Canon G12 still has it

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
Misc shots from the past month, some cropped, some romanced with Picasa or Luminar.

200732
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200733
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200734
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200735
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200736
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200737
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200738
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Cheers, Jock
 

Biro

Hall of Famer
Aug 7, 2011
Jersey Shore
Steve
So, Jock, how is it working with the G12 these days? The results speak for themselves. But do you find the camera’s operation to be snappy enough? And how about that viewfinder? How high do you dare take the ISO?

I ask because I’ve been thinking about some options for trail hiking - and a friend’s G16 is one of them. It’s like new and could be available to me at a very friendly price.

There are a number of more-modern cameras that are smaller and have one-inch sensors. But I get the general impression that they might not be as rugged as Canon’s old G line. A G7X would be an example. And the G16’s ability to zoom to 140mm at f/2.8 would be quite useful.

What say you, Jock - or anyone else? If one checks on eBay, old Canon G cameras (12-16) seem to hold their value quite well.
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
I had a G11 at one stage and now would buy again if the price was right. Its one of those I regretted selling. The tunnel viewfinder was horrible though. Don’t know what the G16 has. Instead, I found using the variable angle screen served quite well but I don’t think the 12-16 had that.
 

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
So, Jock, how is it working with the G12 these days? The results speak for themselves. But do you find the camera’s operation to be snappy enough? And how about that viewfinder? How high do you dare take the ISO?

I ask because I’ve been thinking about some options for trail hiking - and a friend’s G16 is one of them. It’s like new and could be available to me at a very friendly price.

There are a number of more-modern cameras that are smaller and have one-inch sensors. But I get the general impression that they might not be as rugged as Canon’s old G line. A G7X would be an example. And the G16’s ability to zoom to 140mm at f/2.8 would be quite useful.

What say you, Jock - or anyone else? If one checks on eBay, old Canon G cameras (12-16) seem to hold their value quite well.
The short answer is that I would snap up the G16 in an instant. I think it would be "just the thing" for a trail camera . . . small, jacket pocketable, rugged. Not weatherproof, though, so stick a ziplock bag in your pocket and zip it up if the rains come.

Now, here's the longer answer, based on several years experience with the G12, which I have owned since 2010 when it was new. This is my go-to camera for tossing in a jacket pocket when I'm out to run errands or take a stroll with the spotter-in-chief around the neighborhood. (If I know the weather is going to be horrid, I take the weatherproof XP90.)

The G12 is about the size of a Panasonic GX85 with no lens.

G12 2.JPG


G12.JPG


The build quality is top notch -- made in Japan. The vari-angle screen can flipped so that the LCD is against the camera, protecting it. Yes, the tunnel viewfinder (which zooms with the lens) is terrible, but it is way, waaaay, waaaaaaay better than NO viewfinder.

This reminds me of the joke about the two ladies at the resort in the Catskills of New York. One says: Gee, the food here is terrible, and the other replies: And the portions are small!

Yeah, the viewfinder is awful, but having experienced the joys of trying to frame a shot with the viewfinderless XP90 with the sun coming over my shoulder, I can't get enough of it!

The viewfinder sees less than the sensor sees, so you always capture more than you saw through the viewfinder.

Operationally, the autofocus of the G12 is slower than my more modern cameras, but I understand Canon improved the autofocus a couple of times on the way to the G16. Nevertheless, there is a work-around that I use to great success. To wit: if you store a custom setting, the G12 (and the G16, I think) stores everything, including where the manual focus is set. So, for my quick shots of sky phenomena that are rapidly disappearing, I have a custom setting where the lens deploys at wide angle with the manual focus set on infinity. What's faster than blinding-fast autofocus? No focus, that's what. And with the small sensor, everything tends to be in focus anyway.

Some of the shots in this thread were taken with "punch the power button, look through the viewfinder, trip the shutter." Just about as fast as you can read it.

Honestly, I think you'll be pleased with the G16. FWIW, I extend the neckstrap with a couple of hanks of parachute cord and sling my G12 cross-body when on the trail.

As you said, the image quality speaks for itself, and I recognize that I am prejudiced, but I think the G12 punches above its weight.

Cheers, Jock
 
Last edited:

Latest threads

Top Bottom