T.O.P. Ten Recommended Cameras: #9

Number nine on our list for this season is a Most Excellent Gadget and another Canon, the Canon G10...the camera that proves that even Canon can't please everybody.

In a sense the G10 is a throwback to an earlier era of digital photography. This sort of small-sensor but fully belled-and-whistled zoom compact was a very important market segment in the early- to mid-2000s, when Sony, Nikon, Canon and Olympus all competed tooth-and-nail.

A short digression: one thing I really don't understand in the current economic debate is that everybody bemoans failing industries, but everybody assumes the only choices are all or nothing*, and nobody talks about the failure of one competitor being good for other ones. If Chrysler and GM went out of business, wouldn't that be good for Ford? Wouldn't more Americans shift their business to Ford, energizing the company and giving them a shot in the arm and a well-deserved reward for going into the recession as the strongest of the Big Three? Isn't bailing out the weakest competitor tantamount to penalizing the strongest? Similarly, people talk about the "end of newspapers" as if all newspapers are inevitably going to go out of business. But if two thirds of newpapers went out of business, wouldn't that make the remaining one-third more important to us all—and potentially improve those papers' profits enough so they could survive?

Anyway, that's more or less what's happened here. As the G-series' competitors stopped trying so hard and gradually began to give up on this segment, Canon took the opposite tack and revitalized its line with the G7 in 2006. Then it actively addressed complaints and criticisms of that camera with carefully targeted improvements in the G9 and G10. The current camera—arguably the best G[x] yet—doesn't have an articulated viewing screen as many of the earlier models did, and is still often criticized for packing too many pixels on to the tiny sensor, leading to some image quality problems. Here, however, Canon's caught between an enthusiast and a hard place. The enthusiasts want fewer pixels and better high-ISO performance (as things stand, you should stick to ISO 400 and lower); but, as Canon knows, many of the people who actually plunk down their dollars for the G10 are still swayed by the more-megapixels mentality. The reality is, everybody has their own pet features and want list. It's impossible to please everybody. What's a poor camera manufacturer to do?

After eight tries**, this is Canon's best effort to please the most people maximally. And they did a pretty good job: speaking of plunking down dollars, people still do. Without giving too short a shrift to Nikon's quite nice also-ran, the P6000, it can't be denied that Canon has gradually come to own this segment of the market, which obviously still has some life in it yet.

And that brings us to another reason for liking the G10, alluded to in the first sentence: it's a pleasing, even rather jewel-like device. It's solid and heavy for its size and seems to be mostly made of metal, and the finely-made, smooth-acting controls, most of which seem to exude a sort of ergonomic just-rightness, make handling and using the camera a pleasant experience. Why Canon can't bring similarly pleasing "object-quality" to its larger cameras is a mystery. But the G10 is functional, and fun—and fine. Despite a relatively high price, it remains a good choice for people who don't want to deal with the bulk of even a small DSLR.

Our links: Edward Taylor's review; Ken Tanaka's second look.

Mike

Tomorrow: #8

* "In the space of one hundred and seventy six years the Lower Mississippi has shortened itself two hundred and forty-two miles. That is an average of a trifle over a mile and a third per year. Therefore, any calm person, who is not blind or idiotic, can see that in the Old Oölitic Silurian Period, just a million years ago next November, the Lower Mississippi was upwards of one million three hundred thousand miles long, and stuck out over the Gulf of Mexico like a fishing-pole. And by the same token any person can see that seven hundred and forty-two years from now the Lower Mississippi will be only a mile and three-quarters long, and Cairo and New Orleans will have joined their streets together and be plodding comfortably along under a single mayor and a mutual board of aldermen. There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact." (Mark Twain, from Life on the Mississippi.)

** There was no G4 or G8.

Send this post to a friend

Comments

[Cateto/Jose]

Ok Mike, for the sake of criticism: are you putting two Canons at the end of the list to justify the presence of other brands upper? Or are there plans to sell TOP to a certain online megastore?

(Hey, this is STRICTLY joking here!).

[Kent]

Yeah OK. I'm with you so far. In fact I'm really with you regarding the G10, which I think is a heck of a camera for the size and price. Still use a G7 for traveling light myself, but it's just not a genre of camera that demands constant upgrades IMO, so no rush.

But we're still only at #9! Two down, eight more to go.

The suspension is killing me! (<- that was deliberate by the way, just in case anyone thinks I'm illiterate ... or even "alliterate").

So give us a hint. Where does the Deardorff 8x10 fit in? Above or below #5?

And when do we get to the cameras that are going to spark all the flaming and name-calling? Can't have a camera list without a good punch-up you know. I hope you're planning to loosen your grip on the censorship rein a bit for this one. Let some of the juicy bits through, like?

Anyway, so, above or below #5?

[John Roberts]

My first digital camera was the 4 MP Canon G3. It's performance so exceeded my expectations that it turned a former film snob into an enthusiastic digital convert. I've since moved up to a dslr, but I still enjoy using my G3 from time to time, and I remain an admirer of the Canon G series.

[Moose]

You didn't mention one big change from the G9 and earlier models that is welcome to many and unwelcome to many others.

The 6x, 35-210 mm eq. lens has been replaced with a 5x, 28-140 mm eq. lens on the G10. Good for WA aficionados, a step back for "tele" eyes.

The lack of twist & tilt screen is a big drawback of both G9 and G10 for me. It is such a huge help, greatly widening the kind and angles of shots one may make.

I often carry it along when shooting with 5D, for the reach and angles I can't do with an optical viewfinder.

The A650 IS has all the performance features important to me of the G9 along with the addition of a movable LCD.

A cheap WA adapter gives me all the WA I need without the size, weight and cost of the Canon adapter. Cropped to 16:7, it loses the vignetting at the widest setting and the soft corners for the horizontal equivalent of a 16 mm lens on 35 mm and not far from the format of 6x17 cm on 120 film.

A 210 mm AOV has proven to be long enough for most of my use, but 140 mm would drive me a little crazy.

Moose

[misha]

The suspense is killing me.

I repeat my suggestion: publish your hate mail - it will be great entertainment.

[Aman Gupta]

G-series' old competitors may have given up on this segment, but new competitors have stepped up to keep the heat on. Just look at the out of stock Panasonic LX3.

[YS]

Maybe Canon should just make two cameras. With US$ 11 billion in sales from the camera division alone they might just be able to afford it.

Or heck, just copy what Fuji are doing with their F200EXR sensor. Those who need resolution can shoot at 14 megapixels, and those who want higher ISO can shoot at 7 megapixels.

[Michael Steinbach]

Spot on in regards to the Big Three scenario. My wife is tired of hearing me say things along those lines...

[Bron]

Mike,

Another nicely done article. I'm, of course, biased, as I own the previous models of both 10 and 9. I even, grumpily accede to you on small camera viewfinders, though as a "shotgun" aiming device, workable when one doesn't want the display lit up.

[Marc Rochkind]

More than anything, it was the cheap sub-$1000 DSLRs that killed off the $500+ small-sensor cameras. Unfortunately, leaving the pocketable category to really inferior cameras, G10 and a few others excepted.

--Marc

[Adam Maas]

As nice as the G7-G10 are, they're not a revitalized update of the earlier G series. They're simply lower-end Powershots wrapped in a more capable interface (A P&S for pro's rather than a bridge camera). The G7 and G9 share sensors, lenses and processing with lower-end bodies and the G10 is merely an update of the G9. Compared to the G6, the last and greatest of the original G series the current ones are lacking ergonomically, lacking in features (especially the loss of the flip/twist LCD) and feature downgraded lenses compared to the excellent and fast (f2.0 at the wide end) lenses the original series had.

The closest thing you can buy to a G6 today is the Panasonic G1. Which I suspect was named as such intentionally.

[Max Dominic]

I have never, ever, enjoyed making pictures as much as i do with my G10!

[Michael W]

Mike, I don't have any particular argument against your assertion that GM & Chrysler going out of business would benefit Ford & perhaps end up overall as a good thing.
On the other hand I don't think it's quite as simple with newspapers because they are much more of a regional business. People like to read the papers from their city & if that goes out of business they are unlikely to consider an alternative. It's hard to see how that one's going to work itself out.

[bobdales]

And it has an optical view tunnel too. You can actually see (sort of) what you're taking in bright sun.
As you say we each have our must have features.
bd

[James Kingdon]

"it remains a good choice for people who don't want to deal with the bulk of even a small DSLR."

Actually, I think the camera is at its best as an adjunct to a DSLR, which allows you to use each camera to its individual strengths. A G10 doesn't make a great birding or sports camera...

I'm also an 'enthusiast' who likes the megapixels. I don't print often, but I do tend to print big, up to 24x32. The pixels come in useful. Noisy at high iso? Yup, so why use it like that? I'm more interested in the best quality a camera can achieve than in how much degradation is 'acceptable' under sub-optimal usage.

Used to its full potential the G10 offers amazing image quality for the price, along with sufficient control to be able to achieve that potential. The icing on the cake is that it is also very pleasant to use*. Good and fun - what a treat.

James.

* it's a particular blast to use with studio lighting. The extra DOF from the small sensor lets you work the lights less hard, the live view composition works well for product shots and the whole process is just fun :)

[MBS]

"...with the G7 in 2006. Then... the G9 and G10."

Avoiding the G8 for sound political reasons, I suppose?

Oh, I see they avoided the G4, as well. So is this simply a Canonial prejudice against developments of 4? Will we also never see the G16?

[Alan Huntley]

Hi Mike,

I have to agree with you that the Canon G10 deserves to be on anybody's Top 10 List. It certainly doesn't replace my DSLR outfit, but it is a very fun camera to use. Sure, noise from the small sensor is an issue when you start raising the ISO, but I just keep mine set to native ISO (80) all the time. When the light demands a higher ISO setting, I simply mount it on a very slick Manfrotto monopod (recommended awhile back by Michael Reichmann) and keep shooting at native ISO.

Can't wait to see the rest of your Top 10 list. I wonder if any film cameras will show up? :)

Regards,
AlanH

[Lsmbert]

Hi Mike,

Are you gonna interrupt your regular programming to announce the Nikon D5000?

[Andrew Lamb]

I'm going to enjoy reading your list of recommended cameras.

A suggestion for a future list: how 'bout recommended used cameras? You know, bargains to be found on eBay or old camera shops (if there are still any left)?

I bought a tatty Super Ikonta, for $50, 15 years ago and I love it. My hit rate of, successful or pleasing, photos is probably higher with this than almost any other vintage camera I've used, including my M3.

Anyway, looking forward to number eight on your current list. My guess, for the token film camera, is the ZM.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

When a particular company is in trouble in a healthy market, propping that company up may help it survive in the long run and be good. But when the entire market segment is in trouble, such as the auto industry in the USA at the moment (and for most of the last 30 years), then yeah, propping up the companies in it just keeps the segment in trouble, and prevents any of the companies, propped up or not, from becoming healthy.

What people care about often in newspapers is the LOCAL reporting and ads, and most places are down to one newspaper already, so losing that loses them what they care about. Me, I grew up in a household getting the New York Times by second class mail to Minnesota, so I never did figure out what local newspapers were important for.

[Charles Maclauchlan]

This is exciting...waiting to se if "My" camera makes the cut.

re the bemoaning of capitalism's creative destruction, you are correct. As industry segments change other's spring into being. It's not fun but it's real. Beside the inevitable failure of a government's attempt to determine winners is it's darker side...politicians, not the buying public also determine losers. Is this a power any sane person wants to see in the hands of government? Can one imagine this not being mis used? If one can then imagine this power being in the hands of the party you don't support... the "other guys."

[Mike Mundy]

But in fact, low light situations are exactly when you are most likely to use a small unobtrusive camera.

I used a G9 last year in Japan's neon-lit back alleys at ISO 800. When converted to B&W the RAW captures were quite acceptable.

[charlie d]

I'm dying to know what # 4 is.

[Stefan Zollner]

I vote for Sigma DP2. The film camera surely must be the Olympus Trip 35.

[José Santos]

meanwhile, the sigma DP1 continues to sell for $450 'chez' amazon...
and waiting for the DP2. And olympus' micro4/3, surely your list #1 :) !

José

[Jim Hart]

Mike, I'm two for two. I don't want to buy either #10 or #9. Keep it up, and I may get out of this with a whole skin.

I have a G9 and it's never used. I just can't put up with shutter lag, viewfinder, the list goes on. It sounded really good when I bought it...but I ended up grabbing my D70S, putting it in a Tenba Messenger Bag and making it my daily carry. The G10 may be a fine camera but it will never find it's way into my stable. I need to sell that G9, I could use the funds for a new monopod.

On the GM/Chrysler deal (since I live in the Detroit area where jobs are becoming somewhat scarce) - if GM/Chrysler go off the chart the suppliers that Ford depends on will not be able to survive on Ford orders alone. Without the suppliers Ford won't be able to make it either, sort of a domino effect. (Henry Ford had it right - drop off the boatload of raw steel, wood, whatever, on one end of the assembly line and deliver a car on the other. Suppliers be damned.)

The local papers (Detroit Free Press and Detroit News) pretty much agree on that (the supplier issue, the Henry Ford opinion is mine). BTW - Those papers have joined forces, dropped home delivery to three days a week, put together a horrible "subscriber" website and (IMHO) are absolutely doomed. It's very sad here right now - not only are the "Big 3" under siege, the papers that I grew up reading are headed for oblivion.

[D.B. Walker]

If you own all of the cameras in the top 10 list ... do you get a prize? ... before or after the divorce... :)

[Chris]

I can vouch for the sturdy construction of the G10 - dropped mine 6ft to the stone ground at the Trevi Fountain and it didn't suffer but a slightly rounded corner.

[Kevin]

"So is this simply a Canonial prejudice against developments of 4? Will we also never see the G16?"

Personally, I'm waiting for Canon to release the environment-friendly, battery-free, Gstring.

[MIke Potter]

My ex-wife has the G2, and I had the G3 (I let her keep it), and to me, at least, the 3 essential elements of the 'G' line were 1) fast lens at both WA and tele (the G2 was 2.0-3.0); 2) articulated LCD; and 3) ability to shoot RAW files. Seems to me that, maybe because of the lack of competition in this market segment that you quote, Canon felt 'safe' enough to drop two of those three elements in the G10 (and they even droped RAW support for a while in the G line). From what I've read, the G10 is a fine photo-taking machine, but without the flip/twist LCD and the fast lens, it's just not in the same league as the early-model G's.

[EmmJay]

Since I convert much of my stuff to B&W 800 on the G10 isn't any worse than tri-x. Overall the G10 is a wonderful "take it with you" camera. What still bothers me though is a P&S is a P&S. Pokey with too much shutter lag. I'm surprised Canon hasn't worked on getting the response time closer to the DSLR's. Then you would have a P&S worth bragging about.

[Mike Sisk]

Why no G4? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraphobia

[Chad Thompson]

As an aside, I just found the G10 micro site yesterday. Canon had some guys from the VII Photo Agency run around the globe with the things. Interesting to see the video of how Gary Knight adjusts his user settings.

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2726&WT.mc_id=C125201

[KeithB]

Mike, are you being lazy and just copying Ken Rockwell?
http://kenrockwell.com/canon/g10.htm

You did not mention the best feature of the camera: A real exposure compensation knob on top of the camera!

[Jason W.]

The lag didn't bother you? I tried one in a store, and the lag (every type of it, pretty much), even with every last control there was manually preset, was worse than every other compact with any serious pretensions I've held.

Did I just try a bum copy?