The bottle labeled honey balsamic vinegar (bottom of shot right hand bottle) seems to be viewed from a different angle as the white barcode on the side of it is more visible than in any other studio comparison I have seen. Has someone turned the bottle slightly or is this indicative of an off centre shot which could account for some of the lens issues?
Menneisyys: Wowz!!! You already have two MkII's! DPR, please publish the final review before July! I want to purchase a new enthusiast "compact" before going on Holiday (this July) and still hesitate between this and the RX10. (And the rumoured P8000, of course.)
So looking forward to the review.
Thanks Jeff for this, can you put back up the original for comparison?
Hi Jeff,Thank you so much for processing the image of the statue and IMG_0130 into IMG_0130.acr. you did a great job on them, and this show some of what this sensor and lens combination can do. Can you put IMG_0130 back up so we can see the comparison between them?This is a good example of what can be achieved beyond the JPEG and is rarely shown so clearly.
Canon seem to have done a good job matching such a small lens to the sensor, but it does not seem to be a new sensor, is it the same as the old GX1?Thanks for all your hard work - you clearly seem to be enjoying this camera - think I will be buying it - look forward to the full review.
If canon are sensible they will not make a mirorless camera until the electronic viewfinder resolution is better - say 4,000,000. The current ones are far inferior to mirrors for focussing and following action.
The screen tilts up and down. It also has a 3 step neutral density filter built in.There also seems to be provision for a filter attachment and teleconverter to increase the lens reach but one is not shown.For details see: http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_Camera/PowerShot/powershot_g1x_mark_ii/?WT.ac=SS_G1XMarkii_UK#p-accessories5
What strikes me about these tests is how well the RX100 II holds up as it only has a 1" sensor and is truly pocket-able. It looks just about usable up to 1600 - will you be doing a full review of it soon? What do others think?
My New Years resolution is 2560 X 1440.
Is it me or can anyone see a review of what it is like to focus through the electronic viewfinder? I would like to know what this is like if anyone has the camera.
Oh dear it looks like I am going to be buying this one. I appreciate the idea of a bridge camera but the sensors prior to this one have just been too small. Please DP review it soon so we can see some real results not just speculation most of which is foolishness.
I like the sensor size as this is usable (I have the Olympus XZ1 which I carry everywhere and this gives a good blow up quality from a 7.89 x 5.81mm sensor size (this one is 8.8x6.6mm).This will make a good all in one travel camera when an SLR is too much to carry. I just hope that there is a good resolution in the electronic viewfinder as the manual focus and zoom ring will need this. I certainly will be buying one if the viewfinder is good. I hate the current crop of mirrorless SLR style cameras which look like you are peering into minestrone soup!!
Well Nikon have shown their hand and it seems quite a popular oriented choice of a smaller sensor and large body! The lenses seem very slow and are not compatible with any other camera so you are buying a dead end. It will be interesting to see how Canon respond when they enter the market. I hope they get it right. In the meantime I am sticking with my Olympus XZ1 which gives me the best of both worlds!!