Buying a Camera: Canon G12 vs. Sony NEX-3

I often get asked my opinion on cameras. Unfortunately, just as often I don't have a clue about the cameras that the person is asking about; but I'm always willing to offer an opinion!

A friend recently asked my opinion of the Canon G12 vs the Sony NEX-3. He was looking for a camera for personal use; something that would take good stills but also take some video of the family. He'd looked at the NEX-3 at a Best Buy and felt it was kind of clumsy with the large lens sticking out of the small body, and it didn't seem very rugged.

Here is an edited version of my carefully considered opinion. Notice that I sort of tried to steer him in one direction:

I think the G12 is nice. I checked the video specs and it supports 720p, which is the same as the NEX-3. The NEX-5 supports 1080p, but for casual use, 720p is pretty good.

The G12 is a really excellent still camera, with some video capabilities. I actually thought about getting an earlier model - the G7 I think - a few years back, but ended up getting a different Canon PowerShot model instead. Personally, I wasn't impressed by the optical viewfinder on the earlier model because it didn't feel at all like a DSLR optical viewfinder; it felt the same as a cheap point-and-shoot, and I was hoping for something a bit better. That's totally a pet peeve of mine, and if you tried it out and liked it, then that's great!

My other concern is that it sounds like the video is a little limited. I bet it does a better job than the iPhone, but there's limitations to these point-and-shoot cameras. From the review on DPreview:
You get some basic in-camera video editing, but just like the S95, the G12 cannot be manually zoomed during movie shooting (see the clip above for the effects of digital zoom), and focus must be preset before recording commences.
With the Sony NEX-3, the zoom is on the lens, so you can zoom during shooting (but having played with it, I know that the zoom isn't very smooth....the lens barrel is a bit stiff, but at least you can zoom!) That may be the only advantage the NEX-3 has; other than size and the ability to switch lenses

My *feeling* is that the NEX-3 would be slightly better as a video camera, and the Canon G12 a slightly better still camera. It really comes back to what's important to you? If you mainly want to shoot stills, and capture a few video sequences now and again, I think the G12 would be great. If you want to shoot equal amounts of video and pictures, I'd probably choose the NEX-3.

Did you look at the NEX 5? The case of the NEX-5 is metal instead of the plastic on the NEX-3. It might feel more solid; though it's the same basic form factor; a tiny camera hanging off a big lens.

You might also look at an Olympus PEN, like the E-PL2 and see if you like that better. I'm not sure that it's any better in the video department, but it's in the same price point.

If you have no specific goals and needs, I think either of these cameras would take good pictures and video. Since it's for personal use, I'd look at interface, and see how it feels to operate it and use it. Which camera do you feel most comfortable with?

Of course, he bought the Canon G12, and is very happy with it!

See also:
DPReview: G12: New Features
B & H: Sony Alpha NEX-3 Interchangeable Lens Digital Camera w/18-55mm Lens (Silver) [$599.99]
B & H: Canon PowerShot G12 Digital Camera [$499.95]

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sony GV-D200 review

Image
Sony GV-D200 I've been using a Sony GV-D200 deck to transfer old Video8 and Hi8 tapes. Some of these tapes are over twenty years old, and no longer having a Hi8 camcorder that worked I was concerned that if I didn't do something about transferring them to a more modern format soon, I might never be able to. While Sony no longer make camcorders that use these tapes - that I know of - Sony does still sell the GV-D200 deck (or Video Walkman, as it's sometimes labelled.) They also offer the GV-D800, which is almost identical but adds a small LCD screen for about $120 more. I didn't think I'd need a screen since I was using this to capture to the computer, but you will need an external monitor when you first set it up. Physically, the device is small. At 5 7/8" wide, 5 3/8" deep and 2" high, it's the smallest video deck I've encountered. I used to have a Video8 deck that I thought was small; and it was twice as deep and twice as high. The t
Read more

Response: Which iPhone to Get?

Image
In response to my iPhone musings, I got the following reader email which actually sums up a lot of my second and third thoughts too: You might have a point about the fancier camera, but otherwise I would buy the smaller model. Its screen is about the same size as that of my Nexus 4, and I don't feel at all like it limits me with a too-small screen. But I do sometimes stretch to get my thumb the reach to the other corner of the screen. It is plenty big for a phone. A phone is a pocket thing. (Well, in my case it lives an ancient REI soft sunglasses case that I have on my belt.) Ubiquitous, handy, convenient, almost always with me. Small is crucial for all of that. Certainly a large screen is cool, but you need a place to put it: don't break a fundamental feature of a pocket phone by getting too big. That is what your small tablet is for. I have my phone with me almost always. I have my Nexus 7 tablet with me nearly as much. The bigger screen is great, yet it fits in some
Read more

Should you buy the Sony NEX-FS100 Kit Lens?

Image
The Sony NEX-FS100 is available in two configurations: B & H : NEX-FS100U Camcorder only $4,999 B & H : NEX-FS100U (with 18-200mm lens) $5,599 But what does that extra $600 get you? It get's you this: Sony 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Zoom Lens for NEX Camera This lens is also available separately for $799.99, so at $200 off you'd think everyone would be jumping on it. But not so fast... In his article about switching from the Canon 5D Mark II to the Sony NEX-FS100 , Paul Antico  at Need Creative says of the kit lens: 7) Its 18-200 F3.6-6.3 kit lens absolutely sucks and should be avoided (thankfully, you can order it without one) [ 1 ] But is it that bad? At B & H 's site, 43 reviews give it an average of 4.6 out of 5 stars. That's not a bad rating, though many of these people are using it for stills, and the most common complaint noted is how large and heavy it is. Of course this feeling of size would be exacerbated when you put it on a tiny camera
Read more