The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Canon G10 RAW compared to Leica M8 RAW

bradhusick

Active member
Here are two shots to compare from the Canon G10 (first) and the Leica M8 (second). Both shot at f/4, 35mm focal length, RAW. Canon is ISO 800, Leica is ISO 1250. Leica is firmware 2.0, lens is 35 ASPH cron. No noise reduction applied.

100% zoom, crop of 1440x1440 pixels from the center of each image. Try to ignore different depth-of-field despite use of f/4 on both cameras.

I am glad to do other comparisons if you suggest the scenario. Interested in your comments.

I have owned the G10 for about an hour, so I am just getting the hang of it.
-Brad
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Brad critical focus maybe the door handle on the G10 . I know hard to tell with that much DOF but it looks like it hit there instead of the box
 

bradhusick

Active member
Same conditions, this time Canon ISO 80 (first) and Leica ISO 160 (second). Lowest standard ISO on each camera. Slightly different white balance, but good for comparison.
 
Last edited:

bradhusick

Active member
Brad critical focus maybe the door handle on the G10 . I know hard to tell with that much DOF but it looks like it hit there instead of the box
Not sure, Guy. One thing this points out is that if you want shallow DOF you better shoot the G10 wide open at f/2.8. Even then it won't give you much in this department.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Looks like and I agree very big DOF on these little camera's.

File looks pretty good though , obvious DR advantage with the M8
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
canon has that digital look compared to the M8 which more resembles nice smooth tonal ranges like film
 

bradhusick

Active member
Yes, I feared this. If you're thinking the G10 is like a mini-EOS-5D, (like I was hoping with the Digic 4 chip) then you'll be disappointed. It does a fine job at ISO 80 and 100, but starts to deteriorate at ISO 200. I think this one will be going back to the store. Sh*&%t.

I guess I'll have to wait for my 5D Mark II.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well it was a great test for me and told me a lot. i was thinking about it but your test was perfect. Wait for the G1 and see what that looks like. Nothing will beat the M8 but something small that is close would be nice
 

simonclivehughes

Active member
I think to be fair, it would be good to see this or a similar test done with noise reduction (such as Noise Ninja etc) to see the resulting images. Also, I'd like to see the higher ISO shots converted to B&W to see how the noise/grain appears. Someone on the Canon DP forum commented that the noise appears almost like T-grains. I've also seen some other high ISO shots (up to 1600) that looked quite good, certainly better than your example. I'd certainly give it more than an hour to explore capturing and processing before jumping to too many conclusions.

I'm on the waiting list for the G10 to come in here in Vancouver, so I'm hoping it will turn out better that this shows. The bottom line, of course, is that it's silly to think or hope it could match the much larger sensor. If I can get reasonable results over the ISO range in a small camera it will have met my requirements.

Ciao,
 

httivals

New member
I'm very impressed with the G10 at iso 800. Also, given that it's 14 megapixels vs. 10 megapixels for the Leica, it would be interesting to see how the G10 looked when downsized to 10 megapixels (Leica native size), then cropping to 100% after downsizing, to compare to the Lecia noise.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Well it was a great test for me and told me a lot. i was thinking about it but your test was perfect. Wait for the G1 and see what that looks like. Nothing will beat the M8 but something small that is close would be nice
I quite agree Guy - and if not the G1, then the Olympus mft camera coming next year.

Thanks for the test Brad. Let's face it, there are lots of good things about small sensor cameras, but IQ is never going to be it!

Canon G10 sensor:
7.6mm x 5.7mm (0.43cm sq) pixel den: 34mp/cm2
Panny G1 sensor (micro 4/3):
18mm x 13.5mm (2.43cm sq) pix den: 4mp/cm2
M8 sensor:
27mm x 18mm (4.86cm sq) pix den: 2.1 mp/cm2

so the M8 sensor is about twice the area of the G1, which is around 6 times the area of the G10 and with 1/8th the pixel density.

SOMETHING's gotta give!
 
A

asabet

Guest
Hi Brad, thanks for posting this! I agree with Jono and think that this is a pretty decent showing considering that the G10 has the same pixel stuffed tiny sensor as the SD990 (IXUS 980) IS. I'd have expected an unusable result, whereas the crop you've shown suggests to me that the image could be usable with some additional processing.
 

Lili

New member
Brad,
Thanks so much for posting these, they were quite informative!
They were noiser that I might've liked but less than I had feared, esp when I reread your post and saw these were at 100%.
Yes they are noisy, but the noise IS rather fine-grained, not huge clumps of color like some.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The noise was not really the issue but more the DR and if I can get just a little closer to the M8 that will be just fine and yes i agree i am being very critical. My issue is i am actually looking for something that may have to save my butt . I'm thinking maybe the Oly 520 is really what I need or the G1
 

sizifo

New member
Don't really like the look of the G10 very much. Understand that this is not the point of the comparison, but it's incredible how much better the leica files look.
 

Lars

Active member
Seriously, you're comparing a $500 camera to a $5K camera (plus lenses) :)

When car magazines compare a Bentley to a Kia they do it for fun - shouldn't we see this comparison in the same way? Or is it just about comparing sensors, which really is separaded from other quality parameters such as build quality?

I think if price is factored in then the G10 (and many other new releases) blows the socks off anything priced over $1K. Today's compacts and cheap SLRs are simply an exceptional value WRT IQ.
 

bradhusick

Active member
So many of you are right. It's hard to expect a $500 camera to equal the M8, but like Guy, I am looking for that smaller camera as a backup / quick alternative to carrying the M8, and for situations where autofocus is nice. I have owned so many P&S cameras, it's getting silly. I wish some manufacturer would go back to 5 or 6 megapixels and give us great DR and low noise, paired with an f/2 lens of nearly any focal length! Pros and semipros would snatch this up like candy!
 

bradhusick

Active member
For those who mention the huge price difference ($500 - $5000), for an M8 or MF shooter, that's the price of one or two lenses. Many pros would pay $1000 or even $1500 for the RIGHT compact camera. Amateurs are a different story. For them (like my wife) the Sony W300 is the perfect combination of features at only $350.
 

Lili

New member
For those who mention the huge price difference ($500 - $5000), for an M8 or MF shooter, that's the price of one or two lenses. Many pros would pay $1000 or even $1500 for the RIGHT compact camera. Amateurs are a different story. For them (like my wife) the Sony W300 is the perfect combination of features at only $350.
Brad, understood, for me, the compacts need to be good enough so that I do not regret not having my big DSLR.
In short the the convenience/image quality must overlap enough for my tastes.

Still deciding about the G10, its that or the E420 for me right now.

What does the full ISO 800 image look like, not at 100% but rather as one would see it here, normal web viewing?
 
D

David Paul Carr

Guest
You can solve a lot of small sensor dynamic range problems by shooting raw and outputting TIFFs of various densities, to retain detail in the highlights, shadows, midtones etc. Then use Photomatix to do exposure blending.
I think the G10 looks pretty good. I would be interested in seeing high ISO tests done in low, tungsten, or mixed lighting: with such a small sensor you are obviously going to get luminance noise but that bothers me far less than colour blotching which is almost impossible to clean up.
High ISO testing in good light isn't that useful as far as I'm concerned.
 
Top