Retired Navy officer, bubblehead (submariner)
G3User: Number 14 is a Photoshop fail! How can water just bend like that when coming out of the bucket? Another example of the how the judges have no idea what they are doing. Oh, that's right, this is Sony, I should have known. The death of true photography continues.
The water isn't bending (water doesn't "bend"). There is nothing unusual about that picture other than its comic value. Water is composed of water molecules, and in liquid form each molecule acts independently with some interaction due to surface tension, etc. Each undergoes accelerations and has its own trajectory. I have seen much more odd looking plumes than that (I'm an ocean engineer and see weird stuff all the time related to water).
I agree with kev777zero. Gosh the forum has gotten so techno-babble cynical about everything. This camera has the potential (emphasis on potential) to have DSLR IQ in a small, light package with an f2 pancake lens. So if you're stepping up from a P&S and don't want the bloated hardware a DSLR entails, this looks appealing. Throw in that it's compatible with some very good EOS lenses and it has potential. I'm not a mirrorless guy (like OVFs) but if I was in the market for one I'd certainly consider this. I'll bet it sells well contrary to all the marketing genius opinions. If it's IQ is good and there are no weird, dysfunctional issues, what's not to like?
wkay: whoopee, mediocre IQ, poor contrast, hi CA, and soft corners.
I don't like plasticky, cheap cameras. That said, and contrary to what photo nuts posted, I think the high iso quality is exceptional for a camera at this price. If you're a photographer younger than 30 years old, you can't possibly understand how much better even the lowliest DSLR today is compared to the best 35mm cameras of only 10 years or so ago. I remember arguments back then about how long it would take digital to equal film. That was rubbish. As soon as the D2X, 1DS and later models came out it was game over. Add to that the HUGE advantages in modern digital workflow over film and it's ludicrous that we (me included) are so critical of some digital models today. I mean come on, ISO 12,800!! I remember when ASA 800 film didn't look that good. I wouldn't trade any film camera today (and I still own an F4, FM2 and Leica M6) for even my Canon G12. We're so lucky and so spoiled. I can't wait to see what comes out in another 10 years (if I'm not broke from buying new toys).
OK, folks. I'm at a loss here. I've always been able to see pics on DPR before. I have now tried 3 browsers on the Mac side, IE8 on Windows and no joy. I've got the pop up blocker turned off, and security settings at minimum. Any ideas? I can see everything else but the comparison pics.
Carlos, I have tried Safari, Chrome and Camino on my Mac and can't see the pics. It's not you.
ag93: Can someone help me decide between the G12 and the S100
If you like pocketable, it's the S100. G12 makes no pretense towards being a pocket camera. I have the S95 and just sold my G12. I loved the quasi-retro aspect of the G2, but image-wise they were just so close there was not discernible difference. If the S100 is as Canon claims (less noise, higher dynamic range) you can't go wrong with it. I kept the S95 simply because I could put it in my pocket. One note though. If you have large hands, the G series is much more comfortable to use. I have average hands so neither was a problem.