Fun with Cameras

If you know me then you know that I have a tendency to obsess over decisions. However small the choice and insignificant the outcome, I can never just flip a coin; a decision must be well considered, each of the possibilities weighed and the all of the available data examined. This is truest of my consumer purchases, and especially so with technology. The reality is that with digital cameras, laptops, media players, etc. you don’t have the opportunity to try out each of the options for a sufficient period of time (or at all in most cases) to make a fully informed decision. Instead the consumer is relegated to mining blogs, wikipedia entries, amazon comments, and third-party sites in the field of interest, hoping to find exactly the comparison he needs (or thinks he needs). At the end of the day you have to buy something, but I can never just say ‘fuck it’ and pick one, I must be satisfied that I’ve made the right choice.

So as much of a pain as that is for me and mine, this obsessive consumerist quality I’ve developed has the potential to be beneficial to others as I do so much damn market research I might as well be a tech consultant (which is essentially unemployment anyway, so maybe I’ve found myself a new title).

That’s where this gets good for you, dear reader. In anticipation of my trip (which kicks off this Friday, actually), I’ve decided to buy a new camera. My previous photographic device was a Canon A570 bought 2 years ago, which I’ve been extremely happy with. The A570 was anomalous in that it had a sensor and lens nearly on par with the higher end Canon P&S, the G7 (500USD), as well as full manual functionality and a 5x zoom. So for 130USD you get the image quality of a $300 camera. You pay for it in the less appealing construction (it’s not particularly slim or pretty), but I was happy with the decision. Nevertheless, the A570 cannot compare with the current generation of P&S’s, with larger sensors, better in-camera processing, high pixel densities, and slimmer forms.

So I found myself (or put myself) in the market for a high-end digital Point&Shoot (as much as I’d love a Nikon D-series, the point of the camera is catalog my experiences, a reality made far more difficult by a bulky DSLR).

what matters starts here:

Long story short as of right now there are only 2 high-end digital P&S’s worth considering: the Canon G10 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3. The G10 continues canon’s G-series successes that, since the G7, have secured absolute control of the market. The LX3 is a competative new-comer in that the LX2, while a fine camera, could not stand up to its G-series contemporaries. The LX3 impressed a lot of people when it hit the market due to its low pixel count on the largest sensor among P&S’s, which goes a long way in addressing the issue of low-light shooting that all cameras in the market face.

Here’s how the two compare (only the relative differences between the two):

Canon G10

• Easily accessed and employed manual controls (shutter speed, aperture, white balance, manual focus, iso, flash, etc.).
• Well-designed interface displaying relevant information quickly, again enabling the effective use of manual or Av/Tv functionality.
• Solid in-camera post-processing i.e. good White Balance, contrasting, etc.
• 6x zoom (compared to the LX3’s mere 2.5x)
• 14.7 MP, which means that in bright daylight shots you’ll achieve a tremendous amount of detail i.e. you can blow up pictures fairly large or crop them down 20-50% and still have no problem. As a point of reference with 10 resolved MP (i.e. sufficient lighting and sensor area) the average human eye cannot resolve the pixels in an 8″x10″ print. This high MP count also means that you will have major graininess issues at higher isos.
• Only macro’s at 28mm, and some fisheye creeps in there so macro shots are as tricky as they usually are with P&S’s
• Large for a P&S, requires a case or bag of some sort unless you have very large pockets.

LX3:

• Small form, fits into a jacket pocket easily
• Great Leica 20mm macro
• Slightly larger sensor (1/6.3″ as opposed to the G10’s 1/7″), which all around provides better imaging
• 10MP, which means that in bright daylight shots at 100% crop you wont have perfect resolution (with no crop you are absolutely fine), but also means that in low-light conditions, or rather at higher isos, you will get better resolution because the larger pixel area will allow the pixels to pick up enough light to accurately reproduce it, as opposed to the light-noise that causes graininess at higher isos and high pixel counts.
• Only 2.5x zoom
• Crappy in-camera processing. You are essentially forced to shoot in RAW (i.e. straight up image out of the sensor). The RAW conversion software is good and post-processing on computer should be under 60seconds for most photos, but it means you can’t just shoot away and enjoy the pics.

The Bottom line: No P&S can handle low-ligh conditions well. The sensors are simply too small to accomplish it effectively. That said, the LX3 goes a long way by making 400/800 iso shots actually useful, whereas the G10 is strictly limited to within 400 iso (otherwise you’ve got crippling grain). The zoom isn’t as great on the LX3, but in my experience I’m moving back more than forward, and the better macro more than makes up for that. Finally, the small form factor is extremely useful and gets to the heart of P&S’s. On the G10’s side, with the well-designed body and menu of the G10 you will actually use the manual controls with frequency, making your shots average better, especially nighttime shots where relying on the processor to pick your iso will lead to granier, worse-balanced shots than you can  probably achieve with just a bit of work. On the LX3 or any other menu-based, scroll-wheel lacking digital P&S you will not use the manual functionality. You won’t, I promise. When you are travelling around if a shot will take more the 30s you won’t take it, not when the auto functionality is there. Also, with the effective Digic III processor, the G10’s auto function is actually useful making those shots where you just pull out the camera and snap away much prettier at the end of the day, especially for well-lit scenes. The low-light shots aren’t as hot as the Lx3, and you won’t be able to make as many of them work, but in my opinion the active use of manual shooting will make up for, enabling the user to take shots at lower iso’s and close the gap. To me, as appealing as the smaller form of LX3 is, I feel that I will take better shots more consistently with the G10, especially with the ability to take well-processed jpegs right out the camera, a must when you’re using a P&S for what it is best used for.

So I bought the G10, and I have to say it is everything I had hoped for. When the S90 comes out in a couple months though I may pick that up and sell the G10, depending on the how the reviews look. Hope you find my insight useful, please let me know in the comments or via PM if I can provide further information.