You’re right on and I’m happy and sad to hear about the G10, since I just invested big bux in the G9.

The noise issue is not as bad as some of the camera blogs and web sites say, but it’s certainly not good. AS I said in the post, if you’re shooting in daylight, the pictures are excellent. Virtually no noise in shadows or anywhere. I found that even in fully automatic mode, the camera was most often shooting at ISO 80. At 100-200, the pictures remain excellent.

By the way, it’s not 10MP, it’s 12.1MP! Even worse. 8MP is all that anyone would really need for 5X7s or even 8X10s. If you need to print larger images, use an SLR.

You’re right on and I’m happy and sad to hear about the G10, since I just invested big bux in the G9.

The noise issue is not as bad as some of the camera blogs and web sites say, but it’s certainly not good. AS I said in the post, if you’re shooting in daylight, the pictures are excellent. Virtually no noise in shadows or anywhere. I found that even in fully automatic mode, the camera was most often shooting at ISO 80. At 100-200, the pictures remain excellent.

By the way, it’s not 10MP, it’s 12.1MP! Even worse. 8MP is all that anyone would really need for 5X7s or even 8X10s. If you need to print larger images, use an SLR.

Its major problem is the terrible noise above 400. They just crammed way too many pixels into the tiny little CCD sensor it has. 10 MP! Ridiculous – if it had 5, it would have much better usability and you’d be able to make bigger, better prints because there would be lower noise and better dynamic range. Greater density of light sensitive cells packed into the same surface area just means that the size of those cells is smaller and you therefore capture less light. That means you’ve then got to amplify your signal more and while you’re doing that you’re amplifying the noise. So less is better.

There are rumours of an update to a G10 at Photokina in September: apparently the big thing is a much larger (in size) CMOS sensor and that translates to sharper, much lower noise with higher dynamic range. Hopefully they won’t cram too many pixels into it (no more than 8 please!) like they did with the G7 and G9. We’ll see if it happens, but that’s what I’m holding out for (well that and a 24-70 or 24-105 2.8 equivalent lens).

I’m just waiting for the day when I can buy a compact camera like this that has all the manual control, but doesn’t sacrifice the image quality. Back when I used film, I could put the same roll of professional grade film in my compact 35mm camera that I could in my SLR and get incredible results. The reason why I lug my 1DSII around with me everywhere is that the divide in image quality between a compact and that camera is so huge. If I can get half-way there, such as the sensor from a 40D in the size of the G9, I’d be a very happy camper.

Its major problem is the terrible noise above 400. They just crammed way too many pixels into the tiny little CCD sensor it has. 10 MP! Ridiculous – if it had 5, it would have much better usability and you’d be able to make bigger, better prints because there would be lower noise and better dynamic range. Greater density of light sensitive cells packed into the same surface area just means that the size of those cells is smaller and you therefore capture less light. That means you’ve then got to amplify your signal more and while you’re doing that you’re amplifying the noise. So less is better.

There are rumours of an update to a G10 at Photokina in September: apparently the big thing is a much larger (in size) CMOS sensor and that translates to sharper, much lower noise with higher dynamic range. Hopefully they won’t cram too many pixels into it (no more than 8 please!) like they did with the G7 and G9. We’ll see if it happens, but that’s what I’m holding out for (well that and a 24-70 or 24-105 2.8 equivalent lens).

I’m just waiting for the day when I can buy a compact camera like this that has all the manual control, but doesn’t sacrifice the image quality. Back when I used film, I could put the same roll of professional grade film in my compact 35mm camera that I could in my SLR and get incredible results. The reason why I lug my 1DSII around with me everywhere is that the divide in image quality between a compact and that camera is so huge. If I can get half-way there, such as the sensor from a 40D in the size of the G9, I’d be a very happy camper.

The DSC-T200 looks like a good camera. It lacks aperture and shutter speed priority settings which were critical to me. It also has a pretty small sensor and only goes to 175mm at full zoom.

I completely get the need for small size and cutting weight, though. The G9 would only be reasonable in a backpacking scenario for someone who has photography as a goal of such a trip rather than for just recording interesting stuff and memories. That, of course is what 99% of compact cameras are for, after all.

The DSC-T200 looks like a good camera. It lacks aperture and shutter speed priority settings which were critical to me. It also has a pretty small sensor and only goes to 175mm at full zoom.

I completely get the need for small size and cutting weight, though. The G9 would only be reasonable in a backpacking scenario for someone who has photography as a goal of such a trip rather than for just recording interesting stuff and memories. That, of course is what 99% of compact cameras are for, after all.

I’ve had a Sony DSC-T200 for a few months now and very happy with it. 8MP, 5x optical zoom, it’s smaller and lighter than the Canon (I take it hiking and backpacking, so weight is important). It does have a macro mode. Nice big LCD, and it also has a “slide-down” lens cover that also turns it on, which I like better than the “twist-in” kind (last camera it started to lock up after a while). It was about $500 after adding the 2GB memory stick. I don’t know any of the other parameters, a lot of that stuff is settable but the camera seems to do pretty well without mucking with it.