Some G11 pics from Poland

<p><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=33033678">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=33033678</a><br>

What do you think?</p>

<p>Those shots don't impress me much. -Hope to see better samples soon.</p>

<p>Here's a G10 ISO 80 sample, also in mountain country.</p><div></div>

<p>I thought they looked ok but my G10 is not going on e*ay. Perhaps small sensors have reached a point of diminishing returns? Keep in my that these are screen shots. But if the difference is 1-1.5 f stops... I am fine with what I have. I like the 'extra' cropping ability.</p>

<p>Poor samples overall. Fair examples for shots taken in foggy/misty conditions, I guess. I post processed a couple and the clean up okay. They are a bit better than the S90 samples on the same site.</p>

<p>Sorry, but the samples shown look pretty poor to me. washed out (my monitor?), unsharp...except the last which is oversharpened...overall they look pretty poor...</p>

<p>Nice shot Howard,<br>

They only way to *review* a camera is to bring a memory card to a shop, take some pics and make a judgement at home. The Leica X-1 shots on the web are awful.</p>

 

Thanks for the samples! Another underwhelming Sony sensor is the EXMOR in the WX1.

 

I wasn't there, but the color balance in Howard's shot seems way too magenta. Autolevels makes it maybe too green, but green +100 saturation (in GIMP) is an improvement. Does this sensor have fewer green pixels than the normal CCD?

<p>Les, those mountaintops have a slight magenta cast, and the early morning light was a bit warm. But if you look at the foliage and grass and the neutral grays on the door posts of the cabin I think they look okay. It might've been the Auto White Balance, too. But usually it's pretty reliable.</p>

<p>Thanks for posting the link, Les.</p>

<p>I think the G11 looks disappointing. I haven't seen anything remarkable from it yet. It seems to pick up about one stop of ISO in broad daylight. With the reduction in resolution to 10mp, that's definitely not enough to get me to buy one.</p>

<p>This was Canon's golden opportunity to make a 'G' camera with 24mm equivalent at ISO 800 performance and hit a grand slam. The time lapse feature cut from the G9 is also evidently still missing as well. Looks like I'll be keeping my G9 and G10 while I look into other brands.</p>

<p>I read that Nikon will be announcing a compact with an APS size sensor. I imagine there will be others coming. Till then, I'll keep the G10.</p>

<p>Come now, why would anybody expect the G11 to be significantly better than any other prosumer compact? With the technology involved not significantly changing (1/1.7 SONY CCD) we will see no significant progress. For now we can only rely on larger sensors or new sensor technology which of late is proving not to work very well either - eg Sony WX1, Fuji EXR200.<br>

Now if Canon had anounced the G11 had a slightly larger sensor or even a revolutionary sensor design then we could all prey that the samples would be fantastic as high ISO but as it stands I don't see why people get their hopes up.<br>

So - you think you're a Canon G11? That don't impress mee much do doo do do........<br>

If you own a G10 either live somewhere sunny or buy a tripod.</p>

<p>Paul,<br>

I think the "expectations" of small sensor camera users exceeds the performance ability of the available sensors. Until there are larger sensors in small cameras or a new technology is released the best thing to do is get a P&S with the features you need and use it within its limitations. :-)</p>

 

<p>That's what I said isn't it Les? Maybe the large glass of wine confused me...</p>

<p>Maybe it was my reading comprehension? :-)</p>

<p>The G11 has not even been released and people are disappointed? Get real. Les is correct - Used within its limitations it will probably deliver photos at least as good as the 9 or 10. And the 9 and 10 are fine cameras. At ISO 200 or less IQ is quite good. I have been shooting with a 9 when I travel and do not want to carry an SLR and I have a lot of great images. My "hit" rate is a little lower than with my SLR and I am limited to flash or tripod when it gets darker, but that is an OK trade for the very good quality and lighter weight.<br>

So, let's wait for a real test of the camera before we decide how good it is. Let's respect its strengths and limitations. For a camera that fits in my the older G series is a great choice and the 11 will probably be great as well.</p>

<p >I have a problem with my production model G11, the AWB has a magenta cast to it. Anyone else with a similar problem?</p>

<p >See AWB comparisons G11 vs. TZ7 vs. D700</p>

 

<p ><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/15197111@N06/sets/72157622389189391/" target="_blank">http://www.flickr.com/photos/15197111@N06/sets/72157622389189391/</a></p>

<p>Here are 2 shots one with AWB in onrmal position and one with it set on green +1. This latter setting removes the cast. The problem with this is that in the Auto m odes the AWB cannot be over ridden<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/15197111@N06/sets/72157622528502326/comments/#comment72157622404044799">http://www.flickr.com/photos/15197111@N06/sets/72157622528502326/comments/#comment72157622404044799</a></p>

Looks like Canon used color processing for the wrong CCD, instead of that new Sony ICZ685CQZ. Excellent QA, eh?

<blockquote>

<p>This was Canon's golden opportunity to make a 'G' camera with 24mm equivalent at ISO 800 performance and hit a grand slam. The time lapse feature cut from the G9 is also evidently still missing as well. Looks like I'll be keeping my G9 and G10 while I look into other brands.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree!</p>