> So, I sold the last of my film equipment (sorry, AG) and picked up a
Canon
> G-12. If I'm an unrepentant CS5/ACR user, is there any point in
cluttering up
> my computer with the enclosed Canon software? Sems I recall reading
here that
> Canon, while making nice cameras, did not extend its expertise to
software.
AG writes:
>No problem, Bob. More film gear for the rest of us. The G12 is a sweet
>kinda-little camera for what it is. Wierd, though, because I think
i>t's a neither fish nor fowl type of camera. It has the best image
>quality for a compact, but is still hampered by the fact it is a
>compact which isn't compact.
I think I am in the Bob/Moose camp where if the cam can go on the belt
it is a fish and not a turkey.
Perhaps the up and coming new guys will meet the portable fish
criteria for others as well.
http://www.mu-43.com/f92/gf3-mini-camera-how-small-too-small-12463/
Oly is still rumored to at least announce something. I would still
like a hot shoe though.
On the Canyon software issue, I did install the software (and even
updated it twice) and don't mind using it to transfer images.
(Zoombrowser)
DPP is said to have the exact color profiles and some like it better
for this than ACR, but it just doesn't
get used very often at all. (Canyon doesn't share profile data with
anyone) The demosaicing algorithm might extract a tiny bit more detail
in ACR but I doubt I could prove it. DXO's might even be better, but
then I have to turn off some features and often port a Tiff into PS and
it takes too long. DXO is indeed faster (perhaps not better) with the
G9 ISO >200 where the noise removal is very very good and faster for
me than anything else.
Time to trade the G-9 in though.
Digital Pack Rat Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|