Thanks for your input. Could not agree with you more. So far it has been good photography with G10. My wife, Azlina, she took wonderful images and HD video using G10 during her trip to London last year. Wish I can try underwater photography soon. But the water proof casing is pretty costly in Kuala Lumpur. Will stick to G10 then for the time being.

Hope you could review a nice latest semi-pro DSLR soon. I’m using Canon 450D and wish to upgrade one step up without investing much.

Cheers,

Zaid

I do not plan on buying the G11.

Lots of reviews have been posted on the Internet about the G11, most of them highly favorable. My issue with the G11 is that it will not shoot HD Videos. So, I await the G12. My advice is to keep the G10 unless you are disappointed with the images you are getting.

Best regards,

Bill

I bought G10 after reading your review. My wife also love it as it is not as heavy as my current Canon DSLR. Easy to operate.

Canon has produced G11 with lower pixel but claimed that user can shoot higher ISO with lesser noise.

Is it by all means G11 is better then G10? Would it be worth to sell G10 and buy the all new G11? Will you be reviewing G11 anytime soon?

Appreciate your advice. Thanks.

Best regards,

Zaid

The Canon Powershot G10 comes with software that will allow you to open RAW files, although the software supplied by Canon is limited, it does not provide the depth of editing that Photoshop CS4 provides. CS4 is expensive, priced at around $750, although discounts are available for students. There are free alternatives. For example, Gimp is open source software that one can use at near the level of Photoshop CS4, although it does have a steep learning curve. Shooting in JPEG is not the answer either, as most serious photographers will want to make adjustments to photographs whether they shoot in RAW or JPEG.

I have used Photoshop for years, so my work flow is easy for me, for a beginner it is another matter. However, if you are serious about your photography, using Gimp or CS4 is an absolute necessity.

Best regards,

Bill

The expert I am quoting is Professor E. J. Martin at the University of Chicago who has written extensively about signal noise. He posts frequently at Nature Scapes Net and is highly regarded.

I would expect that the G10 sensor which is 20 times smaller than the sensor on my 1Ds Mark III would indeed produce more signal noise. Seems everyone wants to think that engineers can create a small sensor that has the same signal noise of a larger one. The answer is no. I have stated repeatedly that the G10, given its small sensor, does indeed produce very high quality images when one shoots at ISO 80.

But, again, how many times must I state this, all cameras with small sensors will produce high levels of signal noise, especially at higher ISOs.

Recently I printed a shot from the G10 that was three feet by two feet in size. Guess what? No noise. A beautiful print. I was amazed.

And, BTW, I have no faith in anything K. Rockwell says. Period.

Best regards,

Bill

That sound something like what K. Rockwell would say, exaggerations and all.

I’m not bying it until ample visual examples would prove the above statement correct.

Canon is correct, to get to that spot would mean total disassembly of the lens. A camera damaged by water will eventually fail because of the eroding electronic components. Either way, the cost to do that would be greater than just buying a new camera. Chalk it up to experience. Next time you take a water trip, take along a good zip lock bag, and don’t forget to buy camera insurance. Sorry to hear of your misfortune, I have a close friend who has lost two cameras, one over a cliff and the other in a Scottish creek. Thank God she was OK after each incident, cameras can be replaced, friends cannot.

Best regards,

Bill

ciao.
libby
libbytaylor@hotmail.com

Yes, the G10 images are good enough for newspaper publication.

As to the reach of the camera, that might be an issue. The zoom is not all that great. It depends on how close you are.

I have printed shots done at nearly 3 feet by 2 feet and I see no issues. The images hold up rather well.

Again, as I have said repeatedly, if you can shoot at ISO 80-100 then images will be absolutely wonderful, higher ISOs will produce unacceptable noise.

As a photojournalist, you might consider some alternatives. A quality DSLR with a good lens is far superior.

The tradeoff is cost.

But, bottom line, if one is willing to accept the limitations of the camera, one cane produce outstanding images.

Best regards,

Bill