New reviews on the Canon G5, Nikon 5400, and Sony DSC-V1

Dpreview.com has some exellent new reviews on the 5-megapixel Canon

G5, Nikon 5400, and Sony DSC-V1, and some good comparisons of these 5-

megapixel, sub $1,000 wonders.

 

While I'm not in the market right now for one of these cameras and

not endorsing Dpreview, to their credit Dpreview does pretty

intensive investigation of new digital cameras that is educational

into the capabilities and limitations of these devices.

We have our own review of the G5 in the works which should be online in a week or so. While dpreview gets pre-release samples to test, unfortunately we have to wait untill they hit the retail stores and someone buys one...anyone have friends at Nikon...?

The Sony was the only one of these 3 cameras that got the "Highly Recommended" from DPreview, both Nikon and Canon got a "Recommended" instead. But Sony is $100 cheaper and this is -apparently- very important factor, even if its rates were lower than the other two cameras! Phil Askey probably was in a strange mood during these tests. He-he...

I am in the market and had a play with the Nikon 5400 in the local store. So no real quality tests, just handling. Having 28mm (equiv) on the wide end is a major plus for it, even though dpreview.com tests show the G5 lens to be a little better quality. As for handling: I like it. Actualy, I would go so far to say that it has the best handling in it's class. All you need is quickly accesible and it works fast.

 

I am waiting another month or two before I decide to take the plunge. A DSLR is just too far out of reach, mainly because I'd need a fast wide-angle zoom to keep me happy. Which costs about as much as the 10D it would go on. So I am actualy considering dumping my EOS 33 system (28-105/3.5-4.5 + 50/1.8 + 70-200/4L) and use the money for a 5400 and an extra body for my Olympus gear. Nice and light for the traveling I do and affordable high quality lenses, something on which Canon has let me down in the last year and a half since I bought into the system. This way I could afford to go digital with probably the best you can get before going SLR.

Although the V1 got a good review and image quality is excellent, I found handling and controls very unfriendly. The V1 suffers from its small size by being a bit hard to hold (I have average size hands). Gripping surfaces are nil and the buttons on the back are tiny. The zoom controller is weird and also interferes with handling. I really wanted to like the V1 but after using a friend's I dismissed it entirely. The Gx cameras are much more user friendly. YMMV.

From what I understand, ALL 3 cameras use the exact same sensor, so how can there be significant/detectable differences in both speed and noise? Is Sony the primary or sole manufacturer of digicam 3:4 sensors and hence may cherry picking (for lowest noise) for it's own use--another photo.net member suggested this possibility to me?

 

With respect to the Canon G5, it takes an extra noise hit over it's G3 sibling, with the earlier 4MP camera being cleaner of noise. Is this a general trend, with most of the earlier 4MPs being more noise free than 5MPs? Also, the G5 has a worse lens than the G3--per dpreview! Again, how could this be, as I had the impression that the cameras had the exact same lens? Sample to sample variation perhaps?

 

The Nikon is out for me personally, with no RAW capability. Yes, I know it will have a firmware upgrade by Spring of 2004, but it'll be obsolete by then.

 

While I admire Sony very much for it's design panache, the lack of RAW AND the off-the-reservation (and very limited) memory stick, rules it out also for me personally. Lastly, Canon could incorporate into it's RAW converter--distortion correction, chromatic aberration correction and noise reduction IF it choose to do so. I'll stick with my Canon G2 for the moment.

Although they may have good sensors and lenses, Sony's cameras are made by their consumer electronics arm and they seem to sacrifice control for ease of use for dummies and looks.

 

Missing (for now) RAW is an issue, but do you really expect to move up to a new camera so quickly? 5MP + good control, unless you are a megapixel junkie, I would say the current generation of prosumer digicams are not that bad an investment.

Not because she's perfect...she is not! But there are a couple of things that made me go for her instead of the Nikon and Sony:<br>1) RAW files NOW! <br>2) Best sharpness (even slightly)<br>3) Separate button controls for White Balance and Exposure adjustments on the fly<br>4) Swivelling display<br>5) Ugly, but she's the right size and weight and has very good ergonomics.<br><br>It is my first Canon, I hope I will be happy with her!

Hey Scott, what happened to your website? I felt like reading your frontier article again and it was gone. ???

<I>Although they may have good sensors and lenses, Sony's

cameras are made by their consumer electronics arm and they

seem to sacrifice control for ease of use for dummies and

looks.</I><P>

 

 

 

Huh? The one I've been using for a year and a half has modes

for aperture priority, shutter priority, auto, and has a manual

focus ring around the lens. What sort of control are you looking

for? And, if they have good sensors and lenses as you say, what

difference does it make where they are made?<BR>

<P>

 

<center>

<IMG SRC=

"http://pages.sbcglobal.net/b-evans/SF2-9-03/image/tilt.jpg">

</center>

Perhaps the most interesting tidbit from the Dpreview was how they were apethetic towards a 5-megapixel upgrade unless it was a big jump.

 

Concluding that it's not the number of pixels, but quality of pixels. I'm noticing a lot of these cameras have a constant background of digital granularity I don't see in higher end dSLRs.

Before I bought my digital I was always a little wary of sony with their use of proprietary standards for various accessories and gizmos. For a long time the memory sticks were always more expensive than comparable standardised formats eg compact flash. Sony was often very innovative. But as if to vindicate my suspicions along came memory stick version 2 and it finally broke the 128meg barrier (years too late). However it also doomed all the expensive and recently purchased sony digicams (especially the 5 megapixel ones) never be able to use a non volatile storage medium beyond 128meg. It was also a bit of a cynical move since they didn't take the opportunity to increase the performance of the new cards. They will eventually but they could have done it immediately. A much better example of how to look after your customers would be to follow the Fuji/Olympus example - develop a new standard and make it better - smaller size & bigger bandwidth. For the record I eventually purchased a G3.

<I>However it also doomed all the expensive and recently

purchased sony digicams (especially the 5 megapixel ones)

never be able to use a non volatile storage medium beyond

128meg.</I><P>

 

 

Nonsense! I've had my f707 for a year and half and use it

constantly. The last 128 MB memory stick (which holds about 60

pix) cost me around $27. I carry 5 sticks with me when I shoot,

good for about 300 pix. I do NOT want all those pix on one or two

cards.<BR>

<P>

 

<center>

<IMG SRC=

"http://pages.sbcglobal.net/jeanneevans/LatestWeb/image/cabbi

e.jpg"> </center>

i just have to say sony rocks! their low end cameras are C-R-A-P, but their high end cameras are great!!!! don't be jealous of the power of SONY! haha.