G9X II versus Pixel 4a (part 1)

I made a comparison as well, when I tried a landscape shot with my 4a last October.
I couldn't back up or move forward ,and cropping would have reduced the image size. Zooming wouldn't help with the composition, either.
That little fixed lens with it's angle of view couldn't help in the one instance  when I tried a serious image. My Canon G5X framed it perfectly.
As far as the Pixel 4a's images , it takes really good portraits and pans ( I usually use the .dng files) and I marvel at how well the software is integrated - even in low light; but I consider it a 12MP "snapshot" camera. Just my experience.

F8AD wrote:

I made a comparison as well, when I tried a landscape shot with my 4a last October.
I couldn't back up or move forward ,and cropping would have reduced the image size. Zooming wouldn't help with the composition, either.
That little fixed lens with it's angle of view couldn't help in the one instance when I tried a serious image. My Canon G5X framed it perfectly.

I haven't experienced that "problem" jet. The pixel seems to have a little wider angel than my G9X II (which starts at 28mm equivalent) This test was actually my first real test of the pixel as a photographic tool. But I can imagine it to be a problem. I also own a Ricoh GR III. It is a great camera in many ways (Canon could really learn from a camera like this) but it has a fixed 28mm lens and although I shoot most of what I do at 28mm, because it missing a zoom is still one of the reasons not to use it that often.

As far as the Pixel 4a's images , it takes really good portraits and pans ( I usually use the .dng files) and I marvel at how well the software is integrated - even in low light;

The image quality is the reason I made and poste these photo's. I don't like editing photo's so I looked only at jpeg's. At first the pixel images look better but when I look at them more closely the have been over processed. there is way to much sharpness and contrast added to them. For example the planks in the bird watching shed are more textured than they are in real live.

What I also noticed that turning on or of the HDR makes no difference. It is always on.

but I consider it a 12MP "snapshot" camera. Just my experience.

It's funny: some photographers think of taking "snapshots" as a inferior form of photography, while others think that making a good snapshot is the ultimate form of photography.

I shoot a lot of macro with my G9X II and those pictures are really really sharp. But also in other situations I have never experienced the detail smearing you mentioned.

I can imagine that you can get "more details" if you edit your photos. In fact that is what  the Pixel did: It increased the sharpness/contrast so it looks like a sharper image. In fact it  did it to a level that there is more "detail" in the photo then there was in real life. If that's  a good thing is a question of taste. I personally don't  like what the Pixel is doing.

I have 3A XL and g7x1. I generally find that the 3A XL shots are more pleasing s o o c. And for me more detail is usually a good thing. Also the corners blow away the g7x1. I almost never use the g7x1 anymore. Just so much easier to edit and share with the pixel. I use enhance and dynamic in Google Photos often, and the images look pretty damn good for a what's now $75 phone on eBay.

Try some night shot comparisons and see how things come out. Especially with the night mode on the pixel. I haven't really compared. And obviously if you step into manual modes you'll have a lot more control with the g7x/g9x which might significantly improve IQ but the pixel night mode is pretty impressive.

Might want to label which are the G9X shots, looks like image #3 in first set and #2 in second?

redtailboas wrote:

I have 3A XL and g7x1. I generally find that the 3A XL shots are more pleasing s o o c. And for me more detail is usually a good thing. Also the corners blow away the g7x1. I almost never use the g7x1 anymore. Just so much easier to edit and share with the pixel. I use enhance and dynamic in Google Photos often, and the images look pretty damn good for a what's now $75 phone on eBay.

Try some night shot comparisons and see how things come out. Especially with the night mode on the pixel. I haven't really compared. And obviously if you step into manual modes you'll have a lot more control with the g7x/g9x which might significantly improve IQ but the pixel night mode is pretty impressive.

I don't know if I have ever used the night shot mode on the Pixel but I did use it on the G9X II but I found out that I got  better results just handholding the camera at a slower shutter speed. If I really want to make night shots I usually use my Ricoh GR III. It has Ibis and that really makes it a excellent camera for shooting low light.

Might want to label which are the G9X shots, looks like image #3 in first set and #2 in second?

No. I didn't label the pictures on purpose so you can judge them whiteout being preconceived. You can see what camera is used if you press the i in the Dpreview viewer or in the metadata if you download the pictures. As mentioned in the original post two images out of each series are made with the G9X II and one with the pixel. The images you mentioned as being made with the G9X II are actually the ones made with the pixel.

MichielBd wrote:

redtailboas wrote:

I have 3A XL and g7x1. I generally find that the 3A XL shots are more pleasing s o o c. And for me more detail is usually a good thing. Also the corners blow away the g7x1. I almost never use the g7x1 anymore. Just so much easier to edit and share with the pixel. I use enhance and dynamic in Google Photos often, and the images look pretty damn good for a what's now $75 phone on eBay.

Try some night shot comparisons and see how things come out. Especially with the night mode on the pixel. I haven't really compared. And obviously if you step into manual modes you'll have a lot more control with the g7x/g9x which might significantly improve IQ but the pixel night mode is pretty impressive.

I don't know if I have ever used the night shot mode on the Pixel but I did use it on the G9X II but I found out that I got better results just handholding the camera at a slower shutter speed. If I really want to make night shots I usually use my Ricoh GR III. It has Ibis and that really makes it a excellent camera for shooting low light.

Might want to label which are the G9X shots, looks like image #3 in first set and #2 in second?

No. I didn't label the pictures on purpose so you can judge them whiteout being preconceived. You can see what camera is used if you press the i in the Dpreview viewer or in the metadata if you download the pictures. As mentioned in the original post two images out of each series are made with the G9X II and one with the pixel. The images you mentioned as being made with the G9X II are actually the ones made with the pixel.

I mistyped. I meant the Pixel for those images.

Yeah try the nightshot mode, pretty good!

Just put your mouse pointer on the photos and it should show you the exif info. My computers do.

The Point and Shoot Pro wrote:

Comparing the two forest images, the G9X blows the pixel out of the water. The resolution once zoomed in, is not even a fair comparison.

That's exactly what I thought. It is nice to read that at least one person agrees with me.

The Pixel 4a images have better WB, contrast, and for me, more attractive. In looking at the wooden shed/building at 100%, the detail from both is impressive. Daughter picked the Pixel images over the Canon. Just two peoples views.

Sactojim wrote:

The Pixel 4a images have better WB, contrast, and for me, more attractive. In looking at the wooden shed/building at 100%, the detail from both is impressive. Daughter picked the Pixel images over the Canon. Just two peoples views.

Nice black grass with the G9X images. Imo the 4a images look significantly better SOOC. if going to pixel peep might be a different story. As far as computational photography beating physics, in some respects maybe not, but also could just be a matter of time.

Sactojim wrote:

The Pixel 4a images have better WB, contrast, and for me, more attractive. In looking at the wooden shed/building at 100%, the detail from both is impressive. Daughter picked the Pixel images over the Canon. Just two peoples views.

The pictures from the G9X II have different settings for white balance. If you look at them ant an uncalibrated monitor one may look to warm. 
The problem I have with the pixel is that it "adds sharpness" the shed looks a lot older than it is. the G9X II comes closer to the original.

Qimmiq wrote:

I was thinking something similar about this last night. A few years back I bought a Canon G1X Mark II as a light camera that I could throw in my backpack when I go to work or to use on hikes so I don't have to carry my bigger camera around. At the time I bought it I had an older cell phone that was cheap and took very poor photos.

Last night I was charging up the battery for the G1X Mark II and began to question why I was even doing so. Now I have a Google Pixel 6 for a phone and I've been very impressed with the photos I get from it. I haven't done a side-by-side comparison with the G1X Mark II, but I rarely ever print photos and mostly just post on the web.

If I did want to take good photos that I can print or when shooting BIF, or when I want to be creative I would use my EOS R5. But for a walk around camera I can throw in my backpack, I really don't know if my G1X Mark II serves a purpose anymore.

You might think that a pixel 6 is a good replacement for your G1X II and you are totally entitled to think so. But let me make one thing clear: if it is up to me the pixel 4a is never ever going to replace the G9X II.