Image quality: which G-series is best?

[thermal1]

Which G-series camera produces the best image quality bar none?

I'm considering an upgrade/addition to my SD600. The G7 is a fine camera, but if the G5 or G3 produces better pictures, I'm willing to go online and purchase one of those.

If the G7 produces images as good as previous G-series cameras, then the modern technology and speed of the 7 would win it over for me.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thermal/

 

[thermal1]

Note: LCD size, speed, battery life etc are all secondary. I am looking for pure image quality.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thermal/

 

[Photofreak7]

I can tell you from owning one that the G7's IQ is very good. Simon (DPreview) says this in his review of the G7: "As Canon's flagship PowerShot compact you would expect good results from the G7, and it doesn't disappoint, producing output at ISO 80 that isn't significantly different to an entry-level digital SLR and kit lens combo" and "Compared to previous sensor generations the 10MP chip used in the G7 is surprisingly good at ISO 400" - so it would appear that the G7's newer technology is actually better than previous 'G' series cams (as you say only comparing IQ -other feature arguments are irrelevant based on your question) ... Matt

Which G-series camera produces the best image quality bar none?

I'm considering an upgrade/addition to my SD600. The G7 is a fine
camera, but if the G5 or G3 produces better pictures, I'm willing
to go online and purchase one of those.

If the G7 produces images as good as previous G-series cameras,
then the modern technology and speed of the 7 would win it over for
me.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thermal/

 

[Karld70]

I have the G6. I had the G7 for a little while, but returned it. The G6 takes a better picture. The G6 is a little dated now, the startup time and shutter lag has been improved with the new G7. But the IQ is not matched. I didn’t have any of the older G series cameras, sp can’t say anything about the older G’s

 

[gkl]

but the G6 and G7 are probably the best IMO. The G6 has RAW and the F2 lens for DOF, control while the G7 has IS, more speed, more telephoto reach, a bit more resolution and probably slightly better IQ at high-ISO.

Which G-series camera produces the best image quality bar none?
If the G7 produces images as good as previous G-series cameras,
then the modern technology and speed of the 7 would win it over for
me.

Note: LCD size, speed, battery life etc are all secondary. I am looking for pure image
quality.

Don't discount speed - it can affect whether you get the shot or not. Having said that, there is little point in getting a used G6 unless you really need RAW or the swivel LCD. cheers, gkl

 

[ColoradoSkier]

I don't have, nor have ever used, anything other than the G5. I am extremely happy with it. When I do decide it is time to upgrade, it will be to a DSLR so I can take advantage of multiple lenses, etc. Here are a couple pics I took this weekend:







And others from the past:





--
Chester Bullock
My Picture Gallery (lots of shots with Canon G5) is at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bullockfam/

 

[tjdean01]

They all have the same size CCD. Some have 10 MP, some 7, some 5, some 4, and I think the G2 had 3 MP. I'm guessing the G3 with 4 Mp is the best. Maybe G5

 

[gkl]

They all have the same size CCD. Some have 10 MP, some 7, some 5,
some 4, and I think the G2 had 3 MP. I'm guessing the G3 with 4 Mp
is the best. Maybe G5

On what basis?
G1 3mp 3X f2 lens pre-Digic
G2 4mp 3X f2 lens pre-Digic
G3 4mp 4X f2 lens Digic I
G5 5mp 4X f2 lens Digic I
G6 7mp 4X f2 lens Digic I
G7 10mp 6X f2.8 IS lens Digic III

FWIW, all have very good IQ. The G3/G5 lens suffered a bit from CA, G6 reduced this with new lens coatings. G5 was noisier than G2/G3/G6. In high contrast images, G7 outresolves G6, and G6 outresolves the rest. On that basis it has to be either G6 or G7, depending on whether your prefer Digic II or Digic III. In many instances, the G7's IS and longer reach will give better IQ than the G6. In cases where shallow DOF matters, you may need the G6's f2 lens. cheers, gkl

 

[tjdean01]

They all have the same size CCD. Some have 10 MP, some 7, some 5,
some 4, and I think the G2 had 3 MP. I'm guessing the G3 with 4 Mp
is the best. Maybe G5

On what basis?

Based on them having lower noise...and less need for strong noise reduction

 

[gkl]

tjdean01 wrote:
They all have the same size CCD. Some have 10 MP, some 7, some 5,
some 4, and I think the G2 had 3 MP. I'm guessing the G3 with 4 Mp
is the best. Maybe G5

gkl wrote:
On what basis?

tjdean01 wrote:
Based on them having lower noise...and less need for strong noise
reduction

Be careful of generalizations. In his G7 review, Simon says: "at ISO 80 and 100 there's plenty of detail (and marginally higher - though barely visible - noise than average)." So noise levels are not much higher, owing to improved sensor design and sophisticated NR. The noise shows up mainly in shadows, if you care about that. As for higher ISO, the G7 can produce a useable image at ISO 800, something that is difficult to do with the G6.

The G7 "manages to squeeze maybe 10 per cent more detail out of the scene than its predecessor the G6." Without noise, the G7 should be roughly 20% better, so this tells you something of the tradeoff between NR and detail.

Based on DPR tests, the G6 and G7 clearly outresolve earlier G1-G5, generally have noise levels similar to or better than the G2-G3, and less noise than the G5. Based on this evidence, I'd say it's a toss-up between the G6 and G7. cheers, gkl

 

[LarryPhoto]

Nice pictures, while I love the G7, I think in your last picture with the snow, my G7 would blow out the highlights, I think to get that shot with my G7 I would need -1 EV and fill flash on.

--

 

[gkl]

I think in your last picture
with the snow, my G7 would blow out the highlights, I think to get
that shot with my G7 I would need -1 EV and fill flash on.

I couldn't see any EC, but the flickr exif says the flash was fired. cheers, gkl

 

[DG13]

There are a lot of variables to image quality, and they all vary in importance with the individual as well as the kind of pictures you take.

There are a lot of "one issue voters" around. Beware, and judge against what's most important to you.

Is a clinically perfect photograph necessarily going to be aesthetically pleasing?

How do you judge the "best" IQ. Or "better"? Better than what? In what way?

 

[DG13]

How is it better?

 

[Don Franco]

I just got my G7 so I can't say for sure (and I don't have a G# to compare) but my guess is that the G7 will produce better images overall, especially handheld and at telephoto or in low light, due to the IS. I regret that it doesn't have RAW - but you can't have everything.

The longer telephoto and Optical IS were the main reasons I upgraded from my S45 in addition to more pixels (I would have been happy with 7 or 8 mp too). The A710is was a strong contender as was the Pano TZ3 - but other features - ability for filters (polarizing mainly) and a hot shoe were the main deciders. I would have like a litle wide FOV like a 28, but again...

The other close ones were the S5 or S3 - but I didn't want the bulk.

 

[tjdean01]

Be careful of generalizations. In his G7 review, Simon says: "at
ISO 80 and 100 there's plenty of detail (and marginally higher -
though barely visible - noise than average)."

I'm not generalizing, it's true that the older 4 or 5 MP CCD were better pixel for pixel than the 7 or 10 MP ones. The reason the noise isn't in the picture is because of harsher noise reduction. Now if they were to use today's technology and make a 4 or 5 MP, then that'd be the best small CCD ever.

 

[JohnFredC]

Have had a G2 (4Mp) for years now. Considering all factors put together (lens, exposure, blowout, resolution). it takes "better" pictures more consistently than my other digital cameras: Canon A80 (4Mp), Canon S3IS (6Mp), Nikon S1 (5Mp), Sony DSC-T100(8Mp). It seems to have some sort of magic quality that, if I am careful, nails the exposure more often than the others.

That little Nikon comes in second.

Used to be I was concerned about pixels. Now I am more concerned about how the meter does in extremely contrasty situations and how much noise reduction is applied.

My 2 cents.

 

[gkl]

I'm not generalizing, it's true that the older 4 or 5 MP CCD were
better pixel for pixel than the 7 or 10 MP ones. The reason the
noise isn't in the picture is because of harsher noise reduction.

Sorry, the facts don't support that argument. I have the G2 (4MP) and G7(10MP), and when examing similar images at sizes bigger than about 8 by 10.5 inches, it's obvious that the G7 outresolves the G2. This can only happen if there is more information than noise. The same applies comparing the G6 to the G3 - tests on DPR show the G6 resolves about 30% more detail than the G3, which is exactly what it should do given 7 vs. 4 MP[ sqrt(7/4) = 1.32] .

Now if they were to use today's technology and make a 4 or 5 MP,
then that'd be the best small CCD ever.

By that argument, why not 2 MP or 1MP? A 4-5 MP camera with today's technology might have slightly better dynamic range, but it would not outresolve the G6 or G7.

The issue with the MP wars is that the recent gain in resolution has not been as big as you'd expect from the increased MP. E.g., the G7 only resolves 10% better than the G6, whereas it should be able to resolve 20% more detail. So manufacturers are gradually getting to the point where adding more MP will produce no benefit. cheers, gkl

 

[thermal1]

For the record, I used to have an S400 and still am immensely impressed by the little 4mp 1/1.8 sensor (Used in G2?)

But the concensus here seems to be that the G6 is perhaps the best, with the G7 just slightly behind? It's too bad Canon jumped from Digic I with the G6 (slow) to Digic III with the G7 - a G6.5 with Digic II and all the G6's features would have been perfect.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thermal/

 

[tjdean01]

Sorry, the facts don't support that argument. I have the G2 (4MP)
and G7(10MP), and when examing similar images at sizes bigger than
about 8 by 10.5 inches, it's obvious that the G7 outresolves the
G2. This can only happen if there is more information than noise.
The same applies comparing the G6 to the G3 - tests on DPR show the
G6 resolves about 30% more detail than the G3, which is exactly
what it should do given 7 vs. 4 MP[ sqrt(7/4) = 1.32]

I wasn't talking about resolution, I was talking about clarity pixel for pixel. For me, the best IQ might mean a crisp lens, sharp picture, and no noise. For anyone else it might mean detail. It depends what you like.