<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2009 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[Shouldn't the header say G9?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[kelly Denison cole]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 2:49PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[What's this, "here's the skinny" comment supposed to mean?<br>Is it some kind of y00t speak?<br><br>The G9 looks nice, but the Ricoh GX100 has a more compelling feature set.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[trumpton]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 2:56PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[from: <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=skinny" rel="nofollow">http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=skinny</a><br><br>"The skinny" is a slang term that refers to inside information. Similar to the "low down".<br><br><br>A United States Marine Corps term for information:<br>During world war two until the late 1960's, military orders in the Marine Corps were copied on paper that resembled the skin of an onion. It was extremly thin and fragile, and translucent in appearance.<br><br>"What's the skinny on the promotions" said the private]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[yoshi]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 3:30PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[I'd like to see cameras that can take excellent pictures at high ISO's. That should be the next big race, not that they can take a pic at 3200 iso but more that it's not grainy. For those times you need to take hand held shots in candlelight. ^_^]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 3:29PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[I think there's already a winner in that race:<br><br><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp</a><br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[jollyllama]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 3:45PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[I think you are right. A quick google search results:<br><a href="http://cliffmautner.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/09/ok-its-after-1a.html" rel="nofollow">http://cliffmautner.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/09/ok-its-after-1a.html</a>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 4:15PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[look the G9 in action on this videoblog: <a href="http://extremehd.net" rel="nofollow">http://extremehd.net</a>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[max long]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 3:34PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[The problem with all these point-and-shoot cameras is the size of the sensor. Tiny sensors = big noise at high Iso. So we'll have nice quality picture only when the manufacturer will be able to put larger sensors in small enclosures... And yes... it's unfair to compare a point-and-shoot, as high-end as it could be, to a DSLR...]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Nikoooo]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 3:59PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[The answer for such a sensor in a compact is Sigma DP1. Long wait though.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[dionysus]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 4:04PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[I have a G7 and it works wonders so I look forwarding to comparing the two in the near future.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 11th 2007 12:22PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[Although the G9 supports RAW, I read somewhere that the RAW format may be a proprietary Canon version and may not be supported by most photo editing software.   I don't personally use RAW, but someone who's excited about this feature might want to take a closer look into it...   ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[yarp]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 5:57PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[Of course the RAW is Canon's version; there is no 'standard RAW version'.  <br><br>In other news, Photoshop supports Canon RAW just fine, as do many other programs (including Photomatix), or you can use the Canon RAW converter to convert to whatever format you like.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Avedis]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 9th 2007 3:54PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[I had a G7 - it was a really great camera, took extremely sharp and vivid pictures up to around iso 400, which is all you can really expect from this size of sensor.<br><br>The problem for me was the inbetween-ness of it - not really the image quality or flexibility of a dslr, but still far more expensive than a P&S and it's way too big to fit in a pocket. That being said, I've never seen a camera in this range with anywhere near the picture quality. I'd recommend it.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Reynolds]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 7:33PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[This camera pales in comparison to the S5. I just don't understand Canon's G series: you can get most of the benefit from the A series for half the price, and the S series kicks its ass up and down the street with the 12x zoom. The S series is cheaper, too, and you can still fit it in your pocket.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Barry]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 8th 2007 8:51PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[Except for, oh, RAW post-processing and available color gamut.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Avedis]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 9th 2007 3:50PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon's PowerShot G9 gets reviewed]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/08/canons-powershot-g9-gets-reviewed/</guid><description><![CDATA[35mm is just too limiting and the Wide Angle lens for it looks ridiculous! You might as well get a E-410 or D40. ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Oliver]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 9th 2007 6:22PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>