Reading mode: Light Dark

G12 Low-Light Performance Disappointing - Should I Go 4/3 or DSLR?

Go to last post
D

Damiorfla

New member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Had to purchase a camera on the fly just prior to a last-minute trip to Sweden. Decided on the G12 based, in part, on Canon's reputation and what I assumed would be performance far superior to even a good P+S.

I'm admittedly not the most savvy photographer, but to be honest I was expecting a lot more out of the G12 in terms of low light performance. The camera inspires a lot of confidence and adoration in terms of its form factor and tons of manual controls, but I can't seem to get away with high ISO photos without the use of flash. Perhaps it's my ignorance, but this is one of the things I was really looking forward to after spending $600 on a camera. Even at ISO 800 at F2.8 I can't get shots quickly enough to eliminate blur. The only option is to get everything to look like they were taken with a P+S...i.e. with flash.

Anyways......I'm now looking at the Panasonic GF1. Looks to me like the NEXT step along the spectrum to a full DSLR, which is a form factor I'd like to avoid if at all possible. Can I expect significant improvement in terms of low light, high ISO performance on a camera like this, or am I "doomed" (I use that term lightly) to moving up to a T2i or D3100 or D90 (I still can't decide between the three, although to be honest having handled them all the D90 inspires the most confidence).

Cheers!
 
I'm with you. I came back to Canon after couple of years and - I just cannot get to like my S90, which is very similar inside. Poor, poor low light performance, and on top of that, auto mode with flash that keeps pushing ISO800 and shutter at 1/15, making the end result even worse. Unbelievable... Such an easy and straight-forward thing to avoid. Anyone can do good in sunlight.

Very often I need to catch a moment and don't have time to fiddle the manual settings to get the right shot. They messed Auto-w-flash up so badly that I still find it hard to believe. My mother in law still has my old IXUS400 that seems to have less noisy sensor, miles better flash auto mode, fixed at ISO100 and 1/60, and it works 99% of the time - unlike S90. The megapixel race should have stopped at 4MP it seems...

S90 a P/S camera that does not do P/S with flash good at all; I am scared to give it to anyone to take a picture of me and family due to jumping flash, that might scare the person into dropping it. Scroll wheel that turns on it's own...

I have Nikon D40 that is soo good that I am more and more scared to let go. Auto mode just does it's thing, no questions asked! And if time allows it, I go ahead and fiddle with manual settings. If I only could shrink it...

My 2 cents.
 
Damiorfla said:
Had to purchase a camera on the fly just prior to a last-minute trip to Sweden. Decided on the G12 based, in part, on Canon's reputation and what I assumed would be performance far superior to even a good P+S.
Click to expand...
It is superior to a good P+S but you have to know how to use it.
Damiorfla said:
Perhaps it's my ignorance
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, yes. Your expectations are not in line with the type of camera that you purchased. G12 has very good low light performance but you can't compare it to a D90 or T2i.
Damiorfla said:
Anyways......I'm now looking at the Panasonic GF1. Looks to me like the NEXT step along the spectrum to a full DSLR, which is a form factor I'd like to avoid if at all possible. Can I expect significant improvement in terms of low light, high ISO performance on a camera like this, or am I "doomed" (I use that term lightly) to moving up to a T2i or D3100 or D90 (I still can't decide between the three, although to be honest having handled them all the D90 inspires the most confidence).
Click to expand...
Get one of the DSLRs you mentioned with a fast 35mm f1.8 prime lens - the G12 can't compete with this combination for low light shooting.
 
I am sorry to say you are expecting too much from a camera with a 2.8 aperture
the g12 is a high performance p&s camera but it is not going to give you good

low light pictures with no flash. The camera does not always see what our eyes see

For what I am assuming you are looking for, you need to get at least a 1.8 aperture lens on a camera with a large sensor.

--
Murry
 
The G12 is great for what it is, but it's not a low light camera. Neither the lens nor the sensor can do that. I have a G12 and I love it. Within it's limits it's great.

I also have an EX1/TL500 which copes better in low light because of it's f1.7 lens.

I also have an Olympus e-p1, and a Panasonic G1, which perform even better at higher ISO, but still need a bright enough lens on the front...

If you buy a GF1, and put the 20mm f1.7 on the front you WILL get good results in low light.

It's not the G12's fault - it's a good camera - within it's limits.
Damiorfla said:
Had to purchase a camera on the fly just prior to a last-minute trip to Sweden. Decided on the G12 based, in part, on Canon's reputation and what I assumed would be performance far superior to even a good P+S.

I'm admittedly not the most savvy photographer, but to be honest I was expecting a lot more out of the G12 in terms of low light performance. The camera inspires a lot of confidence and adoration in terms of its form factor and tons of manual controls, but I can't seem to get away with high ISO photos without the use of flash. Perhaps it's my ignorance, but this is one of the things I was really looking forward to after spending $600 on a camera. Even at ISO 800 at F2.8 I can't get shots quickly enough to eliminate blur. The only option is to get everything to look like they were taken with a P+S...i.e. with flash.

Anyways......I'm now looking at the Panasonic GF1. Looks to me like the NEXT step along the spectrum to a full DSLR, which is a form factor I'd like to avoid if at all possible. Can I expect significant improvement in terms of low light, high ISO performance on a camera like this, or am I "doomed" (I use that term lightly) to moving up to a T2i or D3100 or D90 (I still can't decide between the three, although to be honest having handled them all the D90 inspires the most confidence).

Cheers!
Click to expand...
 
The OP said ISO 800 and f/2.8 and blurry images. So this sounds like moving subjects. Even a DSLR with a fast prime and high ISO may have trouible in this situation.

If the OP is getting blury images at those settings for still images then the IS must be set to the "OFF" position. Turn IS on.

I am thinking it's camera movement from lack of experience. Try holding your camera still, and pressing the shutter button very slowly while exhaling very slowly (after taking a semi deep breth). A better understanding of low light photography can be the cure.
--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes
 
I own a D90 which is excellent for low light but I also have a G12 which I shoot in RAW at high ISO and the images clean up pretty good. Lack of technique and not enough experience with the camera could be contributing to the original posters disappointment or maybe just too high expectation.
--
Tony

 


Every so often , I see a post similar to this...... " I'm looking for a great low light compact digital camera for photos when I go out clubbin' " The Canon G12 and the Canon S90 are "great" general low light cameras BUT they are not DSLRs . They are not the cameras you want if you intend to shoot in low light hoping to "freeze" fast motion or action. For general low light conditions..... inside/ night time .... without fast motion subjects, these are fine....very very good. I have owned the S90 for more than a year and I'm still amazed at the I.Q. of the low light images I get from this pocket compact. But I do not have the expectation that my low light shots will be blur-free if I shoot fast action subjects.

My gallery has many low light S90 shots and these are not "best shots " , by any means, as I do not post my "best shots " to the web. Within its limitations, I think this is an excellent low light compact.
 
Clayton1985 said:
Damiorfla said:
Perhaps it's my ignorance
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, yes. Your expectations are not in line with the type of camera that you purchased.
Click to expand...
Agreed 100%.
zdr said:
I'm with you. I came back to Canon after couple of years and - I just cannot get to like my S90, which is very similar inside. Poor, poor low light performance
Click to expand...
Compared to other cameras in its class, the S90 is quite good in low light. Like the OP, you seem to be expecting it to perform at the same level as something with a considerably larger sensor. It's not the camera that is the problem but rather the unrealistic expectations of the user.
 
I'll try to break it down -

1. The G12 - best sensor in a compact available for low light, but the lens is only f2.8 at wide angle, which in my experience typically means 1/60 f2.8 iso3200 in "average" indoor lighting. iso3200 is...pretty terrible.

2. The s95 (or the Panasonic LX5 or Samsung tl500) - one stop better low light performance. Same sensor as the g12, but it's lens is f2.0 at wide angle which gives it the extra stop. So 1/60 f2.0 iso1600 in typical indoor lighting. iso1600 is borders on whether it's usable or not - I've had some good shots with it, and some ruined shots because of the high iso. iso800 is far more acceptable, usually giving me pics that look good at facebook and screen size, though they're noisy if you blow them up to 100% (for the most part that last part is academic, though).

3. Micro Four thirds - about another stop better, maybe like 1.2 stops because of the f1.7 lens. Definitely more expensive, but 1/60 f1.7 and the equivalent of iso320 or so on a g12 is pretty decent. Other than the high cost, the only other problem is that you lose all ability to zoom with the low light lens. Size-wise the camera is about the size of the g12 with the low light lens, but is much much larger with any sort of zoom lens.

4. Digital slr - about another stop better, let's call it 2.2 stops with an f1.8 lens and everything. So like 1/60 f1.8 iso200 or so equivalent vs the g12 (though you definitely lose some depth of field in exchange for lower iso-equivalent noise performance, sometimes that matters and sometimes it doesn't). It's noticeably "deeper" than a g12 or a m43 camera with low light lens, and about the same size as a m43 camera with a zoom lens. The entry level models are pretty lightweight.

Frankly, the g12 is a bit of an oddity right now - low light sensor, but not the best low light lens. It's kinda weird.
 
Thank you to you all.

I think you've elaborated on all the points my amateur brain was already thinking about but unable to express, namely:

1) Expectations probably too high, BUT

2) Could still probably squeeze more out of the camera's low-light performance with some know-how, BUT

3) Be mindful that the camera is still limited by sensor size and lens speed at the end of the day and won't match DSLR performance.

At the end of the day, I think the G12 is a fantastic camera (I took it to the office X-Mas party last night and managed to take some fabulous flash shots...great exposure, great auto-mode), but I think I'm willing to give the GF1 a shot. It's interesting for me to note just how rave the reviews are for the GF1, with both the dpreview and dcresource blokes making explicit mention of the fact that it's a camera they themselves went out to purchase for their own use.

For the reasons some of you have already hit on (namely larger sensor and faster lens), I think the GF1 with a 1.7 20mm lens will get me much closer to the low light performance I'm looking for without having to dive into the DSLR form factor. It'll cost me an extra $200 or so dollars, but I'll consider those dollars well spent if the camera presents a bona fide class of cameras sitting between a competent P+S and a DSLR (as opposed to the G12, which might be considered a true P+S on steroids).

Any further thoughts are always appreciated, and thanks again.
 
EX1/TL500 is f1.8 at wide angle and f2.4 at 72mm equiv.
PaulRivers said:
I'll try to break it down -

1. The G12 - best sensor in a compact available for low light, but the lens is only f2.8 at wide angle, which in my experience typically means 1/60 f2.8 iso3200 in "average" indoor lighting. iso3200 is...pretty terrible.

2. The s95 (or the Panasonic LX5 or Samsung tl500) - one stop better low light performance. Same sensor as the g12, but it's lens is f2.0 at wide angle which gives it the extra stop. So 1/60 f2.0 iso1600 in typical indoor lighting. iso1600 is borders on whether it's usable or not - I've had some good shots with it, and some ruined shots because of the high iso. iso800 is far more acceptable, usually giving me pics that look good at facebook and screen size, though they're noisy if you blow them up to 100% (for the most part that last part is academic, though).

3. Micro Four thirds - about another stop better, maybe like 1.2 stops because of the f1.7 lens. Definitely more expensive, but 1/60 f1.7 and the equivalent of iso320 or so on a g12 is pretty decent. Other than the high cost, the only other problem is that you lose all ability to zoom with the low light lens. Size-wise the camera is about the size of the g12 with the low light lens, but is much much larger with any sort of zoom lens.

4. Digital slr - about another stop better, let's call it 2.2 stops with an f1.8 lens and everything. So like 1/60 f1.8 iso200 or so equivalent vs the g12 (though you definitely lose some depth of field in exchange for lower iso-equivalent noise performance, sometimes that matters and sometimes it doesn't). It's noticeably "deeper" than a g12 or a m43 camera with low light lens, and about the same size as a m43 camera with a zoom lens. The entry level models are pretty lightweight.

Frankly, the g12 is a bit of an oddity right now - low light sensor, but not the best low light lens. It's kinda weird.
Click to expand...
 
I think you'll be happy with a Sony NEX. Big sensor smallish size and has a mode called Handheld Twilight that'll make low light shooting even better.
 
SayJaiBow said:
I think you'll be happy with a Sony NEX. Big sensor smallish size and has a mode called Handheld Twilight that'll make low light shooting even better.
Click to expand...
Have you read the above posts? Everone agrees (correctly) that Damiorfla
needs a camera with both a large sensor and a large aperture.

How can you recommend a NEX that has a maximum lens aperture of 2.8
available. He needs at least a 1.8.

What are yiou thinking?
--
Murry
 
Look into the special modes in the Sony Nex before you talk. Especially handheld twilight mode. A sony NEX with it's special image stacking modes and large sensor that can raise iso to 1600 and above for clean shots will absolutely CRUSH any small sensored compact in low light even if they use and aperture 2.8 and above.
murry said:
SayJaiBow said:
I think you'll be happy with a Sony NEX. Big sensor smallish size and has a mode called Handheld Twilight that'll make low light shooting even better.
Click to expand...
Have you read the above posts? Everone agrees (correctly) that Damiorfla
needs a camera with both a large sensor and a large aperture.

How can you recommend a NEX that has a maximum lens aperture of 2.8
available. He needs at least a 1.8.

What are yiou thinking?
--
Murry
Click to expand...
 
My G11 is still Magical !

Love Vjim
 
murry said:
SayJaiBow said:
I think you'll be happy with a Sony NEX. Big sensor smallish size and has a mode called Handheld Twilight that'll make low light shooting even better.
Click to expand...
Have you read the above posts? Everone agrees (correctly) that Damiorfla
needs a camera with both a large sensor and a large aperture.

How can you recommend a NEX that has a maximum lens aperture of 2.8
available. He needs at least a 1.8.

What are yiou thinking?
--
Murry
Click to expand...
I read that several suggested that he "needs" at least 1.8 for best results. That's not to say that there aren't other opinions. Besides, OP said, > > Any further thoughts are always appreciated, and thanks again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top