I suspect that if you denoise a 12MP image and then scale it to 6MP you will reasonably clean result. One of the things I plan to test when I get a chance is how clean the 8MP and 5MP modes on the camera are.
That's probably likely. There's just one problem. I don't want to buffer, record, and archive 12MP raw file sizes if they only have 6MP worth of low-noise information in them. Unless what you're saying is that there are 8MP and 5MP Raw modes.
That's probably likely. There's just one problem. I don't want to buffer, record, and archive 12MP raw file sizes if they only have 6MP worth of low-noise information in them. Unless what you're saying is that there are 8MP and 5MP Raw modes.
I am pretty sure that if you are shooting RAW, you have to record the full resolution. As for the amount of noise free information, that depends on the camera settings. At ISO 80 and f/8, all 12MP are pretty clean.
I was hoping that article would clear it up for me, but not quite... if, for example, you don't much care about RAW files or wireless flash, could you save some money by picking up a lightly used G7? The glass is the same, which is what I'd care most about. The sensor, it's smaller, but can't find much to say whether the sensor, besides gaining a couple mp has really "improved". any comments, welcome
The sensor has not really been improved, but the G9 has a DIGIC III doing noise reduction which, I understand, has had an impact on visible noise in prints.
The sensor has not really been improved, but the G9 has a DIGIC III doing noise reduction which, I understand, has had an impact on visible noise in prints.
The G7 has a Digic III as well, no? A friend and I just went over this yesterday as he's thinking of getting a G7.
Please feel free to retouch and repost my images. Critique, Suggestions, and Technique tips always welcomed. Thanks for your interest.
The G7 has a Digic III as well, no? A friend and I just went over this yesterday as he's thinking of getting a G7.
You're right. One of the reviews I read commented that the noise reduction is better in the G9; I was just guessing that that was because of a faster processor, but I guess not.
I am pretty sure that if you are shooting RAW, you have to record the full resolution. As for the amount of noise free information, that depends on the camera settings. At ISO 80 and f/8, all 12MP are pretty clean.
Yes, but I already have a 4-year-old Canon P&S that shoots clean images at ISO 50 and 100. My main motivation for throwing half a grand at another P&S would be to get better performance at higher ISO speeds. For that, a clean, fast 6MP sensor would be much more useful than a 12MP sensor that isn't much of an improvement at high ISOs and produces 12MP-sized Raw file sizes.
Didn't mean to drag this out, but it seemed important to clarify my point of view on it. Can't complain about the 12 clean MP of the G9 outside at noon on a summer day, but that's not hard to do. But if Canon had concentrated on fewer, cleaner MP at high ISOs, a lot of people (including dpreview.com, me, and from what I've seen, other reviewers too) would have been less disappointed.
As it is, I hear the G9 at least does much better at ISO 400 than my old Powershot, so if mine dies before we get a G10 with awesomely smooth ISO 800 and the return of the swivel screen, I would probably cave and get the G9, especially after seeing the images in this thread.
Comments
That's probably likely. There's just one problem. I don't want to buffer, record, and archive 12MP raw file sizes if they only have 6MP worth of low-noise information in them. Unless what you're saying is that there are 8MP and 5MP Raw modes.
I am pretty sure that if you are shooting RAW, you have to record the full resolution. As for the amount of noise free information, that depends on the camera settings. At ISO 80 and f/8, all 12MP are pretty clean.
The sensor has not really been improved, but the G9 has a DIGIC III doing noise reduction which, I understand, has had an impact on visible noise in prints.
The G7 has a Digic III as well, no? A friend and I just went over this yesterday as he's thinking of getting a G7.
You're right. One of the reviews I read commented that the noise reduction is better in the G9; I was just guessing that that was because of a faster processor, but I guess not.
Yes, but I already have a 4-year-old Canon P&S that shoots clean images at ISO 50 and 100. My main motivation for throwing half a grand at another P&S would be to get better performance at higher ISO speeds. For that, a clean, fast 6MP sensor would be much more useful than a 12MP sensor that isn't much of an improvement at high ISOs and produces 12MP-sized Raw file sizes.
Didn't mean to drag this out, but it seemed important to clarify my point of view on it. Can't complain about the 12 clean MP of the G9 outside at noon on a summer day, but that's not hard to do. But if Canon had concentrated on fewer, cleaner MP at high ISOs, a lot of people (including dpreview.com, me, and from what I've seen, other reviewers too) would have been less disappointed.
As it is, I hear the G9 at least does much better at ISO 400 than my old Powershot, so if mine dies before we get a G10 with awesomely smooth ISO 800 and the return of the swivel screen, I would probably cave and get the G9, especially after seeing the images in this thread.