My official conclusion on G7

I want to conclude my G7-reporting with a small essay. What G7 is, what it is not, and what might be the future of compact cameras.

First, here is a sample that combines every problem, limitation, technological failure and disappointment about G7.



An awful, underexposed ISO 1600 picture taken in awful light. This tells that G7 is not a new Leica, and that it is not a tool for an artist, and it does not bring forth any sort of technological revolution.

My overall assesment of the IQ can be put into a slogan: with G7 you don't capture an image, you capture a file. "Image" would mean a beautifully rendered picture with warm, radiating, vivid colours. You get images with a Canon 5D.

"File" means a bunch of pixels that you need to process to your needs. However, a file also means that you CAN process them to your needs. There is nothing so deeply wrong with G7 files that you couldn't get your picture in the end. In one way or another.

Then the other side of the coin.



The same scene at ISO 80 with a little help from Speedlight 550 EX. This is what the G7 is about: you have EVERYTHING you need to get a good quality picture EVERY TIME.

The hot shoe is not just a nice addition - it is the very core of the camera. I have used the earlier Gs and I will use the G7 as one component in a larger whole. The whole includes the big flash, the wide converter and the camera.

This kit will produce coverpage quality in practically any journalistic situation - in one way or another. Most of the time you must use the flash to get the pic, but then, the flash works wonders. When you hold the camera on the other hand and the swiveling head of the flash on the other, the camera/flash combo moves like a painter's brush.

This functionality is unique to G7 at the moment. No other camera gives you the combination of control and the hot shoe.

This is why the pros and cons of G7 are not that simple as suggested on the forum.

Here is my point: G7 is, believe it or not, a much better tool, a much better camera than any G before. Yes, it lacks many important features, but it has many others instead. The sum is larger than before.

Why?

1. The controls are better. For example, the instant focus check feature gives you a lot of functional speed and assurance in a shooting situation. Also the live histogram is a great advantage.

2. IS is golden. You can capture things at ISO 400, f/2.8 and 1/10 that you couldn't capture before.

3. The smaller size is important. This sounds contradictory, when I talk about the hulking 550 EX and child's-head-sized wide converter, but when I am on an assigment, the camera size still matters a lot.

4. The lack of RAW can be overcome. This seemingly unforgivable problem gets diminished when you actually work with G7. The live histogram, the flash and the possibilities offered by the new Silkypix program (you can develop jpegs very much like RAW) have changed the equation.

Try it for yourself: use the camera, change the ISOs, control the result via histogram, develop the files with Silkypix and voila' - you end up surprisingly satisfied. The usable pictures just keep coming.

5. The lack of swivel screen gets forgotten. About the same explanations as above - swivel screen was nice, but there are new things that take it's place. You actually forget the problem in a few days. Away from eyes, away from heart, as the French say.

My official conclusion is that G7 just works. You have to have the skill and the equipment, but when you have it, you get your pictures practically as surely as you get them with a DSLR. This is excluding, of course, sports and some other demanding situations like that, but on the other hand, you get pics you wouldn't get with a loud, bulky DSLR.

From this moment on, I shall probably use G7 for over half the time in my work. My DSLR will be my second choice that I take out when I need the extra features: 5 fps speed, action AF, studio quality and --- and, well, that's about it.

This is why I think that Canon will get hurt big time in the near future.

They have indicated many times that they produced the G7 half-heartedly. Canon says that "not many" people are interested in quality compacts, so they will focus on only point-and-shoots and DSLRs.

Big mistake. G7 fits so well in the practical act of digital capturing that there will be a sea change in the market. People will always photograph people, and for this job a quality compact will always be better than a DSLR.

This is why many people will abandon the bulk of a DSLR and they will get a G7 - and get angry at the many problems it still has.

G7 is like a sitting duck for all the other camera companies. It will create new demand, and Canon will be coasting away from that demand.

So IMO G7 is the best compact ever, even with it's many flaws, and it will start an era of truly great compacts.

Regards,

Ravalls

Well if your conclution is remotely right, good things will continue to come.

Though without having yet played with the G7 - me things you might be too damming in the first paragraph, even a flawed and messy brush can often be used for great paintings. after all, we have all slammed HP5 for contrasty frames when in need. some of those actually did come out really well all things considered. (smile)

I for one are 100% in agreement, compact cameras have their place in a professional workflow. and Canon would be well served to deliver a serious range-finder style camera with pro-specs.

Thank you for the "essay".

Bo

http://www.bophoto.com/panos

Thank you for your review. I like it a lot and it certainly helps me to make up my mind choosing a new camera as an upgrade to my "old" S30.

What a good honest overview Ravalls. Well done.

I waited for someone to review the G7, as you have, and I realise that I would be one of those who would get angry due to the camera not meeting my expectations for image detail retention at the purchase cost involved.

As a direct result I have just ordered an A640 with its flip screen, 4x standard AAs and an A620 proven record. I also accept that A640 photos might occasionally benefit from the use of Noise Ninja where this does not seem to be as necessary with the Digic3 - G7.

Thank You - for being a real help.

How is the G7 when you are using the standard flash without the hot shoe?

Ravalls, grazie, thank's your official conclusion is a real useful info and help. As in one of my previous messages I drawn the attention about the fact that is most important our brain and knowledge of the photo/technique instead of the tool . When the digital was not yet on the market we use to spend more time to choose the parameters of the camera . now we expect to obtain masterpieces just pushing a button.

When I was a Eos (film) owner I entered in the Eos magazine UK contest and at this time I sent 4 pictures done with my old Eos 620 and only one lens (35-135. ). Well the result was that I reach the third place (over 1500 competitors) because I spend more time to choose the subject , the film (Fuji Reala) and the parameters of my camera.

So I share 100% your advice, as we do not use to work "before" the shot we have to work "after". I work quite close with the Photo Editor of one the publications I represent for Italy and I see how he works , one camera, 2 lenses but time time and time before the shot.

As in my opinion is much better to have always the camera with you instead of to leave it at home let me ask one question: is the G7 "really" small enough to fit in a shirt pocket ?

Thank you once more for your post and please do not forget to come here in Italy with your G7 !
--
Cesaregiancarlo

Thanks for the review!

Perhaps the time is coming where we should stop the "pixel peeping" and look at the final output, which is usually either on the paper or screen size. Back in the 35mm era, who examined films at the physical particle level? And nowadays with 10+ mpix resolutions we could be already there.

I do understand the situation of Canon, and why they are so "half-hearted" against G7 - with the newest achievements, they do have all the technology in their hands to build even better compacts. But they also do understand that this could very heavily hurt their cash cow DSLR market, with already established manufacturing processes etc.

Hi, Ravals.

i don't entirely see your point.

A g7 with that big flash and wide angle converter is even bulkier than a SLR with a decent lens. And is almost on the same price range. And doesn't perform that well.

So where's the catch???

you are also ignoring a lot of prosumer cameras which are very good indeed, like tha kodak P880, and that camera already comes with the wide angle lens, so it doesn't need the monster adapter.

Oh, and ISo 1600 looks bad, but not worst than any other compact, and in the end, I wouldn't expect it to be a useable thing. High High isos on compacts are gizmos this days....

I think everyone is looking for a camera that has not been made yet and may never be made ,a compact digital with the same image quality and size as an SLR.I feels its unlikely to get to that stage for a while .I assume all compacts will have serious noise issues at high iSO .This just not bother me ,most cameras for me stop at ISO 400 and did for film as well .The image quality drops off after that though Canon DSLR's seem to have answered that problem .I have a 350 and some decent lenses and take those if I think I need them .I also have an S3 which is sometimes infuriating .The G7 will probably fit the bill for a good quality picture taker with a hot shoe (most important ).If I gazed at my computer for hours . I will probably find every fault underthe sun but I dont .I do wonder why the many people who rubbish these compact cameras dont go back to film .Its got a nice grain at 800 thats shows up quite badly and for a mere 2 grand ,a Leica film camera will enable them to take perfect pictures,unless of course they also want a zoom lens for wildlife as well ,Most digital cameras will take stunning pictures that can be made even better ,colour added ,removed ,sharpened up and printed in seconds ,the G7 is one of those . Its not a digital version of a film Leica and neither were the earlier G's and for that matter neither will the digital M8.
martin

I know the subject's been beaten to death around here but suffice it to say:

No RAW = No sale!

As I wrote, it sounds contradictory to praise the small size of the G7, and then say that I use with two bulky accessories.

I learned the answer with my earlier G-cameras. There are three points that make it work.

1. Any G-camera alone is very limited. The internal flash is almost useless (pro viewpoint here) and the 35 mm lens is too long, so you need the other stuff. However, there are many, many situations, where you can utilize the camera alone, and keep the two other elements in your pockets. That you cannot do with a DSLR.

2. Also the combined bulk and weight of the G-kit has to weighed against a DSLR-kit. If you want flash and lenses from 26 to 210 with DSLR, you need a backpack. With G7, all the stuff goes in your jacket pockets.

3. Combine the two above, and you notice that the G-kit expands and contracts much more than DSLR. You get a tiny camera when you need it. You get almost a studio-like lightning when you need it. You get silence. You get tricky controls in tricky circumstances. You get the paint-brush like movement. You get good contact with your subject.

So a G-kit is like a magician's hat, when the DSLR-kit is like an industrial machine.

Ravalls

Thanks for your kind words.

Unfortunately I have to say that G7 is not for shirt pockets. It is too thick and too heavy for that. It might work with a thick, hunting-style shirt worn by a big man. Most shirts will sag badly.

However, the size is just on the border between big and small. The old Gs were definitely big in this sense.

I have already carried G7 in a jacket pocket, pant pocket and vest pocket. ( I often wear a outdoors-style vest when working.) The camera is small and light enough that you won't notice it after two minutes.

I also have a belt case that I will use when traveling. G7 is a bit heavy for belts, but you get so much photopower with it that it is worth carrying.

Regards,

Ravalls

I might actually join you with the A-series cameras, but with the distinction that I'll keep the G also.

Now that I have re-learned the advantages of small cameras (used to have Gs and As before), I might get myself an arsenal of those.

Next on the list might be Fuji F31 for unintrusive low light work. Then perhaps some future Canon A, if they have certain qualities I want. Then even an ultracompact, if and when Canon can make the tonality work properly.

Ravalls

As you said, this is an old topic, but you might get surprised with a G7. It doesn't make RAW obsolete by any means, and there is no single factor that makes the jpegs work well enough.

It is a combination of factors. I really don't miss RAW at all WHEN USING THE G7. With other cameras I certainly will continue to use it as before.

Ravalls

Thanks for the OP comments ... all this is giving a clearer picture of the G7 for those of us who have yet to hold it. I for one am looking forward to seeing what it can do for me. I have owned a basic A40 for several years and been waiting to upgrade to a better model, but wanted a zoom that started at 28mm. Sad that it's not to be in this G camera but the rest of it looks more than acceptable for my modest use.

I would be interested how the G7 will perform with the smallest extra flash - the 220ex, rather than the 550. Any idea how good this combination would be?

Ravalls, from a "pro point of view", does the shutter lag when using a flash bother you, or all your subjects stationary?...

Ravalls said:

The same scene at ISO 80 with a little help from Speedlight 550 EX.
This is what the G7 is about: you have EVERYTHING you need to get a
good quality picture EVERY TIME.

Click to expand...

And what camera won't take a great picture with external flash at 800x600. The main problem people have with this chips is the level of noise and detail destroying noise reduction. I could care less about external flash capability for a pocket camera. Once you throw in the external flash, it is no longer a portable camera. Show so full size images done with just the camera and then you might have a case.

With all respect I would like to make a note that the white balance is off. This is one of the things the RAW would be needed for, especially in reporter hectic work:



I’m pleased to hear that you find G7 adequate for your needs. Thanks for posting!

-Virvatulet

As another tread is showing, Canon is interpreting camera warranties in such a way that whatever p&s camera you send in for repairs, you may not get back the same camera but a different model camera of their choosing and not necesseraly of equal or better value.

Read the fine print of your Canon camera warranty.

Enjoy your G7 while you have it, Canon may take it away from you.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=20529878

I tried a G7 today...
Nearly impossible to change settings without dropping the camera...
I got a cramp in my hand...
the best is the ISO-Dial..., should be standard for all cams and DSLRs...
but the grip is a catastrophe

Or do your hands get used to it?!?! I mean, walking with it around for hours and having it ready in your hands - I can't imaging myself doing that.
Tell us about your experience.
--

• Mr Ralf -