Haha! Power chords are awesome and so are depth of field and monochrome. But, they should be mistaken for technical skill or composition.

Some people think that any photo converted to black & white is "deep". There are 10 variables that go into making a good photo, depth of field and color (or lack thereof) are only 2 of them.

Holy shizasdaf. The Canon G12 is expensive! (Somewhat), (Actually, I don't even know why I'm surprised. I'm really not.).. (Maybe I just wasn't ready for it. Yeah.. That's it.)

Find a Canon G10 in good condition.

I don't care what anyone says the D3100 is a sick camera. I'm considering buying one. I currently shoot with a D60 + 35mm f/1.8 lens, and a D7000 + 85mm f/1.8 lens. I really like how small the D60 is with the 35mm lens. That being said, the D3100 takes much better pictures straight out of the camera, but I have a hard time telling apart the pictures from my D7000 and D60 after they have been edited.

Btw, you guys should check out my flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/thisisbenji

I personally hate when people take digital photos and turn them into black and whites. I can always tell right away. I'v done some experimenting with the zone system on my film camera and really liked the results but can't seem to reproduce them on the digital camera no matter how hard I try.

You don't understand composition if you don't understand the purpose of going monochrome vs. color.

Watch this video to learn more why a lot of photographers prefer monochrome.

http://www.musarium.com/stories/viet.../color-bw.html

The reason why people *love* film so much is because of the quality of the grain. You can put a high quality film in a crap camera and still get nice grain texture in the print/scan.

With digital, your "film" is directly tied to the camera that you buy. So, the key is to buy a nicer camera that comes with a nicer sensor (film) then you will get much nicer digital noise (grain).

The best film-like grain that I've ever seen from a digital camera is from my Ricoh GR-D.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/...0eff4fc6_z.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4039/...8534106b_z.jpg


It had it's flaws (like poor flash metering), but the sensor was amazing.
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/re...gr_digital.jpg

I'd like the option of 720p video also. The money isn't an issue, I like a fine camera and I'll take your word for it if you recommended the G12.

I'm sorry to bother you with all these newb questions, but one more? Can you compare the G12 with the Nikon P7000? Both had wide-angle lenses like you recommended.

I'm not up on all of the cameras that are out these days. DP Review always gives honest and informed reviews and comparisons.

I'll chime in as I have a pretty good experience with cameras and recently had to purchase a smaller portable camera. Scratch the G12 and the P7000 from your list and instead replace them with the Panasonic LX5 and Canon S95. Both of these cameras are smaller than the two you mentioned but are better in my humble opinion. If you have some experience with photoshop and lightroom I'd probably go with the LX5. You can also zoom while recording which you can't do with the S95. The ups of the S95 is that the SOOC (straight out of camera) pictures are nicer and it may be a tad cleaner at higher ISO's.

Both are great cameras with pretty fast lenses (f/2.0).

Cliffnotes:
LX5 has a great video function and is faster throughout the zoom range. Has a lot of cool built in functions to play around with.
S95 pictures look better generally SOOC and is slightly cleaner at higher ISO's. It's also pocketable and has a built in lens cap. It has a longer range than the LX5.

With that being said, if I had to make a choice right now for myself. I'd get the Sony Nex-5 with an adapter with the Panasonic pancake lens or the Fuji X100 (probably this one if I could afford it).

Those cameras sound awesome.

The smaller the better, that way you will have it with you more often. One of the things I didn't like about the Canon G10 was that it was bulky. Lots of great features, but tough to put in pants pocket. Jacket yes, pants no. It's a great learning tool, though because it has manual mode.

This is why I liked the Ricoh GR. It easily fit in jeans.

Aren't entry level DSLRs all around that price (if not more)?

Agreed. It was only a year and a half ago that I started photography with a Canon G10 and it's taught me so much but I feel like jumping into film SLR's taught me a lot more in a shorter span but I don't think I would've appreciated film so much if it weren't for owning a point and shoot that allowed me to take 300 pictures in one sitting as opposed to 36 in a week with film haha.

First, I want to add that I enjoy how knowledgeable Carleton is on many subjects.

Second, I'd like to 'second' what Carleton's entire post said, but i decided to cut out and bold some things that i read and said , "Couldn't have said it better myself."

Great bit of info Carleton, I 100% agree! I have a friend who shoots a 7D with a 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200f/2.8, and 16-35f/2.8. All "L" glass, with a very great crop sensor body. The quality of his photos do not match mine taken with an iPhone 3G. I shoot my 50D, a very old Tamron 17-50, and the 50 f/1.8 almost 100% of the time. Im happy with most of the images I make. I do not need my friends $5000 in gear. The fact that I can execute what's I see in my head into a photograph is all i care about. *Although some L glass and a 5dmkII wouldn't be too horrible...haha

Anywho, nice bit of info indeed!

.Chris

i had a canon G11, my favorite thing about it was its high resale value.

****ing hated that camera. total bull****. nothing compared to even the most entriest of dslr's.

Charlie, you're scaring me. I have been checking out the G series for a WHILE now. G10/11 was looking to be my choice. Now of course I would still have the 50D with my other lenses, but the G series looked to be pretty awesome for an 'advanced p/s".

What did you not like about it?

Orrrrr....are you one of those Nikon guys? :D

.Chris

the shutter lag is a total random value depending on the complexity of the scene and light conditions. you can't rely on it taking the picture when you want it to take the picture... and at BEST it will still be a quarter-to-half second of waiting before it gets focus.

the built in flash is **** and the external flash makes it as big as an slr.

the autofocus is slow for most things and the manual focus is a joke.

but the big thing was the shutter lag. it was usually anywhere from .75" to 1.5" and that's just an eternity for me, even if i'm shooting a still scene.

take that general slow operation, stacked with the limited usability of its modes(lowlight is crap compared to a 50d with a 1.8 50mm, marginally better than any current gen point and shoot, the macro is nice but only in bright conditions, and the wide angle isn't really that wide), and you get a camera that's great if you don't have high expectations for your photos, and extremely frustrating if you do. even if you're used to a ****ty slr, you'll be used to better pictures than the g11.

i am one of those nikon guys, but you knew that.

and what really hurt is that i sold my D50, which i loved, for the G11 and used a big gift certificate for it, too. the gift certificate could have gotten me a new monitor, which i desperately need and would have improved my photography way more than a compact camera ever could.

i love nice canons, but it wasn't just the controls of the G11 or the 'canon-ness' of it, it was the performance(or lacking performance) of it. i got some great shots out of the camera but i feel like it took them all on its own and i hated it for it.
that and its too big to comfortably fit in a pocket, so at that point why not just take your slr? especially when you consider the price.

i think it's a great camera compared to any other point and shoot, don't get me wrong... but it's absolute **** compared to a comparably priced slr, even from canon.

Thanks for the info man! Like you mentioned at the end, they are rather big. The whole point for me to get a nicer p/s was to reduce me carrying a bulky slr. Guess i'll have to get my hands dirty and go to a shop and try a bunch out!

and yes...i did know you where one of those 'nikon guys'...haha

.Chris

I would consider the Canon S90. A while ago i was comparing the S90 and G11 for the gf. It was one of those gifts that's also kind of a gift to yourself. They have essentially the same sensor, both shoot raw, the S90 is shorter on the long end but is about half as heavy and significantly smaller. For me, if i have to take a point and shoot as opposed to the DSLR i'd at least want one that fits in my pocket. I wound up buying her (me) the S90 in time for winter in the Presidentials and couldn't be happier.

I hear similarly good things about the Panasonic LX-3 but it's like 20-60mm or something shortish like that.

Keep in mind that any point and shoot is going to be inferior (technically speaking) to the vast majority of SLRs. They're just not as quick, not as clean, noisier, and all-around less versatile than an SLR. Their principal virtue is that they can go where SLR's don't, and while that's no small virtue, you just have to be aware of their limitations.

http://i.imgur.com/eNzRV.jpg

honestly i just hate the canon control dial. that ****ing pinwheel ruins me on the whole brand.

D700 with tamron "focus hunter" 70-200:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...3-DSC_8895.jpg

Canon "i'll take the picture eventually" G11:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...ortfb-2855.jpg

not saying i can't do better or worse with either, but in all they each take good pictures, but the g11 sucks to use if you are used to actually operating a camera.

A craftsman never blames his tools.

I never had any shutter lag issues. You probably didn't do something right.

For example, at one of my son's baseball games, I wanted to know what grip he was pitching with...so I used my Canon G10 to find out:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/...77e39abf_b.jpg

(this is a tight crop of a much wider photo. Enlarged to show the pitching grip.)

if you read what i wrote, i was NOT blaming my tools. I was saying i didn't like how they worked. i didn't expect the camera to do all the work for me, and i didn't blame it when i didn't do the work for it; i just hated having to guess at how much i had to anticipate the ****ing shutter lag.

sure, i could turn i.s. off, zoom in, manually focus and blast the iso high so i can use a fast shutter speed, and probably cut the shutter lag down to a predictable quarter of a second or so... but it's not a ****ing shutter and i still hate using it. not to mention i have to go through eight freaking menus to do that, or rely on some ridiculous preset or custom setting to cut down on shutter lag, and it will still be an unpredictable amount.

any shot i missed because i was using the G11 i missed because i wasn't doing it right. i never said anything to the contrary.

that said, any shot i missed with the G11 i missed because the G11 was in my bag, and i got the shot with my ****ing SLR.

the G11 is great if you CAN NOT use an SLR. like, if someone won't let you take their picture with an interchangable lens camera.

doesn't mean i should love my crayola crayons and multi-use printer paper when i'd much prefer to use conte crayons on ****ing strathmore.

a craftsman doesn't blame his tools... he knows them and loves them. he chooses them.


also, your son is a total badass and that's an awesome crop:lol:

:roflmao:

Hey, guys!
I am an amateur photographer, also volunteer for a community newspaper "The Leveller"
Here are some of my works:

Uralsk, West Kazakhstan
http://i.imgur.com/Ctg0q.jpg

Ottawa, Ontario
http://i.imgur.com/t09OU.jpg

Almaty, Kazakhstan
http://i.imgur.com/ibGx2.jpg

Moscow, Russia
http://i.imgur.com/mpN1x.jpg

awesome! love that shot of moscow.