Canon G2X

Started Jan 14, 2013 | Discussions thread
Contributing MemberPosts: 617
Re: Canon G2X & full-frame sensors...
In reply to Marco Nero, Jan 16, 2013

I too would like to see a G2 X.

I was unexpectedly forced to reconsider my G1 X when it was stolen from me just before Christmas. I had a lot invested in the camera including a Canon 250D, B+W polarizing filter, a Canon Japan only leather case, a 64GB memory card and more. Including the strap and other sundries I would guess I'd spent close to $2,000 on it.

I took many photos I'll cherish forever but when I came to replace it I didn't buy another. Why?

My main complaint was a lack of speed and firmware support. Canon clearly don't see supporting their bodies in this range as a priority. With the G1 X's lens and sensor, it could have been a truly great camera if they'd given it the speed and usability it deserves. Though I learnt to work round it, I lost many, many shots to lousy focus speed and a sluggish startup.

Given that the camera was my 'go everywhere' choice I wanted to replace it with something of similar size and equal or better quality. I managed to do that and in fact am now shooting an APS-C body, with interchangeable lenses, at a lower cost than the G1 X. The image quality is markedly better at all ISOs and the speed is the same or better. I shoot compact primes so have 'lost' the zoom but I don't shoot zooms on my DSLR's so it's not part of my style anyway. Best of all the new lenses I've bought all cover full-frame and will therefore have value well into the future.

I'm not trolling which is why I'm not mentioning the brand-name. It doesn't matter. What does is that Canon are competing with a very sophisticated MILC market now. I'm a little ahead of the curve but I see an obvious future. Small cameras with sub 35mm sensors which can mount 35mm lenses directly.

Canon and Nikon don't want to do this properly. They make too much selling lenses the way they always have. Someone like Sony or Samsung can profit from this approach though. You'll buy a 500 MILC in high-school and take the lenses with you as far as you want to go. You can then spend more on bodies as you're never forced to start from scratch if you stay within a system. The manufacturer's can do what they do right now - producing bodies fast and lenses slowly. Unlike today we won't all have to consider the expense of buying a new set of lenses each time a better body arrives.

We might even see companies agree on a mount. Leave the lenses to the people who are best at it and sell bodies as fast as the technology progresses.

By not buying another G1 X I've turned my $3-4,000 investment in the replacement system into a long-term one. Less than 20% of that money is in the body. I've very happy with the results I'm getting and if I want to upgrade in future I'll take the rest with me. I could have spent much less and still beaten the results the G1 X gave me but I chose to buy the very best glass on the market.

What do I miss? Canon's interface which I've been using for years mostly.

Why didn't I buy an EOS M?

1. I don't own EF-S glass and my DSLR's are the other brand so buying them would mean duplication.

2. EF-S glass is big. I need a body and a handful of compact primes that'll go in a bag with my computer everywhere I do.

3. The EOS M is too slow in operation.

My story obviously isn't what Canon want to hear. The moral is that they need to risk eating into their own sales before other people do and the issue becomes survival not sales.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow