Gamestheory
Active member
Yes, someone i spoke to over the weekend also suggested just shooting in RAW.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
G11 disappoints - some examples
- Thread starter Gamestheory
- Start date
bill hansen
Forum Pro
You original post suggested that you like to shoot and display without much intervention between the two - no processing, etc. If that's correct, be careful of RAW. You do have to convert it to TIFF or JPEG, which requires at least several seconds per image. Not many images look their very best at the default settings of any program - not a problem if you're not critical, but most of us do get critical of our work when we begin to process. IMO that's part of the fun - seeing how to make the most of our best shots. But it's not to everyone's taste.
If you decide to stay with JPEG, experiment a little with the "My Colors" feature, and set that up to please your own tastes. It won't be quite as good as a nicely processed RAW file, but it can be very good indeed.
Disclaimer - I shot JPEG for years, and I liked it a lot. Now I shoot RAW almost 100% of the time, and I like it even better.
Bill
If you decide to stay with JPEG, experiment a little with the "My Colors" feature, and set that up to please your own tastes. It won't be quite as good as a nicely processed RAW file, but it can be very good indeed.
Disclaimer - I shot JPEG for years, and I liked it a lot. Now I shoot RAW almost 100% of the time, and I like it even better.
Bill
Kabe Luna
Veteran Member
...I think the G3 is the high water mark for compact digital IQ. Sure, the G11 delivers higher resolution, but can't touch the DR and color quality of the G3, in my experience. I, too, was disappointed enough in the G11 that I sold mine after just a few short weeks. The G11 probably is the superior landscape camera, but for casually shooting people, I'll take the G3 or G5 any time.
--
- -
Kabe Luna
http://www.garlandcary.com
--
- -
Kabe Luna
http://www.garlandcary.com
You did not include the ISO value for image #1 to compare to image #2. Your G11 images are fine, but I would consider setting the EV control to -2/3 when shooting outdoors and setting the camera to P instead of AUTO for best results. Also, did you read the manual cover to cover? It is necessary to get the most out of any camera. :0)
--
Digart
--
Digart
Joe0Bloggs
Veteran Member
It is a necessary measure as cameras capture a narrow dynamic range and theaters also display a narrow dynamic range. If the arc light were not used the actors would be horribly underexposed and / or there would be horrible-looking shadows--and that's not how the scene would look like to the naked eye. The camera always lies, and extra lighting is always required to bring the lie closer to the truth.
Although I suppose experimenting with HDR tone mapping techniques could bring an unlit shot closer to what the eye sees. But an unlit shot straight out of the camera hardly ever looks like what the eye sees.
Although I suppose experimenting with HDR tone mapping techniques could bring an unlit shot closer to what the eye sees. But an unlit shot straight out of the camera hardly ever looks like what the eye sees.
Gamestheory
Active member
Yes, a number of people have suggested dropping the EV a bit, so I'm going to try that.
I spent an hour yesterday talking to the very helpful manager of my local Jessops photography store in north-west London. Interestingly, he had a preference for those of my pictures that I felt were washed out and flat. In the two indoor pictures that I uploaded at the start of this thread, he said he preferred the G11 one because its Digic 4 processor had ensured that all the faces were equally lit. I preferred the inconsistency in lighting of the G3's Digic 2, which apparently isn't able to optimize to the same extent. I felt that even if the G3's processing was more limited, it gave the shot more depth, more modelling and more interest. So clearly, there's a difference of taste here as well as of technology. His solution was also that I stop down the exposure value.
I spent an hour yesterday talking to the very helpful manager of my local Jessops photography store in north-west London. Interestingly, he had a preference for those of my pictures that I felt were washed out and flat. In the two indoor pictures that I uploaded at the start of this thread, he said he preferred the G11 one because its Digic 4 processor had ensured that all the faces were equally lit. I preferred the inconsistency in lighting of the G3's Digic 2, which apparently isn't able to optimize to the same extent. I felt that even if the G3's processing was more limited, it gave the shot more depth, more modelling and more interest. So clearly, there's a difference of taste here as well as of technology. His solution was also that I stop down the exposure value.
Gamestheory
Active member
I know! Actually I didn't. My G3 got damaged and my insurance company insisted that rather than having it repaired, they supply me with a like-for-like replacement. It cost them three times what the repair would have cost (and they wouldn't tell me how much it would jack up my premium) but their choice was the newly-released G11. Reviews on the web were mixed and I said I'd prefer to hold off until some of the limitations got dealt with in a G12 but in the end I caved in and accepted their offer.
Years before digitals came out, I worked very happily with a Canon AE-1 and loved it, so it's not that I'm averse to making decisions about shutter speed and aperture. It's just that I've been staggered at how well the G3 has done in relieiving me of certain decisions - leaving me, basically, to concentrate on composition - and disappointed at how much less well the G11 emulates the G3's performance.
From all the feedback I've been getting, it looks like if I want to persist with the G11, I'll have to go back to managng a much larger repertoire of decisions before clicking the shutter. Even then, it appears that I'll not be able to fight against the effect of the G11's Digic-4 sensor, which seems to prioritize equal lighting at the expense of contrast, depth, modelling and drama.
Years before digitals came out, I worked very happily with a Canon AE-1 and loved it, so it's not that I'm averse to making decisions about shutter speed and aperture. It's just that I've been staggered at how well the G3 has done in relieiving me of certain decisions - leaving me, basically, to concentrate on composition - and disappointed at how much less well the G11 emulates the G3's performance.
From all the feedback I've been getting, it looks like if I want to persist with the G11, I'll have to go back to managng a much larger repertoire of decisions before clicking the shutter. Even then, it appears that I'll not be able to fight against the effect of the G11's Digic-4 sensor, which seems to prioritize equal lighting at the expense of contrast, depth, modelling and drama.
Joe0Bloggs
Veteran Member
If you enter any of the manual modes (even P), you get to choose whether to enable i-Contrast. Given your preferences this should obviously be off.
PaulRivers
Veteran Member
When you mention brightening shadows, it sounds like you have iContrast on (set to "auto"). It's kinda weird because it's not in the the...ah, shot menu? It's not in the menu with iso and stuff, it's in the other menu with "AF Frame", "AF Frame Size" etc.
It's effects can be helpful or hurtful, but it can be turned off.
Joe0Bloggs
Veteran Member
PaulRivers
Veteran Member
I just tried that out on my s90, and wow - that's super lame.
Using "P" or one of the custom modes ("C") with everything set to "auto" is pretty much the same as auto mode. But that's not saying it's a rather annoying choice by Canon to not let you turn that off.
Kehno
Well-known member
I think the "auto-mode" is simply completely automatic mode, where user doesn't have to think, just shoot away.
Whereas" P-mode" is more recommendable for everyone else.
--
Canon Powershot A710
Canon Powershot SX10
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum