Canon G16 Advanced Compact Camera Review

 

It could so easily have been better

                                             The hand that giveth, also taketh away

My history with Canon G compacts   Over the years I have bought, owned and used a G7, G9, G10, G12 and now the G16. So I am very familiar with the breed. I used the G9-G12  a lot especially bushwalking when I did not want to lug along my (then) main camera kit which was Canon DSLR based.

Why the G16 ?  I recently travelled by ship to the southern ocean, visiting assorted wet, windy islands. My main camera kit was a Panasonic GH3 with 14-140mm superzoom lens. I wanted a compact as backup in case an elephant seal ate my main camera, or more likely it got drowned in salt water. In the event there were no problems with the GH3 even though it was subjected to quite a lot of salt and fresh water in very cold conditions.

I looked at all the compacts on the market and to be quite candid was not impressed by any of them. I posted my thoughts about this here.  The G16 was selected more or less by default as the least worst of the options available and also because all my previous G cams had at least been reliable which is a big deal when one is 2000 kilometers and an ocean from the nearest service facility.

G16 usage  I used the G16 for several weeks before the trip away and made several hundred photos with it on the trip. So it got a pretty good workout which enabled me to evaluate it's capabilities reasonably well.

 

Market position  Canon popularised the advanced compact camera genre with it's early model G cams. However the world into which the G16 has been launched is very different from that which greeted the original G1 in September 2000. Compact camera sales have been slashed by the rise and rise of smart phones. Some cameras with interchangeable lenses are smaller than the G series compacts. So Canon really needed to deliver something special with the G16 to keep the advanced compact category and Canon's presence in that category  thriving.

Unfortunately that has not been the case.

 

Progress from G12-G16   The G12 had a fully articulated monitor, which went some way towards  making up for the dismal optical viewfinder which is still present and incorrect on the G16.  Unfortunately Canon fitted the G16 with a fixed monitor, presumably to make the body slimmer.  Image quality has improved a bit. Lens aperture has seen a welcome increase from f2.8-f4  to f1.8-f2.8.  Operational speed has improved a bit.  Control modules on the top of the camera have been rearranged a bit.

So, compared to previous iterations the G16  has mostly a bit more of  things which matter such as image quality and performance but also less of other things, such as the articulated monitor.

Camera Concept  The G16 sticks fairly closely to the original G cam concept which is for a compact, competent, do-almost-anything- camera for expert and professional users who do not have or want  their big camera kit in hand right now. The G16 has plenty of external interface modules for direct control of primary and secondary exposure and focussing parameters by experienced users.  With one glaring exception these work well.

Larger than the Sony RX100/100Mk2, the G16 is easier to hold and operate than the Sony cams.

Picture Quality  The G16 makes pictures which are good enough for most purposes including publication and printing. It delivers good results indoors or outdoors. AF, AE and color balance are consistently accurate. Dynamic range is good. Recovery of highlight and shadow detail from RAW images is good even when subject brightness range is high.

The lens is of good quality and is consistent across the focal length and aperture range, providing very good resolution in a large central area of the frame with noticeable but not objectionable softening towards the edges and corners. Canon has apparently optimised the lens performance for central resolution which works well for most photos.

I would rate pictures from the G16 as equal to or better than those which I could get from 35mm film about 10 years ago. I think that if this camera had existed 10 years ago it might have been hailed as the 9th wonder of the modern world.

 

Performance  Published reviews say the G16 operates faster than the G15 (which I never tested) and G12 (which I used extensively) This may be true however the G16 is no speed demon. With RAW capture,  using a fast 95MB/sec memory card I clocked the G16 at a shot to shot time of 1.7 seconds with AF and AE on every frame. Compared to my Micro Four Thirds cameras that's a leisurely pace and slow enough to impede the picture taking process on occasion.  Switch on/off, AF speed and response to control module inputs are all decently but not remarkably brisk.

Holding  Being larger, the G16 feels more secure in the hand than say, the Sony RX100 but it could still be better with some minor changes to the shape. The handle at the front and the thumb support at the back could both be slightly deeper without affecting overall dimensions, appearance or price of the camera.  The G16 is at the large end of the compact camera spectrum. To justify it's size I think this camera could and should provide a more secure holding experience for the user.

Viewing  I found viewing to be the least satisfactory aspect of using this camera. You get to view using either the zooming optical viewfinder or the fixed monitor.

The monitor works well indoors or in low ambient light, in which case you can see the image preview and usually also the camera data superimposed on the lower part of the image.

I had not realised until I started using the G16 just how useful was the fully articulated monitor of the G12.  The articulated monitor enables off center viewing, overhead  and  low camera position with landscape or portrait orientation. It is very useful.

In bright sun the G16 monitor is almost useless. The image preview is very difficult to see and camera data superimposed on the image are impossible to read. There is no option for configuring the monitor with "DSLR" type layout with the camera data on a black strip below the preview image.

The zooming OVF is the same one which Canon has been putting on it's G cams for many years and in my view is long past it's use by date. It provides a view 77% of the final image both vertically and horizontally. 0.77x0.77 = 0.6 which means you get to see only 60% of the actual image area. This makes composing very difficult. You know the final image will be considerably larger than the view seen in the OVF but guessing the actual amount is something of a lottery.  In addition there is parallax error, the lens protrudes into the OVF image and there is no camera data, gridlines, histogram etc available.

Operating  Most of the user interface modules (buttons, wheels etc) on the G16 are sensibly located and operate efficiently enough. The camera can be driven somewhat like a mirrorless ILC or DSLR.

There is one glaring exception however and that is the Front Dial which is very poorly located. The G16 has a "Mode dial + control dial" type of user interface, like most DSLR's.  Contrast this with the "Aperture Dial + Shutter Speed Dial"  interface found classically on Leica M cameras and in modified form on Fuji X- MILC's.

For the "Mode Dial+Control Dial" system to work properly the Control Dial (Front Dial on the G16)  must be located and angled such that it can be easily operated by the right index finger or thumb without having to release grip on the camera to get a finger onto the dial.

If you look at the photograph below you can easily see that with the camera held normally the Front Dial lies beneath the right middle finger and is inaccessible without completely releasing the right hand from the camera.  In addition the dial lies in a horizontal plane whereas the right index finger moves in a plane about 80 degrees from horizontal.

The front dial is hidden beneath the right middle finger and is inaccessible with the fingers in this normal shooting position.

 

 

This is the kind of elementary ergonomic mistake one hopes not to see from the camera market leader, but there it is. Why is the Front Dial so located ? I have no idea and have no inside knowledge of Canon or any other maker's design processes. But if I have to take a guess, which I do, I would guess the dial is there because it looks  neat and tidy, sort of tucked in there out of the way. It certainly is out of the way which is exactly the wrong place for it.

In order to get the right index finger onto the Front Dial the grip on the camera with the right hand has to be released and all four fingers moved down. After the dial is adjusted the fingers have to move back to their normal shooting position

 

Another, lesser issue is that the shutter button is set about 15mm too far to the right and about 5mm too far back, as viewed by the operator, for a really comfortable finger position.

The whole top deck of this camera needs to be redesigned to put the shutter button and Front Dial in ergonomically effective locations. There is nothing difficult about this, but in the process the camera will end up with a different appearance.

As it stands the G16 is an example of style having been preferenced over function and the camera's user appeal suffers badly as a result, especially since the target user is an expert/enthusiast photographer.

How Canon could fix the G16's deficiencies  (My prescription for the G17)

* First they could get serious about making good cameras which photographers might enjoy using.  In the 1980's and 90's Canon was a leader in innovation. They dropped the old  FD breechlock lens mount to introduce the all electronic EOS mount. They introduced a string of consumer friendly DSLR's. They started the G line of advanced compacts. ...........................and then ran out of steam, or courage, or whatever it takes............

* Specifically the G17 needs three things

1) A good quality EVF, configurable to DSLR style appearance.

2) Bring back the fully articulated monitor, also configurable to match the EVF in style and appearance.

3) Redesign the handle and top deck of the camera to relocate the shutter button and Front Dial for greater ergonomic efficiency.

4)  Yes, I said three things, but faster shot to shot times would be a bonus.

Yes, the resulting product would cost a bit more. But Sony is asking and getting a lot more for it's RX100/100Mk2 than Canon is getting for the G16.

I think that mediocre products like the G16, not bad but not fully realised to maximise the potential in the genre, will not appeal to buyers in the long run.