Happy Mother's Day! Happy Father's Day! Happy Graduation! Photo.net has great photography gift ideas for the Mom, Dad, or Grad in your life. Shop for camera bags, lenses, DSLRs, and more...
Clubs, bars, and small venues are the places where most concert and live music photographers get their start, the reason being that there are fewer restrictions since the performers are less likely to...
Canon has had a lot of success with their "G" digital camera line. The G1 and
G2 appealed to both snapshot shooters who just wanted good photos without having
to think about "photography," and serious photographers who like to have control
over every part of the photographic process but didn't want the bulk of a digital
SLR. The cameras even found their way into some pro editorial shooter's bags as a
backup camera to their big Canons or Nikons. And for many others, the "G" series
was a good way to dip a toe into the digital waters, without having to spend the
money that moving to a digital SLR system requires.
The G3 is obviously the third generate of this camera. As with the G2, Canon
made some minor (major?) changes and improvements.
A few of this camera's main features (according to Canon):
4 mega pixel CCD
35-140mm (35mm equiv.) f/2-3 lens
Flexible AF/AE points
Intelligent Orientation sensor for proper image orientation
Full range of manual controls
Storage
Canon has decided to continue using the
Compact Flash/Microdrive storage medium for it's pro and prosumer cameras. I am a
big supporter of this decision. Per megabyte, CF/MD are usually the best value in
storage media. Plus, with the new 2 and 4GB CF cards coming out, it is possible
to store a whole trip's worth of photos on one card, even if you are a voracious
shooter. Compact flash and microdrives seem to work equally well in the G3,
though microdrives do seem to eat up the battery a bit faster. Battery life is
far more dependent on things like flash and LCD usage. The JPEG and Canon's RAW
formats are your only file type choices. But with more and more Photoshop
plug-ins and 3rd part Raw conversion software programs coming out, there really
is no reason to miss having a TIFF option.
Power
Included with the G3 is Canon's standard BP-511 1100mAh Li-on
battery. Though I haven't done any specific tests, it easily lasts through a day
of heavy shooting. It will last a couple hundred shots longer if you use the
viewfinder instead of the LCD for shooting. It's the same battery that has
powered the G series, the D30/60, some of Canon's small DV camcorders, and the
new 10D. Good move on Canon's part. Many photographers are likely to have more
than one of those cameras, and it's nice to be able to carry just one charger for
all your batteries. Not to mention that you can use the same batteries in more
than one camera. And as an added bonus, there are plenty of generic BP-511
batteries out there for as low as $10-15. Keep in mind though; Canon is likely to
void your warranty if it finds that a non-canon battery caused any problems.
However, I have used them in various Canon cameras, and they seem to work fine.
They don't seem to have as long of a working life; I've had generic batteries die
after less than 75 charges.
Lens, autofocus, and exposure
The lens is optically equal to that on the G2 (as far as I can tell). This is
a good thing in my mind because I have always been pleased with the G2's lens.
It's nice and sharp and seems to have good color saturation. No, you aren't going
to get any nice blurry backgrounds for your portrait shots. But that has more to
do with that fact that the lens is actually a 7.2mm-28.8mm lens and depth of
field has nothing to do with format size -- a fact of life when dealing with
digital cameras with built in lenses. Ah the joys of the properties of
optics.
One big change is in the way the wide and telephoto lenses attach to the
camera. Instead of an extender tube adapter that screwes onto the ring
surrounding the lens, the G3 has a bayonet system. This makes for quicker
changeovers. But I don't see the advantage because I just tend to leave the G2's
adapter on my camera all the time. The end of the adapter is sized so that it fit
the G2's lens cap (49mm), so it's a no-brainer to leave it on all the time. The
threaded end of the G3's adapter (58mm) is much larger than the lens cap (52mm),
so I have to take the adapter off every time I want to use the accessory lenses.
The advantage to this is that Canon's wide lens now is a true 24mm (35mm equiv.)
instead of the 28mm it had always been. I don't know about you, but I've never
thought of 28mm as being particularly wide. Wide for me STARTS at 24mm.
As with the G2, Lensmate does make nice metal versions of the Canon
bayonet adapter. Interestingly enough, they make them in 52mm and 58mm sizes. The
thinking is that the 52mm version will let you use cheaper filters, third party
accessory lenses, and the standard lens cap. And the 58mm version will let you
have a metal version of the Canon adapter (which is plastic).
I am pleased with both the wide and tele lenses, though I have to admit I
haven't used them very much. The 24mm of the wide lens is great, but in order to
achieve a FOV that wide, Canon had to make the lens huge. It unbalances the
camera and is a little disconcerting to have shoved in your subject's faces.
The G3 also offers a 3.6x digital zoom ("14x combined zoom!" The Canon press
people shout). But, as usual, I suggest you turn off this feature. Digital zooms
are crappy at best and horrible at worst. Besides, if it's really that important
to you, you can do the exact same thing with Photoshop, and with better
quality.
The G3's AF is fine for all general purposes. I tend to be a little annoyed at
fixed lens camera's AF speed because I'm so used to the AF speed of my dSLRs.
But, to be fair, the AF speed of the G3 is above average. You can move the focal
point all around the picture area which means a fairly limitless choice of AF
points. I have no idea how this is any more useful than having, say, nine points
spread across the frame. But some might find it to be a great advantage. One area
where it might make a difference is that you could tie metering to the AF point,
and meter off something particular in the scene. If you were doing tripod work,
this might let you do a psuedo "zone system."
One area where I am pretty annoyed with the G3's AF is Macro focus.
The "G" series macro is usually very easy to activate: just press the little
button on the back with the flower icon, and focus. I have no idea why it gave me
such trouble. My G2 works in macro mode just fine. But often with the G3, I have
a really hard time getting the camera to focus. Once it did lock focus and the
photos were quite sharp, but I was still often annoyed because of this
problem.
As with the G2, I find the manual focus option of the G3 to be mostly useless.
I just can't get the hang of squinting to see a tiny grainy enlarged area of the
image on the LCD while I struggle to focus it. I'm glad that they thought to
offer it, but I'll hardly ever use it. Focus bracketing is another function I
never made much use of. But I think if I were doing macro tripod work, I might
use it more frequently. To my mind, a one-millimeter difference in focal distance
can change the whole composition of a macro photo.
The G3 has 8 exposure modes (nine if you count the movie mode):
Auto: Camera does absolutely everything, including decide when to use the
flash. This is the utmost idiot-proof camera setting. I almost never use it.
"P" Program: Camera chooses the shutter and f-stop, you get to set the flash,
ISO, white balance, and any custom function you'd like. I frequently use this
setting if I'm just shooting snapshots. The G3 is pretty good about getting its
exposures right on the first try. So I generally found that you didn't have to
worry too much under average snapshot conditions. This is also the setting I use
if I'm handing the camera to someone else to use.
"Tv" (Shutter Priority): the same as Program, except that you choose the
shutter speed and the camera chooses the aperture. Very useful for shooting fast
action, or for intentionally creating motion blur.
"Av" (Aperture Priority): the opposite of "Tv" mode, you pick the f-stop and
the camera picks the shutter speed. I never use this setting on the G3, or on any
non-SLR digital camera. Its main use is to create or reduce depth of field, to
make a background blurry for a portrait, for example. But with the HUGE depth of
field that fixed lens digital cameras have, you can't really do it very well, and
the G3 is no different in this regard.
Manual: Just like it says, you've got control over everything. I absolutely
require this in any camera, digital or otherwise, above a simple point and shoot.
The G3's meter is very good, no doubt, but there will always be situations where
you can't get it to do what you want. Hence the need for a manual setting.
Custom 1 ∓ 2: Nice if you have more than one person who regularly uses
the camera, or if you frequently shoot in situations that require completely
different shooting setups. The Custom exposure settings let you change between
two different set of exposure, WB, etc modes with the twist of a dial. If you
don't need it, this will be just one of those extra useless functions that you
never use. But if you have a use for it, this could be a lifesaver.
And finally the four different Scene modes:
"Portrait" tries to create a small depth of field, useless in my mind (see
"Av" above).
"Landscape" which tries to create a large depth of field, you might as well
use it if the camera's meter gives you the exposure you like. Though I suggest
using a tripod as this will result in a slow shutter speed.
"Night Portrait" uses a long shutter speed to properly expose night scenes,
but also fires the flash right as the shutter closes to light the foreground. It
is very good for something like, taking a night portrait in front of the Eiffel
Tower. I actually use this setting a lot. A Tripod is a must, unless you are
trying for a streaky crazy exposure, which can actually look pretty cool.
The G3 does have a movie mode, and I'll just mention it enough to say that it
works as well as you would expect it to. You can record a movie for as long as
you have space on your memory card to do so. The quality isn't even close to mini
DV (or even VHS), but I've used it to make funny little clips for friends and
posted them on the web. Don't look for this to replace even the cheapest
camcorder though.
The G3's white balance doesn't need much said about it. To my eye, it works
very well, as well as any camera in its class and better than quite a few. It has
nine different settings (Auto, Daylight, Cloudy, Tungsten, Fluorescent 1,
Florescent 2, Electronic flash, and two different Custom settings). The two
different custom settings are probably the coolest WB feature that the G3 has.
It's something that must seem heaven sent for people who have to regularly shoot
in various places that require a custom white balance reading/setting.
The G3 has a couple other "exposure modifiers" as well. The
obligatory exposure and flash compensation are there. As well as "Vivid" and
"Neutral" settings, which give shots the look of a very saturated film like
Velvia and a less saturated film like Astia respectively. "Low Sharpening" mode
can be great for those who must have control over every aspect of their image in
post processing. "Sepia" and "Black and White" are useless. Sure they look fine,
but you can do both so much better in Photoshop. Then again, I must admit to
using the B∓W mode on occasion. Sometimes it's just nice to shoot in
B∓W. In addition, you can pick three different settings of Contrast,
Sharpness, and Saturation.
Appearance and Handling
While it's not radically different from the G2, the G3 has some noticeable
differences in its body shape and button layout. Most all of which I feel are
improvements.
The first thing you will notice when you pick up the G3 is that the hand grip
on the front of the camera feels much bigger and more solid. This is only
partially true. More accurately, Canon kept the size of the grip roughly the
same, but made the rest of the camera body slimmer. So the grip has more to hold
on to. The grip also gets an index finger dial that controls things like
selecting shutter speeds and apertures in any of the shooting modes that give you
that option. This is the best selection control that I have yet seen on a
prosumer digital camera. It's far better than most every other camera's
(including the G2) shutter choice method of using buttons on the back of the
camera. It's faster and easier than pervious methods, and is a good step towards
making the G3 feel more like the EOS SLR line.
A few of the buttons have been moved around (for example, the Manual
Focus button is by the eyepiece instead of on the side by the strap lug), but
other than that, the back of the camera looks much the same as the G2. There are
a couple important differences though. One is that access to the WB and exposure
compensation functions have been moved to the "up" and "down" of the direction
pad. This is much better than having to hit the "function" button a couple of
times to get to them, as you did on the G2, especially the WB function, which is
one that I use often when shooting.
Speaking of the "function" button, instead of having to hit it over and over
again to get to each of it's "functions," you now just have to hit it once and
then use the direction pad to access the ISO speed, visual effects, bracketing,
flash exposure compensation, and file type (and JPEG quality) settings. I am
especially pleased that the ISO speed setting was put here instead of being stuck
way down in the shooting menu. I switch ISO all the time, so it's nice to be able
to do it easily. Speaking of that, I found myself wishing that the G3 had an 800
ISO option. The noise level at 400 ISO isn't so bad as to make the thought of 800
out of the question. The ISO 400 setting is great, but for low light work, 800
with the f/2.0 lens would have really been great.
Like the back of the camera, the top plate of the G3 looks much like
the G2's. The one big difference is that the on/off switch has been redesigned.
I'm not sure how much I like it, as it seems too easy to accidentally turn it on.
I prefer the G2's switch where you had to physically click-click the switch to
turn it on or switch to playback. However, the new switch allows the G3 to be
switched back to shooting mode from playback mode just by touching the shutter
button. I found this to be a great function; I was often annoyed by the time I
had to wait with the G2 if I was reviewing images and suddenly saw a scene I
wanted to photograph.
The one other change that I didn't like is the removal of the safety latch on
the battery compartment. Instead of having to hold the latch and also pull the
door over as on the G2, you now just have to slide the door over. It seems like
it would pop open too easily, but it really didn't happen often at all. So I
guess I'm just paranoid. Aside from all this, the G3 just seems to respond faster
to pressing the "function", "menu", "display", etc buttons. On the G2, I always
feel like there was a delay between pressing the buttons and when they would take
effect. With the G3, this is no longer a problem.
Conclusion
Things I liked:
Bigger handgrip
Shutter/aperture finger dial
Easier ISO access
Easier White Balance access
Fast switching between playback and shooting modes
Continues the overall high quality of the "G" line
Things I didn't like:
Giant size of Wide-Angle accessory lens
Regular lens cap won't fit on lens adapter
Problems with Macro focus
No increase in Mpix from G2
All in all I really like the G3. It's a great camera in many ways, definitely
at the top of its class. Would I suggest looking at one if I was advising someone
on a digital camera purchase? Yes I would. Would I suggest that someone upgrade
from the G2 to the G3? Probably not. There just isn't enough difference between
the two, and the G2 is a fine camera in its own right. I would say wait and see
what the G4 has to offer, or make the jump to a dSLR. But what do I know? I'm
just one guy.
Portfolio
[Editor's Note: The huge versions are all 2272 x 1704 pixels and are direct
from the camera; no modifications whatsoever. The medium versions -- available by
clicking on the thumbnails -- were processed with Photoshop 7: reduced in size
from the huge versions, 50% Unsharp masked, and then resaved.]
I'm the digital editor here on photo.net. Home is the Northwest corner of the
USA (Washington state currently). I'm 27 and make my living as a
photographer/filmer for the BMX industry. I have been shooting photos for close
to 15 years now and have been shooting 98% digitally for over two years. I
currently shoot with various Canon digital cameras, a Leica IIIf, and a Barbie
Polaroid iZone camera. The best photographic advice anyone ever gave me was
"Remember son, the Seattle Mariners rule and the New York Yankees are the devil.
And you know how much we hate the devil. The Cubbies just need a little
love."
Good job on the review. A point of clarification though. The lens of the G3 vs G2. The G3 is a 4X optical zoom where as the G2 is a 3X optical zoom. The wide open apeture is f3 at the long end of the G3 and f2.5 at the long end of the G2. I have the G2 and the 10D slr and get great shots with both. Tried the G3, seemed more responsive (faster) than my G2 but not significantly so. See this DP Review link for more on the lens differences of G2 vs. G3.http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong3/
Thanks again.
Obviously the light has a lot to do with it, but the range of tones in the last two b/w pictures is beautiful. Very competitive with the best of what film has to offer - at least in 35mm - to my eye.
I found this review helpful in addition to the www.dpreview.com because it makes me feel that the reviewer is roughly in the same position I am trying out a new camera.
The pace with which new digicams are introduced is frightening. Canon has already introduced the G5 and my camera dealer expects to have them to sell next week. I reckon the G3 was the current model for less than a year. I think Canon should have kept the G2 as the current model until it was able to have more of an advance like the 5MP G5. With the S50 (which I own and love) out, there really is no reason for a 4MP camera of the size of the G3.
I am all over very pleased with the G3 performance - i`m one of those who bought their first digicam (i am an EOS user) The digital EOS bodies are prohibitive in price back here(i`m not a pro).
The overall functions of the G3 are wonderfull and very easy to use i found very familiar operation (very EOS-like).
But the image quality was a big negative surprise for me - especially the chromatic aberration (or color fringing) which i don`t know if it`s lens produced or CCD inherent - that little magenta aureola which encircles subjects photographed against light (my favourite shooting method outdoors), which is visible in your published bird photo (to a minor extent) - that kind of design mistake is unacceptable in even the cheapest film cameras!
Another surprise was the shutter lag which is very long compared to my 6 year old EOS 50E or even 20 year old AV-1!
However besides this i have no other "minuses" to pinpoint.
When i was buying a digicam a month ago it seemed the best solution for the money i had (cca 850 EUR from where i am) - and i`m still positive about my decision however i didn`t tried the camera in my typical shooting conditions - do that if you are buying your first digicam (at least you won`t be surprised as i was).
So the G3 left me with mixed feelings.
I have 2 more questions:
- what is the CCD color capture mode (speaking of RAW files here) 8 bit or 12 bit?
- how do i make a bigger enlargment then 15x20cm since my local lab uses Fuji Frontiers which accepts only 300 dpi files at the final enlargment - the camera limit resolution seems like said above - do i have to resize the image in PS - or is there any other solution?
Am I the only one who still likes to shoot by composing through the viewfinder? The G3 has a major design flaw in this regard - the viewfinder is significantly obstructed by the lens! I've read the reviews, and nobody either mentions this at all or otherwise only mentions it in passing like it is no big deal. Not so with me, anyway - as soon as I looked through the viewfinder I knew this model was not for me. I returned the model and decided to purchase the G2 instead.
The G3 saves 12 bits per channel for the raw format, good to use if you know you are going to want to squeeze out all the dynamic range you can get from the camera.
The lens obstructs the viewfinder field and it gets worse when you put on the lensmate adapters for filters etc, especially the 58 mm one. It also obscures the built-in flash rather badly. www.lensmateonline.com tells you how bad it is depending on what focal length you are using of the zoom lens (it is ok for tele but horrible for wide-angle). I use the adapters myself and they are great, but I find myself using the LCD screen most of the time. That is what you need to do to get accurate framing anyway...
Hmm, thank you for clearing that Stefan - but where did u find out that is 12 bit?
And what should i then do, since the bundled software can convert only to 8 or 16 bit (where does the info for a 16 bit pic come from and why there is no 12 bit save/convert setting?) - at 8 bit the colors are far from remarkable, and i didn`t see much difference in saving at 16 bit - but didn`t make that many pics either.
Yes the lens obstruction is an issue if you compose through the viewfinder (which only covers about 83% of the CCD coverage i think) - but i didn`t buy a digital camera for composing through the vievfinder!
Reading this review, did I not see any comments about the LCD screen, besides the obligatory "It drains the battery faster".
One of the *biggest* advantages of the "G" series is the flip-out, rotary LCD screen. Using the viewfinder may be fine for some, but for others the ability to hold the camera 3 feet over your head and still be able to perfectly compose the shot is awe inspiring!
Is there any feedback regarding this cameras ability to use hotshoe speedlight flashes? This is another major feature of this camera
Thanks for the review. I considered buying this camera during the Spring of 2003. I had been wanting a "rangefinder"-like digital camera to play the same role that my Polaroid cameras always played (SX-70, Spectra 2000), sort of as fun snapshooting supplement to my SLR system. However, I had the use of a Canon S30, S40 and S45 for a short while, with the S45 being virtually a G3 in sheep's clothing, and when I look at the photos posted as part of the review, I see exactly the same, vaguely-definable creamy softness that I saw in pictures I took with the S45. I've seen examples of the same thing made from other makes of 4 megapixel cameras. It's like the picture is very smooth, ie. no grain, but this smoothness is almost an illusion. The resolution just isn't there to take advantage of the lack of grain. I guess smoothness without detail is how I would describe what I see. It will be interesting to see if the G3's successor, the recently-announced G5, will be able to overcome this with its 5 megapixels. So far, I've found that on my computer monitor at least, 2400dpi flatbed scans of my 35mm negatives look much more snappy than the many pics I took with the S45, and the S45 pics look very much like the pics in this review. A few other 4 megapixel cameras I've looked attempt to overcome the resolution limitation by producing punchier colours than the Canons, but the result is a vaguely artificial look instead of the latter's vaguely smooth look. Given that, the quality of the pictures vs the price of these cameras just isn't good enough yet. For people accustomed to good lenses on 35mm SLRs, I suspect 5 megapixels may not be enough either, at least not when coming from the APS-sized CCDs. I do like the look and design of the G3 camera itself though. It reminds me of the compact rangefinders of the 1970s, expect that it is perhaps larger overall. It's larger when seen in person compared to the impression you get from pictures of it.
Re. the 8/12/16 bit issue - I'm not sure what file formats are able to specify 12 bits, and then what software would be able to use it without converting to 16 bits first anyway... I suppose the 4 bits are just filled in with zeros in the conversion to 16 bit tiffs. How did you compare them? I am limited hardware-wise, but the monitors I have access to are all limited to 8 bit channel depths. The advantage for me is to be able to stretch a colormap without too large increments in the final 8-bit/channel map.
Re. the flash - the Speedlite 420 I have works really well with the G3, and I really like the colors I get out of that combination when I bounce off of white walls and ceilings.
I just purchased a G3, last week. I already had a Canon A40, and was very happy with it: easy menus, good quality pictures (it was only 2Mpix), although a bit too big to be in a pocket.
I find the same characteristics in the G3, as in 1/2 hour I was able to do what I previously did with the A40. Everything from then is new features and good features: very good lens (f2-f3!); I love the swinging screen; good flash possibilities; low consumption of the battery; fast response (compared to the A40).
Drawbacks: I don't like the lens cover, it easily falls; only a 32Mb card; (only) 4Mpix.
How is the "shutter lag" of the G3 compared to Powershot point & shoots, and for that matter, to faster digicams such as the 10D? The "digital delay" so many cameras exhibit can really ruin otherwise terrific images.
Just like to comment on the good review.
Regarding the flash: I have just purchased a 220 speedlight & it seems to well suited to the G3. Less redeye, the usual shadow from the bottom right of the frame is eliminated and the AF focus assist is augmented by the one on board the flash. I've tried the larger 550 speedlight from my eos but its much too big & bulky.
I haven't noticed the halo (chromatic aberration) effect much but I don't often shoot at max. aperture.
Regarding the viewfinder: One of the reasons I bought the G3 was that it had an optical viewfinder (and AF assist& full manual control & raw & etc.), not because I anticipated using it much but in low light or for conserving batteries it is indispensible.
On my A70, which may have similar software, you can shift to a central focus spot, partly hold down the shutter button to get focus, and then press the manual focus button to lock the focus.
Read the manual carefully to see if this option is available for the G3.
This is not manual focus but focus lock! Yes the G3 has it.
By the way i just found out that neatimage makes miracles with noisy images - so the 400 ISO setting on the G3 isn`t an issue any more (at least for me).
Hey what size of prints did u folks make out of a G3?
A nice review, but I disagree with the statements regarding portrait photography and the G3. I have gotten very decent portrait photos from my G3, thanks to the built in neutral-density filter, which the review does not mention. The G3's ND filter can be turned on or off and uses an actual filter within the camera body, not a software algorithm. This allows me to zoom in and open up the aperture on a sunny day and get a well-exposed shot with nice softening in the background. Furthermore, the G3 optics exhibit excellent bokeh (rendering of out-of-focus elements). So, with the proper settings, this camera can render very nice portraits.
I'm very fond of my G3 - although a little annoyed that I bought it literally only a fortnight before the G5 was announced - thus far, but I would point out that the bundled 32 MB card is all but worthless, especially shooting RAW. You'll probably want to factor in purchasing a 128 MB card at a minimum; I picked up a 512 MB card, which is good for 120-odd RAW images.
The G3 came out in the U.S. last Fall. At the time I was trying to decide between purchasing it for $100.00 more or the older G2. I went with the G2 because I reasoned that the G3 was just an interim model until Canon got the 5 megapixel G camera out the next summer...looks like the G5 is that camera. Am I supposed to believe that Canon did not already know they would have a 5 MP camera out a few months later?
No doubt the G3 is a good camera, but it's amazing to me that a major camera company would so blatantly market such an obvious example of "Planned Obsolescence". As always, "Caveat Emptor".
I recently received a G3 as a gift. I've only used it for about 3 days now, but I have some comments to make regarding some of the things other people have said about it. I find it to be somewhat small. I compared it to my Nikon SP and it's about a half-inch narrower and about a quarter-inch shorter. However, it's much lighter! I have large hands and it's about the smallest of the digital cameras I can hold with some comfort. Most are much too small for me.
Also, some people made comments about being able to see the lens in the optical viewfinder. This is common to older rangefinder cameras where the lenses were fairly large, especially the interchangeable cameras. It doesn't bother me any. The only things Canon could do would be to make the camera larger or the lens smaller.
Great review overall. Can the administrator please add a link to the photo.net digital reviews page and pull down menus so others can access the review more easily (I just happened to stumble onto it.)? If this has already been done, forgive my ignorance.
"Depth of field has nothing to do with format size." Actually, given the same angle of view, depth of field has everything to do with format size. Shorter lenses have more depth of field, longer lenses have less. It takes longer lenses to produce the same angle of view on larger formats. The very short lenses used on small-chip digital cameras produce endless depth of field, even when you don´t want it. It would take an extreme telephoto, one that could not be considered a "portrait lens," to produce any kind of blurred bokeh behind your subject.
Don, thanks for your comment. From a technical perspective I agree that format size has a direct influence on depth of field. However, your statement that "It would take an extreme telephoto, one that could not be considered a "portrait lens," to produce any kind of blurred bokeh behind your subject" simply does not gel with my experience with this camera.
For a better example than the one I posted above, please take a look at this image taken with my G3 at full telephoto and f4 (1200x1600, 350kB). Other than a little bit of cropping, no image manipulation has been done. I think the blurring of the background, which is only at a medium distance, is well achieved. I also think the bokeh that is displayed is quite good, at least from my understanding of the term derived from Ken Rockwell's explanation.
The G5 has just come out in Canada and I've had mine for 7 days. Unsuprisingly I haven't been able to take better portraits than my 100mm/f2.0 and Elan IIe loaded with Fuji NPH 400 film. But this is my first digital camera so I suspect it's me not the camera.
re the response time from press of button to shutter release :
It's practically instantanious when you pre-focus.
Hold down the button half way, let it focus, then push down all the way and it's a part of a second.
I notice that a lot of reviews about the G3 camera complain about a loose lens cap. My opinion is that if the cap would be tighter, and one would start the camera with the cap on, the camera could be damaged by pushing the lens against the cap. As it is, the lens can push the cap off when left on by mistake, and no damage is done.I wonder if this was designed by Canon this way ??
Thanks for the review, it removed some persistent misgivings I had about having spent the extra bucks to get the G3 over the G2. I think better ergonomics and the 4x zoom justify it.
My main concern with the G3 is regarding the autofocus in low light. My G3 finds it very difficult to focus in low indoor lighting, even with the AF beam turned on. Is this a problem with all G3s, or did I get a lemon? Thanks!
I've thought long and hard about the G3 and it seems like it is an ideal camera for so many purposes, including learning about photography. I have spent time getting well acquainted with the camera and have found it to be a very capable photographic tool. Despite its flaws and other hangups, I think the G3 will become a classic much like some of those ancient Canonet Rangefinders cameras are today.
One idea I found in dealing with the digital lag problem aside from holding the shutter button half way is to use the custom function mode. You can set a custom function mode where the f-stop and shooting mode are set to aperture priority. You have to set the focus to a manual hyperfocal point. Then with this, you can take a picture freely and the camera only has to do work to calculate shutter speed, which is fast. I've found this to be a good way to photograph fast moving things like dogs, children, and hummingbirds. The depth of field you set with using the custom function should cover a good range. I got this idea from an article I read by Marc Jutras on his site:
Like many I had some problems with the lens cap falling off. This was easily fixed with a piece of foam poster-mounting tape. Just cut a little pice of it and peel off the backing from one side and stick it to the inside rim of the lens cap. Problem solved.
...great review and good follow up comments....I'm fairly new to digital and I have only used about half of the G3 features. I needed to get a digital with flash capabilities.....I used a Fuji 4700.... a great little camera ...but not inside or in a dark room.....now for the NY Yankee comment.......ain't it just a pity that the rest of the country gets to hate those devilish Yankees each year as they watch the playoffs and series....at least you get to watch them at home ....while us Yankee fans have to suffer through the cold and crowds at the House that Ruth Built each Fall!!!!!!
I recently replaced my G2 with a G3. I haven't seen these G3 improvements over the G2 mentioned here.
- Use of the Neutral Density filter for flash fill in bright sunlight. Since you're limited to a max shutter speed of 1/250 (and the smallest lens opening is f8), you might need the ND filter for proper exposure. Also good for flash shots at very close distances.
- 1/1250 shutter speed available with all lens settings vs 1/500 on the G2.
- Wireless remote can be set for no delay. Minimum two-second delay on G2.
- Manual focus forced to infinity works fine. On G2 it didn't give as
sharp pix as using autofocus on a distant object. This may be a sample-to-sample issue, but there were several G2 users on the dpreview.com forum who felt the same about the G2.
Very good review. My first digital camera is this Canon G3. Another uncommented feature is the possibility to get very nice shots just only using the moonlight in manual mode. The camera works very fine at 15 sec of exposure and 400 ASA mode. For astrophotography, it is possible to get very nice pictures of constellations and the Milky Way.As an example is shown: the southern sky, with the sillouette of dome telescopes at La Silla Observatory (Chile). The only caveat is the commatic shape of the stars close to the upper t corners.
Also, it is very funny the intervalometer mode, because it is possible to do a movie of cloud developments, among other many things.
I see a lot of people wondering what CF card to get for this camera. Basically the answer is the fastest you can afford.
I have several CF card so I will give you a rough estimate of the performance difference on my G3 w/firmware 1.0.2.0
These test are for the Superfine Large JPEG setting:
HP F1230-80001 (SanDisk OEM SDCFB-4 c97) 10 blinks of the green LED to save.
Nikon EC-8CF (SanDisk OEM SDCFB-8 c98) 10 blinks of the green LED to save.
SanDisk SDCFB-64 c99 10 blinks of the green LED to save.
Canon FC-32M (SanDisk OEM SDCFB-32 c02) 5 blinks of the green LED to save.
And now for the CF that everyone has been drooling over:
SanDisk SDCFX-1024-786 (Extreme BB0308WI) 2 blinks of the LED to save.
The Extreme can save a RAW file in 5 blinks of the green LED.
The main reason for this performance difference is that CF cards have the controller on the card instead of in the camera. So as storage technology improves your camera will not be left in the dust. A problem for non-CF card based cameras; since the controller for other media is built into the camera, making new technology unattainable after the camera is built.
Some tests of continous mode with the SanDisk Extreme before buffer ran out show:
11 frames of Superfine Large JPEG no flash normal speed (7 seconds)
10 frames of Superfine Large JPEG no flash high speed (5 seconds)
14 frames of Superfine Large JPEG with flash normal speed (19 seconds)
Great review and terrific comments. Overlooked however, is one of the greatest teaching tools in photography. When you switch to the B&W mode, the LCD viewfinder shows you how things will look in B&W. This is a concept that can take some photographers a long time to learn and this great little camera does it in an instant.
I own this camera and I love it. However, it has some weaknesses that can be really annoying. The biggest ones (in order of annoyance) are:
- Shutter lag (I have missed a lot of keepers because of it);
- Poor autofocus in low light (even the expensive ST-E2 transmitter doesn't help. Same goes for the 420EX & 550 EX flashes, which is sad);
- Fully manual flash output in "M" mode instead of E-TTL or, even better, a choice between either (that really gets in the way of creative wireless multi-flash photography: you can't set a wireless ratio with the ST-E2 in "M" mode);
- Chromatic aberration (purple fringing) when shooting wide open;
- Lens cap comes off too easily;
- The camera can be started with the slightest touch, which means that, if it starts in shooting mode, the lens begins to come out, and that gets annoying at times, especially if it happens when loading the G3 into a tight pocket or camera bag;
- High noise at ISO 400 (I guess it's universal with digicams);
- Barrel distortion at the wide angle setting (again, I guess it's very common, and I shouldn't really complain about this one).
Other than what is mentioned above, it is an excellent camera capable of cranking out very high-quality 8x10s of any subject matter, even highly detailed landscapes, especially at lower ISO settings. It's got a very sharp lens and is light enough to carry around. Plus, it's so loaded with advanced features, it can be used professionally (no kidding). In many ways, it's more advanced than the Digital Rebel. I'll tell you even more: I am going to hold on to it till it dies. 'nuff said.
I wouldn't even compare it with the digital rebel. A whole different sensor, which is closer to 35mm and the noise levels are uncomparable. Shooting at night / low light situations is VASTLY SUPERIOR with the rebel.
No reason to compare a prosumer digicam, with an entry level DSLR
Some suggestions to improve some of the common gripes on the G3, am not sure to what extent you will be satisfied with them.
Shutter/focus lag: As mentioned above, configuring C1 and C2 in the 'snap' mode (MF at hyperfocal, choose your aperture) for outdoor and indoor (+/- flash) gets rid of the autofocus delay. I dont think the intrinsic shutter lag (eg, shown by the A80) is that long on the G3.
Lens cap falling off: I think it was designed so that the lens will not hit the cap and injure itself ;) if the camera is turned on with the cap on. I currently have a lensmate 52mm adapter with a UV filter which I leave on all the time. So no more lens caps to worry about. Note, this blocks the internal flash quite noticeably.
For me, unlike for the strange man :) above, the IR focus-assist on the 420EX has improved the AF at low light, though not dramatically. But I have not done any objective tests with and without it. Surprisingly, the Canons are thought to be among the best performers in low-light AF, according to reviews on the web.
With closed apertures at ISO 50 and using the timer/remote, the night shots come out very well, with practically no noise. The longest exposure it can do is 15 sec though. True, the G3 does not give the SLR responses of the Digital Rebel, but I do think it offers much more manual control over combinations that the Rebel. The EOS10D might be well worth the extra money.
Manoj, I'm afraid you are mistaken. The IR assist from the 420ex is not used by the G3. I believe this is because the G3 has insufficient IR sensing capability. This is a frequent complaint about an otherwise great accessory for the G3.
Thank you, Jim, you are absolutely correct. Now that I have played with it more, I realize I was mistaken, I do NOT see any improvement in the AF with the Speedlite. Any suggestions are to how to improve the low light AF will be greatly appreciated.
