Michael's Luminous Canon G10 revelation....

Someone posted this in the Panny forum along with a link to another real good LX3 review.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

I decided to post it here because I think it can make for some interesting thoughtful (well, we can only hope) discussion. One of the few times I really want to talk about a brand but grounded again, on photography.

Reichman has derided the article of Ken Rockwell on the equipment/talent/photographer (not that I think Ken has much credibility so I am not really defending him, but that is one his very few logical sounding articles, so I am concentrating on that article), has banged the hammer hard on 4/3rds (he has called the 4/3rds standard a mistake), and then writes stuff about the Canon G10 point and shoot like:

"
The Lesson
[]

The lesson here, especially for newbies and amateurs (the pros have always understood this) is – stop fussing over each new camera's image quality. Now, even sub-$1,000 cameras are able to produce exceptional image quality – likely far better than most photographers are able to execute. Buy high end gear if you need it or want it. But, don't think that the better camera is going to make you a better photographer. As I've written before – most cameras are better than most photographers. This has always been true, and now simply more so than ever."

Something I completely agree with, but why all of a sudden is the G10 the one to carry forward this "revelation?" Why 4/3rds can't wear this badge, but a CANON G10 can?

Maybe Reichman is partial to sensor resolution, and not ISO? Maybe I missed that- though he has openly admitted he's partial to Canon (good for him for being honest).

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

The author explicitly stated not to read TOO much into it.
Specifically he mostly wanted to illustrate :

• that digital has reached the point where it outperforms film;

• that for "big" digital cameras, there is still progress, but it is slowing down;
• that for "small" digital cameras, progress is taking leaps and bounds because there was so much to catch up, and progress also trickles down;
• that, because of the above, the gap between quality categories is slowly closing.

I think that every category of camera has its uses.

--
Roel Hendrickx
--
member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group
( http://www.ukphotosafari.org/ )

UKPSG presents a Tunisia E-3 user field report: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

RoelHendrickx said:

The author explicitly stated not to read TOO much into it.

Click to expand...

Yes, he said that. The problem is that his article has a context. You would think someone writing an article like that would be the last one to call 4/3rds a mistake. So either- (i) he changed his mind, or (ii) for "some reason" the G10 made a revelation to him.

We all know 4/3rds performs much better than a G10, so why the hammer so hard on 4/3rds then? I see two views here that are not easy to reconciliate.

So, correct me here, but if you are suggesting I am reading "too much into it" I beg to differ. And actually I do agree with his conclusions. I am not even disagreeing with his article, that's not what my objection is about. My objection has nothing to do with the conclusions of his article- in the article.

RoelHendrickx said:

Specifically he mostly wanted to illustrate :

• that digital has reached the point where it outperforms film;

• that for "big" digital cameras, there is still progress, but it is

slowing down;

• that for "small" digital cameras, progress is taking leaps and

bounds because there was so much to catch up, and progress also
trickles down;

• that, because of the above, the gap between quality categories is

slowly closing.

I think that every category of camera has its uses.

--
Roel Hendrickx
--
member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group
( http://www.ukphotosafari.org/ )
UKPSG presents a Tunisia E-3 user field report:
http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

Click to expand...

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

Thanks for the link, makes good reading.

Another good article I saw (think it was in Pro Photographer..can't remember) took 3 Nikon DX cameras of 6mp,10mp,12mp and used the same lens lens to shoot the same scenes.

These files were processed and printed to 16x20 and wall mounted...they then got some printers from the local Pro lab along to see if they could assess which were from the lower resolution cameras - the result was they couldn't tell....some of them got the 6mp prints right, but they had to use a loupe

I was a regular reader of Luminous Landscape but no longer.

The vascillations of his opinions are somewhat alarming. FourThirds is dead and the Canon G-10 is God's gift to P&S?

As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Reichmann's opinions are just that and everyone has one. His opinions have as much credibility as Ken Rockwell's opinions but with better elucidation.
--
Bill Turner
Eschew Obfuscation, Espouse Elucidation
Please do not edit my images without asking permission.
Thanks.

There is nothing revalatory about his conclusions. The interesting thing is that he has finally relalized what most of us 4/3 users have known for a while.

As he points out some people will still need/want MF cameras but many users can be served by cheaper, smaller options.

Time will tell if he is a true convert to this belief or if he will slip back to worshiping his old idols of PhaseOne backs and Hasselbalds.

--
Regards,

Peter
'Keep taking the photos'

Did he?

I wouldn't be so sure... unless I heard it from him. After all the old idol he worhips as far as I know has been, at least for some time, Canon.

Peter 1745 said:

There is nothing revalatory about his conclusions. The interesting
thing is that he has finally relalized what most of us 4/3 users have
known for a while.

As he points out some people will still need/want MF cameras but many
users can be served by cheaper, smaller options.

Time will tell if he is a true convert to this belief or if he will
slip back to worshiping his old idols of PhaseOne backs and
Hasselbalds.

--
Regards,

Peter
'Keep taking the photos'

Click to expand...

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

I honestly read that article WITHOUT regarding context or previous preferences of the author, and if you do it like that, then the Canon G10 is just the placeholder for a lot of modern P&S cameras.
So I read it for the general trends described, without brand connotations.

And it is just an opinion.

--
Roel Hendrickx
--
member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group
( http://www.ukphotosafari.org/ )

UKPSG presents a Tunisia E-3 user field report: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

part of his issue with 4/3rds is their marketing claims
Smallest/telecentric/worlds fastest AF/ best pro system

That one I can understand his objections. Those always seemed like bold claims.

The other part was the size matters and photographers always want bigger. Smaller sensors are a compromise. The price of larger sensors is falling. There is no upgrade path like there is with other manufacturers crop cameras.

That one always stuck me as missing the point. Which he sort of made with the G10 review. Sure it isn't the ultimate IQ but most of us don't need that anyway. Most of us are decidedly amateurs and a lot of people I know who have DSLRs have never gotten anything more than the kit lens. It just does not matter. Prices for everything will go down. This is a good thing. I still think he will be getting email on Dec 31 2009 asking where the $1000 FF camera is.

Cheers,
-G.

--
C&C always welcome.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnarayan/

Raist3d said:

Did he?

I wouldn't be so sure... unless I heard it from him. After all the
old idol he worhips as far as I know has been, at least for some
time, Canon.

Click to expand...

He uses Nikon D3 now.

On a side note - if the prints he showed had been of a landscape with small distant details I am sure the difference would been obvious in favour of the big format camera.

Member said:

Peter 1745 said:

There is nothing revalatory about his conclusions. The interesting
thing is that he has finally relalized what most of us 4/3 users have
known for a while.

As he points out some people will still need/want MF cameras but many
users can be served by cheaper, smaller options.

Time will tell if he is a true convert to this belief or if he will
slip back to worshiping his old idols of PhaseOne backs and
Hasselbalds.

--
Regards,

Peter
'Keep taking the photos'

Click to expand...

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which
there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

Click to expand...

--
http://bonusphotography.wordpress.com/

RoelHendrickx said:

I honestly read that article WITHOUT regarding context or previous
preferences of the author, and if you do it like that, then the Canon
G10 is just the placeholder for a lot of modern P&S cameras.

Click to expand...

I never said the G10 wasn't.

RoelHendrickx said:

So I read it for the general trends described, without brand
connotations.

Click to expand...

That's cool. I agree with what is said in the article. That's not what I posted about though. That the G10 can be a good or not good camera, a poster for the P&S (note: I think the LX3 in many ways is more of this than the G10, a camera which Reichman liked but I didn't see the same revelatory comments, I guess probably then guided by resolution), is not related to my post.

RoelHendrickx said:

And it is just an opinion.

Click to expand...

I understand that Roel, just seems to be me we are not really talking about the same thing or point, so I want to make that clear. That's all.

RoelHendrickx said:

--
Roel Hendrickx
--
member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group
( http://www.ukphotosafari.org/ )
UKPSG presents a Tunisia E-3 user field report:
http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

Click to expand...

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

what I wrote

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

Trying to be more clear, here's the subject I am touching with my post:

How can someone using the logic, and rationale (with which I agree with) conclude the G10 is great and can be used at least in some situations (as he mentioned) instead of high end photographic equipment (and this all I pretty much agree with him), which says also that most cameras "are better than photographers that have them" (also I agree with)- in other words, I pretty much agree with the article he wrote - espouse the opinion that 4/3rds is a dead end, a mistake because it doesn't have the big sensor required to do higher quality work- like as well as its competitors do?

The issue I am discussing is not whether the G10 is great or not. That's irrelevant. What I am discussing is how can he re conciliate the "4/3rds = mistake/dead end" with the logic and necessary conclusion of that article he also wrote.

So in the end my point really has nothing to do with the G10.

There is a context to this which means one has read his opinion from before and his thoughts on what 4/3rds is. This context is necessary to make the post I made, this it's relevant to discussion.

I hope this makes it more clear.

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=29783277

--
Villebon

'The average camera fan reminds me of Pollyanna, with a lollypop in one hand and a camera in the other.'
-Weegee

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=29787123

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

That's about 10x the density of a DSLR.

Canon Powershot G10
14.7 million effective pixels
34 MP/cm² pixel density

--



'I cried because I had no E-3. Then I met a man with no E-510'

Olympus E-410, E-330, Nikon D100 (IR) & Pentax K20D.
57 lenses of various types from most brands.

. . . it is a Canon after all. LOL.

God that sight infuriates me. Great stuff, but it is like wading through cowpies to find it.

--
--
Comments are always welcome.

Zach Bellino

'Nothing, like something, happens anywhere.”
-- from 'I Remember, I Remember'
Philip Larkin (1922-1985)

Bootstrap said:

The vascillations of his opinions are somewhat alarming.

Click to expand...

More than somewhat.

Bootstrap said:

As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Reichmann's opinions are just that and
everyone has one. His opinions have as much credibility as Ken
Rockwell's opinions but with better elucidation.

Click to expand...

Exactly, perfectly put Bill.

Bootstrap said:

--
Bill Turner
Eschew Obfuscation, Espouse Elucidation
Please do not edit my images without asking permission.
Thanks.

Click to expand...

--
Best regards,
Jeff
http://www.splitlightphotography.com

I think he still believes that the 4/3 was a "mistake". The fact that the G10, a P&S camera, is capable of producing IQ that's approaching that of cropped dSLR's, reinforces his belief.

Thus, the advancement of P&S cams would make 4/3 (and other cropped DSLR's?) less relevant.

Raist3d said:

What I am discussing is how can he re conciliate
the "4/3rds = mistake/dead end" with the logic and necessary
conclusion of that article he also wrote.

Click to expand...

Not that I disagree with you Ricardo - his retort is going to be that it has no place and offers nothing over APS-C which offers an "upgrade" path so even if it is good enough for the same money there are "better" options. Hence mistake and no upgrade path = dead end. The assumptions that go in here are impressive of course but a lot of people choose to agree with Reichmann. 4/3rds was never the "safe" option. It is a perfectly good choice though. For some it may be the right one, for some the wrong one but for most I'd suspect it doesn't make any difference.

Anyway, I don't think you are going to convince MR that his opinion isn't self consistent. Thankfully it doesn't actually matter what he thinks anyway. As much beating a dead horse here as a thread about the E330 and its live view implementation and Phil Meanypants Askey.

Cheers,
-Gautham

--
C&C always welcome.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnarayan/