Canon G7 pics as good as Fuji F30 in low light

[MrClick #421805]

Is this true? I am really confused right now. Was surfing thru Flickr and came across these Canon G7 pics... all taken without flash in low light. Click on the pic to see larger versions.

I'd really appreciate someone who owns or has used both the G7 and the F30 in low light without flash to comment. Or better still... has anyone done a comparison on these two cameras in low light without flash?

 

[Cubensis]

My first question to you is... what are you not believing about the reviews on this site? They should answer this question for you.

Your second mistake is judging pictures off of Flickr. This is a poor way to get an idea of what a camera can do.

Is this true? I am really confused right now. Was surfing thru
Flickr and came across these Canon G7 pics... all taken without
flash in low light. Click on the pic to see larger versions.

I'd really appreciate someone who owns or has used both the G7 and
the F30 in low light without flash to comment. Or better still...
has anyone done a comparison on these two cameras in low light
without flash?

--
Fuji A310, F10, & F30

 

[MrClick #421805]

My first question to you is... what are you not believing about the
reviews on this site? They should answer this question for you.

Well... for starters... I did read thru the reviews on this site. Some of them state otherwise i.e. the G7 is not too bad really in the hands of someone who knows how to get the best from it.

Your second mistake is judging pictures off of Flickr. This is a
poor way to get an idea of what a camera can do.

Poor way? Seeing is believing... isn't it? I also happened to look at the exif info there to doubly verify if fill flash was used or not. Also, I only linked to pics which have been taken by experienced photographers as is evident from their photos.

That said... I am still leaning towards the F30/31. But before I make the actual purchase, I want to make sure my choice was the correct one that suited my personal needs.

My most important need is image quality straight out of the camera with minimal pp. My second most important need is sharp non grainy exposures in low light. I do not care two hoots about IS, FD, etc. In fact, I personally prefer shooting with higher ISOs than using IS most of the time if the camera allows acceptable exposures.

 

[rsalles]

From what I have read the G7 teakes better photos with good light and the F30 with low light. The F30 is very good but I would prefer the G7 bacause of zoom, hot shoe, viewfinder, SD card and that ISO dial.
Renato

--
Fuji S9100;
Canon A60;
Canon Elan 7e;
But not enough time to use them...

 

[ne beginner]

With tripod and a long exposure, either camera can use a low ISO in low light and take great images. Where the F30 will have the advantage is at higher ISO's ... starting at 400 and above ... where the noise will start to become an issue with the G7.

 

[Amin Sabet]

In low light with a still subject, the G7 will do as well in a number of situations because the IS helps keep ISO down. In low light with a moving subject, the F30 is far superior.

--
Amin

 

[Cubensis]

I was responding to your thread title "Canon G7 pics as good as Fuji F30 in low light" - I pointed you to the reviews because they clearly answer your inquiry as they present the exact same scene with different cameras at each ISO setting. Look at ISO 1600 from the G7 and the F30... there is no comparison... and without RAW, the G7 won't be winning that battle in post processing either.

My first question to you is... what are you not believing about the
reviews on this site? They should answer this question for you.

Well... for starters... I did read thru the reviews on this site.
Some of them state otherwise i.e. the G7 is not too bad really in
the hands of someone who knows how to get the best from it.

Your second mistake is judging pictures off of Flickr. This is a
poor way to get an idea of what a camera can do.

Poor way? Seeing is believing... isn't it? I also happened to look
at the exif info there to doubly verify if fill flash was used or
not. Also, I only linked to pics which have been taken by
experienced photographers as is evident from their photos.

That said... I am still leaning towards the F30/31. But before I
make the actual purchase, I want to make sure my choice was the
correct one that suited my personal needs.

My most important need is image quality straight out of the camera
with minimal pp. My second most important need is sharp non grainy
exposures in low light. I do not care two hoots about IS, FD, etc.
In fact, I personally prefer shooting with higher ISOs than using
IS most of the time if the camera allows acceptable exposures.

--
Fuji A310, F10, & F30

 

[VincentJ]

I have the F30, and can easily get away with ISO-1600 at a pinch, they even produce great looking 5x7's and 6x8 prints. I have never seen anything from the Canon shot at ISO-400 or higher without lots of chroma and luminance noise.

 

[MrClick #421805]

Thanks for all your opinions. After considering everyones' input, I also have come around to agree that the F30 is the unbeaten low light king amongst ultra compacts currently available.

So would you confer that the E900 is Fuji's 'near' equivalent of Canon's G7? Should I opt for the E900 or the F30/F31.

 

[ericN2]

My most important need is image quality straight out of the camera
with minimal pp. My second most important need is sharp non grainy
exposures in low light. I do not care two hoots about IS, FD, etc.
In fact, I personally prefer shooting with higher ISOs than using
IS most of the time if the camera allows acceptable exposures.

I have to agree that Flickr is cetainly one site that I'd NEVER use to make a judgment on ANY pic. It surprises me that for a site of that name , the pics that are on it generally baffle me , as I'm sure they rarely represent the best quality available from the pics. As to it being used by "experienced" users , well .. if they prefer to use the site , it's their choice, but I still feel it does them no justice.

But as to a comparison between the G7 and Fxx cams .. especially as you are clearly interested or expect to shoot in low or poor light, I've certainly seen little or nothing that would make me run for the G7 against ANY Fxx. Yes, the G7 has a LOT of good things I dearly wish Fuji would put on their compacts , but whatever your choice or needs for pic-taking .. it's being able to GET the shots that counts in the end.. and beyond a certain point I just feel that ..bearing in mind also the PRICE you pay .. I just don't fancy the G7 doing it. Fine if you shoot at low ISO mostly , but you say the opposite in effect, so how you can show anything better from the G7 against all the remarks on it, I don't know.

If the G7 is your choice - go buy it and be happy. We all buy what WE want. But don't look to any great shots if you have to use high ISO at all.

--
ericN-UK

 

[ericN2]

No - again you are on difficult ground. If you really expect to be shooting a lot , or a good proportion, in low or poor light, the E900 and G7 are maybe with a lot of similarities. The E900 will in my opinion beat the G7 up to such as ISO 800 (highest it goes) but the G7 for 'ordinary' use probably has a few things better , same as the E900 has a few things better.. they sort of balance out up to a point. But as soon as you start to need higher ISO, then there just isn't anything to better the Fxx.

But I'm concerned when you say in effect you want to keep pics more or less 'out of camera'. Frankly that to me is NOT the way of good photography. Frankly it's a sloppy way - if you relish your pics, be prepared to give them some PP. NOBODY will get the best , just ex cam, but a good one ex-cam CAN become a SUPERB pic with a modest PP-ing. Without that , frankly you're little better than a Box Brownie merchant. BE ENTHUSED about your pic-takling...NOT lazy.

--
ericN-UK

 

[Tulaev]

Difference in noise between F30 and G7 - only about 1 stop. Advantage of IS - about 2 stops That why G7 is beter for still life.

G7 ISO400 samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52993545@N00/sets/72157594469278563/

 

[tbcass]

Poor way? Seeing is believing... isn't it? I also happened to look
at the exif info there to doubly verify if fill flash was used or
not. Also, I only linked to pics which have been taken by
experienced photographers as is evident from their photos.

Exif may not tell you if someone has post processed to remove noise. How many of the photos you looked at were at iso 800 and 1600? I think review samples from web site reviews are a better way to sample because of the controlled conditions.

--
Tom

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

 

[tbcass]

Difference in noise between F30 and G7 - only about 1 stop.
Advantage of IS - about 2 stops That why G7 is better for still life.

True but since low light photos are often inside with moving people the slow shutter speeds will result in motion blur. The following shot is in low light at iso 400 (hand held) resulting in a very slow shutter speed. Results with IS would be the same.



--
Tom

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

 

[Clyde Atkinson]

Depends on the camera, many examples of OOC jpegs I see on the Fuji dslr forum from the Fuji S3/S5 are excellent with no need for PP with the exception of perhaps cropping. I do very little PP with my S7000. Sorry, I think many on this forum have become PP snobs, the right cam with the right settings should eliminate the need for very much PP, use the correct tool in the correct way for best results. Should you PP a pic if it needs it? Absolutely, but let's be real here, most people don't want to spend a lot of time in front of their computer correcting what could have been done in camera. Just my opinion.
Clyde

 

[ericN2]

Depends on the camera, many examples of OOC jpegs I see on the Fuji
dslr forum from the Fuji S3/S5 are excellent with no need for PP
with the exception of perhaps cropping. I do very little PP with my
S7000. Sorry, I think many on this forum have become PP snobs, the
right cam with the right settings should eliminate the need for
very much PP, use the correct tool in the correct way for best
results. Should you PP a pic if it needs it? Absolutely, but let's
be real here, most people don't want to spend a lot of time in
front of their computer correcting what could have been done in
camera. Just my opinion.
Clyde

Well, I must firstly say that it is quite true to at least some extent , what you say. But people vary - and the people I think that are really within the category YOU speak of - the "don't want to PP" group - are the ones you see by the load.. standing outside their favourite local processor shop, avidly looking at their latest holiday snaps .. and to be brutally honest , most are that .. just snaps.

I don't think I'm OTT in saying that MOST that come on such as this or other Forums are a bit more interested in photography - some are "newbies" by their own admission , many are not. And the latter are who comprise the group that believe with a degree of sense, that you never shot a roll of film and not have other than the thought that it HAD to be processed - so what is different with digital. They ALL have to be processed - we were FORCED into it in film days..NOW, we can be made lazy as WE get the shots ex-cam and WE have to decide whether to accept them or process them. If you just accept them , then alas it is my feeling that you will never be a good photographer.

Photography is just NOT about , and only about, shooting in-camera. There is no question of 'snobbery' - it is a matter of pure fact - whether you accept it or not is your prerogative.

--
ericN-UK

 

[ericN2]

Difference in noise between F30 and G7 - only about 1 stop.
Advantage of IS - about 2 stops That why G7 is beter for still life.

G7 ISO400 samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52993545@N00/sets/72157594469278563/

I took the offer in Flickr to download "full size" (actually 1064x) THREE of the Berlin pics and have put them through Photoshop (v7). The 'originals' as they come, are each ISO 400 of course, but even at that modest level (by Fuji Fxx standards) there is a lot of noise in the blank sky area and whilst the quality is excellent for what are around 1/10 or so in each case, they really do shout for some PP.

So they got Noiseware Pro treatment - just by prog 'Default' setting, then a modest final Sharpen .. and I ran them just once through a PF filter action I've got (made up).

The above gave a remarkable difference and the pics now look almost from another camera. But it DOES prove the benefits of a bit of PP - at this level the G7 WOULD hold its own against the Fuji - but beyond ISO 400 , and assessing from these AT 400, I'm quite sure the Fxx would give vastly better result generally than the G7 at anything like higher ISO. The G7 IS a good camera, and with an excellent lens as all G's have had, but it's just no better than ANY when it comes to being forced to work with low light problems.

--
ericN-UK

 

[ne beginner]

... regarding post processing ... or not post processing. The right camera for you is the one that best meets YOUR needs.

Any of the cameras you mention can produce great out-of-the camera pictures ... as long as you learn to use the camera. Each has things it does well ... and dosen't to so well. Look at any forum on this site, pick a camera, and you'll find examples of many beautiful images. You or I could take the same camera and be very dissappointed in the results we get. Is it the camera? Or the photographer? You don't have to be an engineer or Ansel Adams to get great results from a camera ... just have to take a little time to learn what a particular camera can and can not do, then learn how to use the camera to the best of its ability.

What types of situations do you think you'll be shooting? That should determine the camera. Here are some things to think about.

Lots of action? Kids running around? Will this be natural light (ie no flash)? Think DSLR .... ALL P&S cameras have shutter lag. You'll need faster shutter speeds to capture action. If that's not for you, then for a P&S, the F30/31 will have the advantage over the 3 you mention due to low noise at high ISO, allowing you to use faster shutter speeds.

Social scenes? People? Indoor? Outdoor? Both? If you use flash, any of the cameras you mention will work fine because you'll be using lower ISO's, so noise is not a factor. The G7 may have an advantage because it's IS will help reduce the effects of camera shake. Both the F30 and G7 will automatically adjust the flash as needed, but the G7 also allows you to adjust it yourself, a nice feature of the camera is tending to over flash a scene. The G7 has face detection ... you'll need the F31 to match that. If you don't want to use flash in these situations, think F30/31 ... you'll need to use higher ISO's.

Daytime outdoors? Scenics? Street photography? The G7 and F30 CAN both do well there ... BUT you'll need to learn a few things about each camera to get those really good results that we often see posted. If you learn to use either of these you'll be able to get great images out of the camera. The G7 offers you a few things that the F30 can't: the G is a more sophistcated camera, allowing you to create custom colors, adjust sharpening and contrast in-camera, create custom settings. It also has a longer zoom range and IS (that allows you to use the long end of the zoom at lower shutter speeds without getting camera shake).

Night time? Sunsets? City scenes? You'll be using low ISO's and long exposures (and a tripod, or the timer and a stationary place to rest the camera), so any of these cameras will do well there. If there's action in the scene and you want to freeze it, the F30/31 will let you use higher shutter speeds.

If you're looking for an all-around camera that can be usefull in all of the situations above, and don't want a DSLR (or you have one and want an alternative), then the next question is how much control over the camera do you want? If the answer is a lot, then the G7 is hard to beat. It's a more sophisticated photographic tool ... that's why it costs twice as much as an F30. With the G7 you also get expandability: there are lens options and it has a hot shoe which uses Canon Speedlight flash units. If answer to control is not much, then the F30/31 is the best out there, bar none.

I don't know a lot about the other Fuji (tried one once in a store). It's older technology: has a small screen, dosen't share the great sensor in the F3X's, so it won't give you the great low light performance. What it does offer, I believe, is RAW, which the F30's and G7 lack. THAT's important if you want to do a lot of post processing (RAW gives you more latitude for PP than Jpeg's).

Hope that helps ...

 

[Tulaev]

F30 has exellent ISO400, but ISO800 and higher are overprocessed (IMHO).

 

[tbcass]

If you are happy with the way your camera processes images fine but since there are infinite possibilities in processing the odds of any given camera producing images just the way you like are almost zero. If you are happy adjusting your expectations to what your camera produces fine. If however you have a certain way you want a photo to look then PP is a necessity.
--
Tom

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/