A little less than a year ago I posted on digital photography and hinted that high tech cameras do not make great images, its the photographer. I stated that more of my images were taken on a Canon G10 yet I owned several other digital cameras. Little has changed other than I have added another camera to the list, a Canon G12, another pro quality compact.
I have used the G10 and G12 for around a year, sometimes I shoot the G10 other times the G12 and there are some good reasons why. First I will state that I did not go shopping for a camera to replace the G10. Neither was it adeliberate "upgrade". I actually found a second hand G12 in perfect condition selling legitimately at less than half the cost of a new camera today, 12 months on. Knowing and loving the G10, the offer was irresistable. Was it worth the money and what did I gain with the new tech.
Let me set one thing straight, I love the Canon Powershot G series, especially the G10. They do all that I need them to, are light, compact and unobtrusive. Having spent years humping around a huge camera bag full of lenses and other "essentials", the G10 was an absolute revelation in its ability to cover 99% of my photo needs in such a small package with total control when needed. I neither desire, afford or need another bag full of lenses and a DSLR. But each to their own. We are all different. Anyway, moving on.....
These days I am more of a landscape and "street" photographer, with a few family pics thrown into the mix from time to time. That is what sets my requirements in a camera.
I need a camera that is:
Small, light and unobtrusive (black)
Moderately fast focusing and metering
Has a modest zoom (I use my legs more than the zoom facility)
Best in daylight, yet flexible enough for low light and night shot.
Has manual control options inc focusing.
And can produce an image that will hold up to some pretty heavy cropping at times (translate to high pixel count).
Both the G10 & G12 score highly on these requirements. Next, my shooting style.
I like a viewfinder (G10/G12 ticks the box), and I have several reason for this. Bracing the camera against the face aids stability, even with electronic stabilisation. Its easier to keep one eye on the viewfinder, the other on whats happening around me. And, I feel a total, noticable prat with a camera thrust out in front of me, obviously taking a photo. That pose can make some people stop dead in their tracks when I want them to moving into the frame. I do use the back screen, but more often than not I have the viewfinder up to my eye and the screen turned off.
I occasionally use a tripod, but it is very rare, normally confined to landscape/low light shots. It's one more piece of kit that I dont want to carry unless I am on a mission. I do have a couple of mini tripods. These get used more than their big brother.
I have come to appriciate that the view from a low angle, or high, is often far more interesting than a standing shot.
Finally, most of my photos are un-planned, spontanious.
For the most part those are my reasons for shooting a G series compact.
I could have sold the G10 when I got the G12, but to be honest, I just love and prefer the handling of the G10 most of the time. It just works better for me. There is more to the G12. More control (I am not a big fan of the new front wheel), better low light performance (thats another debate), and of course the articulated screen (yet another debate). ON the other hand there are less pixels on the G12, which is an improvement!! The G10 was pushing it at 14.7 mega-pixels. High ISO low light shots become noisy. The G12 low-light high ISO/low light images are noticably cleaner.
Which is the better camera, the G10 or the G12?
Neither. They both have their merits and shortcomings. They fit my needs for slightly different reasons. On balance, if could only keep one, the choice would be a very tough one, but I guess I would stick with the G10, I just prefer the handling. But given the option, I will keep both.
Nothing is perfect.
No comments:
Post a Comment