I need a camera...

btw, apparently the G11 won't be available until a little bit into October. So... yeah, no sense in waiting to see if it'll be available in time since it likely won't.
 
When's the S90 available? I've browsed through some samples from that today, and it's quite good up to ISO500, and ISO800 should be usable as well.

:)
 
I have an S3. It can do anything. I'm not too keen on the SX1/10/20 because they just keep getting bigger and bigger, and the lens gets slower. I haven't seen an SX20 yet, but the SX10 is way too big. I can fit my S3 in my cargo pants pocket or the pocket of any coat, you couldn't even do that much with the new models. Humbug, I say. Good cameras and all though.
 
Dropped by a Camera World today. They have no idea when they'll be getting a G11 in.

My dad needs a new camera, but can't afford one yet. We're thinking maybe I buy the one he wants now and he buys it off me later once he finds a job (laid off). After that, I can guy a G11 or something.
 
It won't be as good as a G11 (he's thinking $300 range), but at least it'll be better than my 7 year old A40. :lol:
 
Hmm, so about this S90 -- it seems like a compacter version of the G11 with a wider aperture. I've never really gotten how aperture applied to things like low light though, anyone care to explain? I've always just understood it as the range of what's in focus (smaller = less depth in focus).
 
Smaller number means bigger aperture, a big aperture will let more light pass through it than a small aperture. It's like a carriage track versus a highway.

:)
 
(smaller = less depth in focus).
Click to expand...
Smaller aperture = larger number (ie.: f/16) = less light = more depth of field
Larger aperture = smaller number (ie.: f/2.8) = more light = less depth of field

I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. Depth of field is almost irrelevant for compact cameras, even at large apertures.
 
Last edited:
^ fun fact: at its widest my S3 reaches hyperfocal DOF at 1.4 feet

In short:

Apertures are written in powers of the square root of 2. If you don't know, in photography when you have one stop more light you have twice as much light hitting the sensor/film, one stop less is half as much light. So, say your aperture is f5.6 (or (?2)^5), without changing the ISO or shutter speed, to get one stop, two times, more light your aperture would have to come down to f4 (or (?2)^4). If you open the aperture up by one stop, you can half the shutter speed. This is why big apertures are desireable in low light, a standard DSLR kit lens is f3.5 at the widest, the popular and inexpensive f1.8 fixed focal length lenses are two stops faster and therefore can let in four times as much light, or have 1/4 the shutter speed, making them excellent for low light.

[edit]
full stops are
1.0 - 1.4 - 2.0 - 2.8 - 4.0 - 5.6 - 8.0 - 11 - 16 - 22 - 32
[/edit]

So what does this mean for you? The S90 has a f2.0-4.9 3.8x zoom lens, the G11 has a f2.8-4.5 5x zoom lens. The S90 is twice as fast at its widest, but 1/3 slower on the telephoto end and it doesn't even zoom as far. They both have image stabilization. The lens alone isn't enough to decide between the two, IMO. Do you want a small stylish high end compact with a faster lens and a sweet control ring on the lens, or a bigger ugly-but-it-grows-it-on-you high end compact with tons of switches and dials and a little optical viewfinder and swively LCD. They both have their merits.
 
Last edited:
fun fact: at its widest my S3 reaches hyperfocal DOF at 1.4 feet
Click to expand...
Yup, exactly my point: even zoomed out, compact cameras have such insanely-wide focal lengths that they get everything in focus almost all the time.
 
that's at f2.7 btw

OT: my S3 only drops down to f3.5 at 432mm equivalent, the SX10/20 is 5.7 at 560mm equiv. That's lame, yo dawg.
 
Last edited:
I'm thinking of getting a LX3 now. Wish I had thought of this 2 weeks ago so I coulda had it on my trip... <_<

This pretty much sums it up: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1002&message=33197834

Comparing it to the G11 I have noted down the following pros and cons:

LX3 PROs

1) better wide angle (24mm instead of 28mm);
2) brighter lenses (F2.0 - F2.8 instead of F2.8 - F4.5)
3) smaller;
4) 110g lighter;
5) about 100$ cheaper;

7) besides the 4:3 and 16:9 it supports the 3:2 image ratio (the G11 supports 4:3 and 16:9 only);

8) better image quality compared to the G10 (I am looking forward to see a comparison with the G11).

LX3 CONS

1) doesn't have a swivel LCD;
2) has a short zoom range (2.5x instead of 5x)
3) doesn't have a viewfinder.
Click to expand...

The LX3 also does 720p video rather than the G11's 640x480 (I don't plan on doing much video, but I did do a few on my trip and having 720p is really nice).

My only real concern is the shitty optical zoom, but I think I can deal.

Thoughts?


Here's a comparison table for reference: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...e&cameras=canon_g11,panasonic_dmclx3&show=all
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top