Canon's ISO ratings are off. ISO 50 is closer in sensitivity to ISO 100, and the same seems to applu to other settings.
I agree. If it weren't for the body design and Memory Stick of the 717, I'd have a very tough time picking between it and the G3.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Are Memory Sticks slow too? I thought they had pretty fast read/write speeds.
So you mean you don't expect to ever buy 512MB of memory then, so the greater capacity of CF is moot?
It is amazing how good the S200 actually is. I haven't depleted the battery yet but I do have a spare. Now the kicker is you have a $300 camera with a damn $50 spare battery. It is just so small that you would be amazed how often you can carry it when the G3 isn't a possibility.Oh, so for you the G3 is the high end camera, but one that you doPoor example. I will use my S200 more than the G3 because of thePerhaps a useful exercise might be to imagine that you DID own
both, and then try to decide which one you would use most often...
form factor, not because of better performance
not bring along everywhere. For me, it's the only camera. I don't
have the budget to spend an extra several hunderd dollars on a
smaller camera with limited features and crappy battery life.
If it helps anyone, I chose the G3 over the comp (7HI,5700,Fuji602!!!,Oly20N) because of the lower noise, supposed better external flash integration (which after the fact proved to be awesome with the 420EX). I hoped for zoom to be helped by the teleconverter but even though it does well, the fact you get a pretty black circle when not at full zoom was a bit of dissapointment only dampened by how fast the new bayonet mount is. Seriously, the biggest complaint is the more chessy look compared to the professional looking competition from Nikon, minolta, fuji and Olympus.. A thicker lense body with focus ring would have bee a sweet item on the G3. The Teleconverter + 420 helps the look aspect though
I didn't even consider the sony due to the memory stick issue but with 256MB sticks and an imagetank that situation will change. For example, trying to catch my 4mth old niece in a pose lastnight, I took over 200MB of shots not even realizing it (of course only 7 were keepers). This would have been a problem because of the critical timing needed for this sort of shot.
U
Ulysses
Guest
Just to clarify, while I was being a bit tongue in cheek, I really DO think that the set-up that they often have in place is pretty ungainly and gets in the way of a good user experience, just like yourself. Sorry, didn't mean to sound facetious. I just think they could come up wiith a better way to display and manage them so that the consumer could get a better feel for the devices. Maybe longer and less tension, like you say, would be the way to go.
I really don't have much to compare it to. Or at least, I'm not familiar enough with the G2 to know. Sorry I couldn't offer more there.
HAHH!!!! Check that out!! It's YOU!!!
Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!©
That's too funny.
))--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
U
Ulysses
Guest
I have no doubt. And I would never disbelieve you at all.
I don't have much experience with the G2 at all. But I can demonstrate samples like I've done here, between the G3 and the F717. I guess on this point, we have a different perspective due to our different origin points: For example, as a G1/G2 user, you really expected to see so much more improvement from the DIGIC and iSAPS. Whereas I, as a F707/F717 user wanted to know whether the 4-megapixel G3 could hold its own. From what I'm seeing, it can do that. And the additional functionality within the camera is a positive thing. Low noise is even more good reason to like it.
But I do respect what you are saying. I can only say that in my sharpness tests, Sony cameras have always had the reputation for being sharp. Whereas Canon cameras have a reputation for appearing film-like. I can see both sides of this.
The key to any good photograph requires that we use the camera to best advantage in any lighting conditions. Early shots from excited or inexperienced users simply don't prove a whole lot.
But I'm excited for them, too.
Phil has also mentioned himself in the forums that there is little difference with a 0.5 point difference. For good reason, he took this part out of his future reviews. The ratings had little to do objectively with the data in his tests. His tests are about data and objectivity. Those numbers were all about subjectivity instead.
--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
U
Ulysses
Guest
Okay, I understand what you are saying a little better now. In this case, we will need two things: We will need to see Phil's demonstration of the CA. And we will also need to know how to reduce the incidence of the problem, if necessary.
But everything I'm seeing now demonstrates that the F717 behaves very similarly on this issue to the G3. It's not enough difference to be a real deciding factor.
For myself, I didn't go into it with those expectations. Actually, I only knew of the G2 reputation. I did not have any other preconceived notions about the G3. I only looked at what it had to offer.
Additionally, I knew that some would look at it as a step "down" because of lower megapixels.
So you might say that my expectation level was rather neutral.
Heheheh... well, there's not much that can be done about that except to send a feedback or e-mail to Sony. Let them know what you want them to do differently. They monitor the forums closely and they do (eventually) make changes. Sometimes not as quickly as we'd like, however.
See, now here I have no problem using the adapter.
I would probably find it different and fun.
Yes, unfortunately, this is a little bit of a weakness. Just like the lens being 38mm at full wide instead of being even wider.
Try one of these things:
Hit the Refresh in your browser.
If they are still .BMP, then this means you need to empty your browser cache (probably using IE, right?). Delete the files from the cache. Reload the page. It should work now.
Uhhhm... I'm not sure what you mean.
If you have the flash engaged, it works similarly to the Canon. If the flash is engaged, the LCD does NOT show you what the exposure would look like as a preview. Instead, it works simply as a monitor to brighten the field so that you can frame properly. Turn the flash off, however, and you should get a more realistic preview of what the exposure will look like.
See how it works for you.
--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
U
Ulysses
Guest
Well, they're not exactly PIG slow or anything like that. But they could use a bit of 'giddy-up'!
--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
Just a 19 inch. I have noticed a couple of different threads now comparing the Sonys to the Canons and there seems to be one central theme. The Sonys all seem to have 1 more MP than the Canons. I run around the review sites checking each cameras samples (Phils if he had done one, Steves if he hasn't) and I always seem to like the Canons better as far as color and clarity. But it is definately close and I can see where each eye is different and others opinions will obviously be different. What I think is somewhat apparent is that Sony isn't doing as much as they probably should with that extra Megapixel. I don't hate Sony either, I waited all night in a Target parking lot in the rain to get their Playstation 2 when it came out. I just see what I see and go from there. Just my opinion, which I seem to be having more of the longer I stay in these forums.
Rgds
KR
Y
Yang
Guest
I never compared shots this way because one can do it better at home with PS. Actually, it's a ever contradiction between sharpness and noise. After using USM, the G3 doesn't have the advantage of low noise level at ISO any more.
yang
Ulrich K
Member
Yang, seems to me that you are/were very much torn apart over the last couple of days by experimenting with the 717 visa vie the delayed delivery of your intended G3 (in face of your upcoming vacation trip - where you need a camera).
I hope you find peace of mind!
Having followed many of the technical discussions, it appearrs to me that all comes down to a personal choice when comparing a class of DCs. And that'over-rationalization' will not help. A personal decision must be made as there is no 'ideal' DC out there...and there will never be one in the future - unless one brand would become the single brand in the world..but that would be a terrible situation!!
And I expect we still will see drastic improvements over short times...and we will have to live with with our preferences and choices ... now and in future.
So after exchanging all the technical details this boils down to a philosophical matter.
I hope you get your camera soon!! rgds Uli
I hope you find peace of mind!
Having followed many of the technical discussions, it appearrs to me that all comes down to a personal choice when comparing a class of DCs. And that'over-rationalization' will not help. A personal decision must be made as there is no 'ideal' DC out there...and there will never be one in the future - unless one brand would become the single brand in the world..but that would be a terrible situation!!
And I expect we still will see drastic improvements over short times...and we will have to live with with our preferences and choices ... now and in future.
So after exchanging all the technical details this boils down to a philosophical matter.
I hope you get your camera soon!! rgds Uli
Dear Ulysses,
I can sense you still need some more reasons than the well-known G3
features to justify your possible upgrade to the G3 from your 707
instead of to 717. However, those minor details like G3’s
reasonable noise reduction in long time exposure or its longer USB
cable cannot compensate for the disappointing fact that G3’s image
(Jeff’s words) is “not as sharp as the very best 4/5 Megapixel
cameras” (Phil gave the 717 as the single 5MP DC a “9” for its
image quality, during the G2 as the best 4MP DC got a “8.5”) what
you must be able to confirm by examining countless G3 shots
presented on this forum as well as some side-by-side test shots in
the Internet.
Of cause, Phil’s review will give you the last push (or brake) in
this matter. But, you may agree that currently we don’t see any
reason for Phil to the G3 a higher note in image quality than the
G2, particularly with regard to the softness of G3 shots and the
(Jeff’s words) “strange chromatic aberrations”. Simply speaking, if
I were you, I would go with the 717, even without reading Phil’s
review.
While writing the above lines for you, it suddenly occurred to me,
why I don’t go with the 717 myself, since my supplier still cannot
deliver my G3 that I pre-ordered 6 weeks ago!!! Now, it’s your turn
to persuade me out of buying the 717 instead of the G3 (yes, I must
sell my 420EX, spare BP 511 and CF if I really have changed
system).
The price. In Germany, I can get the 717 for 1015 EURO, almost the
same price for the G3 (830 EURO)+ tele-converter (130 EURO) +
bayonet (30 EURO) adapter (thread 58mm).
The size. G3 is already too thick (the thinnest side is 70mm) for
my suitcase attaché case, the shortest side of the 717 is almost
the same (69mm). But, 717’s body is much better built. 717’s grip
is bigger (better for my hand), and its dial wheel is more solid
than G3’s new little dial wheel of plastic which appears quite
loose. Having to mount and demount the teleconverter (together with
the bayonet adapter) on the G3 again and again is a pain. Actually,
with the bayonet adapter and converter, the G3 is as bulky as the
717, during the built-in long zoom generally has a better image
quality than any converter, not to mention 717’s excellent 5 x zoom
with F2.4 at the telephoto-end – very unique. Finally, you have a
built-in 58mm thread for daily use.
If I understood rightly, 717 must have a very good macro ability
because I read "Macro focus range 2 cm (0.8 in) - 50 cm (19.7 in)”
that would mean one will have a shorter subject distance at the
telezoom than the G3 (15mm).
717’s video ability impresses me very much: First of all, one can
use zoom and AF in video mode, not to mention its “unlimited MPEG
movies”. As a former fan of “videography”, this might be an
important point for me.
In comparison with the G3, the 717 has some small, but nice
features like Live view histogram, EVF, EXIF 2.0, USB 2.0
connectivity,
showing focus distance on LCD, overlay day/time, longer exposure
time to 30 sec, ISO 800, instant reviews (via a special button) of
the last image/movie, laser AF assist etc.
My biggest concern is the small and expensive memory stick.
However, there will be a 256 MB as well as 512 MB MS in near
future. And the 717 has a very useful feature to save memory space
which I like very much. This is in-camera-resizing: It allows you
always shoot in the maximal resolution (5MP) and resize the
unsuccessful or unimportant shots (just for viewing on PC) down to
smaller sizes (e.g. 2MP) on the way or in the hotel (not later at
home!!!).
My second concern is the flash shooting. The 717 has no TTL
control. However, I think I must always take a third party external
flash with me while using the G3 because it allows me use higher
sync. speed than 1/250s (very stupid limitation of the Canon
flashes).
My third concern is 717’s noise level. Phil’s sample shots are
quite noisy during Jeff did show us some “clean” shots in the same
noise level of the G2/G3. Since Sony dares to implement ISO 800 on
the 717, its general noisy cannot be too high, I guess (Phil has
shown us that it’s better than the CP5700).
So, I’m going to try out the 717 at the weekend to decide if I’d
better jump to the 717 next week, since I’ll go on holiday in two
weeks, definitely with one of these two cameras, the G3 or the 717.
Cheers!
(Former) G1 veteran, Yang
http://www.fototime.com/inv/4E6EE4D1C7782B6
I've owned smaller digital cameras before and I know that it's nice that you can take them anywhere. But in my experience, the limited battery life was a serious drawback and I was very happy when I finally eliminated it with the purchase of my S85. Overall, the current camera's more extensive controls, faster lens, better zoom, higher resolution, and excellent battery life have added up to a camera that I take more pictures with, while its size is still just barely small enough that I can take it almost anywhere.
In contrast, the added advantages offered by the 717 would not, for me, outweigh the disadvantages of its increased size and more cumbersome operation. It's most enticing features for me are the fast lens, fast AF, and more powerful zoom, but these alone aren't enough to compensate for the down sides, for my style of shooting. If the 717 had a conventional body design, then it might be a different story. Then the better AF and longer zoom would be very tempting indeed.
Meanwhile, aside from the prohibitive cost of owning a second camera costing at least $300-400 plus extra batteries, I think I'd find myself frustrated at having to repeatedly decide which camera to bring along, and then regretting the consequences. I have tons of images from my older cameras that came out badly becasue of lack of flexibility. For instance, all my night shots used to be dark, grainy messes, destined for the recycling bin. Now I have tons of photos I've taken at night with the help of longer shutter speeds and a faster lens. Meanwhile, although the current camera's bulk is a drawback at times, I can't think of many situations where I've missed photo ops as a result and where a smaller camera would have been with me. In other words, for me at least, there are few circumstances where I'd accept a compact camera's limitations just for the sake of compactness. The only exception might be a weatherproof, credit-card sized camera with a flash, and the only examples I can think of are just overpriced toys. I might also be tempted by something like an IXUS, but not with a one-hour battery and no exposure control.
I'm looking for an all-purpose camera so my decision is based on many more factors than that.
The 7Hi is too large, lacks a swiveling LCD, has poor battery life, and is hard to use.
The Fuji looks ergonomic, but I find it extremely uncomfortable to hold. It lacks a swiveling LCD, has poor low light AF performance and lacks an AF assist lamp. And marketing BS aside, it's just a 3 megapixel camera.
The Oly E20 is almost as big a disappointment as Nikon's 5000 and 5700. First of all, it really should be competing with DSLRs considering its size and price. Very poor speed overall in operation, AF, controls, and processing; flawed image quality, useless in low light, bulky and overpriced.
Yes, I also used to think that attachment lenses could be used throughout the main lens' entire zoom range. Now I know better...
I think the G3's appearance is a step up from the G2, though I had also hoped for a totally redesigned and more professional body design and construction.Seriously, the biggest complaint is the more chessy look compared
to the professional looking competition from Nikon, minolta, fuji
and Olympus.. A thicker lense body with focus ring would have bee a
sweet item on the G3. The Teleconverter + 420 helps the look aspect
though
Really? I can't imagine dealing with the inconvenience and expense of that when I could get better results for less money with a MicroDrive. The latest ones go up to 3GB! Sony will never catch up with CF in price or capacity.
Exactly, so you wouldn't want to be fiddling with multiple memory sticks or, god forbid, offloading to an image tank. I can't wait to get my hands on a camera with 1GB of storage!
Olga Johnson
Forum Pro
Walter,
I've seen you mention the MicroDrive a few times, as an answer to high capacity device for digicams. But I cannot share your enthusiasm about them even though I've never even tried one. Why? Because I cannot count the times that I have dropped a CF card, no matter how carefully I tried to handle it. I know that not everyone suffers from the dropsies, as I do, and that a MD wouldn't have to be removed from a camera as often as a lower capacity CF, but I would hate myself if I ever lost hundreds of hard earned shots, not to mention damaging or ruining the MD itself.
- Olga
Justme
Forum Pro
If you mean you can do a better sharpening job in PS, yes. What I was trying to say is, "if" you find the in-camera G3 shots to be not as sharp as the in-camera G1/G2 shots, perhaps the G1/G2 has more in-camera sharpening at the same Sharpness setting? Still, I'm wondering what other cameras you have compared the G3 to for sgarpness, besides the 707/717?
I'm assuming you mean ISO 50. Do you have samples? There's something I don't quite understand and maybe you can clear it up (if you want). Do you have access to a G3 in a camera store?
Justme
Forum Pro
I recently had a 192mb Sandisk CF card fail on me. Fortunately, I had downloaded the pics before that happened. It could easily have gone the other way though. The data on the card (as far as I know) was unrecoverable. I could not even reformat it. The G2 had a problem with it (Err message). Speaking for myself, I wouldn't put all my eggs into one basket, as the saying goes. It also took Sandisk about 1 1/2 to 1 3/4 months(!) to send a replacement. They really have to reassess their RMA process because that's a loooooong time to have to wait. maybe they're hoping you'll buy another one in the meantime 
I did. A Lexar.
http://www.pbase.com/golfpic/the_dome
I did. A Lexar.--
http://www.pbase.com/golfpic/the_dome
U
Ulysses
Guest
Will current cameras be able to use the larger > 1GB drives?
Additionally, I would submit that it's not quite as important that Sony equal the size of current CF/SM/MM/SD formats, but that they simply get into the more "serious" sizes to enable more than just 100 shots per card/stick.
Keep in mind, also, who they market towards. The "fun" crowd. The problem that Sony ran into was that their F-series turned out to be a much better camera than even THEY anticipated. Now the consumers ask for even more features, and the memory size is still stuck at the level of the "fun" crowd. An interesting problem.
))--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
Ulrich:
Well said. I still believe that although all the technical comparison and rationalization do help, it is usually and eventually the "small voice in our heart" that eventually guide our choice....
And there is never a perfect choice, but a choice that we are most willing to live with....and enjoying photography.
Louis_s
Well said. I still believe that although all the technical comparison and rationalization do help, it is usually and eventually the "small voice in our heart" that eventually guide our choice....
And there is never a perfect choice, but a choice that we are most willing to live with....and enjoying photography.
Louis_s
U
Ulysses
Guest
OlgaJ -
Your post caused me to think about something that I'd read, perhaps in Jeff's review. It was mentioned that the CF card is more difficult to remove in the G3 than it was in the G2.
Well, I don't have experience with the G2, but all I can say is that the G3 was very easily removed after a little push of the CF Card Eject button. I was worried that perhaps the card didn't come out far enough.
If it didn't come out far enough, that would mean it would get "fiddley", thereby increasing the "droppage rate" for either CF or Microdrive. But I find it very easily removed, at least for the configuration of my hands and fingers.
Since I have my camera on a desktop when I'm downloading or exchanging memory cards, I wouldn't see this as a problem. I would rarely in actual usage have occasion to need to switch when outdoors.
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
Your post caused me to think about something that I'd read, perhaps in Jeff's review. It was mentioned that the CF card is more difficult to remove in the G3 than it was in the G2.
Well, I don't have experience with the G2, but all I can say is that the G3 was very easily removed after a little push of the CF Card Eject button. I was worried that perhaps the card didn't come out far enough.
If it didn't come out far enough, that would mean it would get "fiddley", thereby increasing the "droppage rate" for either CF or Microdrive. But I find it very easily removed, at least for the configuration of my hands and fingers.
Since I have my camera on a desktop when I'm downloading or exchanging memory cards, I wouldn't see this as a problem. I would rarely in actual usage have occasion to need to switch when outdoors.
--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
U
Ulysses
Guest
This is why I say:
Pick your poison where digital cameras are concerned.
Choose the Blue pill or the Red pill.
When you choose the Canon, you lose out on megapixels, possibly on some slight sharpness, a fun full-length movie mode, and a red laser.
When you choose the Sony, you lose out on control.
To get either camera involves a rationalization about why you're willing to give up on megapixels and gadgets on the one, or why you're willing to give up control on the other.
You pick your poison with either camera. Neither is precisely what we want. That's the bottom line.
--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
Pick your poison where digital cameras are concerned.
Choose the Blue pill or the Red pill.
When you choose the Canon, you lose out on megapixels, possibly on some slight sharpness, a fun full-length movie mode, and a red laser.
When you choose the Sony, you lose out on control.
To get either camera involves a rationalization about why you're willing to give up on megapixels and gadgets on the one, or why you're willing to give up control on the other.
You pick your poison with either camera. Neither is precisely what we want. That's the bottom line.
--
Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101
I'm an uncle!!!
hunter124456
Active member
Good point, both cameras fail to satisfy. In my waiting period(Nov 28th) to the delivery of my G3 I wonder if I would not be better served by a true camera...the D60 or D100. Cannot expect a Lexus out of a muti-purpose Pacer/Gremlin. Maybe, just maybe the big boys have it right. throw a few more grand at the wall and behold Bliss is the result. If I owned a D60 or D100 I would be laughing at the fools on the G3 hill......I have a week, Phil has the same deadline. Phil, Phil where art thou?
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum