Donnie G: Does 2500 comments here translate into 2500 sales, or is that just wishful thinking for Sony? Just curious, since the rangefinder style compact system camera category has become so crowded of late.
Not 2500 sales but lots of free publicity. And then there's the enthusiasm which for now is off the charts. You've got people saying they can make professional level 20x30 prints from it, which most people would say requires a full frame camera. It's the biggest thing since the Df and pure photography.
If I may interrupt the trading of insults for a moment, making money off these is pretty low.
Antony Dean: I got the Mk1 G1X the day it came out (broke my G7, had been looking at the G1X and Nikon 1 variants anyway). Quick count... 24k shots and 276GB later (videos, not raws) I have few regrets - I'm going to sound like an emotive (or worse) type when I say all the technical details I don't really care about any more, and that carries on to the G1X Mk2. I used to worry a lot about corner sharpness, aperture, NR, integer ratio scaling, readout noise and on and on (and that worked out well when choosing a small sensor camera like the G7). But for anything that can take shots handheld in the full moon, the tech specs start to matter less. The main regret I do have though, is that the G1X is SLOOOOW. Painfully, frustratingly slow. Not the AF speed, or burst speed or anything, which is all fine for a P&S - but driving the thing through menus - shoot, review, quickly change something, try to get it back to "seeing" again, and so on. I've lost far too many good opportunities for shots that way.
I have the Busch book (the G1X doesn't even come with a printed manual; Canon must have been copying Apple). Even with Busch's tips, I find the G1X very slow. The image quality is on an SLR level, the sensor is big enough so you can crop if you need closeups, the viewfinder can be ignored but there's no denying it's slow enough to be writing one pixel at a time. I learned to live with the G1X for the images it produces. Except for the image quality, the Sonys are superior in every way.
W5JCK: I didn't know that Amazon owns DPR. That explains a lot. Amazon has ignored user requests for years to change some of the idiotic formatting on Kindles, just like DPR refuses to get rid of the idiotic white text on black background that makes you see stripes in front of your eyes. I'm sure this new Amazon device will sell dozens of units just like its latest sibling the AmazonTV. Bwahahahjahjahaha!!!!!!!!
When I look at that test scene, I see stripes in front of my eyes. Sometimes I see stars, too.
TransientEye: Excellent support from Ricoh. The new AF speed seems to be quite a bit faster - comparable to the better u4/3 cameras. And the new firmware finally fixes the lockups when syncing with Lightroom on a Mac.
The GR may well be a one-trick-pony, but it is a very very good trick (sharp 28mm equivalent with APSC sensor and great controls), and it is nice to see a company supporting its products with these updates.
Yep. This is what you get when you focus on a large sensor and a fixed focal length lens. Do one thing well...or do many things just average or even poorly.
Why the emotional attachment? If you are a Nikon user but not a fan, this is just an unfortunate case of mismanagement. It doesn't have any bearing on any other Nikon product. If you are a fan, there's betrayal, lost of trust, etc.
They made a mistake, they denied it, they got caught. It's not like G.M. having a safety issue going unaddressed for 9 years.
iAPX: I don't understand why they didn't do it at first???
I will cost much more for Nikon to repair or exchange D600, and restore confidence, than to have done the right thing at the right time! Dumb!
It's business. They thought they could ride it out.
instamatic: Nikon sales must really be hurting so they launched this campaign. Good, but too little and too late.
I hope Nikon is not oblivious to the notion that DSLRs are slowly progressing on a way to extinction. In my opinion it's not only about rebuilding user confidence in the brand, but also about deciding where to take the company next.
Hint: The Nikon 1 system is great in hands-on practice, but poorly marketed, and unappealing to the Western consumer. Why? The Western consumer wants large numbers, i.e. large sensors, large ISO values, large etc., and at the same time he wants full manual control. Actually none of those things are needed in practice because Nikon 1 is so surprisingly smart in taking photos in auto mode, but the consumer won't know this until they use the camera, and to use it they need to buy it - because now cameras are mostly bought online not in a brick and mortar store when they can be tried first. Nikon 1 is expensive - the consumer concludes to skip it.
Legal action was taken against them. That is why they launched this "campaign".
dale thorn: Ha!!! People ask if DPR has a deal with Sony, but take a look - 2308 comments so far - I'd say the reader interest is a slam dunk!!
Reader interest is a slam dunk, especially if nothing else interesting comes along for a while. You have to admire Sony's ingenuity even if you're not planning on buying one.
Ken Heid: I see a lot of post comparing the G1X to the Sony RX100 M2.
I wonder how many of them actually used both of them.
I used to be a Canon only person. I had the G1XI picked up an RX 100 M2. I was totally impressed.
The Canon G series had only one advantage to me over the others in their class. That was the built-in viewfinder.
Now that is gone.
I sold Canon G1X and kept the RX100 M2
The G series are not pocket-able like the RX100's They don't have interchangeable lens. It was a camera that I rarely used.
Now when I am going out, I tend to grab the RX100 M2. The pictures and Videos I get are great.
Like the G1X M2, an optional EVF is available for the RX100 M2. I never got one. It is expensive and changes the camera profile.
I agree that Canon missed the mark with the optional EVF ( $300) for the G1X M2. It failed with the RX100 M2 and it will Fail with the G1x M2.
The future is the pop-up EVF on the RX100 M3.
You can keep the G1XM2. My Rx100 M3 is on pre-order.
I had both the Sonys, mk I and mk II. Loved the handling, the interface, the LCD, everything. Except the image quality, which was better than my LX 5 but nowhere near the G1X. Both Sonys had soft corners at the wide setting, with some corners better/worse than others.
I figured small cameras just weren't there yet and I heard the G1X dynamic range was poor (it is) but since the Sonys didn't cut it, I figured I'd try the G1X. The first images from the G1X were so superior to the Sonys (in detail rendering, not dynamic range) that there was no real comparison. Suddenly, the slow operation and the finder which I never used didn't seem that bad.
Love these. I haven't done anything like this since college but when you know what's involved it's hard not to respect the dedication and expertise it takes.
Or we could just look at some more photos of Yosemite taken with a D800 and a 14-24.
munro harrap: This morning I downloaded a large set of pics of a Leica IIIf with a 50mm Summicron, my first "real" camera. But, I would not now buy one. To suffer for years as I did in a darkroom day after day, unecessarily, when there are better machines that always and instantly give better results, even though you made your reputation as a monochrome reportage photographer, is like wanting to dress in skins and live in an unheated cave somewhere.
The "We suffered, now it's your turn" mentality of courses encouraging stoneage photography is a sympton of how absurd those who educate our children have become.
Why is it here? To discourage us from visiting the north of England? This is a site for digital photography, for the free, unshackled by a Gitzo and an 8x10(or 18x24cm in my case!)
Modern cameras are wonderful and allow everybody to get great photos with little skill and even less effort. But when the process you use is so complex that you can only take a few pictures in a day, it really does force to you make each shot count.
Nomorefilmman: I just looked at the sample images of the Sony rx100 III, and then the dpreview sample images of the G1X and G1X Mark II; the Sony images in comparison appear to me awfully drab and dead compared to the G images.
The G images appear to be brighter, be more colorful, and have more contrast.
I have a G1X and have shot well over a thousand images of all kinds of trips and events, and the sample images of the dpreview review are exactly representative of what my photos are like.
If the Sony sample images are similarly representative of users' experiences, I myself would hold off on buying an RX III until picture quality is improved in a new model!
What would really be great (and I'm sure DPR staff would be on board) would be to move DPR HQ to a place where the sun shines. This seems to be a tradition going back to Popular Photography, where they would point the camera out the window and take photos of midtown Manhattan in the dead of winter.
simpleshot: It looks like the noise on the Canon G1 X MK2 is significantly less than that of the Sony.I'm not really surprised because the Canon has a much larger sensor.
People are surprised because they "want to like" Sony, while Canon keeps making the same thing over and over. But a larger sensor is still better. Imagine if Sony used a sensor the size of the G1X. People would complain the camera didn't fit in their pocket but the image quality would be terrific.
Digital Suicide: Man, this camera really must give a lot attendance (click ratio) for the DPR site. No mentioning 2.2K + comments. Advertising department must be very pleased with that.I think that's why we see it's review pages as a separate news everyday...
There is a lot of interest because everybody wants a camera this size or smaller than has close to full-frame quality. Unfortunately, that's not currently possible.
flektogon: As I was originally disappointed with Canon G1 X Mark II (just based on other users/testers experience), now I am changing my mind. The IQ of Canon is definitely better. Yes, RX100 is smaller and has built in EVF, but with better IQ and better (longer) zoom lens, Canon is the winner.
I had the first two Sonys and the only pocket they fit in was a coat pocket. Considering it's almost 90F here today, if I had the Sony, I'd still need a separate bag for it, at which point I might as well use the Canon or a 4/3 camera or even a small SLR.
mauijohn: Finally after a year of hagling sony personels agreed to adapt a 24mm to the wide end of their not so pocketable camera with a price just right with a bright lens through out. But the zoom is a little bit anemic. Why can't they make up to 120mm like canon s110 or longer zoom is beyond me. Just my thought.
There is a fifth thing that neo-nights doesn't mention. Image quality. Discussions about why a pocket camera can't go from 18-200mm always revolve around size and cost. But even if these didn't matter, once the lens range is increased in a wide to tele zoom, the image quality goes through the floor. This is why Nikon's very good $1800 24-70 covers such a short range. If they extended the range, the quality would go down.
AbrasiveReducer: It's not bad at the 70mm equivalent setting at 5.6. I went straight to the extreme corners and, depending on which corner you pick the Sony is better/equal to/almost as good as the G1X2. Impressive. (All 4 corners equally sharp would be even better but point and shoot cameras with zoom lenses don't seem to do this).
Now. how do these cameras do at the 24mm setting? Everybody wants the wider lens but nobody asks, is it any good?
Yes. Exactly. My guess is, neither the Sony nor the Canon will be very good at 24mm and wide open. Then, when reviewing them, DPR can say the Sony isn't great but neither is the Canon and vice-versa.
It's not bad at the 70mm equivalent setting at 5.6. I went straight to the extreme corners and, depending on which corner you pick the Sony is better/equal to/almost as good as the G1X2. Impressive. (All 4 corners equally sharp would be even better but point and shoot cameras with zoom lenses don't seem to do this).