File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
hey /p/
i have the G9
no, im not a fag who uses it to take shitty underexposed, noisy, etc. pictures
besides the small CCD sensor(which, due to the 12mp's, is awful noisy) i quite enjoy the camera

im planning on buying a 430ex and some ebay triggers to work on some strobe action

what does /p/ think?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Congratulations, you're planning on using the G9 for the only thing for which the G9 is really the best camera out there.

Proceed
>> photon
Yea, I bought a G9 for the company I work for too.. Hope its a good camera. I am going to take it around for shoots too.. haha
>> Anonymous
I've been using a G9 with a couple [sometimes just one] of triggered off-camera flashes and it works great in that regard. 100% improvement in the results.
>> Anonymous
/wishes sony would bring out a cybershot with the iISO shoe so he could use his 5600s off camera with a p&s
>> Anonymous
>>172130
lol. you could buy a fucking DSLR and stop spending your money on flashes and triggers with a CCD that suck
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>172385
>lol. you could buy a fucking DSLR and stop spending your money on flashes and triggers with a CCD that suck
The G9's CCD doesn't particularly suck. Especially at ISO100, which is would be possible by chaining wireless flashes to it.

Additionally, the G9 has the ability to flash-sync much, much faster than an SLR, which is nothing to sneeze at. And for the times when you're not using it as a pocket strobe driver, it still makes for a very good pocketable P&S camera.
>> Anonymous
>>172130
Is noise really that much of an issue? I mean, scaling down from the whole 12MP to a much more usable, say, 2MP image, most of the noise should become irrelevant, no?
>> Anonymous
>>172389
>Is noise really that much of an issue?

No, not really. People are spoiled by the clean output modern large sensors can give.

>I mean, scaling down from the whole 12MP to a much more usable, say, 2MP image, most of the noise should become irrelevant, no?
2MP is large for screen display, but it's too small for prints.
>> Anonymous
>>172393
So if you don't print, MP is a non-issue.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>172418

no amount of "resizing" will save a picture with details completely smeared by noise

step zoom and shutter lag = not photographer friendly

random and backup use = a-okay

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot G9Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size7.40 - 44.40 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.00Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2007:08:06 00:19:26Exposure Time1/1250 secF-Numberf/4.0ISO Speed Rating3200Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length21.97 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1600Image Height1200RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeUnknownImage SizeUnknownFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingSuperfineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance2.060 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed320Image Number124-3100
>> Anonymous
>>172418

Much less of one. More megapixels will allow cropping if you need it, and probably the higher resolution will make it look a bit sharper even resized, but I'm not going to bother to test it.

Don't worry about it. If the camera has six megapixels or more, it's good for almost everything without cropping.

>>172426
I actually like stepped zooms. The range of a zoom, but it'll stay there instead of moving around like a continuous zoom. Find a few steps you like, learn how to get it there, and it's like working with a Tri-Elmar (which technically is a stepped zoom anyway).
>> Anonymous
>>172426
Oh, and most modern, high-end compacts don't have shutter lag if they're manually focused.
>> Anonymous
yeah, manual focusing a point and shoot sounds like a real winner
>> Anonymous
>>172449
Magnified focusing spot + large depth of field = real winner indeed.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>172450
So you've never actually tried it, then?

On every P&S I've used, it suuuuuucks. The magnified view doesn't help that much since digital sensors are already a bit fuzzy at the pixel-peeping level, so it's difficult to tell if it's focused. Also, since you're focusing with a couple of buttons rather than with a mechanically-linked ring, it's sloooow.

It might not be bad with something like the Ricoh where you can tell it to stick at hyperfocal distance, but it sucks with every other P&S I've used.
>> Anonymous
>>172459So you've never actually tried it, then?

sounds more like a g9fag
>> Anonymous
>>172459
Actually you use the same ring you'd use for adjusting aperture, exposure and shutter speed.
>> Anonymous
>>172459
I've always wondered why you can't manually focus (via ring) on a point and shoot. Digitally manually focusing sucks balls and basically you just have to know how far away your subject is in feet or inches.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>172685
It adds size and a good deal of mechanical complexity to the camera with no benefit for 99% of the people buying it.
>> Anonymous
>>172679
...and by ring I mean wheel. Should not post while barely awake