Canon G16 improves on already great G15
G16 hand-held HDR
Recently I was reminded again about how even our tiny sensor digicams are darn capable and even my lowly Canon G16 would have been a dream years ago.
I selected just a few of my photos taken with various tiny sensor digicams (non-ILC) and created a new, small album of photos:
http://www.bakubo.com/Galleries%202/Dig ... index.html
The photos were taken with the following digicams and are in chronological order starting in 2000:
All the photos have a caption that includes the year and the name of the camera.
Almost all the photos were taken with the Canon digicams. About 85% in this album were shot as jpegs and the rest were raw. Take a look if you are interested. I have a ton more, but this is a small album to give a flavor.
I am reminded of a Magnum photo exhibition I saw in 2013 called:
Radical Transformation: Magnum Photos into the Digital Age
https://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/ ... formation/
I wrote about it here on dpreview in 2013:
The photos were excellent and the presentation was good too. The prints were of various sizes by many Magnum photographers. I am sure lots of the people on the internet would have hated almost every single photo though because even many of the smaller prints (5x7, 6x9) were not eye cutting sharp when viewed at 3 centimeters. There would have been screaming and derision by the dogmatic extremists with their 10x loupes. Not sure about CA, distortion, and all the other things that so many people are obsessed with since I didn't even bother checking. They were wonderful viewed from a normal viewing distance. Very nice exhibition.
Probably about 90% of the photos in the exhibition were B&W. Some of the photos are famous iconic photos from Capa, Cartier-Bresson, et al that you have seen before.
Later I was walking around with my camera and I sort of wondered if all the photos in the exhibition had been taken with digital cameras if some of them, maybe a bunch of them, would have been deleted in the camera? I imagine these photographers are smart enough to not be over concerned (concerned, of course, but not over concerned) with all the technical details and let those things override what the image looks like and whether it is interesting. Fortunately, the photos had not been deleted.
Most of the photos in the exhibition could have easily been taken with my Canon G15 and the technical quality in many cases would have been even better. Just being able to quickly change ISO or use Auto ISO is a huge advantage. Good ISO from 80 on up to, oh I don't know, 3200. Even 12,800 is usable and quite good compared to just slightly fast film from a long time ago. Especially if shooting in raw. A long time ago ISO 400 film was fast.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests