Canon G10

[divemaster08]

I just bought a new digital camera and was wondering if I made the right pick. Guess I should have posted before I bought. It is a Canon G10. Any information/opinions are welcome. Thanks

[Dusty2]

Good choice, It is one of the top rated cameras in it's class and will give you lots of room to grow. Congrats

[dphershman]

I just bought a new digital camera and was wondering if I made the right pick. Guess I should have posted before I bought. It is a Canon G10. Any information/opinions are welcome. Thanks

Good choice!

While the G10 is a 'point and shoot' its a top of the line model, so it has a dedicated hot shoe. This feature is important as it allows you to connect a strobe directly to the camera's exposure system. No messing around with fibre optic/slave attachments! The camera's ttl system will work to set the exposure directly on what the camera's meter says is necessary.

My suggestion for a housing for this is the Ikelite version for this model. It has the neccesary circuitry needed to utilize the hot shoe attachment. Cheaper housings (including Canon's own model) don't.

[camerone]

Good choice. We picked up one to replace an older Canon P&S camera. It's a lot easier to deal with underwater than our 5D with big lenses (and most UW housings can't fit the good L-series glass anyway.)

It's inexpensive, top rated, takes great shots, is easy to handle, has lots of manual controls to override the defaults, and, most importantly, can shoot raw images, so that you can actually edit them after the fact without sacrificing quality. I'm convinced this is one of the best bargains in UW camera gear out there right now - couple it with the Canon case and you're not in the hole for very much, but you can definitely get a lot out of it.

We're going to see how well the lithium battery holds up in Antarctica next month, and I'm intending on using it to get some quick UW videos since I haven't finished my HD video housing yet, and won't get it done in time for the trip...

-C

[divemaster08]

Thanks for the info and keep the tips coming. Hopefully it arrives today.

[dphershman]

, and, most importantly, can shoot raw images, so that you can actually edit them after the fact without sacrificing quality.

At the risk of starting yet another 'jpeg vs raw' flame I'd like to suggest that you start off just shooting in jpeg format, then experiment with RAW conversions later on as your experience with the camera increases. I know many fine photographers with very nice equipment who only shoot in jpeg. I tend to shoot RAW when I have time to tinker or a need for the best quality, and jpeg when I want a fast turnover.

the choice of using RAW or JPEG boils down to whether you want the camera to do the image processing or whether you want to do it yourself. An argument can be made that the best results are obtained through RAW conversion, if you shoot in jpeg you're letting the camera do that step for you. But modern cameras these days are very good at making jpegs. Most people will look at the quality of their jpegs today and say 'why bother with RAW?" Arguing with these people that "you're making an 8-bit file out of a 14bit file and throwing away most of the image!" doesn't seem to make a difference for them, they're perfectly happy with their pictures the way they are, and which can be uploaded directly without any further tinkering.

There is a bit of a learning curve with doing RAW conversions as it requires a special set of software, either provided by the camera maker or as a part of Photoshop. One way to learn RAW conversion is to shoot in RAW+JPEG mode, which gives you two images that you can compare-- one in RAW, the other a processed JPEG file. Then you can experiment with making the RAW file look as good (or better) than the JPEG.

[camerone]

the choice of using RAW or JPEG boils down to whether you want the camera to do the image processing or whether you want to do it yourself. An argument can be made that the best results are obtained through RAW conversion, if you shoot in jpeg you're letting the camera do that step for you. But modern cameras these days are very good at making jpegs. Most people will look at the quality of their jpegs today and say 'why bother with RAW?" Arguing with these people that "you're making an 8-bit file out of a 14bit file and throwing away most of the image!" doesn't seem to make a difference for them, they're perfectly happy with their pictures the way they are, and which can be uploaded directly without any further tinkering.

My point is that the RAW file will always have the opportunity to look better than the JPG file. You can screw it up, of course, but if you know what you're doing, it's physically impossible to make the JPG look anywhere as good as a RAW, period, because you've thrown away a lot of the valuable data you need to actually manipulate the image. It's not just the 8 bit color depth per channel, it's the lossy compression, pixel averaging, etc. If you've ever gone to the symphony playing in a good concert hall (Seattle's sucks, but there are good ones out there...) and then listened to a recording of the performance on an iPod as the typical 128k MP3, it's a wildly different experience - most people would agree the MP3 doesn't sound as rich, good, clear, or defined as the live performance. In fact, I find the MP3 at that low a bitrate almost painful to listen to and not at all relaxing. What I'm getting at is that the JPG is the optical equivalent of the MP3. It's a great format for shoving a lot of low to medium quality images into a very tight space (disk space is small, it uses very little web bandwidth to transmit on the network) but not at all approriate for any kind of serious use other than index prints, web page thumbnails, snapshots in a digital photoframe or tv, or a desktop background.

I'd even argue that it's better to start out shooting RAW, unless you're just the "I shoot vacation snapshots and never print more than a 4x6" crowd. Why? Because the RAW has enough information that you can rescue the shot in many cases where you've screwed up lighting and exposure...at least two stops are salvagable out of the RAW, but the JPG is what it is. Plus, you'll get immersed to how to do things right from the get-go, with the workflow ingrained in how you do things. Trying to pick it up later means you have to break old habits and learn new.

Finally, one major advantage for beginners is that RAW is always un-doable if you mess up in Photoshop. Many of the mathematical transforms you apply to a JPG are strictly one-way only when you're doing image processing post shot. With JPGs, you'll have to save a copy of the image after each and every transform to have that capability.

So, decide upfront - are you happy being the cell phone camera / weekend snapshot guy or just sticking up small things on Flickr? Shoot JPG - it's simpler and the best option. If you're serious about quality, color accuracy, and detail appearance, and might you ever want to print more than a 4x6 or maybe a 5x7 without being embarrassed with the quality of the print? Shoot RAW.

Your comparison point is really good - the G10 will shoot both, as well, simultaneously, so you can compare the two... Most people don't realize that really good photos only just start with a good image, good lighting, and good composition. They forget that it takes a lot longer to finish up with a lot of work in Photoshop (or GIMP, for the O/S geeks). It's the post production time that really makes this a time consuming hobby...getting the shots is the easy part. At least we've got it better these days than the hours in the darkroom that it used to take

-C

[Dusty2]

Pass

[divemaster08]

Well it finally arrived today with an underwater case from canon. After all it was within my budget. This is truly a remarkable camera. Can’t wait to try it out. The only thing that confuses me is how to edit raw format images. I currently use picasa3 for photo management. Without having to buy Photoshop what are my options? Keep picasa? Use canon software? Thanks for all the help people!

[Dusty2]

For my part I would suggest you just shoot JPG and see how you like the results. The new logic processor in the G10 along with the large format will give you awesome pix without all that work and expense. In order to do RAW you need photoshop or Paintshop pro with an addon . Picassa is a very basic program for entry level photographers. Paintshop pro is the editor I use and it only runs around a hundred bucks and will do almost anything Photoshop will. Photoshop is a pro level program and is very expensive.

Get out and shoot lots of pix and enjoy. Then if you are dissatisfied with the output start playing with RAW. That camera is capable of 16X20 prints in jpg that are more than satisfying.

[Grateful Diver]

I got a G10 a couple weeks ago, and am learning how to use it with strobes. I'm heading to Bonaire on Friday, so I suspect I'll get a lot of practice down there ... especially with the wide-angle stuff. So far I love the camera, and suspect it'll take some time to figure out how to use most of its capabilities.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[divemaster08]

what kind of strobe do you have? what strobe do i need to get since im using the Canon underwater case? i think that will be my next item to purchase. are you staying at Buddy Dive? great deals there right now, im jealous! have fun.

[dphershman]

what kind of strobe do you have? what strobe do i need to get since im using the Canon underwater case? i think that will be my next item to purchase. are you staying at Buddy Dive? great deals there right now, im jealous! have fun.

The Canon case doesn't have a strobe-synch cord attachment to connect to the camera's flash hotshoe, so you have to do the process where the camera's internal flash is monitored by the strobe in a 'slave' setting. Any modern digital strobe will do this, but the best for your particular case would be a small Sea and Sea strobe. You'll need a tray and arm plus a fiber-optic cable attachment accessory for the strobe to get the camera's internal flash to trigger the strobe's slave mode.

[Grateful Diver]

what kind of strobe do you have? what strobe do i need to get since im using the Canon underwater case? i think that will be my next item to purchase. are you staying at Buddy Dive? great deals there right now, im jealous! have fun.

I purchased a Sea & Sea YS-110a to go with the camera. It's an optical strobe, so it should work with any housing (it fires off the camera's internal flash). I already owned a Sea & Sea YS-25, which I'm using as a slave strobe for the other side.

Yep, I'm staying at Buddy Dive ... they've got a great house reef, which I'll be using not only to practice some wide-angle shots with the new camera, but also to complete an AOW class for someone who's going on the trip with us.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[olyvtx]

Well it finally arrived today with an underwater case from canon. After all it was within my budget. This is truly a remarkable camera. Can’t wait to try it out. The only thing that confuses me is how to edit raw format images. I currently use picasa3 for photo management. Without having to buy Photoshop what are my options? Keep picasa? Use canon software? Thanks for all the help people!

I dont have this camera but usually most camera mfg. supply software with the camera for image processing (RAW). If not, you can continue to use picasa. Keep in mind that picasa only exports and saves in jpg format. Picasa does have some good basic editing tools and that may be all you need.

Software such as photoshop or elements allows u you save your picture in other uncompressed formats such as tiff or pdf, which you would want for high quality prints. To use photoshop or elements for RAW i believe you will need a plugin...i can edit RAW with Elements but not with my photoshop CS3. I would recommend either photoshop or elements for post-processing, these have more powerful editing tools then picasa.

Bottom line, if your only using your pics for websites, screensavers, etc. i would suggest you use jpg, much easier and less post-processing work. If you know your going to get FANTASTIC photos and plan to make prints....capture in RAW.

Good luck and get out there and start using that baby!

[camerone]

Software such as photoshop or elements allows u you save your picture in other uncompressed formats such as tiff or pdf, which you would want for high quality prints. To use photoshop or elements for RAW i believe you will need a plugin...i can edit RAW with Elements but not with my photoshop CS3. I would recommend either photoshop or elements for post-processing, these have more powerful editing tools then picasa.ood luck and get out there and start using that baby!

If you're still stuck on Windows, Canon's web site has the downloadable Vista codec for *.CR2 files, as the G10 (and the G9 before it) use the newer second generation raw image format. It'll let the shell display the proper icons in the folders, let you double click to use the built in previewer, etc. Canon's included disc will also install it, if I remember right. I believe that also makes Photoshop work correctly, but you need to install PS first, and then the Canon software to get things all registered correctly...there's some documentation out there on the web about it, but I remember it was a hassle for Heidi when she bought a 5D a couple of years ago to get things all hooked up correctly.

Otherwise, I just use GIMP for my editing with the UFRaw plugin, and it works fine for me and with a lot less problems than she had, and it cost me a whole lot less. The UI is not as well defined, structured, or clean, but for the money I saved, I got a strobe

[dphershman]

To use photoshop or elements for RAW i believe you will need a plugin...i can edit RAW with Elements but not with my photoshop CS3. I would recommend either photoshop or elements for post-processing, these have more powerful editing tools then picasa.

You should go to http://www.Adobe.com to downloads if you haven't already and find the latest RAW update for CS3. They periodically update their supported RAW formats when new cameras come out. The latest version is now CS4 they should have backward compatability to CS3. I did have to upgrade to CS4 from CS2 last summer when I got a Nikon D700 and found that Adobe wasn't making the RAW converter available for CS2. Afterwards I found lots of reasons to love CS4 even more than CS2.

[Biodiversity_Guy]

My G10 should get here Friday, replacing my flooded G9. I am hoping/planning to move from the OEM housing to an Ikelite.

As far as RAW vs JPEG, the G10 will let you take both at the same time, which is handy so you can easily do an initial sort of the pictures based on the JPEGS, discard the large and unwieldy RAW images that are not worth saving, and then only deal with/process/get sucked into cleaning up only the good RAW files.

I use the included software from Canon to convert the RAW files into TIFFs and work on those. This works well for me as you can also have the software rename the images into a more useful name ( IMG_1034 into SundRockOct08_002) My version of photoshop is too old to have the new RAW plug-ins work.

Working with RAW or TIFF files allows you to work with non-compressed images, so as you work on it, you lose little resolution. The trade off is, these are LARGE FILES, so can be slow depending on your computer. As JPEGs are already compressed, as you work on them the images degrade rapidly (or so the logic goes).

Once I finish playing with an image as a TIFF, I "save as" a JPEG, because the resulting size of the file is much smaller (5 MB vs 15+).

[smike]

I also just bought a G10, with the canon case (Cheap!). I like that there is an upgrade path, with the hot-shoe - or is it hot-boot - or is it hot-sandal, hot hipwaders whatever...; ikelite UW enclosure, or the expensive one grateful bought... Anyway, the canon case will work for now, and the camera should allow me flexibility for a long time, until I can afford one of these: http://www.red.com/epic_scarlet/ And a case.

So I have a good starter system for about $650.

I am planning on shooting in RAW - we'll find out how good my photo editing software is, whether my computer needs an upgrade, and whether I will soon be shooting in just JPEG ](*,)

I just got the last parts last night, and my son and I went swimming at the community pool, and I took some pictures and video. I need a weight belt for the pool , and my subject wouldn't stay still - a little camera lag.

Still got some cool shots.

Am REALLY excited to take it on a dive

S'Mike

[Dusty2]

Good luck and happy hunting with the new rig. One word of caution.... Service that case religiously before every dive. They are not the best and losing a $400 camera is not a fun experience. A couple of drops of salt water will toast it beyond repair.

[smike]

Good luck and happy hunting with the new rig. One word of caution.... Service that case religiously before every dive. They are not the best and losing a $400 camera is not a fun experience. A couple of drops of salt water will toast it beyond repair.

Thanks - Will Do.

[Ms.Dragsalot]

DM 08...It has been convinced this would be the best camera to purchase reading all your replys..Thanks for helping me make a desicion about what I should look for...(hehehehehe)

[Dusty2]

Jeeze we are getting so many G10's around here we need to start a G10 forum section and you guys need to get a G10 club together! :occasion5: :occasion5: :occasion5:

[Dusty2]

Something to keep in mind if you chose to shoot in RAW/JPG format. You will be using massive amounts of storage both on your computer and your SD card. Each photo is equivalent to 4 jpg photos. You need to use only high speed SD cards or you will slow your camera down dramatically and you will need a large hard drive for storage. I would recommend no less than 2 Gig SD cards and 4 would be better. 2 gigs will only give you about 100 photos which is about 1 dive for me.

[smike]

I bought a 16G card, it will take a fair amount of shooting to fill it. But I think I am going to need a new hard drive for storage.

I wish the G10 did live zoom/focus for video. I took some video in the swimming pool the night my enclosure came in, and to worked pretty well nonetheless, but that is one of the shortcomings of the camera. Also the audio has a high pitched hum (above water at least). I think I can filter it out in audacity, but that is another 2 - 3 steps in processing video. Probably won't care about the audio for underwater work most the time anyway, unless people really like hearing me blow bubbles.

S'Mike