II can act as the master, or controlling, flash. My first attempts to set the 580EX II as the master flash were unsuccessful and I was beginning to think that the 580EX II was itself incompatible with the G12. Then I discovered that the G12 requires a menu setting to enable the Canon wireless system. As soon as the wireless system was enabled in the G12 menu, the 580EX II immediately became the master flash. Alas, the YN565EX did not respond to the 580EX II as a master when the 580EX II was mounted on the G12.

In my frustration, I got out a Canon 420EX and set it to slave flash mode using the same settings as the YN565EX. Side-by-side with the YN565EX, the 420EX responded to the 580EX II as expected but the YN565EX did not. More frustrated, I removed the 580EX II from the G12 and placed it on the 7D, noting that the settings did not change. When triggered by the 7D, both the YN565EX and the 420EX fired as expected -- end of compatibility tests.

Well, almost the end of compatibility tests. In optical slave flash mode, the YN565EX does respond to the G12 internal flash and also to the 580EX II when mounted on the G12.  The YN565EX also responds to the simple Yongnuo RF-602 wireless trigger. These are very useful features.

My conclusion is that although the YN565EX is not totally incompatible with the G12, it is best to declare the YN565EX as being incompatible and therefore avoid the frustration of attempting to remember which settings and modes work and which do not. I won’t be using the YN565EX with my G series cameras except as an optical slave flash or with the RF-602 trigger.

… but I’m still OK with having purchased the YN565EX.

Fireworks Fiasco

Well, almost, anyway.  I wanted to photograph the neighborhood fireworks display and play with a handful of cameras in the process.  Here’s what I did:

G3 using the built-in intervalometer at 1 shot per minute for 100 shots.  ISO 50, 2 second exposure, f4, manual focus at infinity.

G6 set up the same as the G3 but pointed in a different direction.

The G9 doesn’t have an intervalometer and no external connections to use one so the G9 was set in its “HD” movie mode (1024x768 at 15 fps).

G12 connected to a cheap no-name external intervalometer (worked fine).  ISO 80, 2 second exposure, f4, 1 shot every 4 seconds, manual focus at infinity.

7D triggered manually using wired remote, ISO 400, 2 seconds at f8. 

I knew I was trusting to luck on the G3 and G6 but it never occurred to me that my luck would be so bad.  Nothing.

The G9 movies were pretty bad and had lots of noise. 

Of the 298 G12 shots, a handful were OK.  That is, when the intervalometer got lucky, the photo was OK. 

I got by far the most keepers by triggering the 7D myself.  I used the old tried and true method of watching for a rocket launch and pressing the remote button – or just taking a random guess that it was about time for another launch.

The picture above is a composite of five shots that were combined in Photoshop.  Not bad but not what I hoped for.

G12: Hot Shoe Cover –> No Flash

From time to time there are reports of the G12 internal flash absolutely refusing to work in spite of (almost) every possible corrective action – including resetting – that could be imagined. Frequently the problem is related to a small micro switch located in the hot shoe, see the above image. The purpose of the micro switch is to inform the G12 that an external flash has been attached but if the micro switch has become stuck or unintentionally depressed then the G12 is misinformed. Result: no flash.

The problem is not confined to the G12; the micro switch is used on all the G series Powershots. The photos in this post are of the Powershot G9. The image above shows the G9 hot shoe with a cover designed by Richard Franiec. Notice that Richard cleverly engraved his design with “G” for “Gordon” (although some believe there were other reasons).

Knowing that the G series hot shoe has a micro switch, the Franiec cover is relieved along one side so that the micro switch is not activated when the cover is in place. There are other hot shoe covers available but all are not compatible with the Powershot micro switch. The G series internal flash will not work if an incompatible hot shoe cover is placed in the hot shoe.

I bought my G9 hot shoe cover directly from Richard and the G12 hot shoe cover from Lensmate. The same cover is used for G7 through G12.  My G3 and G6 also have the micro switch but the Franiec cover is just a bit too wide to fit.

There have also been reports of a stuck micro switch but more often the “flash doesn’t work” problem seems to be an incompatible hot shoe cover.

Light Description in 2010

.
Seems hard to believe, but this blog is about to enter its fifth year of "publication".  I initiated Light Description as a means to learn about blogging and to force myself to be more disciplined and organized in my thinking about photography.  Along the way, I found that participants in photography discussion forums often ask the same questions over and over.  This blog has become a convenient way to answer those repetitive forum questions in more detail with less typing.  Of course, Light Description is also a platform for showing the occasional good picture that I get as well as griping when things or equipment are not to my liking.  For all these reasons, I like my blog.

Light Description really picked up when I got my Canon G9; in fact, to some viewers, Light Description is the "G9 Blog".  Now that I have a G12, I suppose Light Description will become the "G12 Blog".  Actually, my best camera is the Canon 7D but I take the most pictures and have the most fun with the G9 and G12.  In fact, I bought a G6 not long ago just to see how it filled in those gaps between my G3 and G9.

A few statistics:  Last year, Light Description has 46974 visits from 35407 unique visitors for an average of 129 daily visits.  Visits typically run between 100 and 200; the peak was 337 visits in one day.  Visitors average reading two posts before exiting. Most visitors are from the USA, UK, Canada and Australia but the list includes 156 countries!  Most traffic to Light Description is generated by search engines but nearly the same amount is generated by direct referrals from other sites. 

The most popular posts on Light Description are:
1.  Yongnuo Speedlite YN460-II
2.  G12 and G9 in Noise Modes
3.  G12 Lens Adapters
4.  G12:  Going Wide

Plans for the future include, well, more of the same.  I'm still learning the ins and outs of the G12 and have a few new gadgets to report on as well.  I'm anxious to learn more about video on both the G12 and 7D; frankly, video is a bit intimidating. 

Light Description is completely non-commercial and almost certain to remain so.  The various cameras, accessories and gadgets that I report on have been purchased with my own funds for my own use.  Obviously, I am not a professional photographer or blogger.

Thanks for reading Light Description.  Stay tuned in 2011 but don't forget to use the labels and search function to find useful information from previous posts.
.

G Series: 1 Second Av

.
The longest shutter speed available for a Powershot G in Av mode is 1 second.  There, I've said it.  OK, so I'm not 100% sure about this.  The G1 or G2 might be different but my G3, G6, G9 and G12 all have this problem -- or feature, depending on how you look at it -- and I've read enough questions and complaints to feel sure that the G5, G7, G10 and G11 are programmed with the same limit.  The 1 second limit is not a bug because all the G series have it.  Although not a particularly serious problem, the 1 second exposure limit is unexpected -- especially since I typically forget!

Perhaps the 1 second limit is Canon's attempt to save us from ourselves because, of course, we could not hand hold the camera for that duration.  But we also could not hand hold the camera for 1/2 second or, after several coffees, even 1/30 second.  Plus, the little jiggly camera icon comes on to warn us at slow shutter speeds.  Besides, the shutter speed can be set for more than 1 second in Tv or, or course, M modes.  Therefore, I suspect that the 1 second limit is an arbitrary one or perhaps a programming convenience.

The vast majority of the time that the 1 second limit in Av mode becomes a problem to me is when I'm making a High Dynamic Range (HDR) photo.   To make an HDR photo, I typically mount the camera on a tripod, set the lowest ISO, select Av mode and set a mid-range f-stop.  I then use the auto bracketing feature of the camera.  The G series auto bracking can be set for 3 shots at +/- 2 stops.  When the camera is in Av mode, the "stops" are adjusted by changing shutter speed.  As an example, if the "correct" exposure is f5 at 1/60 second then the auto bracketing process produces an underexposed shot at f5, 1/240 and an overexposed shot at f5, 1/15 second.  Most of the time, this works out fine; however, if the base case exposure is, say 1/2 second, then the overexposed shot is at 1 second instead of the expected 2 seconds.  If the base case exposure is at 1 second then the "overexposed" shot is also taken at 1 second which is not useful.

For purposes of bracketing in Tv mode, remember that the (most recent) G series really has only 4 stops of aperture exposure bracketing:  f2.8, f4, f5.6 and f8.  Not all of those apertures are available at all zoom settings.  Also, for purposes of creating an HDR image, variations in aperture produce variations in focus and depth of field.  

As a result of the 1 second exposure limit in Av mode, long exposure HDR sets must be done in manual mode.

Now I can use this post as a reference for anticipated future complaints and explanations.
.

G: 3, 6, 9, 12

.

Canon introduced the PowerShot G series with the G1 in September 2000. Since then, there have been ten G series cameras; the current version is the G12. For various reasons, usually said to be “bad luck”, there was no G4 or G8. This means that the G12 could have been marketed as the “Tenth Anniversary Edition”; however, it was not. Strange.

I began my G experience with the G3, still have it and use it on occasion. I learned a lot about photography in general and digital photography in particular by using the G3. This blog was begun a few years after getting the G3 but does include posts about the G3.



Although greatly tempted by the G6, my next G was the G9 and I've written about it extensively. In fact, counting the labels, there are 132 posts in this blog that are labeled G9. I still have my G9 (as you might guess, I tend to keep cameras!). It is a fun camera and my goal – nearly achieved – was to squeeze every bit of performance from it that I possibly could. I've now transferred that goal to the G12.




I've not regretted skipping the G5 and, without RAW, did not consider the G7. But that skipped G6 remained a missing link until last week when I was able to find a good one. Now that I have a working G6, I'll play with it alongside the G12 for a few weeks. Meanwhile, here's a summary comparison of the main features of the G3, G6, G9, G12.

.

G12: First Impressions

.

Even though I was disappointed by the less-than-revolutionary design and features of the Canon G12 and hesitated to pre-order it, when the G12 became available at my local Best Buy, I changed my mind and bought one. The G12 features that really appeal to me are the 28mme wide angle, articulating screen, HD video and some hope of reduced noise at high ISO. I'll be exercising this one and see how it works out.

First a few visual comparisons to my old G3 and current carry-around G9. It is easy to forget how bulky the G3 is until it is side by side with the G9. In comparison to the G9, the G12 is somewhat larger but this is not likely to be a problem for me.  In the image above, all three cameras are zoomed out to the maximum focal length.  The G3 had a bulge for gripping; my G9 has the Franiec grip and thumb rest; the G12 has a small grip and thumb rest. I also use the Franiec hot shoe cover for the G9 and plan to get one for the G12.

Of course, the G9 did not have the articulated display screen but the much older G3 did; the G3 screen was much smaller than the G12 screen (as were all the display screens of that time).

The G12 comes in a much smaller box than the G9 did and does not include a printed manual but does include a printed 35 page “Getting Started” booklet. As a challenge, I've decided not to read the booklet or the PDF manuals on Canon's “Digital Camera Solution Disk” (Version 74.0!) for a while. After all, the G12 is very similar to my G9 and a little fumbling around will remind me of the differences.

I can't quite decide how I feel about the slightly rough, grainy outer surface of the G12. This must have been done to avoid a slick plasticy feeling when holding the G12; I'll have to get used to it. Otherwise, the G12 almost, but not quite, has the same feeling as the G9. The buttons and controls seem a little smaller and closer together than those on the G9 – another detail to become accustomed to.

The G12 certainly comes up quickly when the ON/OFF button is pushed. Also, it seems a bit more responsive than the G9 with respect to acquiring focus and shutter lag (but that may be some rationalizing on my part!).

Now to take the G12 on an outing – more later.
.

G12 Announced

.

No, that's my G9. The G12 was announced yesterday but I don't have one – yet. In fact, I'm agonizing over whether to get a G12.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have a G12. I passed on the G10 and G11 so the G12 has some (although not that many) advantages over my G9. Unfortunately, it turns out that you are required to trade money for a G12. I'm not fully convinced that the improvements in the G12 are worth $500 in comparison to my G9. On the other hand, if, for example, the G9 were dropped from a height of, say, six feet or so, then I'd certainly get a G12 instead of repairing the G9. Of course, this is just a hypothetical situation and not to be discussed with my wife.

Thinking out loud here …

Even though it is getting a lukewarm reception, the G12 does have some advantages over my G9. One of the features that surprised me in the G10 was the wide angle lens; I'd like to have that wider lens. Likewise, I was surprised when Canon returned to the articulated display screen in the G11 but I didn't buy the G11 even though the articulated screen was very useful in my G3. I'd predicted (and was wrong) that the G11 would have full HD video and then predicted – again wrongly – that the G12 would have full HD video; however, the G12 does have HD video as 720p. So, the G12 has the wide angle, the articulated display and HD video (albeit 720p) that I've been wanting.  Plus, the G12 sensor with its 10MP and a three year or so evolutionary advantage is likely to be better than the G9 12MP sensor – especially in low light (high ISO). Also, the G12 image stabilization is likely to be an improvement over the IS of the G9.

I'm curious about the High Dynamic Range feature of the G12 as well as Quick Shot mode and multi-aspect ratios but doubt that I'd use them very much. I do think that I'd use the G12 remote control quite a bit because the Franiec cable is very useful on my G9.

At this point, my conclusion is that the G12 is even less of an evolutionary step from the G11 than I'd anticipated – much less hoped for. On the other hand, the G12 is a nice step up from my G9. I'm seriously considering the G12 but anxiously awaiting the review and commenting process before opening my wallet.

By the way, I've given up on the PowerShot G series getting CMOS. I've also given up on the G series getting more sophisticated flash controls. In fact, I still think that the G series is near the end of its product life.

.

August 29

.

August 29 is a memorable date. On this day forty years ago, Jean and I were married; we've had a wonderful life.

On this day five years ago, Hurricane Katrina struck the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Jean and I were in Chicago on a business trip that was extended to an anniversary vacation until Katrina entered the Gulf. As Katrina changed course, we realized that if we did not beat the storm to our home in Baton Rouge, then we might not be able to return for several days. We were able to get a flight to Houston and rent a car. On the road to Baton Rouge from Houston, we had the eastbound lane mostly to ourselves. The westbound lane was packed from Houston to Baton Rouge with cars moving about 30 or 40 mph. That was a long and strange trip.

Our own house had little damage from Katrina although we were without electrical power for several days. Our families and friends on the Mississippi Gulf Coast did not fare very well at all.

This panoramic photo of the damaged Ocean Springs harbor was stitched from photos taken with my Canon G3.
 
 

.

7D AF-ON

.
I’m learning to use the AF-ON button on my 7D. Well, perhaps learning to use is not quite the best wording. AF-ON is, after all, just a button. I can already press it but I’m not in the habit of doing so. My habit is to press the shutter release button halfway, hesitate and then complete the press.

To take a picture, you point the camera at the subject and press the button – right? George Eastman built his company around the motto “You press the button, we do the rest”. More recent is the ongoing joke slogan about PHD cameras (“Push Here Dummy”).

The shutter button on many (most?) modern cameras actually has two “stopping points” or triggering positions. The first position is about halfway down. You can feel this first position by pressing the shutter button lightly and slowly. With a little practice, you can quickly get a feel for the effort and distance and the half-pressed button then comes quickly and naturally. The second position is the actual stopping point and is at the bottom of the shutter button stroke or press. The half-press has been my habit for a long time. It was especially useful with the G3 and G9 because those cameras had a very noticeable shutter lag unless the half-press technique was used. In addition to reducing shutter lag, the half-press was especially useful in the “focus, recompose, shoot” technique that I almost always use.

In addition to the two position shutter button, the 7D also has the AF-ON button. This button acts like the half-pressed shutter button. So what? Why use AF-ON ?

In addition to focusing, the AF-ON button locks focus as long as the button is held down. This means that I can focus, recompose, shoot, recompose, shoot, shoot, shoot, recompose, shoot, etc., etc. There’s no need to refocus as long as I remember to hold down the button. This is especially useful in portrait shooting. I’m no longer waving the camera around as I continually focus, recompose and shoot.

A good feature, AF-ON .
.

7D

.
After much agonizing and deliberation, I decided to upgrade my Canon 20D (DSLR) instead of my Canon G9. In other words, I decided to purchase a Canon 7D instead of a G11. The 7D has arrived and is looking good!

As just a bit of my thinking and rationalization, my wife and I share the photography hobby and therefore the equipment. When we began, I had some old film cameras (most notably the Konica T2), but we became more serious with a pair of Canon EOS SLR film cameras and gradually accumulated lenses, flashes, etc. From film, I eased into the Dark Side with the Canon G3 and liked it so much that we bought a 20D shortly after it became available. The 20D is a fine camera but we had only one and it quickly became my wife’s camera! Whenever we were photographing together, my wife used the 20D and I used various combinations of the G3 and film (usually transparency). The G9 was definitely an upgrade from the G3 but we obviously needed another DSLR.

Why a DSLR and why the 7D? In a word, my granddaughter -- although in truth there’s more to the decision than that Apple-of-My-Eye. In addition to being cute, she is quick – much quicker than the G9 (and yes, I know about the half pressed shutter button, etc.). Video might catch her and HD video (not available on the G11!) seems appropriate. Also, I’m studying off-camera flash and frankly have been envious of Nikon’s ability to control external flash directly from the camera. When not using flash, the 7D’s promise of reduced noise at high ISO sensitivity is very alluring. Finally, the 7D just really seems to be a very good camera. We’ll see.

What about the G9? I still have it, plan to keep it and will certainly be using it; in fact, I used the G9 to get this picture of the 7D. I also still have the G3, 20D and, uh, all my cameras.

What about Light Description? This blog has never been just about the G9 although for much of the past two years it probably appeared to be. As I explore and learn to use the 7D, I’ll be documenting those experiences just as I did for the G9. From time to time I still expect to have a few posts about the G9 or referencing the G9.

What about the 7D? It really feels good in my hand! More later.

.

Comparison of all Powershot G Cameras

.
In this very interesting article, the author conducted tests of every Powershot G camera: G1, G2, G3, G5, G6, G7, G9, G10. Cropped versions of both uprezzed and downrezzed images are shown for all ISO sensitivities. Prints were made and three people evaluated and ranked those prints. Very interesting!
.

A Year with the Canon G9

.
Just over a year ago, I ordered a Canon G9 and made my first post about it. Since then, I’ve posted at least 80 articles about my experiences with the G9 along with an occasional bit of news or other link. (See the labels on the left hand side of the blog for an index.) In the past year, the G9 has been by my side (well, in the bag over my shoulder) almost every day.

Even though I’ve done a lot with the G9, yesterday was the first trip to the zoo for my G9 and also for my granddaughter. Another first – as simple as it seems – was that I used the on-camera flash for fill. The day was bright and clear but the zoo was full of shadows and I was not always able to get the best angle to the sun. As usual, I shot in raw, Av mode but this time turned on the flash with flash compensation reduced by 1/3. This worked out well.

Thinking back over the past year with my G9, I began by talking about my trusty G3. The G3 still works as well as ever but is rarely used. During Hurricane Gustav, I did use the intervalometer of the G3 but fortunately recorded nothing of serious consequence.

Noise at high ISO was an early concern for G9 images and I’ve worked with noise reduction techniques quite a bit ever since. In fact, noise reduction and comparisons is my latest on-going project. I’ll summarize my conclusions about G9 noise by saying that the results at ISO 400 are usually OK for me if I get the exposure right and use raw mode. In a pinch, I do use ISO 800 rather than miss a picture entirely.

I’ve used the G9 almost every day since getting it and have taken 8599 pictures with the G9. True, many of those were learning or experimental shots but most were taken with at least some hope of getting a ‘keeper’. My keepers include 22 photos posted in a public G9 gallery and roughly twice that number of more personal shots in private galleries. By my count, I’ve printed 11 keepers at 12x18 inches in addition to test shots; several dozen keepers at 8x10 (OK, mostly of my granddaughter) and hundreds of snapshots. Some of my G9 shots were entered into the monthly competition sponsored by my local camera club and occasionally get some sort of recognition. Like many photographers these days, most of my work lives only in computer memory and is shown only on a computer screen.

Friday, I held a G10 in my hot little hands. Having used the G9 so much, the G10 felt very familiar and almost intuitive to use. The G10 is a nice camera and I wouldn’t hesitate to get one except that I already have a G9.

For the foreseeable future, the G9 will remain my everyday work horse of a camera. I recently bought a few new flash gadgets as well as Photoshop CS4 and will be writing about those as soon as I finish my self imposed study on G9 noise reduction.

.

My G3 Gallery

.
Since I've owned and used a Canon G3 for many years, I have quite a few pictures taken with the G3. I’ve posted a G3 gallery alongside my existing G9 gallery on SmugMug.

For both galleries, the images have been resized to display full screen at 1024x768. The G9 gallery is more representation of where I am at the moment whereas the G3 shows my learning curve over the past several years. In assembling and posting these galleries, there was no conscious effort to compare cameras, styles or techniques – just some photos that I like.

I stand by my previous statement that, for purposes of full screen viewing, it would be difficult to choose one G series camera over another – for that matter, many cameras produce similar screen images. (But I’ll grant that pixel peeping, cropping and print making are a different subject!)
.

G9 Wiki!

.
The G9 has a Wiki! In fact, the entire Powershot G series of cameras has a Wiki.

A Wiki is a collaborative informative article. You’ve probably heard of “Wikipedia” – the free, online encyclopedia. Well, Wikipedia now includes a Powershot G article. Check it out; in fact, contribute to it!
.

Comparison of G3 and G9 ISO 400 RAW

One of my reasons for getting the Canon G9 when I already had a G3 was to get a higher useable ISO rating. The G3 has a maximum ISO 400 whereas the G9 goes up to ISO1600. Much has been made of the fact that the G9, having 12 megapixels, necessarily has smaller pixels than the G3 with its 4 megapixels. Small pixels generally mean more noise. Even so, it seemed likely that the G9 might be more useable at, say, ISO 400, than the G3. I decided that if the G9 produced reasonably good 8x10 prints at ISO 400 – even if special noise reduction was required -- then it would be a keeper. This turns out to be true and I’m keeping the G9.

The picture below is a direct comparison of the G3 and G9 at ISO 400. Once again, it is important to know the “rules” of the comparison. The scene is the same as in the previous post. The G3 and G9 were set at ISO 400, RAW mode and aperture priority (Av). The cameras were placed, one at a time, on a tripod; the tripod was not moved. RAW files were processed in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) with no adjustments; that is, all tonal adjustments, sharpening, noise reduction, etc were set to zero. (Keep this in mind when looking at the crops.) Even so, there are some important differences in the basic image files. The G3 image is naturally 2272x1704 pixels; the G9 is 4000x3000. The G3 lens was at its widest, 7.2mm focal length but the G9 widest focal length is 7.4mm. Even though the tripod did not move, the cameras were not precisely oriented. The G3 exposure was 1/1250 sec at f4.5 but the G9 selected 1/640 only about five minutes later. Rather than manually adjust these automatic exposures, I decided to accept them; the histograms look about the same.

Again referring to the previous post for the complete view, the sample below is from the bottom towards the middle.

On a 100% pixel view, the G9 image is larger. How should this be resolved? I decided to reduce the G9 image to the exact same number of pixels as the G3 (G3 and G9 images have the same aspect ratio). The above is a 100% crop showing 400x400 pixels (click on the picture for a larger view) of the (essentially) unprocessed RAW images. Clearly the G9 crop has less noise and shows more detail.

The above area was well exposed; let’s examine another sample from the shadows. The crop below compares the G3 and G9 at the middle right hand side of the full image. The rules of comparison are the same.

Once again, it is easy to prefer the G9 image. Perhaps the most obvious improvement of the G9 as compared to the G3 image lies in the amount of visible detail. Notice that the G3 sky shows more noise. Interestingly, the amount of noise in the shadows seems roughly equal but, again, the G9 image has much better detail and gives the impression of less noise.

Remember, these were comparisons of ISO 400 RAW files as exposed by the G3 and G9 in Av mode. The samples shown were not adjusted for levels, curves, saturation, sharpness, noise reduction, etc. The G9 samples were downsized to match the G3 samples. Obviously, each image could be improved with proper post processing.

My conclusion is that I’d prefer to use the G9 at ISO 400 instead of the G3 at ISO 400 – even though the G9 pixels are smaller.

Comparison: G3, G9, S5, SD800, 20D

Suppose you come upon a well lit scene and simply raise your camera to your eye and get a snapshot. Which camera would be best? I gathered a Canon SD800IS, an S5IS and a 20D along with my G3 and G9 and attempted to make a comparison.

Once again, I’m impressed by the “rules” that must be made up for the comparison game. This time, the rules are: no special exposure, no special focusing, use low ISO setting, no tripod, compare the in-camera jpg images. Although all the comparative images came out OK, I probably should have used a tripod just to eliminate that variable. Also, because it is my normal practice, I shot in Aperture Priority (Av) mode.

My original intention was to post the various images and elaborate on the differences. As I viewed the various shots on my monitor, I realized that they were all the same. Well, almost the same, anyway. Especially at full screen size. I printed them on an Epson 2200 printer – the same. I printed them on a Canon i9000 printer – the same (but different from the Epson). Different papers – the same (but different paper to paper).

Of course, when I processed the RAW files (couldn’t resist getting RAW from the G3, G9 and 20D) then those images should be different from the in-camera jpgs. And they were. The ones that I over-exposed in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) were too bright. The ones that I over-saturated or over-sharpened were, well, over-saturated or over-sharpened. I combined an overexposure and underexposure in an attempt to get more detail but didn’t like it. All in all, for this particular scene and for the first pass attempts in ACR processing, the in-camera jpgs were fine – and that goes for all the cameras.

The picture posted above is from a Canon S5 IS. The G3, G9 and SD800IS look very similar – and why not? These images are all “designed” by Canon’s marketing teams and engineers (I’m making this all up but you get the idea) to be pleasing to the purchaser – on average. Realistically, you have to expect the in-camera jpg images from these Canon products to be very similar.

On the other hand, the 20D image was very different (remember, we’re talking about an in-camera jpg). The 20D has a CMOS sensor instead of the CCD used in the G3, G9, SD800 and S5. The 20D, a DSLR, is targeted at a different market. The obvious difference that I observed is more related to color saturation than anything else. That is, the 20D image was less saturated; however, this is actually a consequence of the 20D settings that I had personally established.

I tried to be objective. I waited days between comparisons. I showed the prints to quite a few people. These images, whether viewed on screen or printed to 8x10 are all essentially the same. I’ll venture to say that, based on these images alone, almost anyone would be happy with any of the cameras that I “tested”. Strangely enough, most people preferred the over-saturated in-camera jpgs of the digicams to the more realistic 20D version. In fact, I have to admit that my own preferences (based on processing the RAW files) look more like the digicam in-camera jpg than the more realistic 20D in-camera jpg. No doubt those preferences are a sign of the times.

My conclusion? For front-lit simple landscapes, any of the higher end Canon digicams produce about the same image. A more realistic image is made by the 20D DSLR. All produce an acceptable image when printed at 8x10 inches.

My personal choice? I’ve learned enough about the G9 to know that if image quality, especially enlarged prints, is the criteria, then I’m going to use the 20D. At the same time, for these particular images, I’ll give the edge, albeit a slight one, to the G9. Whether from the in-camera jpg or a processed RAW file, I consistently picked the G9 images as my favorites. I attempted to forget, to be objective, etc., etc. but the G9 just takes good pictures.

G9: Noise in the Garden

Any self-respecting Pixel Peeper will take one look at this 100% crop and cry out “Noise!”. (You’ll probably have to click on the image to see a larger version and get the full effect.) On learning that the image is from the Canon G9, the Peeker will further exclaim, “I knew it. Small pixels are noisy. The G9 has too many pixels on a small sensor and therefore each pixel must be very small. No wonder the image is noisy; I predicted it.”

All of the above (explanation, that is) seems to be true. The Canon G9 does pack a lot (12,000,000) of pixels onto a small sensor. Therefore, those pixels are small and, all other things being equal, smaller pixels produce more noise. I’m not a camera designer, a chip designer or even an electronics engineer but I’ve come to accept these facts as being in accord with the “Laws of Nature” and, even more convincingly, Internet Lore.

Besides, the detailed tests and reviews of the G9 are published and it produces noisy images. No doubt about it: G9 images are noisy and the noise gets worse as the ISO setting increases. The full scene from which the noisy crop was taken is shown below (but reduced in size to 1024x768, high quality jpg compression).



Two of the main reasons that I bought the G9 were that I wanted higher resolution and a usable higher ISO than I could get from my Canon G3. The G3 was limited to 4MP and ISO400; however, the ISO400 was not particularly usable. My hope was that the G9 would have good quality at ISO400.

I’ve seen the reviews and read the comments in the discussion forums: G9 = Noise. I took a few shots at high ISO and peeked at the pixels. Yes, even my own G9 is noisy. Now, could I find a way to work with or around that noise?

Of course, I had to generate some images and conduct my own tests. Here’s the set up and procedure:
- found a scene with both bright and dark areas
- G9 on tripod
- Set for RAW + jpg (hoping to get improvements in Photoshop)
- Set Av mode
- Set 2 sec shutter delay (wish the G9 had a remote)
- Pictures at ISO 80, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600

The above pictures were taken at ISO1600 and are direct from the in-camera jpg. Surprised? The second lesson learned is that the high ISO images can be very usable so long as the image is small. What good is a small image? Well, uh, the Internet...

The first lesson learned (see, the paragraph above has the second …) is that testing cameras is not at all straightforward. For example, what is the correct exposure for all these varying ISO speeds? I decided to use Av mode but that decision also means that the test results vary with the G9’s judgement of exposure. (Shutter speeds selected by the Av mode did not exactly track ISO.) Is the in-camera jpg that is embedded in the RAW file the same as a jpg made without RAW? (Seems to be.) How should the data be presented?

Entire scenes are shown in this post as 1024x768 pixels. The in-camera jpg images are presented as-is and 100% with no post processing whatsoever except for cropping to emphasize the noise.

The ISO 80 crop from in-camera jpg

The ISO 800 crop from in-camera jpg



The ISO 1600 crop from in-camera jpg is the first picture show in this post.

I’ve already admitted to peeking at a few pixels myself. I didn’t care for the higher ISO images from the in-camera jpg. In fact, I didn’t particularly like the ISO 80 image from in-camera jpg – not that it was noisy, it just doesn’t look good to me. Time to break out Photoshop CS3 and process those RAW files.

Interestingly, Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) did not automatically change the exposure of the RAW files. Of course, I did tinker with the settings myself. I wanted to minimize noise and get a picture more to my liking as well.

In the G9 review on Digital Photography Review, I was impressed by the noise reduction of an ISO 400 image with ACR 4.3 (and by noting that ACR 4.3 is being Beta tested; the current version is 4.2 and it only approximately fits the G9). The ACR settings really caught my eye: luminance at 0 and chroma at maximum. I’d have never thought to use these extremes but it seemed to help the DPReview images. Of course, I don’t have the 4.3 Beta but I tried both extremes and the middle settings for luminance and chroma noise reduction in ACR 4.2. To my eye, there was no effect; perhaps this will change in version 4.3.

I use Photokit Sharpener from Pixel Genius for sharpening. PK Sharpener uses a three step process: 1) capture sharpening, 2) creative sharpening and 3) output sharpening. Capture sharpening is user selected according to camera resolution and user taste, creative sharpening is entirely user taste and output sharpening varies with file size, output device (screen, printer, etc.) and user taste.

The most recent versions of Photoshop include sharpening in ACR. The ACR sharpening parameters are on the Detail screen along with the noise reduction parameters. I’ve been wanting to try ACR sharpening as a sort of “capture” sharpening. Strangely enough, to me anyway, when ACR sharpening is used, the luminance and chroma settings come into play. I suppose ACR is designed this way but, if so, it was not obvious to me. After much trial-and-error, it seemed to me that settings of 50, 0.5, 20, 80, 50, 50 for the ACR Details page reduced noise nicely but not entirely. (You’ll have to check the Details page to see what I mean by these numbers.)

I still used PK Sharpener for capture sharpening (incorporated into the trial and error above).

Now for more noise reduction using Neat Image. I made my own profiles using the Neat Image calibration targets and applied Neat Image at 35% strength. Pretty simple and took me a lot less time and experimenting.

By this point, the noise level had dropped quite a bit. I finished up the post processing by tweaking levels, curves and saturation. Here’s the 100% illustrative crop from the ISO 800 image:

Notice that the noise, even pixel peeked, is not too bad. On top of that, the details look better to me. And here’s the final, full image from the ISO 800 RAW file after post processing.


I even like this one more than the ISO 80 image from the in-camera jpg but that’s a matter of taste. I will say that the colors, especially the fence, are more accurate (if somewhat saturated). It made a nice print.

So, I think my G9 has very good potential at ISO 400 and even 800 under the right conditions and when processed from RAW. The requirement to process from RAW is not a problem to me; much of that processing can be done semi-automatically using Photoshop Actions.

But, sad to admit, I gave up on the ISO 1600 file. Although it could be improved, I haven’t got it quite right – yet.