I was pretty impressed by this little camera when I got it back in 2007, but now adays it sits in the closet, unused. I shoot a lot in Vail, Colorado, and this is the gear I use on a daily basis.
ORIGINAL POST: I just got Canon’s new G9, and it rocks! Hooray! I don’t have much to compare this to since I don’t have any other point and shoots — this is my first one since 2001, when I got a 2 megapixel digital Elph — and this is 12 megapixels. But what I am used to is my 1dII and my Canon 5d, of which the latter is a gold standard when it comes to low-noise shooting. My lens collection consists solely of L-series glass — primarily primes.
Since you’re reading this, you presumably already know everything about the G9. If not, in a nutshell it’s got:
An image stabilized lens, equivalent to a 35 to 210 (f/2.8 to f/4.8)
12 megapixel sensor
3 inch LCD display
Digic III sensor
RAW capture mode
The ability to work with remote flashes
The last two features are what interested me in this camera. I’ve been looking for a point and shoot that has RAW mode, and all this stuff about the G7 not ‘needing’ RAW is to me a big load of hooey. I shoot everything in RAW and I batch process them in the Adobe Camera RAW, which lets me tweak my images so they have the best color rendition, saturation and range. JPEGs don’t cut it, so I’ve been waiting for this thing. Since I’m a Canon guy with Canon flashes, I also wanted one that would work with my STE-II or 580EX flashes.
First, the camera’s ergonomics suck when you’ve got a 580EX attached to it. You pretty much have to walk around holding the camera by the flash. Observe:
It’s a lot less ridiculous with an STE-II or a PocketWizard attached to it.
Will I ever use the camera with an external flash? Absolutely. With an STE-II? Maybe. With a PW? Very infrequently, but at least I can if I need to. Each of those three options increasingly nullifies the point of having a point and shoot, but I digress.
Let’s just skip right to the important stuff. The RAW write speed is decent. Nothing to phone home about, but it’s definitely useable. It takes 1 to 3 seconds to write a RAW file, depending on the card speed and the ISO (or so it seems). Recognizing that this is not a DSLR, I’m fine with that.
And the other important question is: how do the images look? I’m just going to post some full-size images after RAW processing, and you can see for yourself. All images were taken with my new G9 and my old 5d with the trusty 70-200 f/2.8L IS zoom. All the images were exposed the same in manual, at 1/200th and f/6.3. I just changed the flash output (wireless 580ex from a Pocket Wizard) and shot at the following ISO settings: 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600. The images were all processed in Canon’s (IMHO ridiculously useless) RAW converter and saved to highest quality JPEG. I applied no sharpening and no noise reduction, and then I made them 100% crops in Photoshop.
Here we go at ISO 100:
And at ISO 200:
And at ISO 400:
And at ISO 800:
And at ISO 1600:
Basically I think according to the above test, the G9 holds its own until ISO 1600, at which point it totally sucks and is completely unusable. But that little lens is surprisingly sharp, and the noise control is very good at ISO 800 and below in good light. That’s pretty dope for a point and shoot.
Now, for an UPDATE thanks to some feedback: note that the above test was performed in the best of circumstances. Great light and good exposure. Now a pretty harsh test with low ambient light and no flash. I’m not comparing the two cameras, I’m just using the 5d as a baseline. By the way, everything in the below test was shot at f/2.8. That means wide open for the G9 and stopped WAAAY down for the 5d (it’s a 35mm f/1.4).
At ISO 200, pretty good.
At ISO 400, the differences appear:
At 800 they are really apparent:
And at 1600… Well, yikes.
Clearly the G9 doesn’t work that well in poor conditions, but hey, I still think I can pull out some good pictures — especially with a good flash attached. Now I’m not a professional gear reviewer, so take my words with a grain of salt, but I’m pleasantly surprised and pretty happy with the G9. I might even use it professionally for weddings! I’ve thought about mounting it in the rafters and making time-lapse videos of the reception (yes, it has that feature too) and giving them to the bride and groom. That could be super fun! Or maybe I can mount it to a tripod and have guests take photos of themselves. Or maybe I could … Anyway, point is, the camera is way cool, and I’m psyched on it.
Here’s the link to it on Amazon.com:
I just received my G9 and have been playing around with it. I’ve read your post and I just wanted to know if you would keep me posted of any new findings. I’m particularly interested in a smaller flash for the G9 that still has as many features as possible.
Thanks, Jere
Nice work with this. Much appreciated.
Tried the G9 at a local shop. The color was way off. Used auto WB and then florescent WB, no difference. Couldn’t get an accurate rendition of a deep green shirt. It turned mushy bluish/green (w/ gray tones). Ran a print to verify the LCD was accurate, and it was.
Going back Sat to check camera in daylight.
Do find the colors accurate? I’ve read elsewhere that WB and color accuracy is lacking.
Hi thanks for posting this. I’m strongly considering the G9 as a digital “stand-in” shall we say, for my Nikon EM 35mm.
As most of my work is used to illustrate articles – I’m a freelance journo – I need something that has no problem taking street snaps in bright bright daylight (I’m in the Middle East) to low light w/out flash.
For the latter I usually get away using my EM with a 50mm F1.8 and 400 ASA film. I need to know if the G9 will do that for me. Looking at your 400 ISO shot gives me cause for concern.
What are your thoughts now that you’ve had the camera for a while?
thanks.
Hi, I enjoyed reading your review. I have a G9 which I started testing out today. I personally love the feel of the G9. It feels sturdy, ugly, and functional, a camera meant for serious photography and not a teenage sleepover.
It does daylight to dusk very well. Controlling aperture and shutter speed is easily done using a scroll wheel. It has an optical viewfinder too, and I can shut off the LCD – a must have feature for me. I am enjoying being able to shoot 16:9 on it. In low light, the camera can struggle to focus, and there is significant shutter lag. I personally found the colors to be very accurate. Depth of field is lacking however.
Russel, On my Flickr page are a couple of photos I shot in low-light, no flash, at ISO 400. I don’t think they would compare to a 50mm F1.8 sadly.
http://flickr.com/photos/anthonybaby/tags/g9/
Something that needs to be mentioned is that the G9 suffers from two common problems (mine included): hot pixels appearing in the photo or on LCD – or both; and light leakage in the lower right-corner of the LCD. These are flaws in the camera. Also, there is moderate barrel distortion at the wide end, and it’s evident in one of my photos.
Hello
I’ve had the G9 for several weeks now and generally I’m impressed. It certainly fills a gap.
http://thewhatandwhy.slashedcanvas.co.uk/2007/11/27/using-the-g9-advanced-compact/
It may be a mistake to elevate any compact too much – only so much can be expected – but if we learn how and when it’s appropriate most of us will find the G9 ticks all the right boxes.
Best regards,
Sam
I’m still raising money to get a G9 and will continue doing research and reviews all what was and wil be said about G9.. By the time I will have $500 the G10 will probably come out. Hopefully, it will be for less. Thanks for the informative blog.
Try the ISO 3200 mode. It’s not any worse than ISO 1600, and after you use NeatImage on it, you wind up with a photo that looks pretty good if you downsize it to 500 x 375, a perfect size for posting on a blog.
What a great camera. I was forced to sell my Digital SLR for a compact P&S – Only because of being in a wheelchair and having spinal injuries which prevented carrying a heavy camera around my neck. Well to say the least I am impressed, sure it has it’s limitations, however if you enjoy the art of photography and want all the bells and whistles, the G9 is the way to go. My only critisism is that I would like to have seen some display in the viewfinder, rather than just on the LCD. Perhaps as is seen in the panasonic FZ20.
Great review – Excellent idea to have a baseline to compare images to.
Cheers
Here is an Update about the G9. I have owned mine since March 2008. I own other Canon Camera’s but enjoy using my G9 when I can. It does take very good photo’s. BUT, Now I have a Power Up Issue with it. It turns out the Canon G9 Camera’s where built with a minor defect. The screw that holds down the motherboard comes out and shorts the motherboard out. Canon knows about this problem, but is refusing to step up and take care of it. They want $160.00 to repair the problem that they created. I will NO LONGER buy any CANON products. Here is a link so you may read up and judge for yourself.
http://celticland.com/about/canon-g9-wont-power-on-time-bomb/
What ever you decide, Good Luck!