Not happy with G16 as an upgrade

Sorry... but apparently I should asked in my original post to include your reasoning for upgrading or not upgrading to the G16 :/

No. I have the G15 and for its intended use, I can't see any reason to upgrade. If it had a very good EFV like the new Nikon, I would be tempted. The Nikon costs the same and also has a rotating LCD, so I don't buy the argument that a good EFV would cost too much. Not really interested in some of the other options because they either cost too much or have other limitations. With a very fast, sharp lens, and low noise to at least ISO400 and sensor not "over pixeled" I find the G15 can produce excellent prints to 13x19 in. If I need action sports capability, the d-slr is used.

Greg

deploylinux wrote:

Overall, the biggest issues with the G series now are:

- Zoom, at some point - we're going to have to get better than optical 5X especially with just 12MP to crop from.

At least a 7X would be much better for my needs! Even if that means the lens would be larger and the camera would weigh a bit more. The G series is not a shirt or pants pocket camera anyway, so that would not be an issue for me, as long as I can put it in a belt pouch.

- Noise at ISO's greater than ~1000, the G16 should have improved this somewhat with the slightly better sensor and a good flash reduces the need for high iso shots, but this is going to be something the next iteration of the G series will have to address.

Getting a new 2/3" (or slightly larger) new and improved higher efficiency sensor would do that. A bounce flash would also help reduce high ISO noise and give sharper images to moving objects.

G16 improvements are certainly good enough to justify upgrades from those with older G series cameras....probably not enough for those with the G15...but thats fine, I limit my upgrades to no more often than every 3 years anyway.

I also upgrade every 3-4 years or so and require much better IQ, faster operation and higher ISO capability if I'm going to upgrade. I would also like to see a touch screen/articulating LCD display and panorama mode included with weather sealing would be great upgrades, IMHO. If all those improvements happens (or most of them) with the G17, I will be one of the first in line to upgrade my trusty old G12. Lets all keep our fingers crossed for Canon to do a complete revamp and make us all even prouder of the next G series next year! I think they can do it, but if they will, well... time will tell.

Feudal1 wrote:

RX100: 29-105mm f/1.8-f/4

G16: 28-140mm f/1.8-f/2.8

A great lens with an outdated, low efficiency sensor does not make give you great IQ!

It's 28-140mm, starting at f/1.8 at the wide end, and f/2.8 at the long end. Contrast that with the RX100m2 - 29-105mm. I think an optical 5x zoom is actually pretty good.

Pretty good, but not as good as it could/should be compared to it's competition! See Nikon and Panasonic's latest P&S's with 7x zoom lenses and better sensors.

With the G16, Canon has a lens that is very bright through it's entire focal range. This is an area where Sony had to compromise - at full zoom, the RX100 lens if f/4.9, whereas Canon is f/2.8. Huge difference in favor of the G16.

It is a shame you do not have an RX100 to compare your new G16 to in IQ across the focal range up to 105mm. Since the G16 is so much larger and heavier than the RX100 and could/should easily accommodate a 1" sensor, that would be a great comparison. I wish the G17 will come with a 1" (or slightly smaller) more efficient sensor then it has now that could even come close to the RX100 IQ. When will people stop making excuses for Canon and it's inability to keep up with features and IQ as it's completion? Admit it, Canon could and should do better with it's next upgrade to the G16!

always found the G15 fast enough so not worried about 'extra' speed, have noticed that the higher iso shots of the G16 seem not as detailed as the G15 which disappoints, seems to be the case with the S120 too (same sensor and processor as G16) see my S110 vs S120 higher iso's compared thread... so I will definitely not be upgrading, seems IQ (at higher iso's at least) has taken a knock...

tron555 wrote:

I have been looking forward to upgrading my G12 for one with faster operation and better IQ especially in low light. It seems like the G series is lagging behind its competition in the P&S segment.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_G16/verdict.shtml

One of the first reviews, but I think more will agree with it

You're afraid that more reviewers will rave about how great the G16 is? I'm confused.

"But look beneath the surface and there's plenty to get excited about. First, there's the new Digic 6 processor, providing faster AF and reducing shutter lag, which makes the G16 a faster surer camera than its predecessor and greatly increases your chances of getting a shot in situations where speed matters. It also provides the G16 with very respectable continuous shooting that outclasses most of its competitors and is a huge advance on the mediocre burst shooting offered by its predecessor."

B1ackhat wrote:

You're afraid that more reviewers will rave about how great the G16 is? I'm confused.

So far, I have not seen ANY “rave” reviews so far and seriously don’t I will. From what I’ve seen so far, they all look about the same:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/digital-camera-reviews/canon-powershot-g16-review/ “we can’t give it our strongest recommendation”

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/canon-powershot-g16/4505-6501_7-35826692.html “A mediocre Wi-Fi implementation, no articulated LCD, and lack of manual controls while shooting video are among the ways in which the G16 lags behind the competition. And other cameras deliver better photos in low light.”

http://www.dslrphoto.com/dslr/canon-121mp-powershot-g16-camera-review-by-cnet-us-with-rating-78-10,33599.html “If you're sensitive to price and don't care about Wi-Fi or speed, I'd look for price drops on the G15. And if you want better photo quality and have the budget, I'd probably suggest paying a little more for the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100”

"But look beneath the surface and there's plenty to get excited about. First, there's the new Digic 6 processor, providing faster AF and reducing shutter lag, which makes the G16 a faster surer camera than its predecessor and greatly increases your chances of getting a shot in situations where speed matters. It also provides the G16 with very respectable continuous shooting that outclasses most of its competitors and is a huge advance on the mediocre burst shooting offered by its predecessor."

Also… having a “respectable continuous shooting” (5.8fps with continuous autofocus) only means that you will have more noisy/grainy images to choose from at anything over 400 ISO.

Dale Buhanan wrote:

tron555 wrote:

Feudal1 wrote:

RX100: 29-105mm f/1.8-f/4

G16: 28-140mm f/1.8-f/2.8

A great lens with an outdated, low efficiency sensor does not make give you great IQ!

According to a recent email from Chuck Westfall, the G16 does not use the same sensor as the G15, but rather uses a new BSI-CMOS sensor instead, which is likely manufactured by Sony, since Canon does not have BSI capability. (See the last few posts in this thread. http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52031522

So … a new sensor, a new lens and a new processor … has Canon really be sleeping at the switch?

Dale Buhanan wrote:

According to a recent email from Chuck Westfall, the G16 does not use the same sensor as the G15, but rather uses a new BSI-CMOS sensor instead, which is likely manufactured by Sony, since Canon does not have BSI capability. (See the last few posts in this thread. http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52031522

What he said was: “Per Tech Radar it's not the same sensor as the G15. That would validate “Canon's claim” for better low light performance.” I don’t doubt the G16 has a new BSI-SMOS sensor. The only problem is; I have not seen any appreciable difference in IQ or better low light shots in any of the reviews or images posted in them so far. Also, none of the reviews mention any appreciable difference in better noise control, even with the new DIGIC 6 processor.

As we all know, all manufacturer “Claim” all kinds of remarkable new features, just like Canon’s claims to have a 50% faster shutter lag and AF acquisition, I suppose you believe that one too. From the reviews I’ve read so far, that has not happened either! I only believe what I see and observe, not what I read when it comes to reviews and spec's.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

Upgrading to get the same IQ but get it a few milliseconds faster, does not make sense IMHO. Lets hope the G17 increases much more than just AF time, like better IQ at higher ISO's, sensor size, sensor efficiency, longer focal range, weather sealing, an EVF like the P7800, articulating display (like they used to have), touch screen, bounce flash, panorama mode, etc... to name a few. At $550, I would sure like to see most of these features, especially better IQ!!!

tron555 wrote:

Upgrading to get the same IQ but get it a few milliseconds faster, does not make sense IMHO. Lets hope the G17 increases much more than just AF time, like better IQ at higher ISO's, sensor size, sensor efficiency, longer focal range, weather sealing, an EVF like the P7800, articulating display (like they used to have), touch screen, bounce flash, panorama mode, etc... to name a few. At $550, I would sure like to see most of these features, especially better IQ!!!

+1