G1X MII or RX100II?

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,644Gear list
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to meland, 10 months ago

meland wrote:

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

Of course. You might like them to be a charity but unfortunately they wouldn't remain in business very long if they were. And even if they made the very best products technically possible there is absolutely no guarantee that those products, at the price they would probably have to be sold for, would sell. All manufacturing for the consumer is a compromise even if some here think that makes manufacturers dirty, money grabbing bastards.

Yes, I'm not making any moral judgments on Canon. I'm just stating this because some people are suggesting that some features are technically impossible or something ... I don't doubt that Canon could make a much better camera, but ultimately it is marketing (and not engineering) these days that decides which consumer products will make it to market.

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 4,027
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to howardroark, 10 months ago

howardroark wrote:

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II. Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket. I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios. If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.). Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens. As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself. The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

I do hope you are right, that is your comment that it will shut up the naysayers.  But I fear that there will still be too many who simply don't understand the point of the product, or rather don't want to see the point even if it's not for them, and they will continue to snipe away at it until something else comes along they they don't understand either, or they just get bored.

Prepare to be stunned by all the ways Canon decidedly did not hold back.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,644Gear list
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to Tonkotsu Ramen, 10 months ago

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not assuming anything, but I worked in this business (both product development and sales) for many years and I have a pretty good idea about how the decisions are made and what actual production costs are.

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,644Gear list
Like?
Re: You actually think Canon held back? They've spoiled you.
In reply to howardroark, 10 months ago

howardroark wrote:

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II. Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket. I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios. If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.). Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens. As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself.

Agree that the lens is worth the price of the camera if it really delivers (= at least as sharp as the one on G1X, especially when it comes to corner quality), but I first want to see how it performs.

The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

Let's hope the macro quality is better than what they provide on their somewhat similar 15-85IS lens for APS-C. That one is so bad for closeups (very unsharp outside the center; way worse than the cheap 18-55IS) that I never use it.

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 4,027
Like?
Re: RX100-3 will be better. June.
In reply to technic, 10 months ago

technic wrote:

Jennyhappy2 wrote:

June ... Expecting a new lens for the RX. Yay !

Given the G1X II, Sony is now forced to make more significant improvements than what they did on the I to II. Keep in mind this is always the case with ever new camera. Personally I prefer the size of the G1X II, the sensor size, the lower MPs, and the lens range over the RX100.

If Sony improves the RX100II lens by giving it sharper corners and 24-100 (or 120) mm equiv. zoom range in a slightly bigger package, I would definitely prefer the RX100-3. An optically less compromised lens will be bigger, but so be it. Somewhere between RX100 and RX10 there could be an attractive compromise.

"If Sony improves the RX100II lens ................"  Now there's the thing.  One of the reasons why the Sony's lens is not that good is because of its small size it's already on the borders of what can be manufactured with reasonable optical quality.  So then make it bigger some of you might say.  But then the whole camera has to increase in size because the bigger lens has to retract into somewhere within the body and suddenly the whole thing doesn't become quite so appealing.  So if Sony want to retain the RX100's form factor (and that arguably is part of its appeal) then there are no guarantees that Sony could improve the lens, even if they wanted to. So don't hold your breath on that one.

For me the RX100 1" sensor is good enough for a 'walkaround camera', for extreme low light etc. there are other cameras. Canon has some advantages in jpeg output quality, ergonomics, special features like flash sync etc. but for me those are not a major factors.

Yes, competition is good

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tonkotsu Ramen
Senior MemberPosts: 1,367
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to technic, 10 months ago

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not assuming anything, but I worked in this business (both product development and sales) for many years and I have a pretty good idea about how the decisions are made and what actual production costs are.

If you've worked in this industry, then you should know exactly why decisions like this are being made. No point bitching about it on the forums.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to meland, 10 months ago

meland wrote:

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.). Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens. As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself. The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

I do hope you are right, that is your comment that it will shut up the naysayers.  But I fear that there will still be too many who simply don't understand the point of the product, or rather don't want to see the point even if it's not for them, and they will continue to snipe away at it until something else comes along they they don't understand either, or they just get bored.

At the very least we won't have to endure reviews where some dude picks up the camera, tries to focus on something a foot away, and when it doesn't work he goes "what a worthless camera....this sucks."  Now it will behave much more normally in close-up situations and have a much closer min focus distance when put in macro mode.  And perhaps the AF will be fast enough that we won't have to keep reminding people that, with the proper technique, you can actually greatly improve the AF speed of the G1 X.  Like a DSLR, a lot of things can be improved on the G1 X with good technique.  When people pick up a P&S/compact camera they don't expect to have to use good technique:  if sloppy technique in full auto mode doesn't work then they are disappointed instantly.

Prepare to be stunned by all the ways Canon decidedly did not hold back.

 howardroark's gear list:howardroark's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,644Gear list
Like?
Re: RX100-3 will be better. June.
In reply to meland, 10 months ago

meland wrote:

technic wrote:

Jennyhappy2 wrote:

June ... Expecting a new lens for the RX. Yay !

Given the G1X II, Sony is now forced to make more significant improvements than what they did on the I to II. Keep in mind this is always the case with ever new camera. Personally I prefer the size of the G1X II, the sensor size, the lower MPs, and the lens range over the RX100.

If Sony improves the RX100II lens by giving it sharper corners and 24-100 (or 120) mm equiv. zoom range in a slightly bigger package, I would definitely prefer the RX100-3. An optically less compromised lens will be bigger, but so be it. Somewhere between RX100 and RX10 there could be an attractive compromise.

"If Sony improves the RX100II lens ................" Now there's the thing. One of the reasons why the Sony's lens is not that good is because of its small size it's already on the borders of what can be manufactured with reasonable optical quality. So then make it bigger some of you might say. But then the whole camera has to increase in size because the bigger lens has to retract into somewhere within the body and suddenly the whole thing doesn't become quite so appealing. So if Sony want to retain the RX100's form factor (and that arguably is part of its appeal) then there are no guarantees that Sony could improve the lens, even if they wanted to. So don't hold your breath on that one.

Agree, I'm not holding my breath either. But for me personally, I see a possible compromise somewhere between RX100II and RX10. RX10 seems to have a great lens without the most obvious flaws of the RX100; and I don't need the top half of the zoom range or the f/2.8 aperture at tele on such a camera.

I don't consider the RX100II 'pocketable' anyway, so making it e.g. 0.5cm thicker and 50 grams heavier (to increase WA range to 24mm and make the lens a bit better) would not be a real issue for me. But maybe Sony has decided that for the average buyer size is far more important than optical quality. The general comments on the Sony forum ('who cares about corner quality') seem to confirm that ;-(

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,644Gear list
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to Tonkotsu Ramen, 10 months ago

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not assuming anything, but I worked in this business (both product development and sales) for many years and I have a pretty good idea about how the decisions are made and what actual production costs are.

If you've worked in this industry, then you should know exactly why decisions like this are being made. No point bitching about it on the forums.

I'm not bitching at all, I'm just pointing out that many comments here about these decisions are plain WRONG. Apparently that hurts ...

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 4,027
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to technic, 10 months ago

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not assuming anything, but I worked in this business (both product development and sales) for many years and I have a pretty good idea about how the decisions are made and what actual production costs are.

If you've worked in this industry, then you should know exactly why decisions like this are being made. No point bitching about it on the forums.

I'm not bitching at all, I'm just pointing out that many comments here about these decisions are plain WRONG. Apparently that hurts ...

No they are not necessarily wrong. They are just not comments that you happen to personally agree with.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
G1 X Mark II. I still would hate life with a Sony in my hand.
In reply to phazelag, 10 months ago

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent.  I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom.  This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II.  Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket.  I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios.  If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

They are just so unpleasant to use.  Plus I want a serious camera, and that means that fitting in my pocket is not anywhere on my list of priorities.  The G1 X Mark II lens alone will most likely sell the camera.

 howardroark's gear list:howardroark's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dames01
Forum MemberPosts: 55Gear list
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to phazelag, 10 months ago

phazelag wrote:

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II. Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

I am sorry but it seems to me that you are comparing apples and pears. The Ricoh GR is undoubtedly a great camera, but it has a fixed focal length of 28mm whereas the G1X mk II has a 24 to 120mm zoom lens. So you will not need to crop, unless of course you forget to zoom

And as concerns the Sony RX100, the sensor size is less than half the area size of that of the G1X mk II. If you compare the image quality between the original G1X and the RX100, you will see more noise starting at ISO 800!

 Dames01's gear list:Dames01's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS M
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mark B.
Forum ProPosts: 15,455Gear list
Like?
wrong comparison
In reply to coody, 10 months ago

A6000 is an interchangeable lens camera with a much larger sensor.  Different class of camera, and not a competitor to the G1X II.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
panamforeman
Contributing MemberPosts: 869Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes, definitely a G series as well as a G1 X series.
In reply to howardroark, 10 months ago

howardroark wrote:

Jennyhappy2 wrote:

I'm wondering if Canon plans to continue with the G-series? Will there be a G17 and beyond?

With the exception of the G1X II being 1 inch thicker, they are almost identical in size, the G16 actually being taller. I would assume the extra thickness of the G1X II is due to the lens and sensor, and with my limited knowledge of it, a jacked-up AF. (although I had no problem with the G1X AF)

I will almost certainly buy the G1X II. But if I do, why then would I buy a G17?........unless they are going to, say, enlarge the sensor in the G17 to 1 inch etc. (ala Sony RX100 II), with all the appropriate resultant changes that would cause? And will they be able to keep the cost at $499? In today's economic climate, I doubt it!

I'm no prophet, but looking at it logically, except for retail cost, what is the incentive for Canon to continue the G series? Certainly the G1X II would bite into G series sales if the G1X II is a huge hit, and I think it will be! (golly, I'm getting tired of typing "G1X II every time! Can't we come up with a short-hand name?)

Any prognostications?

You raise a very good point as the G1X II is far superior to the G16...look for its price to drop after the G1X II is released.

As was the case with the G1 X, the two camera types are only tenuously related. The G1 X was never meant to replace the regular G series and, if you'll notice, it did not. The G1 X II will also not supplant the G series camera as they are both aimed at very different markets. The price alone should make that clear.

I personally hope you are right. But......

 panamforeman's gear list:panamforeman's gear list
Canon PowerShot S120
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Yes, definitely a G series as well as a G1 X series.
In reply to panamforeman, 10 months ago

panamforeman wrote:

howardroark wrote:

Jennyhappy2 wrote:

I'm wondering if Canon plans to continue with the G-series? Will there be a G17 and beyond?

With the exception of the G1X II being 1 inch thicker, they are almost identical in size, the G16 actually being taller. I would assume the extra thickness of the G1X II is due to the lens and sensor, and with my limited knowledge of it, a jacked-up AF. (although I had no problem with the G1X AF)

I will almost certainly buy the G1X II. But if I do, why then would I buy a G17?........unless they are going to, say, enlarge the sensor in the G17 to 1 inch etc. (ala Sony RX100 II), with all the appropriate resultant changes that would cause? And will they be able to keep the cost at $499? In today's economic climate, I doubt it!

I'm no prophet, but looking at it logically, except for retail cost, what is the incentive for Canon to continue the G series? Certainly the G1X II would bite into G series sales if the G1X II is a huge hit, and I think it will be! (golly, I'm getting tired of typing "G1X II every time! Can't we come up with a short-hand name?)

Any prognostications?

You raise a very good point as the G1X II is far superior to the G16...look for its price to drop after the G1X II is released.

As was the case with the G1 X, the two camera types are only tenuously related. The G1 X was never meant to replace the regular G series and, if you'll notice, it did not. The G1 X II will also not supplant the G series camera as they are both aimed at very different markets. The price alone should make that clear.

I personally hope you are right. But......

I would be willing to bet extremely large amounts of money on this one.  The G series is hugely popular and the price point sets it up to hit the middle ground between cheap crappy P&S and high end ILC/compact/DSLR.  In other words, it's a great camera that is much less expensive than the G1 X/II.  The G won't vanish for a long, long time.

 howardroark's gear list:howardroark's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
phazelag
Senior MemberPosts: 2,759Gear list
Like?
Re: RX100-3 will be better. June.
In reply to technic, 10 months ago

meland wrote:

technic wrote:

Jennyhappy2 wrote:

June ... Expecting a new lens for the RX. Yay !

Given the G1X II, Sony is now forced to make more significant improvements than what they did on the I to II. Keep in mind this is always the case with ever new camera. Personally I prefer the size of the G1X II, the sensor size, the lower MPs, and the lens range over the RX100.

If Sony improves the RX100II lens by giving it sharper corners and 24-100 (or 120) mm equiv. zoom range in a slightly bigger package, I would definitely prefer the RX100-3. An optically less compromised lens will be bigger, but so be it. Somewhere between RX100 and RX10 there could be an attractive compromise.

"If Sony improves the RX100II lens ................" Now there's the thing. One of the reasons why the Sony's lens is not that good is because of its small size it's already on the borders of what can be manufactured with reasonable optical quality. So then make it bigger some of you might say. But then the whole camera has to increase in size because the bigger lens has to retract into somewhere within the body and suddenly the whole thing doesn't become quite so appealing. So if Sony want to retain the RX100's form factor (and that arguably is part of its appeal) then there are no guarantees that Sony could improve the lens, even if they wanted to. So don't hold your breath on that one.

Agree, I'm not holding my breath either. But for me personally, I see a possible compromise somewhere between RX100II and RX10. RX10 seems to have a great lens without the most obvious flaws of the RX100; and I don't need the top half of the zoom range or the f/2.8 aperture at tele on such a camera.

I don't consider the RX100II 'pocketable' anyway, so making it e.g. 0.5cm thicker and 50 grams heavier (to increase WA range to 24mm and make the lens a bit better) would not be a real issue for me. But maybe Sony has decided that for the average buyer size is far more important than optical quality. The general comments on the Sony forum ('who cares about corner quality') seem to confirm that ;-(

I agree think an RX with a sharper 24-120 lens, thats weather sealed and with a built in evf would be sweet.

www.scottzinda.com
http://instagram.com/phazelag
http://motivationmachine.net/

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Olympus E-M1 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
phazelag
Senior MemberPosts: 2,759Gear list
Like?
Re: You actually think Canon held back? They've spoiled you.
In reply to howardroark, 10 months ago

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent.  I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom.  This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II.  Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket.  I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios.  If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.).  Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens.  As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself.  The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

Prepare to be stunned by all the ways Canon decidedly did not hold back.

I hear you and agree. The camera is intriguing me more and more.
--
www.scottzinda.com
http://instagram.com/phazelag
http://motivationmachine.net/

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Olympus E-M1 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mark B.
Forum ProPosts: 15,455Gear list
Like?
Re: Compare size & weight against lens size and brightness
In reply to yatesd, 10 months ago

It is important to compare size & weight against other total packages with similar lens range, brightness, and sensor size.

I see other cameras with similar zoom ranges which are smaller, but not with similar sensor size and brightness.

I see other ILS options with lighter bodies, but not with a combined lens package that is more compact (or cheaper).

I am very tempted by this product. Can the Canon G1X MII command off camera flash with the pop up?

-- hide signature --

Doug

Don't think so; this is a feature reserved for the DSLRs.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ed B
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,195
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to howardroark, 10 months ago

howardroark wrote:

At the very least we won't have to endure reviews where some dude picks up the camera, tries to focus on something a foot away, and when it doesn't work he goes "what a worthless camera....this sucks." Now it will behave much more normally in close-up situations and have a much closer min focus distance when put in macro mode. And perhaps the AF will be fast enough that we won't have to keep reminding people that, with the proper technique, you can actually greatly improve the AF speed of the G1 X. Like a DSLR, a lot of things can be improved on the G1 X with good technique. When people pick up a P&S/compact camera they don't expect to have to use good technique: if sloppy technique in full auto mode doesn't work then they are disappointed.

Have to agree with much of what you're saying but have to add that when people pay this kind of money, for a compact camera, they shouldn't have to worry about much of anything.

The camera has a nice size sensor and the lens looks like it will be great. I only hope Canon has been able to improve the auto focus speed so the price of the camera is really justified.

I've always liked Canon and, except for the lack of a viewfinder, I think this is one of the nicest compacts I've seen. Hope it turns out to be as good as it looks.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PaulRivers
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,414
Like?
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
In reply to phazelag, 10 months ago

phazelag wrote:

...and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential... know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II.

I don't think you understand how megapixels work. If there was a way to do it, I'd bet you $100 that the G1X M2 will consistently the same or better real, actual details and resolution than the Sony.

On the other reasons, like size, weight, etc - well those are good reasons. But 12.8 megapixels on a larger sensor vs 20mp on a smaller sensor? The 12.8 is going to have more details.

Even on full frame cameras with quality glass, improving the megapixel count above 12 or so has only improved real detail in the picture by a very, very tiny amount. But that's with huge sensors.

The reason your Ricoh has more croppability is because it uses a dslr-sized sensor and good glad. The megapixel count is not why. Increasing megapixels is a game of diminishing returns when it comes to real detail increase, and those returns have been small since 6mp and very tiny since 12mp.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads