Probably the most profound wake-up call on IQ you/I will ever read...

Well, it was the pixel peeping at the end of the day that got him to sit up and take notice in the first place. To quote the author:

"Now, I'm no newbe. After some 50 years in this industry I know what I'm looking at, be it a screen blow-up or a print, and I certainly don't confuse how something looks on a 15" laptop screen (though properly profiled and calibrated) with how it will turn out on a critically produced exhibition-quality print. But nevertheless, I was curious about what I was seeing. In fact I was more than curious, I was somewhat amazed."

Not discounting the look and feel of a nice print but it was this very same pixel peeping that got me to sit up and take notice too. Most people who own the G10 are amazed at the pixel level detail, and it's my experience that this pixel level detail translates extremely well when making prints. This should be true for any digital camera, wouldn't it?

Not saying the G10 isn't without warts but for landscapes it continues to impress me and a lot of other owners too. If they could just improve dynamic range then we'd really have something.