Rich N
Well-known member
and I'm still feeling really good about my D-7 purchase.
I guess Sony is next up at bat.
Rich
I guess Sony is next up at bat.
Rich
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Canon G2 review just posted
- Thread starter Rich N
- Start date
You must be kidding...
Canon G2 Native JPEG Super-Fine $999.00
ISO Noise Range Bits Density dB
50* 0.08 675:1 9.4 2.8D 57
50 0.08 645:1 9.3 2.8D 56
100 0.10 403:1 8.7 2.6D 52
200 0.16 212:1 7.7 2.3D 47
400 0.30 103:1 6.7 2.0D 40
Minolta DiMAGE 7 5mp JPEG FINE $1500.00
ISO Noise Range Bits Density dB
100* 0.13 354:1 8.5 2.5D 51
100 0.14 289:1 8.2 2.5D 49
200 0.22 239:1 7.9 2.4D 48
400 0.41 153:1 7.3 2.2D 44
800 0.98 111:1 6.8 2.0D 41
Proofs in the output baby. There is still time to take it back!
Rich N hesitantly wrote feeling buyers remorse:
Canon G2 Native JPEG Super-Fine $999.00
ISO Noise Range Bits Density dB
50* 0.08 675:1 9.4 2.8D 57
50 0.08 645:1 9.3 2.8D 56
100 0.10 403:1 8.7 2.6D 52
200 0.16 212:1 7.7 2.3D 47
400 0.30 103:1 6.7 2.0D 40
Minolta DiMAGE 7 5mp JPEG FINE $1500.00
ISO Noise Range Bits Density dB
100* 0.13 354:1 8.5 2.5D 51
100 0.14 289:1 8.2 2.5D 49
200 0.22 239:1 7.9 2.4D 48
400 0.41 153:1 7.3 2.2D 44
800 0.98 111:1 6.8 2.0D 41
Proofs in the output baby. There is still time to take it back!
Rich N hesitantly wrote feeling buyers remorse:
Rich N
Well-known member
Don't misunderstand me, the G2 looks like a very nice camera but would I change my decision if I were to choose again today.
No way, I'd probably take the Fuji 6900 over the G2 if I was spending $1000.
I'll glady pay the extra $500 for the D-7's 28-200 lens (that alone is worth it) with manual zoom and focus, and the multitude of spot focus points, and the exposure preview and low light capability of the D7's EVF any day over the canons 34-102 , 3 focus points, peep hole viewfinder and button driven zoom any day.
The G2 may have lower noise and more DR at low ISO but my D7 shots at ISO 100 and 200 have no noticeable noise or DR issues on the monitor or when printed at 8x10 so those specs are non-issues to me.
very un-remorsefully yours,
Rich N
No way, I'd probably take the Fuji 6900 over the G2 if I was spending $1000.
I'll glady pay the extra $500 for the D-7's 28-200 lens (that alone is worth it) with manual zoom and focus, and the multitude of spot focus points, and the exposure preview and low light capability of the D7's EVF any day over the canons 34-102 , 3 focus points, peep hole viewfinder and button driven zoom any day.
The G2 may have lower noise and more DR at low ISO but my D7 shots at ISO 100 and 200 have no noticeable noise or DR issues on the monitor or when printed at 8x10 so those specs are non-issues to me.
very un-remorsefully yours,
Rich N
Mike Roberts
Senior Member
How much $$$ to cover 28mm-200mm?
$1000 camera + $???? wide lens + $???? long lens = what?
I figure another $300-$600. Know idea if I'm close though.
Mike Roberts
$1000 camera + $???? wide lens + $???? long lens = what?
I figure another $300-$600. Know idea if I'm close though.
Mike Roberts
Jim K53618
Senior Member
The G2 sounds good until you get to the stair stepng effect on diagnal lines. Also it has a rangefinder similar to a cheap point and shoot 35mm.
The noise level may seem like a lot in numbers, a difference of .03?! But in reality is not noticable.
I will admit the G2 does have the swival monitor and killer battery life going in it's favor, but i hardly think it will sway too many people from getting the D7 if they were leaning towards it any way.
Different market all together, different cameras all together. As nice as the G2 is it, it is aimed for the mainstream consumer market and will do well in that market. The D7 is aimed more for the prosumer market and while certainly not as good as it could have been, will do well in it's market.
Any D7 killers will most likely come from future SLR style prosumer cameras, not rangefinders.
Nice try, but no cigar.
Jim K
The noise level may seem like a lot in numbers, a difference of .03?! But in reality is not noticable.
I will admit the G2 does have the swival monitor and killer battery life going in it's favor, but i hardly think it will sway too many people from getting the D7 if they were leaning towards it any way.
Different market all together, different cameras all together. As nice as the G2 is it, it is aimed for the mainstream consumer market and will do well in that market. The D7 is aimed more for the prosumer market and while certainly not as good as it could have been, will do well in it's market.
Any D7 killers will most likely come from future SLR style prosumer cameras, not rangefinders.
Nice try, but no cigar.
Jim K
MikeA
Senior Member
But of course, he had only your best interests at heart.
Giovanni
Forum Enthusiast
Sorry Canon I expected something more to compete with D7, also considering the real retail price of D7/G2.
I will stay on D7 boat.
I will stay on D7 boat.
Jack40001
Leading Member
Without reading the review, when I read this: "Best of all we've had one for the last two weeks in order to bring you a full in-depth review of a production camera!", I already could guess his conclusion: "Highly Recommended.". ;-) He likes it or not.
Jake.
Jake.
Per Michael Knudsen
Member
Well, I own a Dimage 7, and if I had the chance to go back, I might go for the Powershot G2 instead.
One thing that really annoys me about the Dimage 7 is its poor metering. One can choose between overexposed or underexposes
)Of course that is an exaggeration, but even though I am getting the hang of when to compensate for underexposure, and when to compensate for underexposure, it would have been nice if the camera could actually find out itself.
In most other aspects I am happy about my Dimage 7, but I might wanna trade the 28-200 for the 34-104 on the Canon which is "faster", and seems to be sharper (with only slightly more aberration).
I want to be fair to the Canon Powewrshot G2 - even though I own a Dimage 7!!
Regards
Per Michael Knudsen
pka
Senior Member
I am G1 user waiting for D7, and I don't find enough improvement in G2 to go for it ... sure, in some good upgrade program, why not, but it is not software ... my main decision point is 28mm end of the D7 lens ... but I am curious what comes next as the Pro90 ancestor ...
pka
pka
B
Bob Williams
Guest
Actually, I am shocked that Phil gave it a HR with the jaggies
problem. He has always seemed pretty steady about what
appears on the screen mattering. Whether or not it made a
difference in print has not been a real consideration until now.
The Casio QV3000/3500 has had this problem from the beginning.
It isn't a problem at all most of the time for inkjet people, once
you learn how to get rid of it in the prints. You use USM to the
point that you have just gone a little bit too far for screen display.
When you print, dot gain wipes it out in everything but the worst
cases. I agree it is not a problem, but I am still scratching my head
when I think about Phil saying the same thing. The next few
months will tell the true story on how much the metering and
focus have improved tho, and that was where the real G-1
problems were.
problem. He has always seemed pretty steady about what
appears on the screen mattering. Whether or not it made a
difference in print has not been a real consideration until now.
The Casio QV3000/3500 has had this problem from the beginning.
It isn't a problem at all most of the time for inkjet people, once
you learn how to get rid of it in the prints. You use USM to the
point that you have just gone a little bit too far for screen display.
When you print, dot gain wipes it out in everything but the worst
cases. I agree it is not a problem, but I am still scratching my head
when I think about Phil saying the same thing. The next few
months will tell the true story on how much the metering and
focus have improved tho, and that was where the real G-1
problems were.
Giovanni
Forum Enthusiast
Read the post in the canon for the features that ahve not been changed form G1 that is:
1) zoom: not many steps, not easy to control (said also by Phil)
2) Exposure: blow at least as D7 sometime more
3) occasionally slow AF at telephoto (it wasn't "THE" problem of D7?)
4) not real full manual mode.
Regarding the G2 read this tread:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&page=1&message=1409957
believe me it's no perfect camera in the market.
G2 as his pro and his cons in respect to D7
I prefer to see to the pros than to the cons of a camaera and I prefer the pro of D7 despite G2 is an excellent camera.
Moreover the G2 is, IMHO, an answer to S85 not to D7, then two completly different camera concept.
See aslo this tread:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&page=1&message=1410995
1) zoom: not many steps, not easy to control (said also by Phil)
2) Exposure: blow at least as D7 sometime more
3) occasionally slow AF at telephoto (it wasn't "THE" problem of D7?)
4) not real full manual mode.
Regarding the G2 read this tread:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&page=1&message=1409957
believe me it's no perfect camera in the market.
G2 as his pro and his cons in respect to D7
I prefer to see to the pros than to the cons of a camaera and I prefer the pro of D7 despite G2 is an excellent camera.
Moreover the G2 is, IMHO, an answer to S85 not to D7, then two completly different camera concept.
See aslo this tread:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&page=1&message=1410995
Well, I own a Dimage 7, and if I had the chance to go back, I might
go for the Powershot G2 instead.
One thing that really annoys me about the Dimage 7 is its poor
metering. One can choose between overexposed or underexposes
Of course that is an exaggeration, but even though I am getting the
hang of when to compensate for underexposure, and when to
compensate for underexposure, it would have been nice if the camera
could actually find out itself.
In most other aspects I am happy about my Dimage 7, but I might
wanna trade the 28-200 for the 34-104 on the Canon which is
"faster", and seems to be sharper (with only slightly more
aberration).
I want to be fair to the Canon Powewrshot G2 - even though I own a
Dimage 7!!
Regards
Per Michael Knudsen
I agree with Jim, we are comparing apples and oranges.
I suspect that for a new point and shooter it will be a good buy, but I seriously doubt they counted on taking on a D7 or an E-10 with the G2, and I also doubt that they expect many G1 owners to upgrade out of loyalty, since there are too few changes. Nikon certainly couldn't have expected that with the 995, and did not get it either. The fact that it is an improved model will get a lot of sales people pushing it to new customers, though. It is a high end consumer camera with good specs for that on paper at least.
I too was prepared to pay $500 more for the D7 lens alone. A camera of any kind relies first and foremost on its lens(es)--all other things being even roughly equal.
The consumer P&S (35-105 9approx) lenses on consumer cams just plain suck. Sure, you can put convertors on them to match the D7 range, but you will drop at least $400 more on a decent set, and providing you get ones that don't degrade the optics of the native lens, or get lucky and get ones that improve it(actually possible !), that still leaves you with the absolute PIA of changing them when you need them for a shot opportunity that suddenly arizes.(hey, any ofl you folks frustrated at having to change an $11 set of batts one extra time in a 3-4 hour shooting session out there,realize you can change three sets of batteries one after the other faster than you change 1 lens convertor).
Besides the lens, there are a whole pile of features on the D7 or E-10 that put the G2 in another category.
Competition will come, but not from P&S designs where the prosumer features are thin and often come as add ons.
And when a better camera does come along (and it will), don't cry. Just remember that the D7 you bought raised the competition bar at the time you bought it. Use it and have fun with the greater photographic capabilities (opportunities, challenges, and successes) that it makes possible for you right NOW.
dh
I suspect that for a new point and shooter it will be a good buy, but I seriously doubt they counted on taking on a D7 or an E-10 with the G2, and I also doubt that they expect many G1 owners to upgrade out of loyalty, since there are too few changes. Nikon certainly couldn't have expected that with the 995, and did not get it either. The fact that it is an improved model will get a lot of sales people pushing it to new customers, though. It is a high end consumer camera with good specs for that on paper at least.
I too was prepared to pay $500 more for the D7 lens alone. A camera of any kind relies first and foremost on its lens(es)--all other things being even roughly equal.
The consumer P&S (35-105 9approx) lenses on consumer cams just plain suck. Sure, you can put convertors on them to match the D7 range, but you will drop at least $400 more on a decent set, and providing you get ones that don't degrade the optics of the native lens, or get lucky and get ones that improve it(actually possible !), that still leaves you with the absolute PIA of changing them when you need them for a shot opportunity that suddenly arizes.(hey, any ofl you folks frustrated at having to change an $11 set of batts one extra time in a 3-4 hour shooting session out there,realize you can change three sets of batteries one after the other faster than you change 1 lens convertor).
Besides the lens, there are a whole pile of features on the D7 or E-10 that put the G2 in another category.
Competition will come, but not from P&S designs where the prosumer features are thin and often come as add ons.
And when a better camera does come along (and it will), don't cry. Just remember that the D7 you bought raised the competition bar at the time you bought it. Use it and have fun with the greater photographic capabilities (opportunities, challenges, and successes) that it makes possible for you right NOW.
dh
henri56123
Leading Member
2 years ago, I bought an Olympus 2500L (excellent machine); my buddies were impressed (great); one year later, I was "old fashionned" compared to their 3 and more pixel cameras; but it was not: the Olympus was still making nice pictures;
So why did I go to the D7: bigger zoom (mainly) , more pixels, compact flash cards, excellent lens etc... Of cours this will happen again to the D7 with newer cameras but I am happy with my choice; I expect to keep this one a bit longer ;
Henri
So why did I go to the D7: bigger zoom (mainly) , more pixels, compact flash cards, excellent lens etc... Of cours this will happen again to the D7 with newer cameras but I am happy with my choice; I expect to keep this one a bit longer ;
Henri
Jim K53618
Senior Member
I hear you! Phil is not always consistant in his reviews. For example, he seemed to be overly critical of the D7, and his first review of the G2 sounds like a bloody commercial for Canon. I won't dare speculate to the meaning of this, if there even is one, but I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing this.
At least Phil occasional gets guttsy in his reviews, most other review sites over paraise all the cameras and sugar coat any problems, similar to magazine reviews. It's like reading a advertisment directly from the manufacturer. When Phil does this he over does it IMHO.
later,
Jim K
At least Phil occasional gets guttsy in his reviews, most other review sites over paraise all the cameras and sugar coat any problems, similar to magazine reviews. It's like reading a advertisment directly from the manufacturer. When Phil does this he over does it IMHO.
later,
Jim K
DarrenH
Senior Member
Ahhh, but Phil updated his opinion on that matter....the rangefinder is definitely a drag, but, one down.....
JerryO
Senior Member
Definately he is a Canon lover for some reason..
P
Phil Askey
Guest
I'll let you 'presume' what you like, I don't care much for this kind of talk because it's baseless garbage.. You're annoyed because the G2 did better at its price and target market than the D7 (which is a different camera at a different price band at a different resolution). There's no favouritism, there's no bias. But you're welcome to believe what you like.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum