I just read the DCResource review. Let us know how it goes. If nothing
else it will be nice to do away with the minor hassles of CHDK. As to
the lack of focal length, a 0.7x crop will give you the field of view of
a 200mm lens and still leave you with a 5 MP image which is plenty good
enough for an 8x10. Maybe you don't really, really need to carry that
auxiliary lens most of the time.
Chuck Norcutt
Moose wrote:
> Since the Canon G11 came out, and some initial chatter here, I've been
> keeping a weather eye out for reviews and price breaks.
>
> Around a couple of weeks ago, the digitalcamerareview.com test appeared
> and test images appeared on imaging-resource.com, including his usual
> RAW files. Comparisons with the A650/G9 sensor showed a significant
> improvements in IQ, particularly in higher ISO performance. Still, DCR's
> reviews are less informative than the others and test studio shots
> aren't everything ...
>
> Then a routine visit to Amazon to buy some un-photo related stuff showed
> a price drop to $450. Looking around revealed that dcresource.com and
> imaging-resource.com had posted full reviews. User reviews are starting
> to show up on Amazon, B&H and elsewhere (I generally eschew the
> DPForums, as my mental health is more important than even picture taking.).
>
> Along with many others, I've been hoping for the megapixel war to die
> off in favor of overall IQ as a goal of at least higher end digicams.
> Also, when I had to make a choice between features of the A650 and the
> G9, I deeply wished Canon would merge the articulated LCD once a part of
> the G series from the A650 back into the G series.
>
> Well, here was the answer to both my wishes, all the more important
> features of the G series with articulated screen and a lower pixel count
> sensor focusing on other aspects of IQ. Wasn't I sort of morally
> committed to buy one if the IQ claims were true?
>
> Lots of reading and peering at images convinced me that Canon had indeed
> delivered, not perhaps what I wished for, but what I suspected was the
> best possible with current technology, and a very real improvement.
>
> But then, what a price to pay for real WA, long end dropped from 210 mm
> eq. to 140mm - oh what wringing of hands! Further research revealed that
> a tele adapter I already have works pretty well on the G10/11 lens. I
> hate carrying something extra, but have often been doing so with the
> A650 for extra WA.
>
> Long before all this sturm und drang was over, the price had gone back
> up to $500. I did discover that there is a $20 "loyalty" rebate to those
> who have previously registered Canon digicams of many models, including
> me. It was listed for $430 at another e-tailer, but one I'd heard
> nothing about, good or bad.
>
> So I started my regimen of checking my Amazon shopping cart 2-3 times a
> day, as I've successfully done with other big ticket items. Sure enough,
> Sunday night it went back down to $450. With the 3% cash back on my
> Amazon card, the Canon $20 and free shipping, that's $416.50, delivered.
> I try to buy from B&H, but they were still at $400 plus shipping and
> only 1% cash back from a card.
>
> So one left an Amazon warehouse headed my way today. They were offering
> a 30 day trial of their premium service with free two day shipping, so
> it's supposed to be here Wednesday. I guess they forgot I did the free
> trial and canceled before. Oh well, it's their nickel. Sure enough, by
> this morning, the price was back up to $499. :-)
>
> I'm pretty excited. I have really enjoyed the A650 in many, many ways,
> but the high ISO isn't quite up to my desires, and the RAW work flow is
> annoying.
>
> Although the RAW files made possible by CHDK are what makes the camera
> good enough, they are also much less convenient than native RAW capability:
>
> - Shot to shot times with RAW are about 6 seconds, vs. under three for
> the G11.
>
> - CHDK RAW files are simple dumps of internal memory, without EXIF
> headers, so they can't be geotagged until EXIF data is copied to the
> TIFFs from the JPEGs after conversion.
>
> - PTLens doesn't work automatically until the EXIFs have been copied.
>
> - RAW conversion requires use of slightly off mainstream apps.
>
> - Now that I'm geotagging, I can't tag these files until they are TIFFs,
> when they can be tagged or the geo info comes across with the rest of
> the EXIF from tagged JPEGs.
>
> Individually, none of the above is a big deal; I have much of it
> automated. Collectively, the number of ateps is annoying, although not
> enough to have put me off using the camera. I would certainly not be
> going with a G11 for those reasons alone.
>
> A. Chatty Moose
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|