G11 and S90

My needs as a photographer have changed over the years. I no longer sell my services. I use to rely upon flash in low light and have many modern and ancient strobes to show for my disease. I've a number of SLRs but primarily shoot with a 1DMKIII and the really fast "L" glass primes, but find that I rarely have this camera with me when I see my potential subject and it isn't state of the art high ISO anyways.

Small quality high ISO images will get me into a small form factor. I want to be able to easily carry my camera and I don't care what company makes the camera.

Lastly, the Japanese have the technology these days. The days of German camera supremacy are long gone. Canon has earned my trust, while Leica has demonstrated high prices and technology that, as of recent, been less than stellar. We will see what the future brings.

If it makes the image, is reliable with good ergonomics.. I'll use it.. please..
 
For the web presentation technical image quality from small sensor compact digital cameras is good enough, but for large gallery prints... maybe, but only if it was shot up to iso 200 and below. Good looking pictures from lumix lx3 at iso 400 on the web, when printed large look quite bad - strong noise reduction, lack of fine detail... Photojournalists quite often have to shoot at iso 800, 1600... I work on my long term projects, I spend most of my time for that, this is my life, and I want my life work to be suitable for large gallery prints. While technical image quality in photography is usually a secondary thing, very often that same technical quality helps and adds to the image a lot... All my wealth is and probably will be my archive and (as of 2009) I don't see any reason for shooting with small sensor compact cameras. My nikon d200 with prime or small kit lens and a leica style shoulder strap looks compact enough, and I carry my kit in a non photographic bag. By the way, for example: Pentax dslr k-m/2000 with kit lens is very compact, cheap and light, but technically it would outperform any the best compact camera on the market including g11... Small sensor compact cameras are good and fun to shoot with... but for seriously working photographer... no, I don't think there is a necessity for this. Entry or prosumer grade dslr's aren't that big, I would say when properly used they look the size of leica rf.
 
Last edited:
performance is always trumped by subject matter. i have images that could not have been taken with a dlsr. no way, no how.

digital compacts (or film for that matter) have their place in this photojournalists bag.
 
Last edited:
"..and as for Photojournalists being interested in this camera.....no way....not for work purposes. It's not a pro camera and the quality isn't up to standard yet. While many amatuers would think the quality is perfectly fine, many photo editors to agencies and publications would strongly dissagree."

i am presuming you are NOT a photojournalist?
 
Even though I am Jewish, I enter into the confessional box. The Priest asks me to confess my sins. I wiggle in the seat. Finally I blurt out," I have sinned, I usually have my Ricoh GX200 with me and sometimes it is the rig the gets the "shot"". Please, please forgive me for I am confused. The Earth is moving quickly under my feet. I am lusting for the S90 with the "ring". I am weak.
 
emraphoto said:
"..and as for Photojournalists being interested in this camera.....no way....not for work purposes. It's not a pro camera and the quality isn't up to standard yet. While many amatuers would think the quality is perfectly fine, many photo editors to agencies and publications would strongly dissagree."

i am presuming you are NOT a photojournalist?
Click to expand...

You presume wrong
 
Ken Ford said:
You may want to re-read Bill's original post - this is *all about* usage.
Well, you made it that way by talking about 'execution'. Besides it's is all about usage!


I wasn't aware the question was about stock. Pick the right tool for the job.

I'm not talking about stock. I am talking about important PJ assignment work beyond the needs of just newspapers, where quality isn't a major factor.

Who are you to assume what I do or don't do? I still shoot my D1 and my Oly 4040, so I must be one of those tech jumpers you so obviously despise. Yeah, right.

"If carrying and using a G11 allows me to create what I see, who cares?"

Remember saying this? Wow, seems like you're taking this personaly and you really shouldn't. I'm not attcking you, just disagreeing with your comments, as you are mine.

How do you justify owning a GRDIII, oh great Leica purist? It would seem to be beneath you. Besides - you are aware the G11 has an optical VF, correct? Not a good one, but suitable for most use. That's the only reason I'd even consider one.

I am by no means a Leica purist, but I am experienced at using rangefinders and understand the differences in application. No camera, nor person is beneath me, thank you. BTW, I've owned a G10, and would never class it in the same category as a rangefinder.

There is absolutely no reason a camera like a G11 can't replace a traditional RF for journalistic use.

For amatuers that still life, landscapes and basic portraits, the G11 could easily replace the M, but at a reduced quality and different photographic method. It is the method alone which I enjoy most about using a rangefinder. The methods are different using a G11 and that's my point. Plus one is designed to work with fast interchangeable primes lenses and one isn't.
Click to expand...


Most people that say a G series camera can do whatever/however a M series camera can, don't actually own a Leica M, nor have they extensively used one to know the advantages/disadvantages and differences of using such a camera. This is not being snobbish, just a matter of my perception from reading forums such as this.

I don't expect my GR to do what my Leica can (and vice versa), especially in the way it does it so I don't compare them. One compliments the other for different purposes, and I'm not confused about that. Neither do I expect everyone to understand what I'm talking about seeing not everyone owns/has used a rangefinder.

I've said enough. I don't feel like continuing this useless argument, especially one where no one wins. But it has been somewhat interesting. I haven't taken anything personaly and I hope you haven't either. Good arguments make people think as long as it doesn't get (too) ugly.

Cheers, Kris
 
Last edited:
leicashot said:
I've said enough. I don't feel like continuing this useless argument, especially one where no one wins. But it has been somewhat interesting. I haven't taken anything personaly and I hope you haven't either. Good arguments make people think as long as it doesn't get ugly.

Cheers, Kris
Click to expand...

I don't know what to say given your behavior in this thread. Good bye.
 
Ken Ford said:
I don't know what to say given your behavior in this thread. Good bye.
Click to expand...

My behaviour? I know I speak in an abrupt manner, but you're no angel either, so may I suggest you take a look in the mirror pal. Neither of us have been angels here :bang::angel:
 
leicashot said:
You presume wrong
Click to expand...

a photojournalist that fills stock image banks? yes, you need to meet the parameters of said stock image bank.

i know wire service, press and assignment shooters that use point and shoots. i use a point and shoot on occasion. to say that photojournalists don't/won't use them is plain wrong.
 
emraphoto said:
a photojournalist that fills stock image banks? yes, you need to meet the parameters of said stock image bank.

i know wire service, press and assignment shooters that use point and shoots. I use a point and shoot on occasion. To say that photojournalists don't/won't use them is plain wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, they use them, I am one and use one, but for most of my clients, they expect high resolution files, especially when light gets low. I'm not saying these cameras aren't capable, but their sensors are still not up to professional standards and not everyone will accept such files.

Sorry but if you know press/wire assignement photographers going outand using point and shoots as their main professional cameras, they aren't too professional sounding to me. There may be situations where looking like a 'pro' can hinder one's results or even entry into certain places, but for the most part PJ's on assignment need to be taken seriously and shooting with a small camera can also have the opposite effect, depending on the situation of course.

Professionals that I know have standards, standards that meet their clients standards, and that's why they are called 'professionals'. If they 'need' to use a compact to gain certain access into a an event where larger SLRs or press aren't permitted then I understand, but for the most part they aren't designed to withdtand professional use and are not dependable cameras. More than anything, too much can go wrong with electronic controlled zoom designs. Not weather proofing of electronics, etc. Which is the reason I also don't classify the M8 as a 'pro' camera.

Like I said, I shoot a GR which in good light could pass as professional images on certain assignments but for most of my work, it's file quality (like all other compacts) just won't cut it. Can't say I've seen too many G series in the hands of pros on assignment, ever.....but I am optimistic they will become more common when the sensors are improved, heck, I'll get in line. But for now, sorry but they don't cut it, and the M8 at ISO 640 and under does, IMHO. Nuff said.

Cheers, Kris
 
Last edited:
"Sorry but if you know press/wire assignement photographers going outand using point and shoots as their main professional cameras, they aren't too professional sounding to me. There may be situations where looking like a 'pro' can hinder one's results or even entry into certain places, but for the most part PJ's on assignment need to be taken seriously and shooting with a small camera can also have the opposite effect, depending on the situation of course."

i didn't say they used them as their "main" camera. i just said they use them. it's not about how people perceive your "seriousness", it's about getting photo's that could get your arrested (or worse) in a country you DON'T want to be arrested (or worse) in.
 
emraphoto said:
"Sorry but if you know press/wire assignement photographers going outand using point and shoots as their main professional cameras, they aren't too professional sounding to me. There may be situations where looking like a 'pro' can hinder one's results or even entry into certain places, but for the most part PJ's on assignment need to be taken seriously and shooting with a small camera can also have the opposite effect, depending on the situation of course."

i didn't say they used them as their "main" camera. i just said they use them. it's not about how people perceive your "seriousness", it's about getting photo's that could get your arrested (or worse) in a country you DON'T want to be arrested (or worse) in.
Click to expand...

That's a good point but I think if you're a foreigner in one of 'those' countries, you're already gonna stick out somewhat, so the camera really isn't going to make a big difference as they're not quite used to seeing tourists running around I suspect....but the 'best' photographers will use whatever it takes to get the job done...and relating back to the topic, the G series is not a camera to compare to a Leica rangefinder, like the M8. Sure they can be used for similar things, but so can small SLR's, so where is that comparison, and were does it end? EP-1, DP2, E-420? Most of these cameras can do whay more than a Leica M, but a skilled M photographer uses an M for the rangefinder attributes which cannot be substituted by compacts or SLRs. If you think they can, then why are we all on this website?

Camera's are so veratile now that they can be easily substituted if the photographer is capabale of operating the substitute equipment successfully in a similar way. A rangefinder is totally different in operation to a compact, more so than an SLR which is why I don't believe in the comparison made here.

I couldn't possibly have anything more useful to say so I'll end it here, but some great arguments either way, regardless of the 'hostility' :D Lets just enjoy whatever we shoot with, with whatever our opinion is.

Cheers

Kris
 
Last edited:
The pros do use them -- like it or not!

The pros do use them -- like it or not!

First of all, let us not fight. It's only an Internet forum, eh?

The idea that using one of the Canon G's makes you somehow "non-professional" is a bit off.

The discussion is about photojournalism, not fashion photography. Journalists will use whatever tool fits to tell the story. And, I suggest the quality does not suffer.

My buddy who went to Afghanistan did NOT want a DSLR because it was too unhandy when going out with the troops. These guys wear 50 lbs of body armour in 50 degree heat, have to climb in and out of vehicles and frequently run for cover.

I bet the same arguments were being made when photojournalists started using Leicas and Contaxes instead of Speed Graphics.

In the end, it's the results that count.

The world is changing. Newspapers now run video on their web pages and the G9, G10 or G11 can deliver that.
 
On another site, I've been following what is probably the most important issue for photojournalists with the G11 or any compact digicam ... shutter lag. I know that there is a least one PJ who shoots with a few Olympus compacts, but if any camera can't respond when you need it to, I wouldn't be interested.
 
I don't know if it was already posted, but it fits to the discussion about pros using PS cameras.

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2726&fromTips=1 (strange flash navigation here)

By clicking "Tips & Advice" you can watch three testimonial videos where protographers of the VII Agency talk about using the G10.

I would like to know, how they dealt with the shutter lag of the G10. Even in manual focus you have a considerable shutter lag.
 
I had been in short contact with Stephen Mayes from VII agency about their photographers using the G10. While he did not tell about the technical side, he stated that they use it mostly for in between official assignments (where they mostly use DSLRs) but there had been some assignments where they used it and also published photos from a G10 PJ (he did not state which ones).

Still interesting though. It seems that Gary Knight also used it during the workshops he run in 2008 and 2009 so far (there's a participient's video on the net somewhere).
 
I got a dinky little Selphy printer this weekend and finally made some prints from some older photos that I made with an Elph while on a fishing trip last year. You know, despite it being a lowly little point and shoot, many of the prints were quite lovely.

I'm going on my honeymoon to Italy next year and I've been thinking of what camera setup I should take. I thought I'd take my OM system with a few lenses and my Autocord. But I'm finding that using the OM alone can be a pain while trying to just enjoy a weekend in the area. "Hold on, Honey. I've gotta change a lens." etc.

Having something like the s90 could take off some photographic pressure. I remember it was a fun little camera to use in a pinch on the fishing trip. I would, of course, take the Autocord. That's a no brainer.
 
tom.w.bn said:
Hm. Why? There are definitely some situations that are gone when you have a shutter lag of 1/2sec. For example a smile on a face or a nice scene of my daughter while playing outside.
Click to expand...

I occasionally use the now ancient Canon G2. You deal with shutter lag by depressing the shutter half-way. The camera focuses and after that the lag is negligible. It is not more difficult than shooting action sports with a film camera.
 
Michael Reichmann at the Luminous Landscape conducted an interesting survey comparing G10 images to that of a medium format digital.

Here’s a brief quote from that piece.

“In every case no one could reliably tell the difference between 13X19" prints shot with the $40,000 Hasselblad and Phase One 39 Megapixel back, and the new $500 Canon G10. In the end no one got more than 60% right, and overall the split was about 50 / 50, with no clear differentiator. In other words, no better than chance.”

Here is the piece in its entirety

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

It should be noted his pictures were taken using a monopod and the low, native ISO of 80.

I conducted a set of comparisons (except I used a tripod or high shutter speeds instead of a monopod) with the G10, the M8 and some DSLR’s just for my own edification. Same results, professional photographers and regular humans couldn’t really distinguish between 13x19 prints from the G10 and the other cameras.

This type of shooting (camera support, low ISO) doesn’t apply to photojournalism. We fortunately have lower standards even when we have to make big prints for exhibitions. It does, however, apply to M8 shooting.

The M8, in many ways, follows the pattern set up by medium format digitals - no anti Moire filter, slow processing, great files at the native ISO and not very good files at high speeds. This must disappoint people who used a film Leica with pushed HP5 or P3200 and Tom’s base winds. On the other hand, it certainly makes up for Kodachrome being discontinued.

Unfortunately, fortunately? - so does a camera like the G10 and a tripod.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom