Hugo808: Hard to believe those pics are from a compact camera. Truly we are spoiled.
That doesn't look "compact" to me at all.
"Optimized for one-person operation" :))
cpkuntz: Typical Canon dull colors, plastic skin, mushy details, and blown highlights. In 2012 these sensors were badly beaten. Now they are embarrassing.
I owned a Sony NEX-5N and an RX100, I sold both because the colors were a joke and the NEX-5N kit lens was an insult. Now I effortlessly get stunning looking pictures with a maligned Canon EOS-M which you can buy for $250 with a very sharp 22mm kit lens. Sony does innovate more than Canon, but if their cameras are fundamentally flawed color-wise and they don't do anything about it I'm not sure why they even bother.
It seems that the Canon campaign had its desired effect. This article seems to have the largest number of comments in dpreview's history :)
PeterBM: Still waiting "my" good camera:- compact with large sensor- good fixed lens, min range 28-135, possibly more- max aperture 2.8, possibly better- overall good features (photo quality, responsiveness, focus accuracy, ...)- and absolutely a fully articulated screen
Catalin Stavaru: Looking at the samples, the colors are not typical Canon colors, which means that the problem is not the "secret sauce" in the color processing algorithms - Canon masters these quite well - but the Sony sensor output.
It seems to me that the Sony sensor is quite bad at highlights, even if it's good at shadows. Daylight photography needs good highlight performance, that's why Sony daylight pictures always have a shadowy/cloudy tint on them, as opposed to Canon daylight pictures.
Canon tries to compensate the sensor shortcomings by overexposing a bit, but it doesn't really work, the result looks flat and without enough contrast.
More samples are needed but until now the G7X does not render colors in a typical Canon fashion. Which is disappointing because colors were the only reason why I would buy a Canon G7X versus a Sony RX100/II/III (which is even worse than the samples posted here).
@theprehistorian You may want to look at the other members opinions on the samples, maybe you are the one looking at the wrong gallery ? :)
Peter Gurdes: better than the LX100
I strongly disagree with this statement. Colors are way worse on Canon.
Looking at the samples, the colors are not typical Canon colors, which means that the problem is not the "secret sauce" in the color processing algorithms - Canon masters these quite well - but the Sony sensor output.
- deleted -
Catalin Stavaru: Canon may be late to the party, but if the color rendition is the typical Canon, it has a winner. I for one don't need a viewfinder, I just need good image quality in as compact a camera as possible. I sold my Sony RX100 (and a NEX-5n) for the awful colors. If the G7X is priced right, I think it will be my next camera.
@Zeisschen: indeed, the colors are not typical Canon color, which means that the problem is not the color processing algorithms, but the Sony sensor output.
They announce a new technological advancement in less than 5 years after the last.
I think this picture is very nicely rendered color-wise. It seems that Panasonic did something to improve the color rendering.
At first sight, the color rendition from the real-world samples looks quite a bit better than what I am used to from Panasonic and vastly better than Sony, for example, which was not the case before.
al_in_philly: Is it just me, or does the X look almost like a toy camera? The thickness of that lens barrel just doesn't work aesthetically. Leica's always seemed to reek of being no-nonsense but this camera just comes off as minimalist without conveying German durability and precision. But that's just my opinion.
It's just you.
ProfHankD: Yes, Canon has been serious about mirrorless in that the EOS-M is grossly inferior to their DSLRs only in AF speed and ergonomics. The problem is that it isn't compelling against models from Sony, Olympus, Fuji, Samsung, etc. Canon was once an innovator, but not lately, and they have a long way to go to make a compelling mirrorless. For example, I don't think a 7D Mark II with an EF-M mount would be a very compelling mirrorless, and it has been years since Canon's sensors gave them an real edge over those made by Sony.
I buy lots of Canon cameras, mostly PowerShots to use with CHDK, but also an occasional higher model to use with Magic Lantern. Ironically, both those environments are conspicuously not aided or supported by Canon. I think it is long overdue that Canon should encourage, and actively leverage, this type of external innovation.
The only thing that the current EOS M needs is the dual-pixel sensor for faster auto-focus. Everything else is perfect about it.
This article does not mention the new Panasonic CM1, which in my opinion will have the same impact on the market as the Panasonic LX3 had. This will be the first serious camera that "forces" you to have it with you all the time at very little ergonomic cost, due to being glued to your smartphone.
ironcam: How can Leica make a dslr with such a minimalist design, while Japanese dslr's have more buttons than an 80's stereo tower?
Leica listens to common sense, the Japanese listen to forum members.
Increasing the size of the camera was the stupidest thing Panasonic could do. Just make a detachable EVF and bundle it with the camera for free, not necessary to ruin the camera appeal and the display size for a small EVF.
Does anyone know if the smartphone part of this device includes a notification light (LED) ? I am really interested in it, but I can't use a smartphone without this feature.
HS Wells: why this reminds me of NX mini ?
Not sure why. This one includes a high-end smartphone and is 3mm slimmer than the NX Mini without any lens attached. There shouldn't be any reason aside from the brushed aluminium sides :)