First Impressions Review: Using the Canon PowerShot G16

Buy on GearShop$499.00

Image quality compared (Low Light)

Our latest test scene is designed to simulate both daylight and low-light shooting. Pressing the'lighting' buttons at the top of the widget allows you to switch between the two. The daylight scene is shot with manually set white balance, but the camera is left in its Auto setting for the low-light tests.

Note: this page features our new interactive studio scene. Click here for instuctions on the widget.

75
I own it
45
I want it
26
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Canon PowerShot G16

Comments

Total comments: 350
123
cab321
By cab321 (3 months ago)

The lack of articulating viewfinder is a deal-breaker. I'm holding on to my Powershot A640, it uses standard AA batteries that also work my mouse, phone, remote, Wii remote, etc. Proprietary batteries are the reason I stopped buying Sony.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
taosphotos
By taosphotos (4 months ago)

I hope the leaf lens cover stops scratching the lens … a la the G10 and G12

0 upvotes
keekimaru
By keekimaru (4 months ago)

The Canon G series of cameras has sat at the top of the compact pile for several years and there are signs that Canon is taking its customers for granted. The phone app is not worth the effort of installation. The lack of a swivelling LCD is odd for a top compact. The G16 is a good camera, but not the category killer the G once was.

Read More : http://webcamerawebcamera.com/detail.php?id_detail=21

0 upvotes
Konrad Lefkon
By Konrad Lefkon (6 months ago)

Comparing the various ISO's RAW and JPEG at different parts of the studio scene the RX100M2 doesn't seem so much better than the G1X to me...I must be missing something as the RX100M2 is one heck of a popular camera on here.

In the UK the RX100M2 is about £200-£250 more expensive than the G1X.

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (6 months ago)

The G1X has a larger sensor. It is also a much larger camera.

0 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (6 months ago)

100D become smallest DSLR, so I am waiting for the smallest APEC G1X mk2. Dual pixel AF, Dual pixel exp, f/1.4 ~ f/2.8, 24 ~ 150 mm, switchable macro filter. 20 fps.

3 upvotes
Konrad Lefkon
By Konrad Lefkon (6 months ago)

I'm not holding my breath waiting :)

0 upvotes
Den Sh
By Den Sh (6 months ago)

Dream on.

0 upvotes
Hachu21
By Hachu21 (6 months ago)

Hi DPR,

Please could you explain why you did the test shots at f/5.6?
- first, it's not représentative of the typical use for this kind of camera. They are often used full opened or a bit stopped down, but not that much (mini. aperture is f/8)
- second, I saw some test saying that the g16 lens is best around f/2, diffraction loss being visible right from f/4 (Chasseur d'images magazine).

I know it will not change the whole story, but it seems a bit unfair imho.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (6 months ago)

I think Canon did a good job here....... protecting their entry level dslrs.

4 upvotes
camerosity
By camerosity (6 months ago)

The Nikon P7700 is much better, now the P7800 even better. Sorry Canon.

1 upvote
naththo
By naththo (6 months ago)

Canon GX1 is even better than Nikon P7700 :P

1 upvote
Sordid
By Sordid (6 months ago)

Unfortunately, Sony spanks them both.

0 upvotes
Benarm
By Benarm (6 months ago)

NEX-3N spanks the PowerShot G16 from the value side and the image quality side.

4 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (5 months ago)

It doesn't really "spank" anything unless you put a non-kit lens on it though does it and it certainly doesn't spank a G16 for versatility in a small package, which is the point of such a camera.

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (6 months ago)

The compact camera market, specifically the ones with the auto retracting lenses, collapsed many months ago, Canon.

Is this your model to try to sweep away the last remnant of that quagmire?

Well, somebody has to clean up the mess... might as well be you.

.

2 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (6 months ago)

@ Ajax2u

You are right. After all the hype about the RX100M2, I tested the camera a few days ago. Despite all the good things people say about it, I find the camera is not as user friendly as my G12 or the G16. What's very good about the G12 is you get all the important dials (controls) like ISO, mode and exposure compensation up front and not in the menu. Sometimes, I wish my DSLR has that too. You get to change those variables in an instant. The grip is also better. 10Mp on the G12 is more than enough. I shot a night scene resting the camera on a rail and could make an A3 enlargement with it using ISO100, f/4.0 and 5sec exposure.

The G series has much better macro capabilty, useful for casual closeup shots of flowers and still life. Battery life is longer.

One can get an underwater housing for the G series but I am not so sure about the RX100M2.

So, even if the G series has a smaller sensor, it is a more versatile camera to use.

2 upvotes
vapentaxuser
By vapentaxuser (6 months ago)

I like the G series cameras but if Canon wants to continue to be relevant in the enthusiast compact market, they are going to have to up their game some. The Sony RX100II may be as slippery as a bar of soap but the output from that camera is in a whole 'nother league. Canon would help themselves immensely in this segment if they A) lowered the price of the G16 and B) Released a follow-up to the G1X that at least rivals the speed of the G16 in terms of operational performance. It's not just Canon...but Nikon P7800 is way overpriced, and Olympus was out of their minds charging $600 to start for the XZ-2. 1/1.7" will soon represent the lower end of the camera market and should start to be priced accordingly.

4 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (6 months ago)

@ vapentaxuser

It would be good if Canon can produce a Canon G1X Mark 2 with a faster AF at about $550 and trim down the physical size of the body as well.

If Olympus can produce a tiny GM1, I am sure it is possible to make it smaller. They can also make a brighter but shorter zoom lens, say, a 24-70mm equivalent at f/2.8-4.0.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (6 months ago)

"Olympus" above should read "Panasonic".

0 upvotes
Hachu21
By Hachu21 (6 months ago)

@ vapentaxuser

again, the full g16 review on Camera Lab says the G16 is a bit more reactive than RX100. So in this field at least, Canon allready upped the game.

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (6 months ago)

We have both the G15 and the RX100. The Sony is by far the better camera at least image quality wise. We also have the G1X which has better image quality than the Sony. What Canon should do is come out with a G2X but make it much smaller than the G1X and do their best to keep the large (G1X) sensor.

2 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (6 months ago)

The only reservantion against this camera is that it should have EVF instead of OVF. It alone would make the camera probably smaller and certainly much more usable.

Re "ridiculously small sensor" comments: you guys are ridiculously uninformed. Despite the RX100 1" sensor, it can provide serious IQ advantage over 1/1.7" on wide end only. The lens is not bright enough at mid-to-tele, and does not resolve closeups well enough

1 upvote
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (6 months ago)

Yeah, I noted that with my Pentax Q7, it outperforms RX100 on anything above 70mm equivalent.

0 upvotes
Hachu21
By Hachu21 (6 months ago)

I agree. please have a look to the Camera Lab review.
the whole story is not so "black & white" as people seems to like.
As an exemple, the g16 offer a shallower dof for portraits, have better macro capabilities, better continuous shooting mode, and according this review, a bit better AF.

0 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (6 months ago)

I thought these studio shots were already available for a month. They were included in RX100 II review comparison

1 upvote
audiomay
By audiomay (6 months ago)

Anyone knows if in video mode, the zoom continues to be Digital?
Although I use my G12 mainly for photos, I also like to use the video to catch my children's playing around and doing funny stuff, like any father :), but is annoying to see the pixels on the TV, every time I use the zoom during the recording…
I love my G12, but I don´t mind to upgrade to the G16 if this issue already disappeared.

0 upvotes
Hachu21
By Hachu21 (6 months ago)

they upgraded this on the G16 : Optical zoom is working during videos. so no more quality loss. (have a look on youtube.

0 upvotes
audiomay
By audiomay (5 months ago)

Great!
Thanks for the answer

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (6 months ago)

To mushy. ...don't need a web cam. We can't abide these tiny sensors; when we know there exists smaller lens solutions, for much larger 1" (pocket end) , m43, APS-C, and even FF sensors (small prime lens size).

...and none of those need to be expensive! Don't believe otherwise.

2 upvotes
pixperfect
By pixperfect (6 months ago)

I would like to know about the body of the G16, metal or plastic?
I am comparing the Canon G16 and the Nikon P7800. I would like to know where the Canon G16 is made? I know the Nikon P7800 is made in China and I have heard that the Canon G16 is made in Japan.
Between 2 cameras, one made in Japan and the other one made in China, I guess that most people will buy the one made in Japan, even though the P7800 has a better lens.

0 upvotes
philcuore
By philcuore (6 months ago)

G16 is made in Japan, we'll i was expecting Thailand or China ... anyway i'm happy that it is made in the country where the brand are from.

1 upvote
vapentaxuser
By vapentaxuser (6 months ago)

I think it's high-grade plastic over a metal frame.

0 upvotes
Hachu21
By Hachu21 (6 months ago)

Nope.... full metal boby. The thick black coating is misleading like on my S95 and other G cameras. But i don't know if it's one piece magnesium or magnesium sheets screwed ond stainless steel frame...

0 upvotes
HiHai
By HiHai (6 months ago)

So if I shoot RAW most of the time, I can save money by getting G15?

0 upvotes
vapentaxuser
By vapentaxuser (6 months ago)

Yes. There isn't that much that separates the two in terms of image quality.

1 upvote
gpsgps
By gpsgps (6 months ago)

Whrere, oh, where is the tilt and swivel screen, eh?

6 upvotes
Guidenet
By Guidenet (6 months ago)

I think those tilt and swivel screens are more for the blokes who rather argue those points instead of making pictures. It seems that everyone who makes the point to ask also has nothing in their free DPR Gallery nor a link to something else. Why then would they need a flippy twisty screen?

12 upvotes
Jeffery1987
By Jeffery1987 (6 months ago)

because compared to DSLRs, compacts are easier to hold in other positions and a tilt swivel screen allows the photographer to explore different possibilities in composition through these different positions. This you would have known if you spent more time taking photos.

6 upvotes
Semperfed
By Semperfed (6 months ago)

I have one on my Canon HX40HS, and find it works great where you are in a crowd and forced to shoot up and over the crowd, you can just tilt the screen downwards to frame a good shot. The other way I use it is when I want to take a picture of myself next to someone else, I can swivel the screen so I can view it from the front of the camera and thus frame a good "buddy" shot of the two of us. I'm sure there are other ways as well......

0 upvotes
Ajax2u
By Ajax2u (6 months ago)

Guidenet... Seriously dude!! talk with a higher level of respect for the art of photography! A professional for 38 years and I can assure you that swivel and tilt screens on these little accent shot cameras are an important feature sadly missed on the G15 and now G16. shooting from the ground or above your head is a great advantage and is why many will not give up their G12. I have the G15 and its a great little number to have in your pocket to shoot wedding accents such as the rings, table dressings and all those little things that make contextual shots. Swivels are fantastic for this type of shooting. Please think before saying silly stuff, as peer photographers we should always have respect for one another!

6 upvotes
Le Kilt
By Le Kilt (6 months ago)

It's always someone who's ignorant and never used a t&s screen that slams then.
In addition to what's said above, any time you have the camera on a tripod and it's not at eye-level, it's sooo useful.
I'll pick up a G17 if it has one and a lens that opens to 24mm.
If we're lucky we'll also see one on the 5D Mk IV...

4 upvotes
EDWARD ARTISTE
By EDWARD ARTISTE (6 months ago)

@guidenet

Stop making a fool of yourself. Is it really that hard for to to grasp the kind of shots that you can take with that twisty thing?

For street photography, a swivel screen is golden. Ive frequently set the camera to the side of me and gotten pictures that would have otherwise not been possible. How about shooting BEHIND you- without walkign backwards? Can you do that with you 5d3? Dont think so.

1 upvote
vapentaxuser
By vapentaxuser (6 months ago)

Despite my concerns on the price...I bought this camera and got it from Amazon last night. I am not so sure the AF has improved in low light over the G15. But the image quality is impressive. The rounded handgrip up front makes it more comfortable to hold but the thumb grip on the back is slightly smaller.

0 upvotes
Rick Hughes
By Rick Hughes (6 months ago)

Would agree with "JustmeMN" >Minor updates mean continued sales, with minimal R&D expenses.<
Evolution can be beneficial, small but impressive tweaks, rather than throw it away each time.
Saving R&D costs can mean better value products.
In same way I had several 35mm Canon cameras ..
AE1, E1, EOS600 ......... development of the family.

0 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (6 months ago)

Panasonic GX-7, LF-1 and Nikon's P7800 all have accurate EVFs leaving the Canon with a highly inaccurate glass tunnel to roughly guess what you are getting. As I need corrected vision close up, a VF is essential so this means the Canon Gs are still off the list. Pity, as I like Canon products overall and would have bought the G15/16 had it come with a decent OVF or EVF. One other thing, Canon have a shorter zoom range than the competition so why can't they give us a 24-140mm to compete with Nikon and Panasonic's 28-200mm?

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (6 months ago)

Panasonicus:

The GX-7 only just shipped in the USA, it costs a great deal more. The LF1 is the only pocket raw camera with a built-in EVF.

And I believe the Nikon has a bit slower lens.

The reason for less zoom on the Canon is that the lens is faster than both the Nikon and the LF1. Most people who buy this camera are far more interested in a fast lens than zoom range.

There are also those who prefer an optical view, even if it's not perfectly accurate--particularly when the cited LF1 is not the greatest.

3 upvotes
philcuore
By philcuore (6 months ago)

G16 gives you a FS of 1.8 to 2.8, i guess this makes up the zoom. a lower FS lens is much prefered.

0 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (6 months ago)

As long as people continue to buy GXX cameras, Canon will continue to make them. Minor updates mean continued sales, with minimal R&D expenses.

2 upvotes
Musikboy
By Musikboy (7 months ago)

Surprised at how Canon keeps ignoring the market overall. Still one more iteration without a 24mm wide lens, still just 12mp and a small sensor compared to the now leading RX-100 cameras. Still too heavy, still too big.

Just my opinion.

7 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (6 months ago)

Canon already made the mistake of entering the more pixels race in earlier versions of the G series.

Thankfully Canon learnt that better image quality at higher ISOs is more important than simply more pixel cramming, and Canon revised the sensors in later G cameras to have 10 and now 12MP. (Wikipedia link to G series: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_PowerShot_G)

Frankly 8MP would be better.

So drop the more pixels unconditionally makes a better image implication. Even the vaunted Sony RX100 suffers from pixel cramming sins. Though the new one, with the BSI sensor, sure looks better at higher ISOs. Anyhow in either case, those Sonys have a much bigger sensor than the Canon.

In fact Canon is not “ignoring the overall market”, cameras like the Panasonic LX7 and the Olympus XZ2 have 10 and 12MP sensors respectively, and those are direct competitors.

It's no longer the year 2003.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (6 months ago)

I would agree with HowaboutRAW.

I have a Canon G12 which I use more often than my Canon 5D Mk2, 40D, Lumix GF1 and other film cameras.

I don't think Canon is ignoring the market overall with the G series. In fact, the G has an established customer base. Those who go diving but could not buy a DSLR housing would most likely use a G series camera with its affordable housing. Many journalists would use a G camera for small assignments. The G series is adequite for many travel writers who do not need enlargement larger than A3. Contrary to what others say, it is quite a capable "small" camera.

Most important, it must be user friendly. I have no complaints about my G12 for what it can do. The G16 should be better.

10Mp is more than enough, 12Mp is about the ceiling for the sensor size. Just keep it that way.

Hey, I could do an A3 enlargement with an image taken with the 7Mp Powershot A620 years ago without any problem. So how big do you want to go?

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
peter42y
By peter42y (6 months ago)

I also 100% agree with whataboutraw.
The g12/ g15,,etc continue to be very popular. This is the reason canon does continue to make them.
When it does come to more pixels in a small sensor..,canon make a good move.
Less pixels are better.

2 upvotes
Ajax2u
By Ajax2u (6 months ago)

I have the 5DMKII, 50D, G15 and the Sony RX100 and use them all but the one standout for portable light compact shooting is the G15, its very impressive and the only reason I will not be updating it for the G16 is that the G16 still does not have the swivel and tilt screen. The RX100 is not as good as the G15 for picture quality but the RX100 is much smoother for video and is why I have kept it in my kit.

0 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (6 months ago)

"the RX100 is not as good as the G15 for picture quality"?
Is this April 1st?

2 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (6 months ago)

We have both the G15 and RX100 and the Sony's image quality is better.

Our G1X has better image quality than the Sony. Sensor size matters.

1 upvote
Kawika Nui
By Kawika Nui (7 months ago)

Gunther35
Aloha and thank you for posting your comments--organized, on topic and to the point. The type of comment that is needed on any camera forum. Agree or not, you have given clear and precise observations.
Mahalo

0 upvotes
2001
By 2001 (7 months ago)

When I bought my G9 it was the compact camera of choice., it could shoot raw, it had full manual controls and a magnesium aloy body. It was one of a few compacts a professional photographer considered. This was in 2007. For me this is where my interest in the G series ended, although still excellent cameras , compact iLCs with aps c sensors and interchangeable lenses and being able to use old Lieca , Contax and Angenieux lenses via adapter for the same price as G series camera ended my enchantment. I remember the outrage when the G7 didn't shoot raw. Given that the new bodies are plastic, the price is high and the sensors are small and they are made for professionals who are aware of all this, I wonder how they even sell at all. The blunders of the EOS M and now this ? Can't Cannon at least put an aps-c sensor to at least make it worth looking at ? Cannon has more than proven they make excellent ones. can't imagine buying this camera, I think others feel the same. 9 fps per second is nice but not enough of a rationale to get the camera. Is Cannon asleep? Is a stubborn moron in market research holding everyone hostage at Cannon ? Are they trying to lose a lot of money and reap the rewards of an obscure subsidy or stock option of some kind? I really can't account for any reasons Canon has for making an obsolanete camera and figure out why anyone would want to buy it? I remember when Canon made the best cameras on the market from the 1980's until now. Nikon and Sony are catching up and in some ways even surpassing Canon. Canon's response seems to be bending over backwards to fail. Hopefully Canon will wake up, otherwise the mid 2000's will be remembered as a once great maker a remembered fondly in spite of it's failures like a Voightlandänder and the German camera industry before they lost out to the Japanese in the early 70's

0 upvotes
redeye47
By redeye47 (7 months ago)

You can't make a APS-C camera this size with this small a lens. But, I agree. they could have a much larger sensor. The G1-X seemed to be a logical new path but focus was slow (so I hear).

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (7 months ago)

The Nikon Coolpix A is a compact camera with an APS-C sensor. To keep the camera compact, using that sensor size, they had to use a fixed 18.5mm (28mm equivalent) lens. No zoom.

0 upvotes
FrankS009
By FrankS009 (7 months ago)

M4/3rds?
Same size, much bigger sensor, IQ equivalent to APS-C except for large print pixel peepers, better internal EV in some models, large collection of great glass smaller and lighter than APS-C lenses etc.

F.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (6 months ago)

I bought a Panasonic G3 and yes, it is not much larger or heavier than a G series. Panasonic are, however, building newer Gs larger and heavier defeating the purpose of small. If only the G had a decent OVF or EVF.

1 upvote
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (6 months ago)

I still use my G9. It's a great camera.

2 upvotes
peter42y
By peter42y (6 months ago)

Hi : You ask :" Can't Cannon at least put an aps-c sensor to at least make it worth looking at ? ".
G1X has an APS-C sensor.., and was not popular !!!
People complained a lot.
The G series at the time , sold much better than the aps-c canon which was the canon G1X.
In fact the september 2011 when a small sensor G was due , canon did not launch any G small sensor camera.
January 2012 G1X was launched.

It was a flop

0 upvotes
gunther35
By gunther35 (7 months ago)

I actually think the G16 might compete well with my RX100II.

In favor of the G16:

1) Built in viewfinder
2) No buffer at 9 fps!
3) IQ will be pretty close at the tele focal lengths because the lens is almost 2 stops faster at the tele end.
4)Better ergonomics ( I always prefer a smaller lens to body ratio)
5)A second custom setting on the dial
6)longer telephoto reach
7)A remote cable switch

In favor of the RX100II:

1) Better IQ at wide focal lengths and lower light
2) Pocketable
3) 20MP
4) tilting LCD

2 upvotes
KariIceland
By KariIceland (6 months ago)

You are confusing image quality with apeture, they are never related

1 upvote
Rogue2
By Rogue2 (6 months ago)

In addition to that tidbit of 411, what's your thoughts on a side-by-side comp of Canon's G16 v Sony's RX100ll? I really like both but the G16 seems more sturdy and offers a little more body to grip. While I'm not familiar with Sony cams, I'm impressed with its low light rez and overall IQ. What am I missing?

0 upvotes
Ajax2u
By Ajax2u (6 months ago)

I own a G15 and the RX100. If you want great videos get the RX100 but for Stills the G series is much better. You don't realize this until you commence post editing... Not that the RX100 is bad, its just that the G series is better in both image quality and has a much better menu system with good direct access to the essentials.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (6 months ago)

@ Ajax2u

You are right. After all the hype about the RX100M2, I tested the camera a few days ago. Despite all the good things people say about it, I find the camera is not as user friendly as my G12 or the G16. What's very good about the G12 is you get all the important dials (controls) like ISO, mode and exposure compensation up front and not in the menu. Sometimes, I wish my DSLR has that too. You get to change those variables in an instant. The grip is also better. 10Mp on the G12 is more than enough. I shot a night scene resting the camera on a rail and could make an A3 enlargement with it using ISO100, f/4.0 and 5sec exposure.

The G series has much better macro capabilty, useful for casual closeup shots of flowers and still life. Battery life is longer.

One can get an underwater housing for the G series but I am not so sure about the RX100M2.

So, even if the G series has a smaller sensor, it is a more versatile camera to use.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (6 months ago)

@KariIceland: aperture and IQ unrelated? The main advantage of large aperture (smaller f-number) -beyond the shallow DOF gimmick- is that it reduces the shutter time, allowing for lower ISO values.

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (6 months ago)

A faster lens is one thing but a larger sensor is another.

1 upvote
Stephen_C
By Stephen_C (7 months ago)

I thought the G1X was the worthy successor to the G-series cameras. Coming out with the G16 when the G1X and the Sony RX100 are already out seems odd.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

In the USA, the G1X still retails for $700.

Yes it has big sensor--though likely of course a Canon sensor, not say a Sony.

Then it has a slower lens than later G series cameras, or the first G series cameras too.

It' s good bit bigger than the G16.

And, really most important: The AF does not have a good reputation.

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (7 months ago)

The body of the Canon G1 X is 7% wider and 21% taller than the Canon EOS M. If Canon ever creates a G2 X, it should have a smaller body.

2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

The G1X has accurate but very slow focusing. The lens is slow, too. It has no close-up capability at all--the way cameras used to be, when you bought a macro lens and got outstanding macro results. It's large and not stylish. But the absolute worst feature is that once you see the image quality, you're not going to consider any of the other G series.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

AbrasiveR:

Perhaps I should have said "slow" instead of "bad reputation".

I've not tried the G1X, but I'm sure it has plenty good image quality when shooting raw, but as you say it has a slow lens and slow AF.

It remains fairly expensive too. It's something that Canon should replace with V2. Yes, I know it will take something out of lowend SLR sales.

0 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (6 months ago)

The Canon G1X seems to me to be a "clunker" with a poor VF, no close-up ability, large and heavy and slow focusing. Why buy it when Micro 4/3rds offers far more?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (6 months ago)

Panasonicus:

If you're thinking of the G1X, then yes it makes sense to also look at the MFT cameras.

Though the G1X has a screen with greater articulation and the lens collapses into the body--so those are features some may seek out. Technically the G1X also has a bigger sensor.

0 upvotes
Jim
By Jim (6 months ago)

I think some may have a misunderstanding regarding the G1X. There is nothing on the market today that packs a near-APS C size sensor and zoom lens in such a small package.

My experience has been that the G1X's autofocus is in the same general performance category as the G11/G12...not a speed demon but acceptably decent. What often gets overlooked is its ability to really crank up the ISO and still maintain excellent image quality. Yes, macros aren't its strong suit.

As far as overall flexibility in taking images under a very wide variety of lighting conditions, it far outshines the G15/16. This is a very underrated camera.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (6 months ago)

Now, the G1X is selling for about $550 in many markets. It might even drop further.

For those who do not plan to get an APS-C DSLR, the G1X may be a good alternative for better image quality.

0 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (7 months ago)

Why so big the physical size??

2 upvotes
brn68
By brn68 (7 months ago)

clearly to make up for the ridiculously small sensor.

9 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (7 months ago)

There may be additional reasons, but it has to be tall to fit in the optical viewfinder.

1 upvote
rocklobster
By rocklobster (6 months ago)

There is a segmant of the market that still believes that bigger is better irrespective of sensor size. People that have large hands or that are used to the ergonomics of a chunky design that is big enough to grip firmly love this design. This is one of the reasons why people have not crossed over the compact mirrorless cameras and are still buying traditionally styled DSLRs. Also, a larger camera is peceived to be the tool of a serious or semi-pro photographer and unfortunately many amateurs like to be seen with a big camera around their necks rather than some dinky looking toy (their thinking, not mine). This is possibly why the Panasonic GH3 has grown to DSLR size to capture this market despite its smaller mirrorless heritage.

Cheers

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
mcshan
By mcshan (6 months ago)

It follows in the G10 +++ tradition...big camera and a small sensor.

0 upvotes
Jote
By Jote (7 months ago)

Bring back the 200mm on the tele-end and I'm sold. Been waiting to upgrade my G7 since like forever, but 140 is not enough for me, and I don't dare to switch to Nikon.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

Most people, though not all, would want a faster lens, and that limits the zoom range. Or the lens gets much bigger+heavier and the camera is a good bit more expensive.

2 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (7 months ago)

Live on the edge ...
Keep your Canon, and boldly go where you've never been before.
You might end up with a Casio and be happier then ever.
Think of what you could be missing....

0 upvotes
Jim
By Jim (7 months ago)

As HowaboutRAW mentioned, count me in as one who would rather have a faster lens rather than more zoom for a "G2X"

Jim

0 upvotes
Semperfed
By Semperfed (6 months ago)

Jote, take a look at the Canon HX50HS, or even the Canon Powershot SX260HS, if you want zoom in a smaller camera.

1 upvote
SRT3lkt
By SRT3lkt (7 months ago)

Does G16 maintain MF when rear LCD turned off?

0 upvotes
deploylinux
By deploylinux (7 months ago)

G15 with its f/1.8 lens, good af, low price, and excellent image quality at <=1000 iso handle most situations very well and is a great deal.

G16 seems to address the fps issue for those needing great action photography at low cost. It also fixes the main complaint regarding G15 video (that it didn't support 1080p60). So, a nice incremental bump.

Going forward, the biggest issue holding back the G series is noise at >1000 iso and the minimal zoom (5X is starting to look pathetic). My guess is that G17 will have a variable f/1.4-f/2.0 lens with 10x zoom. Faster lens = less noise for most shots. That seems much more realistic than assuming they'll get a larger sensor down to g15/16's size and price point without sacrificing lens speed, fast a/f, and fps.

0 upvotes
Teru Kage
By Teru Kage (7 months ago)

The G-series was a serious contender during the early boom of DCs but with the advent of MILC, I find it increasing difficult to find a justification for this line. There are M4/3 and NEX cameras that offer better quality and performance with less bulk and comparable prices, and compact DCs that fit in your pocket with similar image quality, which makes me wonder what benefit the G-series offers in today's market.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

And a few months after this Canon G16 ships, it will retail for less than those system camera bodies. So the comparable prices thing is misleading.

With lenses those are all bigger than the G16.

It is lovely that Canon stuck with the wheels for adjustment on this G series. Sony could learn something from that.

No, barring some radical change in sensor technology–prisms, Samsung’s Isocell perhaps–this smaller G series isn’t likely to compete with the likes of the Sony RX100 or MFT cameras for high ISOs. But this is a good smallish camera, with real manual control and very good image quality at lower ISOs.

Finally: It shoots raw, and Canon fixed the slow lens problem of versions like the G12.

Does it have stiff competition from the likes of the Fuji X20 or the Olympus XZ2? Yes.

2 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (7 months ago)

Nex-3N (with pancake zoom) sells for $449, so the Canon needs to drop $100 just to match that price

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

ET2--

That Sony is being discounted to get to that pricing, and the Sony has a slower lens.

0 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (7 months ago)

I cannot understand the NEX3 being touted as an alternative. The whole point of the G cameras is you do not have to wade through labyrinthine menus to do anything as is necessary with the stripped to the bare essentials entry level NEX's.

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
dstate1
By dstate1 (7 months ago)

Most people would never be able to see any differences in prints between the current small sensor cameras and the load of apsc cameras flooding the market. You are better off investng in a great printer and fine art grade paper if results are important to you.

PS: we need a "dislike" button.

4 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (7 months ago)

Panasonic LF-1, GX-7, Nikon P7800 all have electronic viewfinders and the Fuji X20 has more than an inaccurate tunnel a la Canon G series. The market appears to be moving toward accurate viewfinders and for me not having an EVF or a reasonably accurate OVF is a deal breaker. Pity the G16 didn't catch up with Nikon and Panasonic in this area.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

The LF1 is still an outlier for cameras that small, and has a much slower lens than the G16--particularly when zoomed.

The GX7 has not even shipped yet, in the US, and has a much bigger sensor, takes interchangeable lens, so is in a significantly different category+costs a good bit more.

1 upvote
IEBA1
By IEBA1 (7 months ago)

5x lens? Nikon beats it.
No tilt-swivel screen? Nikon beats it.
But the Nikon is infuriatingly slow to use.

Can someone come out with a mash up?
Great image quality, 10x bright lens, very zippy, 10MP enough- use big pixels to gather lots of light, WiFi, = great travel zoom.

5 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (7 months ago)

Leica V-Lux 1. Bright lens, 10x, 10mp.

Done.

0 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (7 months ago)

Panasonic G6 with compact 14-140mm zoom. Or, if the G6 is too large the "not much bigger than a Canon G series" G3 will do it but it lacks wifi.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
paragrapher
By paragrapher (7 months ago)

One question to the reviewer: does the new grip make the camera more comfortable to hold?

0 upvotes
vapentaxuser
By vapentaxuser (6 months ago)

I can answer that because I just got the camera last night...up front it does but the thumb grip on back is slightly smaller and less comfortable than on the G15...so it's pretty much a wash between the two.

0 upvotes
paragrapher
By paragrapher (6 months ago)

Thanks! I got the G15 in the end because of the price difference. Love the fast lens, fast operation and multiple dials. Small sensor image quality, but in a great package.

1 upvote
Class Three Plus
By Class Three Plus (7 months ago)

G17 = no conspicuous, ugly (yes, ugly) WiFi sticker, a tilt screen and a better sensor. ...so hang on.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (7 months ago)

Amazing so much criticism for a camera that performs so well for the price. Wifi-sticker ugly, really? lol

I'm seriously amused and smiling when reading the comments, so don't confuse this comment as whining, It's seriously amazing to me to read some of the criticisms and comparisons to cameras that are in another class or price range entirely.

8 upvotes
Minolta4Life
By Minolta4Life (7 months ago)

Not impressed. Canon needs to step up their game as of late.

2 upvotes
LiSkynden
By LiSkynden (7 months ago)

I still dont get why Canon got back to a G camera with fixed LCD :/

2 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (7 months ago)

So people step up to the G1X to get it.

1 upvote
Abhijith Kannankavil
By Abhijith Kannankavil (7 months ago)

G2x please

9 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (7 months ago)

My theory: If you want a large-sensor small-body camera, Canon wants you to buy an EOS M. I doubt that there will ever be a G2X, but only Canon knows.

0 upvotes
radissimo
By radissimo (7 months ago)

ugly cyclop of the camera!

2 upvotes
Hubertus Bigend
By Hubertus Bigend (7 months ago)

The most interesting compact camera with such a feature set is neither the G16 nor the P7800, while the Nikon would, for my purposes, come closer than the Canon, but rather the Panasonic LF1, which includes both a 28-200mm (eq.) lens and an electronic viewfinder, and it's so small that it's indeed pocketable, something neither the Canon nor the Nikon really is.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

Okay, but the Pana LF1 doesn't have as fast a lens as the G16.

1 upvote
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (7 months ago)

If the LF-1's EVF was reasonable quality I would have been tempted. Put the P7800's EVF in the Panny and they would sell like hot cakes. Canon are falling behind with the G15 and G16 with the old OVF that is far too inaccurate to rely upon for composing your shot.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

Panasonicus--

I like the LF1's VF for a first try at this kind of thing in a truly pocket camera.

But I like the optical quality the lens and high ISO capacity of the Olympus XZ10 more--as pocket cameras go. (Yes of course the Panasonic does better video than the Olympus.)

0 upvotes
MarcMedios
By MarcMedios (7 months ago)

It's a great little camera. Put a Leica logo on it and most of you guys who now criticize it would be salivating for it.

I have a Fuji X20 which cleanly outmatches the G16 in two areas which are important to me: shutter lag (the X20 has none) and small size. However, the G series is excellent; I've used several, a G10, G12, G14, G1X and they all perform admirably, much better than, say, the Leicas that are nothing but rebadged Lumixes.

6 upvotes
nevada5
By nevada5 (7 months ago)

You had a G14? Can you describe it for us please?

12 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

This isn't so far-fetched. Too late now, but if they had put a red dot on the G1X and priced it at $999, DPR would have said "While we have considerable reservations about the G1X's quirks there is no denying the large sensor produces better images than it's competitors."

1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (7 months ago)

I wouldn't say that the X20 is smaller than the G16:

X20 - 117 x 70 x 57 mm
G16 - 109 x 76 x 40 mm

1 upvote
sfphotoarts
By sfphotoarts (7 months ago)

HAHA, kind of hard to take this seriously, when you say you've used the G14, which never existed!

2 upvotes
calmwaters
By calmwaters (7 months ago)

I'd be curious as to how you used the G14 as Canon went from the G12 to the G15, skipping 13 and 14. Are you just making things up to sound impressive? I have used the G15 and just as the article says the shutter lag is pretty much nonexistent so your argument that the Fuji X20 outmatches the G16 is doubtful. While the Fuji is a fine camera I'm inclined to go with the Canon with its brighter lens and much better battery life.

6 upvotes
MarcMedios
By MarcMedios (7 months ago)

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/42066782

I said I used it, and I'm pretty sure it was a 14, because it certainly wasn't a 12, certainly not a G1X and definitely not the 10. I never bought one because it did not fit my other need, size. But I was certainly impressed by the G's. And I really stand by my assessment: put a little Leica logo and half the photographers would be salivating but, because it is an evolution of something that is pretty good, everyone is going "yawn".

0 upvotes
Minolta4Life
By Minolta4Life (7 months ago)

No G13 or 14 ever existed. Must have been the 15. I do agree that if Leica made it, it would be a hot little momma, but they didn't. It's the same old boring Canon design with minimal upgrades IMO. The G's are great cameras, but I haven't seen any improvements that would make me jump from the 12 to the 16. I like the LF1, but it's too tiny, so I'll probably go with the new Nikon for a compact.

1 upvote
SayCheesePlease
By SayCheesePlease (7 months ago)

useless information.

in the west, number13 is unlucky
in east Asia, number 14 sounds similar to the word death

no wonder no 13 and 14

1 upvote
MarceloSalup
By MarceloSalup (7 months ago)

Could have been another 12 for all I know and it just looked different to me. I'm always amazed at how people always grab some tiny detail and hang their entire argument on it.

The point is not the nomenclature, but the camera itself. The times that I've used G's, I have found the image to be really good, the quality solid, the controls very good and the only thing that I didn't like that much was the size and, naturally, the shutter lag.

People are willing to pay $200 or more for the rebadged Lumix under the Leica badge when they are clearly inferior: long lags, slow focus and, in the case of the M's, notorious problems such as the shredding of the memory cards.

Yet, when a manufacturer takes a good product, slowly but surely makes it better, it is criticized because "it is not enough"

1 upvote
mcshan
By mcshan (7 months ago)

That ugly Wi-Fi sticker would be the first thing to go. Makes the camera look cheap.

10 upvotes
BigBen08
By BigBen08 (7 months ago)

I agree!

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

I don't think so ... at least it could be worse in red color.

0 upvotes
sfphotoarts
By sfphotoarts (7 months ago)

paint it red!

3 upvotes
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (7 months ago)

It could be worse: like Sony with anodized aluminum advertising on the stupid thing.

0 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (7 months ago)

It is amazing that people are actually calling it a sticker but still not getting that means it can be peeled off. It beggars belief really.

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (6 months ago)

Greynard, It is ALSO amazing that you missed the part of my post that reads "...would be the first thing to go". That means if I were to buy this camera I would peel it off. Others seem to agree. The entire point is it would be peeled off. Good grief.

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (7 months ago)

DPR should give this camera a Gold, just to torture fans of Sony RX100 II. :-)

6 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (7 months ago)

LOL!

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (7 months ago)

Nothing quite as bad as rabid Sony fangirlz

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (7 months ago)

Sigh, Canon is too comfortable with their sales with no upgrade yet with the image sensor. By now, the G series should have been at the level of the Nikon 1 and Rx100, in terms of sensor size.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

GX1 already has a sensor bigger than the 1" sensor of the Sony RX100.

A bigger sensor in the G16 body would mean a bigger lens.

4 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (7 months ago)

The G1X is at another level, it is m4/3 territory which made it larger and slower to focus. Between the Nikon 1, RX, and the G, I would preferred the Nikon but I don't need an ILC. The RX seems the best, but the price is steep. The G is huge yet nice to handle but with IQ lagging.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

zod--

The GX1 is slow to focus, because Canon was cheap and lazy about the AF on the camera. Nothing to do with a bigger sensor.

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (7 months ago)

Agree, but I'd say with high certainty that EOS M2 and G2x will get dual pixel technology from 70D and EVF, making them go from could would shoulda's to hell yeah's.

0 upvotes
Wendell Wagner
By Wendell Wagner (7 months ago)

Like others -- I see the removal of the articulated screen as an omission for sure. Otherwise, a good tweak to the G series and a possible acquisition if you haven't owned one in quite a while. My G3 was an incredible camera -- and the shots I got from it are still among some of the best pictures I have taken.

Admittedly the RX100 is probably the better all-round camera.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
vroger1
By vroger1 (7 months ago)

I bought each of the G series- trading in each one for 50% of the cost of a new one- and stopped at the G12. In the interim I bought the G1X for the larger sensor. My problem with all of the series was solved with the new lens on the G15 (which I did not buy). f2.8 reducing to 5.6 or whatever when the lens is extended, is too slow. The other item is the v/f. I shoot only through a v/f and it is difficult with these cameras. We need an EVF. Don't ask me why, but when the price dropped like a stone, I bought the EOS M for the sensor size. I can only use it with one lens and an OVF. I have been waiting for a G1X withe a faster lens. I will give up on the V/F if they will produce one. The lenses and quality are wonderful.

0 upvotes
jkoch2
By jkoch2 (7 months ago)

Do you keep the entire "G harem" in the same stable? Doesn't one get jealous if you pick another for an outing? But it must be quite a show to carry them all about at once.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (7 months ago)

vroger1:

You seem to be saying that the G15 has an F2.8 lens, that's a mistake I made too. It, and this new G16, have an F1.8 lens when wide.

0 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (7 months ago)

If you want a small form factor and good OVF the SL1 would be a far better choice than the M. Seems like a strange choice.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (7 months ago)

Canon follows the degenerating way of humanity. It is a real involution we see here.

2 upvotes
MarcMedios
By MarcMedios (7 months ago)

I will be politically incorrect: this comment is dumb. Period. It has nothing to do with photography and it has nothing to do with humans.

9 upvotes
cab321
By cab321 (3 months ago)

deleted .. sorry , wrong thread.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 350
123