Doug Kerr
Well-known member
Canon has just announced its G16 compact camera, the latest in a long line of G-series machines. It looks very interesting.
DPR calls it a "minor update" to the G15. Whatever.
As some of you know, I am looking for a "compact" camera to use for much of my work. Our workhorse for serious photography is our Canon EOCC 40D, often bearing the EF-S 18-200 IS.
But that rig is big and heavy, and I don't always care to tote it to social events and such.
Our second camera is a Canon SX-150, a very nice compact. But its noise performance, especially at even moderate ISO sensitivities, is not very good.
It also has no eyepiece viewfinder, and thus (especially in bright sun) it is hard to effectively aim and compose.
The G16 sensor is 7.44 x 5.58 mm in size, and has a 4000 x 3000 sensel layout (1.86 um pitch). I would like somewhat larger sensor, and I have looked slightly into the G1X. But its range of focal lengths is more restricted, and there are some other problems with it (as reviewed) for me as well.
And today much of our work ends up in fairly-low resolution output (largely on forums and blogs), so we have greater opportunity to deal with the resolution impact of nose reduction (such as what is likely practiced inside the G16.
So who know what we might do.
Best regards,
Doug
DPR calls it a "minor update" to the G15. Whatever.
As some of you know, I am looking for a "compact" camera to use for much of my work. Our workhorse for serious photography is our Canon EOCC 40D, often bearing the EF-S 18-200 IS.
But that rig is big and heavy, and I don't always care to tote it to social events and such.
Our second camera is a Canon SX-150, a very nice compact. But its noise performance, especially at even moderate ISO sensitivities, is not very good.
It also has no eyepiece viewfinder, and thus (especially in bright sun) it is hard to effectively aim and compose.
The G16 sensor is 7.44 x 5.58 mm in size, and has a 4000 x 3000 sensel layout (1.86 um pitch). I would like somewhat larger sensor, and I have looked slightly into the G1X. But its range of focal lengths is more restricted, and there are some other problems with it (as reviewed) for me as well.
And today much of our work ends up in fairly-low resolution output (largely on forums and blogs), so we have greater opportunity to deal with the resolution impact of nose reduction (such as what is likely practiced inside the G16.
So who know what we might do.
Best regards,
Doug
Last edited: