Jim: Rhetorical Question: I wonder how much better the G3X image quality will be over an SX50HS when compared at 600mm and below? Especially so, since the SX50HS can be had for $200. Maybe it's just me but I am not seeing the value proposition here.
If you accept the fact that neither the SX50HS or the G3X is pocketable, then the pockets needed for either is more in line with those found in a jacket. That was all he was trying to say.
I don't disagree with that. All this is still reasonably speculative and we'll all see soon enough when the production level product is released.
Yannis1976: Well no worries, the market will actually give this product the position it deserves. Fortunately there are plenty of alternative options. I really wonder if the marketing or sales people of Canon surf these forums...
Fully agree...the market will ultimately decide.
Rhetorical Question: I wonder how much better the G3X image quality will be over an SX50HS when compared at 600mm and below? Especially so, since the SX50HS can be had for $200. Maybe it's just me but I am not seeing the value proposition here.
The same rinky-dink tilt-only LCD as on G7x...Disappointing.
Augustin Man: Wow! Interesting to say the least, but how big and heavy would be that "grote" zoom? Besides, after the SX60 cold shower, I feel like treasuring my dear SX50, but also like moving away to other brands :(
I agree and am seriously considering an FZ1000. We'll know more in the coming days.
princewolf: This is one rare case where the airplanes are more of interest to me than the camera they are shot with...
I'm an airplane enthusiast too. I have to say that this Nikon D750 is truly an outstanding camera. In the hands of people who really can bring out the best in it, it's stunning. Those shots of the aircraft that were very dark (to wit: the Mig-15/F-86 and the Lockheed Electra) and they used the features to downplay the highlights yet bring the shot to life without bracketing were absolutely amazing. Wow!
How completely uninteresting and uninspiring can these releases possibly be? As a long-time Canon user and proponent, no releases at all would make more sense than these offerings. They make the company look foolish and unfocused. Canon can do much better than this...and it's time they showed it.
When Canon does lame things like this they really cheapen their brand. It's a great company that makes great products but both the marketing fool that thought this foolishness up as well as the idiot who approved it should be shown the door. They're not helping their cause.
Jim: It's not much smaller than the G1X Mk II. Both appear not to be shirt pocket-able but both do appear to be jacket pocket-able. Given this and the fact that the G1X Mk II isn't much more money, why not buy a G1X Mk II instead of the G7 X?
To David Hart - Precisely. And with the G1X II's superior image quality and only marginally higher purchase price, I just don't see a market for the G7X...unless the price is closer to a $499 list price. At this price point.the two cameras have enough separation to make sense.
...just my take.
That was my point...it might be smaller than a G1X2 but considering size AND weight, it really isn't practically shirt pocket-able.
It's not much smaller than the G1X Mk II. Both appear not to be shirt pocket-able but both do appear to be jacket pocket-able. Given this and the fact that the G1X Mk II isn't much more money, why not buy a G1X Mk II instead of the G7 X?
IMHO, what a strange review. On one hand, the reviewer criticizes Olympus for producing a camera that is too point-and-shoot emphasized and then goes on to say that the camera can be customized to be very much acceptable to enthusiasts. I think he was a bit unfair by saying he was disappointed with his initial shooting experience without mentioning the customizing potential of the camera BEFOREmaking that statement.
Good article...clear, concise and informative. Good job!
Perhaps it's a MILSPEC model for the 10th Mountain Division so they can take pictures and remain camouflaged in the snow. What a complete waste of time and energy...lame, actually.
The colors in many of these pictures look very washed out. Weak.
What a completely underwhelming presence by Canon. Why bother to even attend the show. Low end offerings...gee, great. Glad I wasn't there.
Although to be fair, Canon is usually a super conservative company with it's products, so I'm a bit surprised they made this.
I imagine there will be a phone app made by someone shortly that does this (if there isn't one already).
This thing reminds me of the camera version of IBM's ill-fated PC Jr. computer that came out years ago. It's the big grown up company trying too hard to be hip...and doesn't pull it off.
JEROME NOLAS: The new year starts pretty badly...
Totally agree, Jerome...nothing would be better than this.
Jim: None of them. My vote goes to the G1X.
Pssst....I'm aware of that, Barney.