G-Series vs. SX-Superzooms??

[BobT]

Obviously not apples-to-apples. But might get closer if you eliminate the zoom range differences.

So, doing that, do the later G-Series (maybe from G10 to the newest G15)cameras simply blow away the IQ of the later SX-superzooms (SX30, 40, 50)? Is there an obvious difference here?

This is "mainly" an Image Quality personal opinion comparison.

 

[Martin87]

BobT wrote:

Obviously not apples-to-apples. But might get closer if you eliminate the zoom range differences.

So, doing that, do the later G-Series (maybe from G10 to the newest G15)cameras simply blow away the IQ of the later SX-superzooms (SX30, 40, 50)? Is there an obvious difference here?

This is "mainly" an Image Quality personal opinion comparison.

Yes. The newer G series cameras do blow away the SX superzooms when it comes to low-light photography. If you intent to shoot a lot in a dimly lit conditions the G series is a must. The SX series will give you very noisy and smudged images in low light.
On the other hand if you take a lot of pictures in broad daylight the SX series is the way to go.

I hope my answer helped you.

 

[Derek Oregon]

Why choose? The SX50 and G1X make an awesome pair!!

 

[Steen Bay]

Martin87 wrote:

BobT wrote:

Obviously not apples-to-apples. But might get closer if you eliminate the zoom range differences.

So, doing that, do the later G-Series (maybe from G10 to the newest G15)cameras simply blow away the IQ of the later SX-superzooms (SX30, 40, 50)? Is there an obvious difference here?

This is "mainly" an Image Quality personal opinion comparison.

Yes. The newer G series cameras do blow away the SX superzooms when it comes to low-light photography. If you intent to shoot a lot in a dimly lit conditions the G series is a must. The SX series will give you very noisy and smudged images in low light.

The newest G-series camera, the G15, will have a clear low light advantage over the SX50, but mostly because it has a considerably faster lens (at the shared FLs). If looking at the sensor sizes alone, then the G15's sensor area is just about 48% larger. That can be translated to a bit more than half a stop better high-ISO performance, which really isn't that much. If comparing the G12 and SX40 instead, then the low light performance would be much closer, because the lenses are equally 'fast'.

On the other hand if you take a lot of pictures in broad daylight the SX series is the way to go.

I hope my answer helped you.

 

[Jostian]

The larger sensor will give you an edge in general IQ too.

 

[BobT]

Concerned as to which series of models will produce better images for an upcoming trip to the U.S. Southwest.....mainly scenics. I have DSLR gear but wanting to occasionally shoot with less/lighter gear. I have even thought of taking something like a E-PL2 and a kit lens.

 

[mfetz1026]

I have a G10 and a G1x and live in the Southwestern US.

Both cameras produce exceptional photographs, with the G1x having better IQ and low light performance. I now carry the G10 just for macro, at which it excels.

Pay no attention to all the people whining about AF issues on the G1X. It is excellent for landscapes. It is NOT for action/sports.

That said, I find myself looking at all the great SX bird photos and wishing I had a superzoom just for brds......

Can't have everything!

 

[brianj]

mfetz1026 wrote:

I have a G10 and a G1x and live in the Southwestern US.

Both cameras produce exceptional photographs, with the G1x having better IQ and low light performance. I now carry the G10 just for macro, at which it excels.

Pay no attention to all the people whining about AF issues on the G1X. It is excellent for landscapes. It is NOT for action/sports.

That said, I find myself looking at all the great SX bird photos and wishing I had a superzoom just for brds......

Can't have everything!

I am mainly a daylight shooter, and most cameras have more than enough IQ for my need which is to print a 6x4 photo of my trips, so I have just ordered a SX240HS, which I think will be just what I need for my trip in a fortnight.

I will let you know how it goes, it is my first canon camera in 10 years of buying digital !!

Brian

 

[BobT]

Brian,




I have a Canon SX230HS, which I believe is a predecessor of the SX240 that you're getting. I have found it to be a great go-to camera for most anything. In fact it's the only camera (I have 3 cameras)that I choose to use for indoor situations such as my grandkid's H.S. music concerts and such.

Not sure if your SX240 has that "irritating" auto pop-up flash or not. But it's really not that irritating as long as you just get use to holding it down (shut/closed) when turning the camera on. And it doesn't hurt the operation of the camera either.

Hope you enjoy it. I think it's a great camera and probably should consider it over the G or SX series for my trip.

 

[BobT]

In a previous forum thread, I had asked about using a SX50 OR E-PL2 ( and 2 kit lenses..14-42 & 40-150) for my SW trip. Only yesterday, I decided to go with the SX50, mainly for it being a more convenient ONE piece camera unit, and it's incredibly huge zoom range. But now that I have decided on that, I'm having 2nd thoughts. I'm back to considering the MFT gear. Yet, I already have suitable DSLR gear, too.

 

[brianj]

BobT wrote:

Brian,

I have a Canon SX230HS, which I believe is a predecessor of the SX240 that you're getting. I have found it to be a great go-to camera for most anything. In fact it's the only camera (I have 3 cameras)that I choose to use for indoor situations such as my grandkid's H.S. music concerts and such.

Not sure if your SX240 has that "irritating" auto pop-up flash or not. But it's really not that irritating as long as you just get use to holding it down (shut/closed) when turning the camera on. And it doesn't hurt the operation of the camera either.

Hope you enjoy it. I think it's a great camera and probably should consider it over the G or SX series for my trip.

The one I have looked at in the shop even in AUTO mode if the flash option is selected in the menu there is a choice to turn off the flash, so they changed it so you can have the popup inhibited. I have also read this in reviews.

Thanks for the feedback on how likable this camera model is, that's good to know as you cannot get that from reviews.

In example images that I have viewed from others on the web, two things impress me about the images, one is the lack of blochy chroma noise, even at high ISO the noise remains fairly fine and monochrome in nature, and the second thing I liked is the seeminly wide color gamut, the images appear to vividly contain very subtle colours that are in between the primary RGB and secondary CYM set of colours. Many digital images that I have seen do not reproduce this well.

I have been told that it will readily use high ISO, which is because the aperture is not very big, starting at f3.5, and in order to keep a respectable shutter speed, but I am not too worried about this due to my mostly daylight shooting style and also only small prints and the fine nature of the noise.

Life is full of compromises, so I think this will be ok considering I get 25-500mm zoom in a small package.

Brian

 

[GeraldW]

Bob,


I really think you'll want both a very long lens, and something much faster and more compact for low light and for places where you don't want to carry the superzoom. It would also give you a backup, just in case.

As to superzooms, the Canon models to look at would be the SX40HS or SX50HS because they have DIGIC 5 and can correct for chromatic aberration automatically, in-camera. Once you zoom a litle, both camera's lenses get quite slow, as both have lenses where the aperture changes quite rapidly as you zoom. By 140 mm, where the G15 is still f/2.8; the SZ's are already almost 2 stops slower. Fine for daylight; but forcing high ISO in dimmer light.

Both the Canon SZ's do fairly well at higher ISO; but neither one can hold a candle to the G15 in low light. I recently bought a G15 to replace a G11, and I'm really amazed at how much better the G15 is. It's also fairly light at 12.5 oz., and slim enough to fit into a shirt pocket.

As an alternative to the Canons, I can recommend the Panasonic FZ150 or FZ200. Both cover 25-600 mm, equivalent. The FZ150 at f/2.8-f/5.2 and only f/4 at 300 mm. The FZ200 is the same focal length and a constant f/2.8; and with a very high resolution EVF. Properly set up, image quality is excellent on both cameras. I own both.

 

[Jostian]

GeraldW wrote:

Bob,

I really think you'll want both a very long lens, and something much faster and more compact for low light and for places where you don't want to carry the superzoom. It would also give you a backup, just in case.

As to superzooms, the Canon models to look at would be the SX40HS or SX50HS because they have DIGIC 5 and can correct for chromatic aberration automatically, in-camera. Once you zoom a litle, both camera's lenses get quite slow, as both have lenses where the aperture changes quite rapidly as you zoom. By 140 mm, where the G15 is still f/2.8; the SZ's are already almost 2 stops slower. Fine for daylight; but forcing high ISO in dimmer light.

Both the Canon SZ's do fairly well at higher ISO; but neither one can hold a candle to the G15 in low light. I recently bought a G15 to replace a G11, and I'm really amazed at how much better the G15 is. It's also fairly light at 12.5 oz., and slim enough to fit into a shirt pocket.

As an alternative to the Canons, I can recommend the Panasonic FZ150 or FZ200. Both cover 25-600 mm, equivalent. The FZ150 at f/2.8-f/5.2 and only f/4 at 300 mm. The FZ200 is the same focal length and a constant f/2.8; and with a very high resolution EVF. Properly set up, image quality is excellent on both cameras. I own both.

 

[PC Wheeler]

BobT wrote:

So, doing that, do the later G-Series (maybe from G10 to the newest G15)cameras simply blow away the IQ of the later SX-superzooms (SX30, 40, 50)? Is there an obvious difference here?

This is "mainly" an Image Quality personal opinion comparison.

Pretty much, particularly in lower light situations -- and especially so for the G15 with its faster lens.

In many situations the IQ differences will be no big deal (e.g., "vacation" shooting in daylight condx). But the G15 and others of the series also provide more flexible shooting controls and other features (e.g., built-in neutral density [ND] filter).

 

[GeraldW]

Jostian,

A couple of us over on the Panasonic compact forum have been stubbornly working to find the optimum settings for JPEGs. Just this last week, quite by coincidence, we hit on the same settings; although we came on them from opposite directions. No matter, I'll put the FZ200 with those settings up against the FZ150 all the way up to ISO 1600. (I have both cameras).

We are both now using NR-1/Sharpening -2/iResolution ON. Not at all obvious; but it works wonderfully well under a very broad range of lighting, ISO, and subjects, including flash.

I have no idea what Panasonic was thinking to deviate so far from the practice they heve used since at least the FZ28. The FZ28/FZ35/FZ150 all were optimized at NR -2/Sharpening +1. I tried that on the FZ200; and it looked terrible. I think the obscurity of the optimum setting and the fact that the default settings needed help has lead to a lot of misconceptions about the sensor on the FZ200; and probably hurt sales as a result.

In contrast, my Canon Powershots have all been quite consistent in what I want for JPEGs. Just about every one has needed +1, or occassionally +2 sharpening in Custom in My Colors to suit my tastes, and then I'm done. Takes maybe an hour to try it and see. We do have my wife's A710IS set to Vivid; but that's really an exception over many, many models.

 

[Jostian]

GeraldW wrote:

Jostian,

A couple of us over on the Panasonic compact forum have been stubbornly working to find the optimum settings for JPEGs. Just this last week, quite by coincidence, we hit on the same settings; although we came on them from opposite directions. No matter, I'll put the FZ200 with those settings up against the FZ150 all the way up to ISO 1600. (I have both cameras).

We are both now using NR-1/Sharpening -2/iResolution ON. Not at all obvious; but it works wonderfully well under a very broad range of lighting, ISO, and subjects, including flash.

I have no idea what Panasonic was thinking to deviate so far from the practice they heve used since at least the FZ28. The FZ28/FZ35/FZ150 all were optimized at NR -2/Sharpening +1. I tried that on the FZ200; and it looked terrible. I think the obscurity of the optimum setting and the fact that the default settings needed help has lead to a lot of misconceptions about the sensor on the FZ200; and probably hurt sales as a result.

In contrast, my Canon Powershots have all been quite consistent in what I want for JPEGs. Just about every one has needed +1, or occassionally +2 sharpening in Custom in My Colors to suit my tastes, and then I'm done. Takes maybe an hour to try it and see. We do have my wife's A710IS set to Vivid; but that's really an exception over many, many models.

 

[BobT]

Phil,




Other than the G15, what other cameras would you put right up there with it? Canon brand or not.




Thanks

 

[jimr]

I'd wait to see how the Fuji X20 performs....