The G10 has a few changes compared to the G9:
- Other focal length range 28-140 (G10) after KB compared to 35-200 (G9)
- Improved controls
- Higher-resolution display
- Higher resolution sensor
- Faster processing speed
- New battery
These are rather small adjustments to the prior art. Can you possibly debating over the zoom range. Who uses much telephoto, the missing 200 mm will miss at the G10 and can not sugarcoat. The number of users who have missed at the G9, the 28 mm will be but higher. The perceived difference between 28 and 35 is in fact greater than the between 140 and 200 mm. While making a positive impact in the wide-angle every millimeter, one must admit quite substantially at the telephoto end, to have a noticeable photographic value. Real Tele fans are also 200 mm nor too short.
That exposure has now got its own wheels, is very pleasing - in fact, it is one of the features that I often use, and then forget that I've used it. With the wheel you keep the better eye. For enhanced ease of use also includes the more pronounced gripping bead on the front. Thus, the G10 is better in the hand. However, I also had with the G9 never really problems in this regard.
The buttons were also little changed. I had especially with the toggle between shooting and playback mode at the G9 some problems. Accidentally press could not the, to put it mildly. The G10 button for this function and the on / off switch extend out a little further and are now easier to operate, except that they are now black and made of plastic. The remaining "Drucklnöpfe" are round like a pinhead at the G9, the G10 at edges. Because I liked the the G9 turn better. But the use of it makes no difference.
The optical viewfinder of the G9 was terrible. Really bad. In the G10 it has been changed, but it has improved not by. An optical viewfinder is still better than none.
The housing of the G10 is a little easier, as some parts that were previously made of metal now apparently made of plastic, and it has become a few millimeters higher. The older G9 seems to me quite elegant and less bulky. Nevertheless, the G10 still fits in my old G9 case. The only compact camera, the G9 or G10 has an admit defeat when it comes to processing, quality, feel to the touch and operation yet, would be a Nikon P6000.
The higher-resolution display of the G10 has been much praised. The display of the G9 was already great and despite a doubled number of pixels I think the difference is not so startling. To be honest, I had not known it, I would have not even noticed. If they are next to each other holding, you can see it already. But for me, it would not necessarily have to be, I can not really judge the quality of the images only at home on the big screen.
Who is the pure image quality goes, who need not "upgrade" from a G9 to G10, the results are very similar and do not automatically better. The already phenomenal resolution of the G9 was indeed once again increased slightly, and even the noise is slightly lower, but even that is no upgrade criterion. Both cameras bring their good performances only below ISO 200. One should not think so, you can with the G10 now simply an ISO level to go higher than the G9. The noise and resolution advantage of the G10 makes itself at best in test series noticeable, but not in real everyday photography. Both cameras record even at ISO80 before a rather rabid noise reduction and sharpening on the JPEGs. Thankfully, they can spend a RAW format.
Otherwise has already been said about the picture quality all you can say. I would still want to add that the G10 is not necessarily the farbtreuste camera on the market despite its frequently praised colors. At Canon, the world looks in the photos from more beautiful than in reality. Many a camera, whose images seem a little sluggish, supply seen by measurement more accurate colors.
What stands out in direct comparison of G9 and G10, is that the G10 responds more nimble. I do not mean necessarily that something increased shooting speed, but the switching on and off, switching between menus, scrolling and zooming in the photos on the screen, etc. Here is obviously a faster processor Blazed. Just a pity that it has not yet been passed at the G10 for an HD video mode.
Become better is obviously tremendous. The flash of the G10 makes significantly more than would be expected given the size.
Finally, the battery with slightly higher capacity. I enjoyed the G9 battery always enough, even though I always had a second case. And any serious photographer will make it even with the G10 hardly different.
One reason for choosing the G-series for me was the way the support provided by the software DXO (a professional RAW Converter with distortion correction for selected cameras and lenses). The G9 and G10 are two of the few compact cameras that are supported. Probably because it is precisely these models are extremely popular among DSLR photographers.
Overall, the reasons to upgrade from G9 to G10 are not mandatory. Many will even be happier because of the better telephoto range with the G9. Both remain among the top class among the manually operable compact and have earned five stars. But who is concerned less about manual settings and more on compactness, which should rather look elsewhere. Size and weight of the camera should not be underestimated.
