5D v 9G

York Minster

This argument has been swirling around in my brain over the weekend.  Which is the better camera, the Canon 5D or Canon G9?  This may sound somewhat silly as on paper there is no comparison, the 5D is simply better in every aspect.  But hold on theoretical performance doesn't really cut it when you are out in the field using each of the camera.  I have found that I have used the G9 far more more in the past few months than the 5D.   I have been able to produce some stunning images with the G9 and yet is it a better camera?

I guess the best place to start is price.   Well the G9 is, was, about a quarter of the 5D's price.  It is a tank when compared to a lot of other compact cameras but for me this is one of its great advantages.   I have stuffed it into all sorts of pockets over the past two years and it has never let me down.  However, there are some significant problems with the camera.  I believe I have mentioned before the dire performance beyond the 200 ISO setting.  I just cannot use the images that it produces due to the appalling noise.  The lens is not wide enough for my liking either, although the G10 has opened up to an equivalent 28mm this is still not that good. 

Now we come to the 5D.  The day in York demonstrated both its brilliance and annoyance.   The photograph above was taken in York Minster with a 24 - 105mm lens fitted.  The ISO was 1000 and the shutter speed was 1/10th of  a second.  Given all these problems the resultant photograph was sharp, due in no small part to the image stabaliser on the lens, and there was no sign of noise.  If I had tried anything like that with the G9 the image would have been appalling.  However, there is a price to pay for this image quality (IQ).  The camera is bulky and requires large hands to handle successfully.  You just can't throw it into a pocket and pull it out at a moments notice.  You have to use the 5D with a certain amount of intention and planning.  It is not a camera that can be used spontaneously.  Given all this you are never disappointed with the results - possibly the best digital camera made to date.

So which is best?   After giving the matter much thought it has to be the 5D.   You very quickly come up against the design constraints of the G9 if you use it a lot.  This is not the case with the 5D as there is usually a fix that can be fitted to the camera to get around most problems.   I would be lost without either and am in no hurry to replace them with their upgrades, I know I was think about the mk II 5D but this has been put on the back burner for now.

Canon 5D

One of the knock effects of having a new camera is that you start to examine the current cameras that you have.  Now this is a particular problem for a digital photographer as there are always improvements in the sensor and software to make the image quality just that little better.   Just as an aside I have a Canon A1 circa 1978 that still works and the only thing that has changed over the year has been the film - which can still be used in the camera.

However, this is irrelevant.  I am a digital photographer and so you have to accept that camera replacement is part of the deal with the devil.  So back to the 5D.  Over the past few days I have been comparing the 1D with the 40D and found that each have their strengths & weaknesses given my overall set up.  The 5D is now getting a bit long in the tooth, nearly 3 years old and a lot of shutter releases.   So do I replace it?   The biggest argument for replacement is the 1D.  This has the latest DIGIC chips and these certainly produce a superior image.  Would this be worth the cost of replacement of my 5D?   At this stage I have no answer to this question but it is something I need to consider.