Sample Shots
15.1-60.4mm lens (35mm equivalent: 28-112mm)
ISO tests
Next page: Sample Shots
COMMENTS
Re: "Once the novelty of an interchangeable lens compact has worn off"
I think that either you missed the poin that the author was trying to make, or I missed your point :)
I have a 5D, and three Sigma EXDG lenses for various uses, as my main camera and I am really very happy with it.
But... I go on special trips with it, or I set it up for photo shoots at home. It is not something that I can carry arround with me constantly.
Compact cameras on the other hand can be carried around with me, but the quality of the sensors is terrible. Good for web use or snaps but when you get up to poster sized prints you start to see too many artifacts (for me anyway - these things are subjective). And of course you have no control over the shot - it's point and click, exactly what it was designed for - and what my other half likes about their camera.
The new range of CSC provide a nice inbetween step. Small enough to be caried, versatile enough to make some nice shots. Well some of them at least (the Sony NEX range with their larger sensors look interesting, as does the Panasonic range. The Nikon on the other hand produces the same artifacts as the standard compact camera from the shots I have seen as it also uses an extremely small sensor).
But... Do you need the hassle of interchangable lenses on the CSC ranges in order to get the control or quality? If I can get a handbag sized camera with a good lens, sensor and manual controls do I care that I only have the one that it came with? 120mm seems a little short for some of the shots I like to take, but I wonder if I couldlive with it...
Re: "Once the novelty of an interchangeable lens compact has worn off"
Based on anecdotal evidence (ie friends who have bought them), I think the G-series is largely sold to people who like taking pictures and want to do it "more seriously" but are scared off buying a DSLR by the perceived "complexity" (or to some extent the cost). This is in contrast to EVIL which tends to be bought by people who would have bought a DSLR before EVIL existed but prefer the form-factor. That is a market which Canon does not serve at present.
I do agree about the S-series though. Awesome cameras - true compacts but with full exposure control and the ability to shoot RAW. The sensor size means quality will never be as good as a DSLR but then a DSLR will never be as good as medium format for the same reason - photography is always about compromises.
As a recent CSC purchaser...
...I say No to the final question in the article. One big reason is that compacts with the quality of CSCs seem to be more expensive than the CSCs for some reason. Also, even as a beginner, being able to select a brighter pancake lens instead of the zoom means I can take photos I wouldn't otherwise be able to.
As ever, it's horses for courses and I suspect that the (no longer very) new formats will at the very least force manufacturers to think more creatively about what they offer customers.
Lens scratches?
Does the lens cover still scratch the lens? [As it has done on several previous iterations of the G-series]
And do Canon still deny there's a problem [in spite of numerous internet articles about it] and refuse to repair affected cameras?
I think I'm the opposite. I thought this was the camera for me. The carry around when you don't want the SLR option. But the speed is the killer. Not the fps, but the focussing speed. Reminds me of other cameras I have that just don't make the grade - G9 being an example, although this would stomp all over it for ISO capability. Perhaps they'll update in a year or two to sort this issue. Until then I'm guessing it's a CSC or nothing.



