The primary reason for a digital SLR is the size of the sensor. The APS-C sensor is about the size of a postage stamp. The Canon G1X is just a tiny bit smaller than that. Typical point and shoot digital cameras have sensors roughly the size of your little finger-nail. That means, the more "pixels", which really are called "photo-sites" on the sensor, the more electronic interference (noise) is created in taking the picture. That noise is what looks like grain when you see your images on the computer at 100 percent size. They look great when small, but, zoom to the actually size and they can look pretty bad. That translates to very poor image quality on anything over a 5x7 image or anything for print publications.

Of course, most people think the biggest benefit of digital SLR cameras is interchangeable lenses, and while they add a ton of shooting options, they are expensive, precision instruments, and can be damaged by dust, moisture, etc. I had pollen on the sensor of my professional DSLR and it was difficult to remove. It's either take a DSLR for road trips and never change a lens, or opt for a really high-end point and shoot. I ordered the Canon G1X for that reason.

For the record... the clearest DSLR ever made was the Nikon D2H. It is just four-mega-pixels. I am of the school of thought that the higher above ten-mega-pixels you go on an APS-C sensor, the more you degrade the image. It is far worse on the tiny sensors in P&S digital cameras.

The smaller arrays do quite well in daylight, IMHO. You mean in low light, I presume?

I agree about the MP mania. I've done some pretty serious enlargements from 4MP cameras.

That G1X is a great choice, BTW.

Love my dSLR, but no way I'll take it on a bike. For snapshots, I carry a Sony DSC-WX9 point-and-shoot. I really like that it has rounded edges, shoots HD and has a HDMI port, has a panoramic mode, and shoots fairly decent stills. What I don't like about it is that it can't shoot RAW and does not have an optical viewfinder, (what compact cameras do have a viewfinder these days?).

That Canon G1X does. Wish more of them did.

I guess it's just personal preference, when it comes right down to it. I like a viewfinder for those times when seeing the display is difficult. I used to use the Canon G series, but am a Nikon guy at heart. The Nikon P7000 has everything I want in a P&S....Nikon discontinued the viewfinder on the newer P7700.

The sensor size difference between a P&S and DSLR also indirectly affects the depth of field options you have. The P&S with much shorter focal lengths can't blur a distracting background near as effectively as the large sensor and longer focal lengths of the DSLR.

Still wouldn't like to carry one while riding, though! Too much size and weight, and too much of a possible financial loss in bad weather, or in a fall. The P7000 fits nicely in a case on my belt with my phone and ID's.

Whoa ... very familiar with the notion of the longer focal lengths (and wider apertures, of course) offering less depth of field, but never considered that the sensor size would make any difference. Guess I should pick up the old Halliday and Resnick again. lol

Yes, in bright daylight even smaller arrays can produce a good image. In pocket-sized cameras, though, I have always said that five-mega-pixel cameras are plenty. That's all people really need for happy snaps and an occasional 8x10 image.

Leica produces a couple and so does Ricoh. Now, Fuji has started producing a competing camera in the digital rangefinder market, but, I have not tested those since I publish a DSLR magazine, they are not interested in giving me the chance to review one.

I have a Topeak rack on the back and a top-bag for it. I put a cycling windbreaker in there and plan to get a bag that will accommodate the G1X and keep it in there when I ride. When I need it, it's just an arms-length away. I prefer Nikon to Canon, too, being a landscape shooter for decades. I stopped shooting sporting events many years ago. I always felt that Nikon had better glass. I agree with you on the viewfinder. Nikon had a series some years ago that were the answer to the Canon G5 of that day. Olympus also had a couple options at the time. We need more choices these days.

ulterior motive " I publish a DSLR magazine," finally is broached.

Not really, no motives whatsoever... other than a pure love for photography and cycling. I am not a big fan of the pixel-madness. The industry feeds itself by marketing all the pixel specs and convincing people that the endless parade of pixels means better images. If that is true, why do they need to enhance the images by intentionally blurring them to hid the digital noise? What really needs to be done is convince the makers that larger photo-sites on the sensors would produce a superior image. This technology is actually quite old and little refinement has been made in that respect. Greater light sensitivity is simply better power-handling in the camera and some programming trickery.

Most Canon Powershots can take ersatz raws, if you use CHDK, which also adds other little nifty features as well, like the ability to play tetris on your camera As of version 1.2 it doesn't take as long as it used to either.

Whoa. Thanks!

I usually carry a point & shoot with me. Currently a Canon SX160is.

I swear I hear a shutter!
Unless I turn off the shutter sound.

Canon Power Shot ELPH 100 HS.

Not Mickey, but most point and shoots don't have a shutter so there is often a lag between when you press the button and when the actual picture gets taken. DSLR's have a real shutter and no lag.

I bought a Nikon Coolpix (can't recall which model) to replace a Canon Elph that was worn out ... the Coolpix takes great photos (for a point and shoot). However I don't care for the touch screen - my fat fingers find changing settings a PIA.

I used to wear a harness with my SLR back in the rock and ice climbing days. Very handy, although at times a little awkward. Considering it was before the point and shoot camera era, you did what you had to to keep the camera handy. It wouldn't be my first, second or 20th choice while riding my bike though.

This quote follows my current thinking of photography ... I almost always have my Blackberry in my pocket. Now if I could only remember to take it out of the pocket and take some photos. I took the GoPro on a ride this week (which I also carry in my jersey pocket) wanting to video parts of the ride up one of our local mountains, realizing as I approached the top that I'd forgotten to take any shots along the way. No worries, I'll capture the descent ... only to discover at the bottom that I pushed the "on" button twice and held the camera all the way down with it turned off. Proof positive that I belong in the 50+ category. Oh well ... just another reason to ride it again (someday).

The shutter sound you hear is just a digital audio file that is used to give you feedback so that when you push the button taking a picture, you know something happened. If you hear a DSLR take a picture, it sounds the same as a film camera, because there is actually a moving shutter.

The Canon G1X I ordered from Amazon arrived two days early. There is a steep learning curve on this little gem. I took a few sample images, too. I'll see if I can get a small case for it on the way home from the office today and take it on an afternoon ride. I'll post a shot or two after the ride. There is a park several miles away that has bison in a grassy meadow. I'll see if I can get a few shots of them.

Just noticed this! I've been a fan of the A5XX series since they were introduced. AA batteries, viewfinder, decent flash, creative control ... even the ability to couple filters to it, should you desire. And $48? That's a terrific price for that camera.

My wife and I took a short ride this afternoon. I took a few pictures with the Canon G1X.

Strange... the forum software downsized those two images at different measures. They were downsized by me to 1024x768 resolution. I set the camera to 4:3 ratio because it captures the highest number of pixels at that ratio (the full sensor). It can also be set for 16:9 and 3:2 (like most digital SLRs). There are other ratios available, too, including 1:1 for that old 2 1/4 format (today called 6x6 cm).

MickeyMaguire, if you want larger res images, it's better to host the image on Photobucket, flicker, etc. and use the image tags to show the pic here. If you have a 4:3 sensor, it's silly to use other formats. You can crop to get those formats.

Even better, IMHO is to include a link to Panoramio ... to wit:

https://www.panoramio.com/user/3486446

With a name like "Panoramio", can this site stitch together panoramas? I don't have enough computer and memory "oomph" to completely stitch my panorama of the Melvin Price Lock & Dam. After picture three, the whole computer starts "chugging", taking three minutes just to do simple menu navigation. It would be nice if there were a FREE cloud solution for doing this sort of thing.