Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon G1x  (Read 17047 times)
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1734



« on: January 09, 2012, 04:18:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Perfect
Canon actually gets it!
I always wondered why in 35mm film days there were a lot of 35mm compact cameras but no larger format compacts these days
I always wanted a larger format Canon G12 or Nikon P7100
Thanks Canon!
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2012, 04:25:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Perfect
Canon actually gets it!
I always wondered why in 35mm film days there were a lot of 35mm compact cameras but no larger format compacts these days
I always wanted a larger format Canon G12 or Nikon P7100

Sounds like a very interesting camera indeed!

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6295


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2012, 04:31:44 PM »
ReplyReply

... I always wondered why in 35mm film days there were a lot of 35mm compact cameras but no larger format compacts these days...

Indeed... my full-frame compact (Rollei 35) is still significantly smaller than today's so-called "compacts".
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2012, 10:15:40 PM »
ReplyReply

At this price and stuck forever with a slowish F/2.8-5.8 zoom lens, why not instead get one of the various compact system cameras with a comparable kit zoom and the option of using other lenses? The only edge I see is 4x instead of the typical 3x kit lens zoom range.

The price of this camera and the FujiFilm X100 explains why large sensor fixed lens cameras are far less common than compact fixed lens 35mm film cameras: most of those little film cameras were _cheap_, and so was film, given that their users did not shoot huge amounts of it. These fixed lens compacts with biggish sensors address a far more specialized market.

I have to mention the irony of Canon almost adopting 4/3 format ... alright, at 18.7x14mm, it is about 1mm bigger in each direction, and in fact it is officially 3/2" instead of 4/3". Canon joins Nikon and Pentax in sustaining a sensor size divide between DSLR's and the more compact alternatives.

So is this an attempt by Canon planning to reject the compact system camera trend, or is it step on the way, like the X100 was partly a step towards the X-Pro1?
Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 666


« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2012, 10:54:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Every camera in every segment of the market is 'a step along the way.'

I'll pick one of these up and enjoy it as a 1 piece grab and go solution. I haven't bought into the line since the G6 so this will be a nice upgrade indeed. It's just small enough to be convenient and big enough to give very high quality images.

I still have a baby Rollei TL that was my 'compact' camera for many years. Now that was fun to shoot with.

Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387



WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2012, 10:57:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Whatever the camera used, it becomes really hard to blame on gear the lack of outstanding images.  Smiley

Regarding which to chose, I count on Thom Hogan to cast some light on the respective qualities of all these mirrorless options. He seems to be interested in trying all of them regardless of the manufacturer's name.

http://www.sansmirror.com/

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1015


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2012, 11:07:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Sample. I think this is impresive for just a P&S. The mother of all!    Cheesy

http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/cameras/powershot/PS_G1X/sampleimg/original_sample_2.JPG

Eduardo
Logged
Paulo Bizarro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1745


WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2012, 03:29:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I think it is a good move from Canon, it is also quite "safe" on their part. Rather than going the Nikon 1 way (small sensor and new lens mount), they opted to go for a large sensor and "adapting" the zoom lens from the G12. The bottom line is that both companies have avoided the risk to impact their DSLR lenses sales, in two completely different ways.

However, for the non-informed customers, the current "mirrorless" market must seen quite confusing... different sensor sizes, different lens mounts, different solutions, and so on...

The lens is quite slow at the long end, but that is the compromise for the large sensor and "small" size.
Logged

RichDesmond
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2012, 07:18:58 AM »
ReplyReply

At this price and stuck forever with a slowish F/2.8-5.8 zoom lens, why not instead get one of the various compact system cameras with a comparable kit zoom and the option of using other lenses? The only edge I see is 4x instead of the typical 3x kit lens zoom range...

Exactly. For about the same money you can put together an m4/3 system that is far more capable and versatile.
Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1291


« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2012, 07:53:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Exactly. For about the same money you can put together an m4/3 system that is far more capable and versatile.

But is "versatility" something that the average consumer really cares about?

Last week I happened to be browsing in a camera store (imagine that!) and overheard a young woman talking to a sales rep about which camera she should buy.

The prospective buyer was looking for something small. Her primary concern was image quality. Whether it had detachable lenses or not was irrelevant.

For the casual shooter, it may be that the G1X (ugh, "X" again!) is a far more attractive purchase than something with lenses that you can or need to change.

In terms of compact size, when the lens is all folded away, the G1X is not that far off the size of other mirrorless cameras with a pancake lens. The ability and need to change lenses on other mirrorless cameras is both a positive and a negative: extra lenses for extra reach need to be placed somewhere. And then there's dust. There is no free lunch.

As it happened, whilst I was in said store, I was able to get a first hand look at the various NEX cameras and the bulk associated with them once you've got a lens attached and needless to say, whilst the body has gone on a very effective sliming diet, the lenses have not (and more or less, that's the way it has to be.)

The lack of detachable lenses is also an important for the price point. For example, Fuji's latest mirrorless that has an APS-C, is at least twice the price of the G1X when similarly equipped. For the budget conscious buyer, this is not a trivial amount of money that is involved.

Now it may be that Canon's market research tells them that all they need is "big sensor with more MP than a phone and IQ that is better than a phone", rather than detachable lenses. Time will tell.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8292



WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2012, 07:57:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Whatever the camera used, it becomes really hard to blame on gear the lack of outstanding images.  Smiley
Amen to that, Bernard!

Some days none of my cameras seem to have much of an eye for great shots.   Sad

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6295


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2012, 08:03:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Some days none of my cameras seem to have much of an eye for great shots.   Sad

Worry not... That's what the Photoshop is for Cheesy
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1291


« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2012, 10:25:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Worry not... That's what the Photoshop is for Cheesy

Indeed, and Photoshop needs to have a "Convert this image into a masterpiece" button so that I can spend more time doing other things.

Logged
JonathanRimmel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199


WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 10, 2012, 10:37:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Wow, this camera looks crazy good for what it is! Now if they lower the price say $100 - $200 I would like to snatch one up asap. This is what a compact camera should be! Sure there are a few tweaks I would make, such as the lens. (24mm - 120mm f/2.0 - 4) An EVF would be great too.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 10:43:32 AM by JonathanRimmel » Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6295


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 10, 2012, 10:57:30 AM »
ReplyReply

The Achilles heal of this (and many other cameras) is the 19-century viewfinder. Sounds like a last-resort option, nice-to-have, just-in-case (and that is why I opted for my G10), but it is so lousy in practice that I never really used it. It is imprecise when it matters the most (i.e., in the telephoto range) and obscured by the lens barrel, has no focusing help and no other information. I sorely miss the intimacy and close contact with the subject that only a proper viewfinder provides. I hate that stretch-your-hands, squint-like-hell, look-like-idiot, touristy way we are forced to use today's p&s. Compare that with the modern EVF and optical hybrids.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1291


« Reply #15 on: January 10, 2012, 01:15:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Wow, this camera looks crazy good for what it is! Now if they lower the price say $100 - $200 I would like to snatch one up asap. This is what a compact camera should be! Sure there are a few tweaks I would make, such as the lens. (24mm - 120mm f/2.0 - 4) An EVF would be great too.

Give it a year or so and the price should moderate ...

The Achilles heal of this (and many other cameras) is the 19-century viewfinder. Sounds like a last-resort option, nice-to-have, just-in-case (and that is why I opted for my G10), but it is so lousy in practice that I never really used it. It is imprecise when it matters the most (i.e., in the telephoto range) and obscured by the lens barrel, has no focusing help and no other information. I sorely miss the intimacy and close contact with the subject that only a proper viewfinder provides. I hate that stretch-your-hands, squint-like-hell, look-like-idiot, touristy way we are forced to use today's p&s. Compare that with the modern EVF and optical hybrids.

I'm confused.

Why is the EVF still so important?

Isn't the hour before/after sunrise/sunset the right time to shoot?

And isn't it usually too challenging to shoot handheld, and thus want to work with a tripod?

And when you're tripod orientated, isn't it better to use the LCD/live view instead of the view finder?

Similarly, when I don't have a tripod and I need to ensure a "steady shot", I usually find something to put the camera on, or push it up against something (so as to try and eliminate one plane of movement entirely), in which case using the view finder (be it EVF or not) is also cumbersome.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6295


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 10, 2012, 01:59:27 PM »
ReplyReply

... I'm confused.

Why is the EVF still so important?...

Not sure if your post is tongue-in-cheek, but in case it isn't, here is my answer:

Why is a proper viewfinder so important? I thought I explained it above.

I am certainly not going to carry a tripod with me only to use it with a p&s. If I carry it, I do not mind carrying my DSLR as well. And yes, on tripod, I prefer live view to a viewfinder.

The same goes for sunset/sunrise. If I am planning to shoot it, then I'll carry a DSLR and tripod (besides, dynamic range of p&s is definitely not suitable for that subject). I carry p&s when I am not planning serious shooting. That is the whole idea of a small, pocketable camera, or at least something less noticeable on my shoulder (as G10, let alone G1X, is definitely not a pocketable camera).

Not to mention that there are other subjects in life, besides sunset/sunrise.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387



WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 10, 2012, 05:17:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I am certainly not going to carry a tripod with me only to use it with a p&s. If I carry it, I do not mind carrying my DSLR as well. And yes, on tripod, I prefer live view to a viewfinder.

That is the thing.

Chances are that the image quality of the G1X is superior in all areas compared to the D2x I used to shoot some of my favorite landscape images with. I always shot on tripod, MLU, cable release and most of my images were as critically sharp as the lack of live view allowed for. It is probably also superior to that of the initial 1Ds that many pro landscape shooters used to replace their MF film cameras.

So it would in fact make sense to shoot the G1X on tripod from an image quality potential standpoint... but does it make sense in terms of total package considering the bulk/weight of the tripod/head? I believe that if you are willing to carry a tripod, you might indeed be better off bringing a top APS-C DSLR like the 7D with better lenses and more flexibility.

So back to the key point... a camera purchase that is done in the context of a finite budget should be considered relative to the rest of one's cameras line up. I believe that it is possible to optimize one's spending by:
- avoiding too much overlap in applications between cameras,
- go as far as possible with the abilities of each camera

I am afraid that few of us at LL will see a real need for a camera like the G1X. This does of course not mean that we might not want one.  Grin

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1734



« Reply #18 on: January 10, 2012, 06:42:38 PM »
ReplyReply

It perfectly fits my needs in the cockpit
I want reasonably good IQ and low light capability
But don't want the bulk or weight of dslr
I always looked at my g9 then my p7000 and wanted one a little larger with a sensor like in my k5
So I was considering a nex7 until Canon answered my prayers
So for me this works
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1015


WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 10, 2012, 06:54:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Chuck Westfall said last night that the G1X IQ is to be a bit better than the 7D's.

I think the whole purpose of a P&S is to leave home without a tripod. No extras of any kind. Nada. But I would certainly carry one and be totally happy about it if by any unexpected circumstance I have to shoot something important with the G1X. bTW, I'm abandoning using the iPhone for night parties. It's totally useless!  Embarrassed

I agree that none us would ever "need" one. But I'd prefer to take this baby to a friends party than carrying my 5D2 with a 24-105 and a 580XII. For traveling when photography is not the main thing, this baby would be the right tool too. For dubious or unsafe places and streets, risking $800 sounds better than risking more expensive equipment.

I'm sure there are more instances for choosing this camera over a dslr. Unless you are 24/365 pro.  Cheesy  

Eduardo


Chances are that the image quality of the G1X is superior in all areas compared to the D2x I used to shoot some of my favorite landscape images with. I always shot on tripod,

? I believe that if you are willing to carry a tripod, you might indeed be better off bringing a top APS-C DSLR like the 7D with better lenses and more flexibility.

I am afraid that few of us at LL will see a real need for a camera like the G1X. This does of course not mean that we might not want one.  Grin

Cheers,
Bernard

« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 07:00:50 PM by uaiomex » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad