nahau, no argument that when the G-1 works, it works well.
I do question the percentage of one shot captures in auto
that are that successful.
Dave, I bought the QV3000 on the last day of Jan. I took
right at 5000 images with it. The lens mechanism broke during
a trip shooting with it. Since I got the extended warranty, I
took it back to the store. The camera was discontinued, and
they don't carry the next version. I ended up swapping for the
G-1. That was three weeks and 700 images ago. My wife is
still PO'ed about losing the Casio, and as time goes by, I become
more upset every time I use the G-1. The metering gives you
two options that don't work well, while the Casio gave you three,
and they all worked. The Casio was so consistant that you could
correct one image out a batch, and then process the rest with
the same settings. The Canon is inconsistant, with every image
needing different touches. The auto mode on the Casio was very
usable and flexible. The auto mode on the Canon is like everything
else about the camera. Outside on a bright day, it is pretty good.
Inside, especially with flash, it is very bad unless the light is perfect.
You will find hundreds of references in this forum alone to keeping
the camera set to -2/3rds EV all the time. The lens is the same.
The range of f-stops and shutter speeds is the same on both
cameras, but the G-1 is crippled in how they can be used. With
the Canon, high shutter speeds can only be used with f-8. I have
some nice rollercoaster shots that were taken at 1000's
f-2 with
the Casio. Because of the lighting, I could not have attempted
the shots with the G-1 because of the shutter speed aperature
bug. The Canon uses much slower shutter speeds for just about
everything, making things like flower or stop action shots much
harder, especially if the wind is blowing. The Casio had no prolems
with this, and I have a clear picture of a butterfly with it's wings
blown down flat on a lilac bush because the wind was howling at
over 40mph. Another shot impossible with the G-1. I have low
light stop the drops in mid air fountain shots taken with the Casio.
Don't know how I would take them with the G-1 at f-8 to use the
fast shutter speeds. Guess I would have had to go back the next
day. I shot a wedding in a dimly lit country church with the Casio
for the heck of it. Despite being handheld at slow shutter speeds
with no flash, so as to not make the pro mad, over half of the
shots are pretty good. In this case, the G-1 might do as well or
better, but I have not tried yet. To take a picture of a red rose
with the Casio, you put it in auto, and might have to adjust the EV
a little for lighting. I have not yet been able to capture this shot
with proper color in any mode using the G-1. The G-1 has better
resolution, but to use it you have to carry a gray card, a reliable
meter, and learn to work the camera. With the Casio, 90 percent
of the time, you just point and shoot. The manual stuff is all there
for the times it is needed, which isn't often. Like i said, the Casio
is really bad at close macro. In the end, if you want to learn to
use manual settings, use a gray card, a meter, and shoot everything
three times in hopes that one of them is usable, it does take
images with a better resolution. If you want to pick it up, turn it
on, and take pictures, then get the Casio. The G-1 is built stronger,
but don't let that fool you. Read this forum and you will find that
one small ding and the warranty is void. The G-1 has a built in lens
thread. The Casio requires a lens thread adaptor that will cost you
60$. The Casio is plastic, but the only reported denial of warranty
that I know of came from being dropped in water. Despite being
made of plastic, the Casio went thru 5000 images with me, mostly
out doors on the farm hanging around my neck. It did not have
a scratch on it when it broke. The Casio is easier to hold and
operate. You do have to use menus for some things you don't
have to with the G-1, but those menus are very well designed.
I could operate it in the dark with no problem. The very best ISO
50 images from the G-1 are better than the very best Casio
images because of the resolution advantage. On everyday point
and shoot pictures, the Casio wins by a large margin because
most of the images will be usable. I have a series of rose shots
from yesterday taken with a tripod, using the ten second delay,
taken in p/macro with the G-1. None of the shots are usable,
because the camera never did clearly focus on the bloom. I take
that back, one of the bud shots may be usable. Even if the
focus had been correct, they would all have to be corrected
for color, as the bloom has a pink lip. I am disgusted with the G-1,
and wonder how something this clutsy could be considered the
top anything but doorstop. Maybe I have a really bad G-1, but
you will find that most of the folks here shut up when I post the
truth about this camera. You will notice that no one has
answered my challenge to post a recognizable picture of a named
red rose. You will notice that compensation for this or that
seems to be the main topic of discussion on this forum. I don't
think it is just my camera.
Mike, take the G-1 off the list. Auto is pretty much useless
except on clear nice days outside. Don't get me wrong, if the
light is good enough, auto works ok inside, but auto with the
flash is bad. The metering is not reliable. The color accuracy is
not reliable. Even the focus is not reliable for point and shoot
usage. The resolution is great, but you have to work to use it
properly. I don't know about the other cameras on your list
other than in store testing. For point and shoot, look at the
Casio. Same lens, more adjustments than the Canon, and it
actually works in auto mode. When you need the control for
the 20 percent you mentioned, it provides very good manual
control, aperature, and shutter priority modes. The absolute
resolution is not as good as the Canon, but in point and shoot,
it will capture 5 times as many usable images as the Canon, and
save you some money. It's biggest weakness is close macro.
By the way, my G-1 is one of the newer ones with the 1.002
firmware installed. The results I just posted are from the
cameras you can buy today, not those of 6 months ago.
Which Casio are you referring to? Do you own both Canon G1 and the
Casio? I too am in the market and have read about the Casio QV3000
and the Canon G1...
Dave
