Canon G1X

[EchoingWhisper]

What do you think of it? Canon PowerShot G1 X Preview: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography ReviewLooks like a nice camera! Good idea on this, much better than the Nikon 1. Perfect zoom range and sensor size. Nikon should really make a 1.5" sensor camera without interchangeable lens. Canon has made a great decision on not having the interchangeable lenses and sensor sizes. I don't like anything else though. It shouldn't have an optical viewfinder (makes the camera large and heavy), the lens is slow, battery life is bad, sensor is similar to Canon's APS-C sensors (would be better with the Sony sensor), and slow FPS. If only Nikon would do this...

 

[usayit]

Nikon should really make a 1.5" sensor camera without interchangeable lens.

The Nikon 1 was intended to capitalize on the emerging mirrorless interchangeable lens camera market currently dominated by the micro 4 3 consortum. I personally don't think they have a good implementation. In the past, Nikon has made many attempts at the high end P&S (no interchangeable lens) and none of them really made any headway into the marketshare of its competitors (Olympus, Panasonic and especially Canon).

It shouldn't have an optical viewfinder (makes the camera large and heavy)

I actually prefer the optical viewfinder. The options are no viewfinder they would be forcing the user to shoot using the back LCD which is not well received for the targeted market or EVF which has a load of advantages and disadvantages. One of the disadvantages is increasing cost.


If a potential buyer was looking for a Canon high end P&S without viewfinder and in a more compact body than the G1X, I would have recommended the S100 instead.



I think the G1x will continue Canon's long line of successful (well except for the G7) high end point and shoots. I have owned several past iterations of the G-series and always enjoyed them. I would consider the G1x for myself but I can't justify it since I have a micro 4/3 system already.

 

[analog.universe]

Aside from the slow lens, I actually like it quite a bit. Nice to see a big sensor in a little body, I think that's a much better way forward than all the silly features that end up in a lot of compacts. It would be awesome if they released a few different models... one with say, a 24mm f/2.0 prime or something, instead of the vari-aperture zoom, would really make this thing an awesome camera.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Fyi, already made this thread:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ucts/270202-thoughts-canon-powershot-g1x.html

Good to do a quick forum search to see if the thread already exists to avoid mutliple threads about the same thing.

 

[nickzou]

Nikon should really make a 1.5" sensor camera without interchangeable lens.

The Nikon 1 was intended to capitalize on the emerging mirrorless interchangeable lens camera market currently dominated by the micro 4 3 consortum. I personally don't think they have a good implementation. In the past, Nikon has made many attempts at the high end P&S (no interchangeable lens) and none of them really made any headway into the marketshare of its competitors (Olympus, Panasonic and especially Canon).

It shouldn't have an optical viewfinder (makes the camera large and heavy)

I actually prefer the optical viewfinder. The options are no viewfinder they would be forcing the user to shoot using the back LCD which is not well received for the targeted market or EVF which has a load of advantages and disadvantages. One of the disadvantages is increasing cost.


If a potential buyer was looking for a Canon high end P&S without viewfinder and in a more compact body than the G1X, I would have recommended the S100 instead.



I think the G1x will continue Canon's long line of successful (well except for the G7) high end point and shoots. I have owned several past iterations of the G-series and always enjoyed them. I would consider the G1x for myself but I can't justify it since I have a micro 4/3 system already.

Whao... I was gonna buy a G7 at one point a couple months ago. What's wrong with the G7?

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Nikon should really make a 1.5" sensor camera without interchangeable lens.

The Nikon 1 was intended to capitalize on the emerging mirrorless interchangeable lens camera market currently dominated by the micro 4 3 consortum. I personally don't think they have a good implementation. In the past, Nikon has made many attempts at the high end P&S (no interchangeable lens) and none of them really made any headway into the marketshare of its competitors (Olympus, Panasonic and especially Canon).

It shouldn't have an optical viewfinder (makes the camera large and heavy)

I actually prefer the optical viewfinder. The options are no viewfinder they would be forcing the user to shoot using the back LCD which is not well received for the targeted market or EVF which has a load of advantages and disadvantages. One of the disadvantages is increasing cost.


If a potential buyer was looking for a Canon high end P&S without viewfinder and in a more compact body than the G1X, I would have recommended the S100 instead.



I think the G1x will continue Canon's long line of successful (well except for the G7) high end point and shoots. I have owned several past iterations of the G-series and always enjoyed them. I would consider the G1x for myself but I can't justify it since I have a micro 4/3 system already.

Whao... I was gonna buy a G7 at one point a couple months ago. What's wrong with the G7?

Nothing. I own one. It's an excellent camera.

 

[usayit]

G7 was a dumbed down version not worthy of the G-series in my opinion. Dpreview had a good short summary

"
Canon PowerShot G9 Review
October 2007 | Simon Joinson

Review based on a production Canon PowerShot G9, Firmware version 1.00

Until the arrival of the G7 last September the majority of observers had written off Canon's 'prosumer' G range, presuming that the arrival of affordable digital SLRs had effectively killed the market for high-end compacts such as this. Barely a year later the G7 has been replaced by the G9, a relatively minor update that increases the pixel count from 10MP to 12MP and the screen size from 2.5 to 3.0 inches and - more importantly given the outcry caused by its omission from the G7 - the return of raw shooting capabilities. Other minor tweaks include a better grip and the addition of wireless flash capabilities. Everything else; the 6x stabilized zoom, flash hot shoe, classic all-metal design and solid build, expansive feature set and extensive manual control system is carried over from the G7.

The G7 receive very mixed responses upon its arrival last year, though as we noted at the time, much of this was because it suffered in comparison to its predecessors (such as the G6) - the lack of defining features such as raw mode, remote control, info panel and rotating LCD made the G7 feel very much like a glorified A series model rather than the flagship it was obviously intended to be . Although there's still no vari-angle screen Canon has addressed a couple of the main complaints about the G7 (the lack of raw and difficulty of shooting single-handed due to lack of grip), and the price - around $500 - has stayed the same. So is it enough to return the G series to its former glory? "

Canon PowerShot G9: Digital Photography Review

It was the only G-series supposedly high end P&S from Canon I could not, in good faith, recommend to the intended targeted audience. I actually saw G7 on the used market go for less than G6 during that time. I personally think this was a HUGE mistake and lost some of its marketshare to later competitors that identified a re-emerging popularity of a niche market for high end point and shoot. Namely... Panasonic. I for one owned many models of the G-series and enjoyed each one. I owned the G5 at the time the G7 and ended up with the LX3 panasonic rather than waiting to see if the G9 would even have raw mode capabilities. I've been a fan of Panasonic models for P&S ever since... Each successor to the G-series has felt like an "update" rather than evolution to the line. Something that I never felt from the earlier models. Just look at how different the G1 (which I had too) is from the G6.

The G1x is the first that I feel is a true evolution of the G-series line... lens and sensor are greatly improved (at least on paper). But alas... the G5 was a long time ago (I still have it) and I've discovered that a rather nice alternative to the high end point and shoot is actually the micro 4/3s. I've been enjoying my G1 Panasonic and the Olympus E-PL1 eagerly waiting for the next model that makes a leap in capabilities worthy of my checkbook. Essentially, it has rendered the high end P&S kinda obsolete for me.... the LX3 collecting a bit of dust lately.... despite being a wonderful camera full of fun tines.

 

[Dao]

I think G1x really gear more to photographer for casual shooting. (i.e. travel camera, vacation camera) For those who do not want to carry around all the gears but still want quality images. At one point, I thought about getting a mirrorless camera. But if I am going to carry couple lenses with the camera, I may as well just use my DSLR.

The image quality is quite good. Like this sample photo from Canon. It is quite sharp.
http://usa.canon.com/app/images/cameras/powershot/PS_G1X/sampleimg/original_sample_2.JPG

And the lens focal range is quit nice for what it is for. It just that the cost of the camera is still a little high. (At least for me) When compare to the G11 that I bought, it is couple hundreds more.

 

[nickzou]

I think G1x really gear more to photographer for casual shooting. (i.e. travel camera, vacation camera) For those who do not want to carry around all the gears but still want quality images. At one point, I thought about getting a mirrorless camera. But if I am going to carry couple lenses with the camera, I may as well just use my DSLR.

The image quality is quite good. Like this sample photo from Canon. It is quite sharp.
http://usa.canon.com/app/images/cameras/powershot/PS_G1X/sampleimg/original_sample_2.JPG

And the lens focal range is quit nice for what it is for. It just that the cost of the camera is still a little high. (At least for me) When compare to the G11 that I bought, it is couple hundreds more.

Nah bro. I went to the local camera store yesterday because I just got my M39-m4/3 adapter in on Friday to try out some M39 lenses. The one they lent me is the one I actually have coming in the mail. Jupiter-8 50mm f/2 and they let me try the Jupiter-9 85mm f/2 as well and I gotta say, not only do they look uber-cool on the camera they are also a lot better than I expected. And there's a world of difference between having a 50mm f/1.4 G and a 85mm f/1.4G in your camera bag and having these little lenses stashed into your regular backpack or satchel. I am looking forward to my Jupiter-8 and I think I will pick up a Jupiter-9 is well. With the crop factor, it's a 170mm telephoto that's smaller than most Nikkors. It may be an extra lens, but it is not the same as carrying around a DSLR.

 

[usayit]

Now I am not going to claim that micro 43 is a DSLR replacement never have and my reviews even state so. Several members here that asked my opinion about the system will attest to that. But what I will say that it is a good system to compliment any system. What most dont understand is that the point of the system is not that he body itself is small but so are the lenses and everything else. It's a compromise.... Just like a high end point shoot is a compromise and a consumer point and shoot is even more of a compromise. What compromises you are willing to measure against is a personal decision. For me, he compromises offered by he micro 43 is a better fit than my LX3 and most likely any other high end point and shoot. For one no Canon Gseries can offer me the opportunity to share and enjoy lenses from other systems. Lenses like my collection of k mount and ltm lenses as well as excellent m mount glass.

Yes... The next bloke is going to like how he Gseries is an excellent 1 lens solution for the traveler. But that's just fine.... More choices is better...

The GX1 is a great camera on paper. The first since the g6 that caught my attention as a true evolutionary step. I just don't think it would see use from me as long as there's a panny or Olympus camera nearby.

Ps. I have heard Ina few places regarding price... My first thought was it was expected given the sensor and lens improvements. Perhaps Canon is probably seeing the success from Fuji and the like... With cameras well above the GX1 price point and has probably convinced itself that the market is ready for a more upscale version of the "G". Afterall the size of the G is no longer small by some mirrorless cam standards... And their consumers have another good choice... The S100

 

[Jeremy Z]

Well, I like the idea of it. I'm thinking of another compact camera, and this was in the running.

I have a Pentax dSLR system. It's great, but I find myself not carrying it because of bulk. I never thought I'd turn into one of these people, but I have. The dSLRs are better, but just not enough better to justify carrying them over a high-end compact.

So a couple years ago, I bought a Canon S90. (S100 is the latest iteration) Man, do I love this little camera. I actually left the Pentax at home when we went to Krakow and Prague a year or two ago. I got some good pictures, too, if I may say so myself. Only occasionally did I miss the SLR, and nothing bad enough that I'd have carried it if I had it to do over again. It was only when the 105 mm was not quite enough. 140mm may have been enough. Here are two other past threads of mine on the subject, you may find them worth a read:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...14-canon-powershot-s90-photographers-p-s.html
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ulk-quality-vs-portability-having-camera.html

Now, back to the G1-X. I'm looking for another high-end compact camera to try to get back just a bit of the SLR's advantages without the bulk. The thing I find myself missing most about the SLR is the hot shoe, to which I could mount a bounce flash and get decent indoor flash pix. I also would be glad to keep the large sensor of the S90, get a faster lens if possible (esp. at telephoto), and I wouldn't say no to a touch more telephoto either, hehehe.

But I did consider the Canon S100, G12, and GX-1. (when it comes out)

- The S100 doesn't seem to me to add enough to my S90 to make it worth going to. The extra telephoto might be nice, but it is slow. The GPS is worthless to me. Having just bought a dedicated HD camcorder with an f/1.8 lens, that feature isn't enough to win me over. The 24-120mm zoom range was seriously tempting. But it is only f/2 @ 24 mm. At 120 mm, it is f/5.9. Fail. That is like any other compact, not like an S-series or G-Series should be.

- The G12 is really nice. I like the direct controls, articulated LCD, hot shoe, and a serious extra amount of telephoto. But the lens isn't really any faster, and it has the same sensor. Maybe not quite enough going for it to justify the upgrade. Reports indicate that the optical viewfinder is all but useless.

- The G1-X is also really nice. The main feature being the much larger sensor. But then the lens is 1-2 stops slower, so much of that advantage is thrown away when the light has to fight its way through the dark glass. OK, so maybe that's overdoing it a bit. But it is a fair point, yes? It is an f/5.9 or something at 140mm. On an $800 camera, that is an epic FAIL. Also, the optical viewfinders is said to be pretty bad. Mostly a back-up feature.

- The Olympus XZ-1 seems to have just the right mix of everything: FAST lens, (only f/2.5 at full telephoto!) slightly larger sensor than that of my S90, 7 mm more telephoto, and it is two stops faster there! Good control design, Hot shoe, Zuiko lens. Good price. So they still just have the largish compact sensor, but with that killer lens, they're really making the most of it!

- Pentax, where are you? No, a tiny interchangeable lens camera with a tiny sensor doesn't cut it in this niche.

Still on the fence between the XZ-1 and G12, but leaning toward the XZ-1 due to faster glass instead of more telephoto.

To those of you who feel there's no point to these cameras, just think of what you could do with one of these. Unless you do wildlife or sports photography, one of these cameras could do everything you need, and with very little bulk, even from the Canon Gs.

That was long, but hopefully had some good points in there.

 

[Jeremy Z]

One more thought, for the record: I think for this to really be successful, it either has to cost less than the $800 they're talking about, or it needs a faster lens. No slower than f/2.8 at full telephoto.

 

[usayit]

One more thought, for the record: I think for this to really be successful, it either has to cost less than the $800 they're talking about, or it needs a faster lens. No slower than f/2.8 at full telephoto.

The micro 43 group is struggling with this one as well... faster optics usually results in increase cost, weight, and bulk. How far do you take the design until one of the most important feature of these compact systems is lost... weight and size? Throw in a larger sensor, and it gets even worse as the image circle increases. (this is the NEX system's delima) Fortunately for micro 43, we can adapt manual lenses and they have just begun to release fast native AF primes to keep us happy; 20 f1.7, 25 f1.4, and a 45 f1.8 all palm sized on a 2x crop. 90mm f1.8 EFOV autofocus lens for around 400 USD... thats a novelty. Heck a good quality 50mm f1.4 legacy lens is a novelty on the system. Me... first time I bought the G1 used on ebay out of curiosity, the first lens I threw on it was a 50mm f1.... woohaa 100mm equiv fov with an f1 aperture... that was fun.

If canon did manage to pull a G series with that range and at a f2.8 on the long end in the same package with the same sensor, I'd be the first in line with cash in hand to buy that miracle of optical magic.

 

[Jeremy Z]

faster optics usually results in increase cost, weight, and bulk. How far do you take the design until one of the most important feature of these compact systems is lost... weight and size? Throw in a larger sensor, and it gets even worse as the image circle increases. (this is the NEX system's delima)

Yep, this is a challenge indeed. However, in the case of the G1-X, I wonder how much of that $800 is there because they want a lot of profit? How much more would a fast lens ACTUALLY cost? Even if it becomes bulkier and heavier, it is still less bulky and heavy than an ILC on account of having only one lens!

Fortunately for micro 43, we can adapt manual lenses and they have just begun to release fast native AF primes to keep us happy; 20 f1.7, 25 f1.4, and a 45 f1.8 all palm sized on a 2x crop. 90mm f1.8 EFOV autofocus lens for around 400 USD... thats a novelty. Heck a good quality 50mm f1.4 legacy lens is a novelty on the system. Me... first time I bought the G1 used on ebay out of curiosity, the first lens I threw on it was a 50mm f1.... woohaa 100mm equiv fov with an f1 aperture... that was fun.

I didn't know this was possible. I use older 35mm lenses on my Pentax SLR and accept the change in focal length, but I didn't know it could be done with micro 4/3. In my case, those lenses are really sharp, because I'm only using the sharpest part of them! From your post, it seems like there's a factor of 2x or so when adapting. I'm guessing there are just mechanical adapter rings for the lenses you wish to adapt? Are you using Olympus OM-series lenses? That would be AWESOME, as I have a few...

If canon did manage to pull a G series with that range and at a f2.8 on the long end in the same package with the same sensor, I'd be the first in line with cash in hand to buy that miracle of optical magic.

Mark my words, usayit. They'll do it. Eventually. But this reminds me of a Steve Jobs quote: "It's not good enough to know what people want. By the time you develop it, they want something else. You have to know what they're GOING to want."

 

[usayit]

I didn't know this was possible. I use older 35mm lenses on my Pentax SLR and accept the change in focal length, but I didn't know it could be done with micro 4/3. In my case, those lenses are really sharp, because I'm only using the sharpest part of them! From your post, it seems like there's a factor of 2x or so when adapting. I'm guessing there are just mechanical adapter rings for the lenses you wish to adapt? Are you using Olympus OM-series lenses? That would be AWESOME, as I have a few...

Absolutely... there is a thriving community out there adapting every known lens known to man (practically) to micro 43 cameras. Ron Evers is one here... along with nickzou up there who is getting into Jupiter lenses. Its probably the most adaptable system available to the common consumer right now. The key is the lack of a mirror box, a very short flange distance, and a very good quality EVF. There are literally dozens of adapters (of varying quality and prices) to adapt dozens of mounts to the system. There are also two adapters that adapt the regular 4/3 mount lenses with full AF support (people report very slow response though). There are also different camera body sizes ranging from the tiny Olympus E-PM1 and Panasonic GF3 to the more substantial (still small) Olympus E-P3, Panasonic G and GH series. Its such a flexible system that literally you can create your own system.

For a long time, C-mount lenses were extremely cheap because of their limited applications. Now... OMG, there aren't enough on the used market. For example, the 25mm f/0.95 Angenieux going for over $1000 on ebay now a days. Shooting a Panasonic GH2 in full 1080 with a 50mm equiv focal length with f/0.95 aperture is SO tempting.

Think of all the rangefinder glass out there that could never be adapted to SLRs because of the flange distance? Jupiters, Leica, Contax, etc... On the long end, think of all the extremely fast long telephotos that are available for a few hundred bucks. I have some fast 300mm and 500mm primes. How much for a 1000m f/5.6 in Canon EOS mount? Lol. I say that the system is not up to DSLR quality but for most of us hobbyists its actually more fun.

I adapt
- Takumar screwmounts
- Pentax Kmount (A could Tamron too)
- Leica M-mount.

Often, I'll leave the spare M8 at home and bring an E-PL1 instead just to mix things up. The E-PL1 is lighter wight and I can use the same M-mount lenses in two different ways (M9 or micro 43).



I'll look forward to the day Canon builds it..... I'm actually hoping that Panasonic or Olympus gets there first..



PS> I still use a Pentax K10D with the lenses as well.... when the x1.5 crop is favorable and for macro. Fun too.