What is a good point and shoot?

[John Saunders]

My cheapo point and shoot got stolen and so I need to get a new one.

I am torn between getting another cheapo or something a little nicer. When I go out with my family and friends I don't want to take my dslr but I also don't want to feel like I am taking "throw away" pictures like I did when I took out our cheapo luminx.

I am looking into these "nicer" point and shoot cameras.

Coolpix p6000 (doesn't seem to have as good reviews as the others)

Canon G11 (I am leaning towards this one, except for the smaller sensor size compared to the Panasonic)

Panasonic DMC-GF1 (I really like the large sensor but I don't think my wife will like the size with a zoom lens)

So if anyone has used any of these (or others I haven't looked at) and has any opinions or suggestions it would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm looking for a new point and shoot as well. I want one that will shoot RAW or will shoot in a format superior to JPEG, which doesn't leave me with too many options... Currently I own the Canon G9 and it SUCKS ASS. I bought a G11 last month and I returned it! Because it sucked almost as bad as the G9.

I'm still looking, but sadly, not finding anything truly better... :-(

 

[Liam Hall]

I bought my wife the Leica D-Lux 4 - it's about as good as it gets for a handbag cam. Shoots RAW too...

 

[Scott Webster]

Just went through this. Round up the usual suspects:
Panasonic LX-3
Canon S90
Panasonic GF-1
Olympus EP-2

You may want to check out the Samsung TL50/EX-1
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/samsung_ex1_review/comments/

Of course we are only 2 months out from PhotoKina so if you're in no rush, wait.

I ended up with a used Leica Digilux 2 which had it's sensor replaced in March this year. Yep, a 2004 camera with 5.2 megapixels and ISO100. But I love it...

There are rumors of a micro 4/3" version of this camera coming...

Otherwise I was leaning towards the EP-2 only because of the superior EVF option over the GF-1.

 

[Leo Ticheli]

My favorite is the Canon G10 or the newer G11. A bit larger so maybe not your choice, but a fantastic little camera with very good manual control.

There's a review on Luminous Landscape; pro photographers could not discriminate between 13"x19" prints shot with the G10 and the $40,000.00 Hasselblad!

I'm never without mine.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Subhadip Sen]

I can only speak for Canon S90, and it is a fantastic camera. It has the same sensor as the much bulkier G11. The images the camera delivers are incredible for its size.

 

[Vladimir Cassel]

I think the GF1 accepts the same firmware hack that was developed recently for the GH1, in case you want to shoot some video with it as well.

 

[sander kamp]

I have the GF1 and it is a very nice camera. A little bigger and heavier than a point and shoot but a lot lighter than a dslr, especially if you want to carry around different lenses.

Build quality it very good, speed is good, image quality is good in the lower iso's.

The downsides are that outside in the sun you can't see anything on the lcd screen and lenses tend to be expensive.

 

[Matthias Hutter]

It depends on your size constraints.
If size doesn't matter that much, but image quality is crucial, i'd get a large sensor compact with a pankake lens. Otherwise, Canons Powershot and Panasonic Lumix Series have been top notch up to now. I have a G9 and really like it, especially since its RAW is handled nicely in Lightroom 3. I'd have bought the new Sony large sensor compact if it had better controls and an allround pankake lens would be available.

Regards, Matt

 

[Anson Fogel]

I mirror Jeff's experience with the G9, 10 and 11 - SUCKS ASS. As a longtime canon shooter was very disappointed. My non-raw PowerShot however, kicks ass. But no raw.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm surprised at the number of good reviews out there for the Canon G9~11 cams. Perhaps that just shows how dismal the world of point and shoot cameras is these days. I was a long-time owner of a Canon G2 and I bought the G9 when my G2 started to show several dead pixels. Also I figured it was more than time to upgrade... Unfortunately, Canon has seriously regressed their offerings in the g-series. The G2 may have been big and clunky and only a 4MP JPEG camera, but it had a damn nice lens and took great pictures. The optics on the G9 pale in comparison and they're essentially the same on the G10 and G11 - terrible. It seems that Canon destroyed their flagship G series by simply making them a more ruggedized version of the A-series. These cameras are terrible for shooting any action, actually they are WORTHLESS for use in any action setting. With the stupidly long wait time between snapping pictures and the inferior optics to what I already bought over 8 years ago, I usually find myself cursing at my G9. The G11 is hardly an upgrade, mostly just an updated sensor, flip-out screen and crappy movie mode.

I'm looking at a couple of the Leica compacts, but I haven't used any of the current ones and I guess I want to play with one before I fork over that much money for a compact point and shoot.

 

[L. Langer]

I'm looking for a new point and shoot as well. I want one that will shoot RAW or will shoot in a format superior to JPEG, which doesn't leave me with too many options... Currently I own the Canon G9 and it SUCKS ASS. I bought a G11 last month and I returned it! Because it sucked almost as bad as the G9.

I'm still looking, but sadly, not finding anything truly better... :-(

Save your money. Nothing really good is coming out until next year. Most companies are moving over to CMOS and there will be more high-end P&S cameras with interchangeable lenses and quality optics to replace the integrated junk that we've been using for the past several years.

 

[Zack Birlew]

Actually guys, I'm loving my Sony TX7. It's really thin, has a pretty wide lens, 10 megapixels, and has AVCHD 1080i 60i video as well. Thought I'd use it for quick stuff that I would normally do with my Droid phone and the 1080i video comes in handy when I can't lug my new 5D Mark II around to grab something.
Only drawback is that it's not RAW, just JPEG, but for a carry-around-wherever cam it's pretty cool.

 

[Leo Ticheli]

I'm surprised at the number of good reviews out there for the Canon G9~11 cams. Perhaps that just shows how dismal the world of point and shoot cameras is these days.

Why are you surprised? The pictures in the test, especially those compared to the medium format Hasselblad don't lie, and when knowledgeable people can't tell the difference in 13x19 prints produced by a premier landscape photographer, how can you damn the G-camera lens? It's mediocre compared to what? At what price?

It's no good for action? Certainly not as good as an 8 frames per second Nikon, but the need is for a small camera. Doubtless there are faster compact cameras, but do they have the best combination of the other desired features in the same price/size category? Perhaps; but that doesn't make the G series cameras dogs.

Point and shoot cameras are dismal these days? Compared to what? The point and shoot cameras of five years ago? I would make the opposite call; the features and image quality bar has risen considerably and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Sorry you've had back luck with the G series; I would say that it's quite likely that it's simply not suitable for your particular needs.

I use mine for scouting, vacations, and for capturing images for my fine art adventures. I've obtained beautiful RAW images, so it works well for me. No camera can ever do all things; so we choose the best compromise for the work intended.

Disclaimer: I don't have any loyalty to Canon; I've always shot Nikons going all the way back to the F. I have had a succession of Canon compact cameras, and really did like all of them.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Kevin Olsen]

I have friend who has tried the CHDK and has had a good experience with his Canon A700 for hacking RAW into a point and shoot

I agree that point and shoots are too slow and tend to drive anyone used to a DSLR insane. That said, I really like the new Nikon S8000 for an ultra compact camera for partying/bar hoping. It still has a wide reach, optical VR and 720p video with a 1/2.3" sensor, better than the P6000 and the Canon G11. The new Nikon P100 has a CMOS sensor, but I don't know exactly what you consider "Point and Shoot."

KO

 

[Petr Dvorak]

I have Canon Powershot SD-940 IS aka Ixus 120 IS and love it
small
wide lens
HD video
partly metal body

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Why are you surprised? The pictures in the test, especially those compared to the medium format Hasselblad don't lie, and when knowledgeable people can't tell the difference in 13x19 prints produced by a premier landscape photographer, how can you damn the G-camera lens? It's mediocre compared to what? At what price?

I'm assuming you're talking about this comparison?
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

Yeah, I've read that... I'm also someone who has owned a G9 for over two years, a G11 for about 5 days and someone who has shot the PhaseOne + series backs, including the P45+ they used, but I'm more familiar with the P40+. Some of their comments about the digital backs at Luminous Landscapes leave me to wonder what they're smoking at times -- read their review of the P45+ for example. Better than drum scanned film? WTF? Anyway, that's another discussion... And all that doesn't really address any of my issues with the G9 or what I had with the G11 for the few days I owned it. And I'm not sure to what extent the comparisons between the G10 and the Hassy/P45+ were done, but comparing a side-by-side in some trees is one thing. There's no way the Gxx camera can compare with a good medium format system in terms of optical properties, as in the "look" created, especially when you have close and distant visual information in the same image. FWIW, I think the Canon sensor in my G9 is superior to what PhaseOne uses in the P40+ back, just smaller and therefore fewer pixels. I guess that's why I don't own a digital back for my Mamiya system -- I have yet to see one that I consider worth anywhere close to the steep price tags. If the Gxx camera were really that comparable in most situations, even half the situations, what would be the point of shooting medium format at all? Then again, comparing sensors, resolution, etc.. I agree. In a proper setting, as this test was, the G10 (or 11, or even my 9) can hold its own. That is not where I have an issue with these Gxx cameras. If I'm on a nature stroll with my G9, it works just fine, provided I don't need a long tele lens for a bird in a tree or that I don't want to get right up on a flower for a macro shot.

It's no good for action? Certainly not as good as an 8 frames per second Nikon, but the need is for a small camera. Doubtless there are faster compact cameras, but do they have the best combination of the other desired features in the same price/size category? Perhaps; but that doesn't make the G series cameras dogs.

Where my issues lie with the G-series is they are literally the A-series in a magnesium alloy chassis with a 50% price mark-up. They no longer offer any leading features for a flagship camera line, as they did originally with the G1 thru somewhere around the G7. The G series were supposed to be the "professional" point and shoot cameras, and that is what they were for the first few generations. Yes there are plenty of compact cameras that are much, much faster in terms of continuous shooting. Where I have a real issue with the G9/10/11 is that Canon has taken a serious step BACKWARD from previous models. The only thing that has progressed has been the sensor itself and now we also have movie modes with the G10 and G11. I have my old G2 here and it all still works except it has several dead pixels these days. It's about 30% larger than the G9. It weighs a bit more too. But it has a vastly superior lens and the physically larger optics are partially credible for that for sure. But it does so many things BETTER than the G9. It has equivalent manual controls and I actually like the manual focus operation better (but that's just down to taste). It was better for macro with a much tighter close-focus distance. I find that even though the sensor is much lower resolution, it still has nearly equivalent DR to my G9 camera and takes more pleasing pictures overall. Honestly, if I could have a G2 with the latest sensor in it, I'd be happy.

The G2 used the larger BP-11 and BP-12 battery packs, the same as most Canon camcorders used at the time. They were double the size of what the G9/10/11 use and the camera lasted more than 3X as long on a single battery. The G2 had an aperture range of f2.0 to f8 on the wide end and f2.8 to f8 on the tele end. It was a 7-21mm (34-102 ff35 equivalent). I always wished it could go just a fuzz wider, but I had a decent wide adapter for it which lost it about 1/2 stop and made it about a 25mm equivalent.

The G9 thru 11 are f3.5 to f8 on the wide end and f4.5 to f8 on the tele end.. FAIL. This is a 28-140mm ff35 equivalent. I guess it's nice to have the long range, but I would trade that for the larger and more consistent aperture any day.

G2 could shoot full quality stills in 3-shot bursts. G9/10/11 have no such ability other than the "quick-shot" on the G11. FAIL.

G2 recorded to CF cards. G8 and newer have shifted to SDHC, which are much slower and less robust. FAIL.

I've looked at everything that Nikon and Canon are offering right now. Of the two brands, my current favorite in terms of all it does is the Nikon P100. I just wish it would shoot RAW. If it would shoot RAW, it would be almost perfect. It has a much nicer lens than any of the Canon point and shoot cameras. And it can shoot 10-shot bursts at full quality. - It's $399 MSRP.

Sorry you've had back luck with the G series; I would say that it's quite likely that it's simply not suitable for your particular needs.

Truly, the current G-series models don't fit my needs. But the old ones did and still mostly do.. So what's up with that? There are several compact point and shoot cameras on the market that fit all my needs in terms of manual features and speed, but of those, none of them shoot RAW -- I'm looking into the Leica ones now and it seems like they have a couple promising options there. Maybe that's where the hold-up is, RAW. Shooting RAW, especially with the bayer-pattern CMOS going into most newer cameras, takes less processing power per pixel than recording JPEG images. And yet very few point and shoots are doing RAW. I attribute this to two reasons. One, the point and shoot market has gone to SDHC media, which has a much slower interface than CF and larger file sizes take time to write to the cards. Adding sufficient buffer memory to a camera like this would raise the price by quite a bit. Reason two is that I really don't think camera makers, Canon even more so than Nikon, don't want to infringe on their SLR lines and the capabilities offered there. I'm finding the micro 4/3 cameras to be intriguing and a potentially nice compromise for some options. But I have not bought one yet and I really don't want another interchangeable lens system. I just want a point and shoot camera that shoots RAW, has a fairly consistent aperture through the zoom range and can whip off 2 or 3 pictures at full quality at high speed for the occasions I need it. Why do I feel like I'm asking too much? If I'm content with shooting JPEG format, there are several offerings on the market that do all this and more...

I'm loving the specs of the Leica X1 right now. The D-Lux 4 looks nice too and I'd be tempted to order one straight away, but it's been out for a while and it seems a lot of rumors of a D-Lux 5 are circulating...

 

[Matthias Hutter]

While I agree that G10-G11 are a step backwards compared to the competition, I still think the G9 was a good camera when it came out (with f/2.8 at the wide end). In my opinion its better than the G7. The G7 doesn't even have RAW. I disagree with your opinion on SDHC too. The speed limit lies within the camera, not the card (especiallt due to the slow Autofocus), and I like the compactness.

I'd like to see more of nice pancakes or 3x zoom lenses with larger sensor compacts though.

 

[PatC]

S90 all day. Raw+f2.0

 

[Thomas Wright]

I've been looking for a P+S too recently, the S90 does indeed look like the guy, be real nifty with that assignable ring round the lens but the whole thing looks a little flimsy, how long have you had yours Pat, and do you find it wide enough? I like the idea of fewer pixels for better low light response, does it do what it says on the tin.

I think the G11 etc. too big, I want a small good compact and the S90 looks good for that, are there any other brands that make a comprable one?