Best Digital Compact?

[usayit]

Yup.. and the list gets smaller. Here's the issue I've been observing from my sales experience. There are two dominating markets (general). Compact P&S and DSLRs. The very high end P&S are squeezed in the middle and the general public has misconceptions that they are just over priced P&S. From the sales point of view, we know better BUT it is difficult to make a sale on an item so much more expensive than the typical P&S and just a few hundred under a DSLR. The fact that DSLRs are all the rage (largely by peer pressure) makes selling high end P&S even more difficult. This is one reason why regular retail stores often don't carry the G9 and cameras similar. This is one reason why this market (high end P&S) is shrinking every year.

As for the hack, it was discussed here a few days ago. I have no experience with it and if your pro-buddy has good results it is worth a look. BUT... why would you take a chance with a Hacked up camera? Doesn't this notion defeat your original intent for a high-quality camera? You said that price is not an issue.. then why go that route?

To me (and I am also a car nut), this is like overboosting a 4-cylinder econobox and comparing it to a Vette or Porsche. Its still an econobox.

Furthermore, the hack will expose functionality embedded in the firmware of the camera... that is it.. There are hardware differences between the G-series (high-end) and the other consumer level Canon P&S. Differences that cannot be accounted for in firmware. Glass? Processor?

Anyway.. it is your decision. Let us know what you decide.

 

[Rhubarb]

Another vote for the Canon G9 and the Ricoh GX100. I haven't shot either but if I was going to buy a P&S today it would probably be the G9.

And I say probably because I would be taking an extra close and careful look at the Sigma DP1. It has an APS-C sized sensor in it and the IQ from sample images I have seen from it are easily better than the former cameras mentioned and any other P&S. That said it does have its quirks so you'll need to do your research.

Good luck, the issue you are having stems from the fact that the vast demand for P&S's are for people who really do just want to point and shoot (funnily enough) and have excellent photos. Which doesn't leave many options for people who want an excellent camera, which they can control, in a small form factor.

As usayit touched on, the current consumer mentality is that if you want a 'real' camera, you need a DSLR.

 

[audiobomber]

It seems that Canon has a compact, a bit smaller that the G9 but includes a rotatable monitor...otherwise has an optical viewfinder, which can be hacked...

...but get this, it can be hacked to do EVERYTHING the G9 does!!!

You're talking about the PowerShot A650. It has the same processor and sensor as the G9 and a flip screen. The G9 screen is larger and I believe higher resolution than the A650 screen. Not sure about the lens but it's probably the same since they're both 6X zoom. Some people say it's the same lens with a different coating. Maybe, or maybe they just want the G9 to be better. The G9 has a metal body, the 650 is plastic. The G9 has a hotshoe for external flash, the 650 doesn't. The G9 uses a rechargeable lithium battery pack and the 650 uses 4 AA's. And of course the G9 comes with RAW, and the 650 needs the hack. The A650 is not smaller, they're similar in size, but shaped a little differently, with quite different grips. I find the 650 more comfortable to hold, but the G9 looks and feels more expensive.

 

[deanimator]

Auudiobomber is quite right...the insides seem to be really the same, just the case and the screen make the difference.
So with the hack, you get everything the G9 has plus the more practical moveable screen. The AA batteries are also an advantage.
Only the plastic body to call a negative feature...if it really matters in practice...!

At half the price it sure is tempting.

 

[Bifurcator]

I recently lost my Sony V3 at a 3 day heavy metal concert somewhere in a massive nearly life-threatening crush to see Rage Against the Machine who were about to play...

Anyway, I need a replacement

I consider essential features to be
1) Compact dimensions (can fit in a largish pocket)
2) RAW and JPEG
3) Optical viewfinder

Any suggestions?

I have lots of P&S models that do TIFF but I don't think I've owned one that does RAW.

If "compact dimensions" are your 1st priority so far I like the Nikon P5100 best. It has a hotshoe and a tripod mount and lots of manual features. A HUGE LCD and your optical VF too. Used they go for about $175 ~ $250. Tiny little thing, so cute, and uber-fine images too! Another great aspect to this guy is that it's min. focus distance is something like 1.5 inch. So it's practically a dang microscope.

Here's the intro link: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07083007nikonp5100.asp
And a review link: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp5100/

 

[amba]

I fail to see the merits of the Canon G9 (and of the other enthusiasts digital point & shoot) over compact point and shoot... really.

I love compact digital p&s, i've owned a few, i do upgrade from time to time, usually from an older canon (SD400) to a newer canon (SD870).

For serious photography, i'd buy and entry level DSLR such as the Nikon D40 or the Rebel XSi, with one of their basic (and good) lenses. a kit runs for ~$1000.

Cameras such as the G9, are bulky, therefore in many cases I'd just won't have them when I need a camera, and, if I am willing to carry something heavier, the G9 and similar "advanced P&S" have some serious shortcomings compared to DSLRs, mainly a smaller sensor, which reflects in inferior low light performance, and inferior depth of field control (due to the smaller sensor as well as narrower range of aperture and shutter speed settings of a DSLR with a proper lens). Another disadvantage of the G9 specifically is its max wide angle (limitted, does not allow true wide angle photography, Nikon's $300 18-70mm lens on one of it's DSLR bodies, or the compact Canon SD870 would be much much nicer in that respect, but that's more a matter of personal taste I guess)

Just my $0.02, cheers!

 

[usayit]

Prior to 50s, most serious photographers used medium format as their primary equipment. They saw the emerging 35mm market cameras as meer toys. Often their conclusion was that 35mm was pointless since it sacrificed image quality for compactness. The issue was they didn't realize the potential... they were incapable of seeing past the equipment in their hands.

Then something changed. A few war photographers started to think out of the box documenting things up close. They inserted themselves within the ranks of those fighting. They got CLOSE and PERSONAL. They published some of the most vivid pictures of what real war is all about. This is when the smaller compact 35mm camera really gained respect.. it allowed for photos that wasn't possible with big bulky equipment that simply slows you down.

Fast forward just 1 decade... the 35mm format is now the most popular format... Gone are the small minded responses of "meer toys". Wait... did the "meer toys" attitude really go away?

Fast forward till today. The argument between 35mm v Digital, P&S v DSLR etc... is no different. People are coming up with conclusions based on their own experiences. They are incapable of seeing past the equipment in their own hands. They are incapable of seeing the writer/journalist creating photos to further their written word. A journalist with no crew, no photographer, no extra pair of hands, no large backpack or luggage to carry the DSLR. They are incapable of seeing the parent who wants to capture moments of their children growing up without being tied down with a camera bag in addition to the diaper bag.

If image quality is the primary criteria from which to rate equipment then all P&S photographers should dump their cameras for the DSLR. Forget the millions of wonderful photos that people had the opportunity of creating simply because they carry a pocket sized camera all the time.

If image quality... then DSLRs photographers should just dump their equipment and run towards the medium format camera. Forget the millions of photos taken by both professionals and hobbiests looking through a zoom mounted to an DSLR body.

If image quality.. then we all should be shooting large format.

If that's true... then we are all on the wrong path... and photography is just plain a PITA.

 

[deanimator]

In checking out the various options and suggestions I ran across one or two interesting things:

One dealer is offering a new Sony V3 for $999 :stun:
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Cybersho...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1213599548&sr=8-1
...production ended in 2004 or 2005. This price is a bit extreme, but maybe indicates the camera is still a wanted item!

A buyer reported on-line his comparison of a new Canon G9 which he wanted to replace his Sony V3. After testing, he sent the G9 back...he found the picture quality wasn´t as good as the older camera´s.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerSh...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1213350288&sr=1-1
(scroll to the bottom for this review)

The Sigma and Ricoh nearest equivalents are probably very good but are let down by having no optical viewfinder.

In answer to one or two comments above, asking why not a DSLR, or suggesting that these are not real cameras, the answers are relatively clear I think. There is no perfect camera for every situation...never was and never will be. I used my old Sony V3 for several years and produced some excellent pictures with it...the features I mentioned are deciding factors, but particularly that the camera is always with me...meaning I don´t usually miss the shot.

So, I bought a near new Sony V3 on eBay...and will wait to see if a manufacturer will dare to produce something actually better.