G9X - My First Impression

I received my G9X today and took some random pictures, and I thought I'd share some of them and my impression on the camera.

• This thing is TINY! According to the specs, it's slightly smaller than my old S90, and just a tiny bit heavier. It's so nice to be able to take pictures with only one hand. I cannot do that with my Sony mirrorless camera!
  
• The Silver body is beautiful! BUT, I think it will show wear much more easily than the black one, due to the metallic coating (just the nature of metallic coating). If you are a type that a slightest blemish bothers you, you might prefer the black body.
  
• I've taken a several macro shots of floweres in aperture mode, but they all turned out overexposured. The good thing is, you can adjust the exposure after taking your pictures, in-camera.
  
• f/2.0 pictures look pretty sharp where focused. I love it!
  
• ISO 6400 looks VERY bad if it contains a face. Looks very unnatural. Details on a fair skin are completely lost and looks VERY unnatural. It might look okay if you shoot raw and post process, but I don't do that so I don't know for sure. So I changed the max auto ISO to be 3200. 3200 looks OKAY for faces. Actually, it's not bad at all for smoothening wrinkles and blemishes. According to sample pictures I've seen, 6400 is not too bad if it's mostly dark, like a night shot.
  
• Touch screen needs getting used to, but I already appreciate it. Sony needs to learn from Canon.
  
• The built-in flash is not too bad, but I had to decrease the intensity by 1/3. I'm still trying to come up with a creative idea to make a diffuer for it.
  
• Skin colors look great. Very natural. Typical Canon.

Focused on the right eye. Pretty sharp!

100% crop on an eye. Details on eye lashes are great!

Indoor, evening light

Semi-dark restaurant

Straight out of camera. I thought it looked a bit "dull".

So I post procossed in-camera, and applied the "vivid" effect. Much better!

Just for comparison, this was taken with my Sony A5100 (APS-C) with a kit lens. Taken on a different day (sunnier).

I just knew you had received your camera and would have a helpful report to give. Great photos and examples. (I was not aware you could do things in camera!)

I think you'll love the touchscreen in short order.

I am using vivid mode some with this cam, and I never did before. I posted a new album with some examples. I shot all my test shots in vivid, one day, to see if it should be the mode of choice in some situations, and it really was a perfect mode for some photos. To apply that after in camera! I have to learn!

So great to wake up to this review. I look forward to more pics and obs. Congrats and thanks!

What program do you use to post process?

Hi Mikan.  Congrats on your G9 X and thank you for sharing your thoughts and images.

No surprises here, the G9 X looks very good.

APS-C offers better pixel level noise/tone/contrast, however, you need a top quality lens to compete with the sharpness you're getting with the G9 X.

The G9 X looks like a keeper.

mikan wrote:

I received my G9X today and took some random pictures, and I thought I'd share some of them and my impression on the camera.

• . . .
• ISO 6400 looks VERY bad if it contains a face. Looks very unnatural. Details on a fair skin are completely lost and looks VERY unnatural. It might look okay if you shoot raw and post process, but I don't do that so I don't know for sure. So I changed the max auto ISO to be 3200. 3200 looks OKAY for faces. Actually, it's not bad at all for smoothening wrinkles and blemishes. According to sample pictures I've seen, 6400 is not too bad if it's mostly dark, like a night shot.
• Touch screen needs getting used to, but I already appreciate it. Sony needs to learn from Canon.
• The built-in flash is not too bad, but I had to decrease the intensity by 1/3. I'm still trying to come up with a creative idea to make a diffuer for it.
• Skin colors look great. Very natural. Typical Canon.

I'm glad you got your hands on this camera you've been so keen to try, and that it appears to live up to your expectations so far. I'll chime in with a couple of points here:

• I actually keep my maximum auto ISO set to 1600. That doesn't mean I won't go higher, just that if I do, I want it to be a conscious decision I make based on the scene I'm shooting ratheer than a choice the camera applies for me. I haven't had problems up to 1600 but beyond that on any small camera you can expect compromises in quality.
• I try to make myself rely on the touch screen more and more, even using it for things that have a physical button, just to get into the habit of using it.
• For a creative diffuser, try using a razor knofe to cut a rectangular hole in a ping pong ball to just fit around the flash unit. You'll have to play with it and may need to flatten it somewhat ince this flash unit doesn't extend very far from the body. One could even use various colored balls for artistic lighting effects. I haven't done this myself but ran across the suggestion some time ago.
• I agree with you on the skin tones and the colors in general -- images seem very true to life and pleasing.

Dan

coody wrote:

How much difference if you adjust that ISO 2500 picture through in camera post processing? Why did you not set the maximum of aperture 2.0 but f/4.9 in that ISO 2500 picture or it was chosen by the camera, by the way?

coody,

I don't think in-camera PP can improve ISO noise. There is a menu item to enable/disable ISO noise reduction, which I already have enabled (by default). I hear the best way to remove noise is to shoot RAW and use a program like LightRoom to reduce noise, but I've never done that.

As for the f/4.9 picture. It was taken in aperture mode. The G9X lens closes down pretty quickly as you zoom up. I took this picture zoomed up (30.6mm), and the aperture value of 4.9 was the brightest it could get at that focal length. That's the thing about G9X; the lens doesn't remain bright as you zoom up. So if this functionality is important to you, I recommand G7X/G5X or Sony RX100 III or IV.

rita416 wrote:

What program do you use to post process?

When you are in Playback mode, you can press the Menu button, then select "My Colors", then "SET" (the bottom right), and it will give you all "My Colors" options you can apply to the currently selected photo. It will let you save the edited picture as a new picture, so you still have the original, as well as the newly edited picture.

It seems the "vivid" mode works really well on colorful objects. The effect is subtle and natural.

MarioV wrote:

Hi Mikan. Congrats on your G9 X and thank you for sharing your thoughts and images.

No surprises here, the G9 X looks very good.

APS-C offers better pixel level noise/tone/contrast, however, you need a top quality lens to compete with the sharpness you're getting with the G9 X.

The G9 X looks like a keeper.

What I am still struggling with is a group picture in low-light. You have to close down the lens in order to get everybody' face focused, but then you have to use a higher ISO value. And 1-inch sensor ISO gets noisier much faster than APS-C sensor. But that's completely expected and it's the case with any 1-inch sensor, so no complain here. And I am learning that the flash is really not that bad if you lower the intensity a little bit. Yep, this camera is definitely a keeper!

requa wrote:

mikan wrote:

I received my G9X today and took some random pictures, and I thought I'd share some of them and my impression on the camera.

• . . .
• ISO 6400 looks VERY bad if it contains a face. Looks very unnatural. Details on a fair skin are completely lost and looks VERY unnatural. It might look okay if you shoot raw and post process, but I don't do that so I don't know for sure. So I changed the max auto ISO to be 3200. 3200 looks OKAY for faces. Actually, it's not bad at all for smoothening wrinkles and blemishes. According to sample pictures I've seen, 6400 is not too bad if it's mostly dark, like a night shot.
• Touch screen needs getting used to, but I already appreciate it. Sony needs to learn from Canon.
• The built-in flash is not too bad, but I had to decrease the intensity by 1/3. I'm still trying to come up with a creative idea to make a diffuer for it.
• Skin colors look great. Very natural. Typical Canon.

I'm glad you got your hands on this camera you've been so keen to try, and that it appears to live up to your expectations so far. I'll chime in with a couple of points here:

• I actually keep my maximum auto ISO set to 1600. That doesn't mean I won't go higher, just that if I do, I want it to be a conscious decision I make based on the scene I'm shooting ratheer than a choice the camera applies for me. I haven't had problems up to 1600 but beyond that on any small camera you can expect compromises in quality.
• I try to make myself rely on the touch screen more and more, even using it for things that have a physical button, just to get into the habit of using it.
• For a creative diffuser, try using a razor knofe to cut a rectangular hole in a ping pong ball to just fit around the flash unit. You'll have to play with it and may need to flatten it somewhat ince this flash unit doesn't extend very far from the body. One could even use various colored balls for artistic lighting effects. I haven't done this myself but ran across the suggestion some time ago.
• I agree with you on the skin tones and the colors in general -- images seem very true to life and pleasing.

Dan

I might do the same and change the max AUTO ISO to 1600. I take lots of pictures of my kids, and their faces don't need an advantage of "smoothering wrinkes/blemishes". LOL

BTW, imaging-resource added the "Performance" tab for G9X. I personally find the start-up time pretty quick (especially comparing to my Sony mirrorless!), and shutter lag is pretty quick, too. It's been a while since I used my old S90, but I believe the shutter lag is much smaller.

mikan wrote:

rita416 wrote:

What program do you use to post process?

When you are in Playback mode, you can press the Menu button, then select "My Colors", then "SET" (the bottom right), and it will give you all "My Colors" options you can apply to the currently selected photo. It will let you save the edited picture as a new picture, so you still have the original, as well as the newly edited picture.

It seems the "vivid" mode works really well on colorful objects. The effect is subtle and natural.

WOW, thank you ! That is an awesome feature. I just applied that to some of my photos, and it did indeed save it as a separate photo! I totally agree, the Vivd mode is very good for some subjects. I have never used that mode on any camera I have had, several brands, as it was too graish and un-natural, but I find the vivid on the G9x to be very good in a lot of situations. The WB is good on this cam and so are the colors, very true.

Thanks so much. I was going to dig into the manual for this when I got a chance, but that was very easy!

rita416 wrote:

mikan wrote:

rita416 wrote:

What program do you use to post process?

When you are in Playback mode, you can press the Menu button, then select "My Colors", then "SET" (the bottom right), and it will give you all "My Colors" options you can apply to the currently selected photo. It will let you save the edited picture as a new picture, so you still have the original, as well as the newly edited picture.

It seems the "vivid" mode works really well on colorful objects. The effect is subtle and natural.

WOW, thank you ! That is an awesome feature. I just applied that to some of my photos, and it did indeed save it as a separate photo! I totally agree, the Vivd mode is very good for some subjects. I have never used that mode on any camera I have had, several brands, as it was too graish and un-natural, but I find the vivid on the G9x to be very good in a lot of situations. The WB is good on this cam and so are the colors, very true.

Thanks so much. I was going to dig into the manual for this when I got a chance, but that was very easy!

You can also change the contrast of your photo, as an in-camera PP (i-Contrast). I've tried it, and it seems to work well!

mikan wrote:

rita416 wrote:

mikan wrote:

rita416 wrote:

What program do you use to post process?

When you are in Playback mode, you can press the Menu button, then select "My Colors", then "SET" (the bottom right), and it will give you all "My Colors" options you can apply to the currently selected photo. It will let you save the edited picture as a new picture, so you still have the original, as well as the newly edited picture.

It seems the "vivid" mode works really well on colorful objects. The effect is subtle and natural.

WOW, thank you ! That is an awesome feature. I just applied that to some of my photos, and it did indeed save it as a separate photo! I totally agree, the Vivd mode is very good for some subjects. I have never used that mode on any camera I have had, several brands, as it was too graish and un-natural, but I find the vivid on the G9x to be very good in a lot of situations. The WB is good on this cam and so are the colors, very true.

Thanks so much. I was going to dig into the manual for this when I got a chance, but that was very easy!

You can also change the contrast of your photo, as an in-camera PP (i-Contrast). I've tried it, and it seems to work well!

You have created a monster.  I am applying vivid and contrast to a bunch of my photos in camera. This is going to be useful, and if not, it's fun. I have taken more test shots than I normally take in total photos for a year.

On my s95, a bunch of us on this forum set our quality to 6mp instead of the 12mp to cut down on noise. I have not tried lowering the MP the G9x. I don't feel very qualified to do experiments like that. Noise has to be really bad to bother me. The type of photos I take rarely have that as an issue.

requa wrote:

mikan wrote:

I received my G9X today and took some random pictures, and I thought I'd share some of them and my impression on the camera.

• . . .
• ISO 6400 looks VERY bad if it contains a face. Looks very unnatural. Details on a fair skin are completely lost and looks VERY unnatural. It might look okay if you shoot raw and post process, but I don't do that so I don't know for sure. So I changed the max auto ISO to be 3200. 3200 looks OKAY for faces. Actually, it's not bad at all for smoothening wrinkles and blemishes. According to sample pictures I've seen, 6400 is not too bad if it's mostly dark, like a night shot.
• Touch screen needs getting used to, but I already appreciate it. Sony needs to learn from Canon.
• The built-in flash is not too bad, but I had to decrease the intensity by 1/3. I'm still trying to come up with a creative idea to make a diffuer for it.
• Skin colors look great. Very natural. Typical Canon.

I'm glad you got your hands on this camera you've been so keen to try, and that it appears to live up to your expectations so far. I'll chime in with a couple of points here:

• I actually keep my maximum auto ISO set to 1600. That doesn't mean I won't go higher, just that if I do, I want it to be a conscious decision I make based on the scene I'm shooting ratheer than a choice the camera applies for me. I haven't had problems up to 1600 but beyond that on any small camera you can expect compromises in quality.
• I try to make myself rely on the touch screen more and more, even using it for things that have a physical button, just to get into the habit of using it.
• For a creative diffuser, try using a razor knofe to cut a rectangular hole in a ping pong ball to just fit around the flash unit. You'll have to play with it and may need to flatten it somewhat ince this flash unit doesn't extend very far from the body. One could even use various colored balls for artistic lighting effects. I haven't done this myself but ran across the suggestion some time ago.
• I agree with you on the skin tones and the colors in general -- images seem very true to life and pleasing.

Dan

A ping pong ball!? What a great idea!! Every now & then I learn something new and great on this Forum.

I created a Flickr album:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/136377341@N07/albums/72157660966308369

Today, I had the camera set to the "vivid" mode most of the time. This worked fine in most "nature" scenes, but colors on faces and the groud had too much brown cast. A lesson learned: keep the setting to standard by default, and post process images as I fit (I can apply the "vivid" effect as post process, in-camera, so take an advantage of it!).

mikan wrote:

I created a Flickr album:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/136377341@N07/albums/72157660966308369

Today, I had the camera set to the "vivid" mode most of the time. This worked fine in most "nature" scenes, but colors on faces and the groud had too much brown cast. A lesson learned: keep the setting to standard by default, and post process images as I fit (I can apply the "vivid" effect as post process, in-camera, so take an advantage of it!).

They are lovely photos, and thanks for sharing!

rita416 wrote:

mikan wrote:

I created a Flickr album:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/136377341@N07/albums/72157660966308369

Today, I had the camera set to the "vivid" mode most of the time. This worked fine in most "nature" scenes, but colors on faces and the groud had too much brown cast. A lesson learned: keep the setting to standard by default, and post process images as I fit (I can apply the "vivid" effect as post process, in-camera, so take an advantage of it!).

They are lovely photos, and thanks for sharing!

Thanks, Rita! I'm still getting used to the camera, and I get a lot more bad pictures than good ones. Practice practice.

mikan wrote:

rita416 wrote:

mikan wrote:

I created a Flickr album:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/136377341@N07/albums/72157660966308369

Today, I had the camera set to the "vivid" mode most of the time. This worked fine in most "nature" scenes, but colors on faces and the groud had too much brown cast. A lesson learned: keep the setting to standard by default, and post process images as I fit (I can apply the "vivid" effect as post process, in-camera, so take an advantage of it!).

They are lovely photos, and thanks for sharing!

Thanks, Rita! I'm still getting used to the camera, and I get a lot more bad pictures than good ones. Practice practice.

I know the feeling!