technic: yet another machinegun style brick from Canon with no real improvement in sensor quality compared to 8 years ago or so ... really sad. Dual pixel is some progress, but not in image quality where it was really needed given the advantage that Nikon and Sony have had for several years now.
IMHO the most boring upgrade in a long time :-(
@brownie314:Yes, and that 70D is hardly better than the top APS-C models from 6-8 years ago (almost same DR, 1/2 stop better High ISO performance, only a bit more resolution). No progress in IQ.
yet another machinegun style brick from Canon with no real improvement in sensor quality compared to 8 years ago or so ... really sad. Dual pixel is some progress, but not in image quality where it was really needed given the advantage that Nikon and Sony have had for several years now.
Dimit: Cellphones will eat even the 1''category PRETTY SOON! So,similarly sensored cameras will become obsolete as well...with the exception of those providing evf.Apparently cells won't have ever.Bottom line: Right now,rx100/3 better option..lx100 even better(definitely) although somehow heavier..for the time being..
I don't understand what someone who thinks cellphones will soon beat 1" quality compacts does on a site like DPR ...
Cell phones are a joke for ergonomics, and I'm not even going to discuss all the issues with pinhead sensors, crappy lenses, lack of a real aperture etc.
technic: typically Canon: a bit dull, nothing revolutionary - but a very solid product that provides strong competition to RX100-2/3 and LX100 (also in price). We can expect better ergonomics and better color from the G7x compared to RX100 series; the big question is lens quality. If the lens really performs (without needing to stop down) this is a winner. Too bad about the low battery capacity but this isn't surprising, just buy an extra one ...
I like the EVF, bigger sensor and the looks of LX100, but it remains to be seen if that camera really has better image quality. It should, given the extra bulk and higher price ...
LX100 should have 1/2-1 stop better low light performance than G7X due to the effectively 50% bigger sensor and the better equivalent aperture of the lens. But the Canon has 50% more pixels, and even if you don't need 20MP those pixels should help improve the quality of in-camera lens corrections, and they offer more room for cropping (on top of the already larger tele reach).
l_d_allan: I wonder why the battery life is so underwhelming. Is it because there just isn't room for a larger battery, in order to keep size and weight down?
Or is it "power hungry", suggesting less than impressive engineering?
FWIW: one of my "pet peeves" is that there seems no legitimate reason to not have a real "finger grip" that would also allow a larger battery.
IMO, one of the more important specs on a compact camera is the depth dimension, which greatly influences "always with you pocket-ability". My Canon S110 easily goes in my shirt pocket or jeans pocket.
With a grip that is the same depth as the retracted-when-OFF lens, you don't lose ANYTHING in pocket-ability. A real "grip" on my S110 would significantly improve handling, especially one-handed.
Ok, some weight and maybe a bit higher fabrication cost? However, I don't consider "weight" to be a particularly important spec in a compact camera that has an objective of pocket-ability ... an ounce or so at the most difference?
it is sad indeed that despite lacking an EVF (EVF usually means more battery drain) G7X has the worst battery capacity among its competitors. Maybe it was important for Canon to keep the weight low compared to RX100-2/3; I guess the brighter lens adds some extra weight.
balios: My LX5 fits into a large pocket and from the published specs it appears the G7X is just a hair smaller.
On the other hand, the LX100 appears to be massive (in comparison). For the size and price of a LX100, why wouldn't I just get a proper M43 camera? If I'm going to have a camera strap over a shoulder, I'll just bring a full-sized camera.
Yes - the LX100 needs to have clearly superior image quality, otherwise it seems much bulk and extra cost for very little gain.
For me the GM5 with compact kit zoom would be a potential alternative, but if it has no tilt screen and only a very basic EVF it doesn't look very attractive (we should know more tomorrow?). Keep in mind that an m43 camera with f/2.8 standard zoom is going to be much bigger and more expensive than LX100...
Island Golfer: Somehow, I can't see people who pay $700 for a camera that has DSLR controls and shoots RAW taking too many selfies. I wish they had left the tilt screen off in favor of a smaller, thinner profile. It might be useful if you want to shoot a ground level macro-type shot. But, it appears as if it can't be held up over the heads of a large crowd to provide a view of what's in front. Of what real use is it?
apart from the big advantage that you can take shots from unusual (low) angles - BIG advantage as most people know who have worked with such cameras - it helps in viewing the display in unfavorable lighting (view LCD at optimal angle, shield external light). I don't like the 'selfie' option but well ... it's a sign of the times I guess ;-(
For those with aging eyes, a tilt screen helps in viewing the small detail on the LCD without having to work 'at arms length'; an EVF would be even better for that, but I think it is an acceptable workaround.
raay: Please make this into a G series , with same lens but G16 like Body , with EVF , I was looking at rx100 MIII but i dont need video. Atlast Canon has brought out something worthy.
Canon always leaves something out for the next model ;-)
typically Canon: a bit dull, nothing revolutionary - but a very solid product that provides strong competition to RX100-2/3 and LX100 (also in price). We can expect better ergonomics and better color from the G7x compared to RX100 series; the big question is lens quality. If the lens really performs (without needing to stop down) this is a winner. Too bad about the low battery capacity but this isn't surprising, just buy an extra one ...
justmeMN: This is a larger sensor version of the Canon S120, which also doesn't have a viewfinder or hot shoe. I don't see anything wrong with that.
but in addition to a much bigger sensor and much brighter lens (at tele) it does have a tilt screen, which is great!
whtchocla7e: Now this is a fine piece of equipment. One could almost get depressed looking at the new Canon offerings. This in contrast is a breath of fresh air to ease the pain..
maybe it looks better from the outside, while the Canon looks dull ... but Canon G7x has very nice specs in a cheaper and smaller package: longer zoom reach, 20 instead of 12 MP, tilt screen, ND filter.
Andrew Butterfield: This is an amazing and lovely camera, but they must've known we would all coo over it and then say, if only it had a tilt screen and an ND filter. It makes the MkII version easy for Panasonic but means it misses out on being right first time. Still want one though.
Canon G7X has tilt screen, ND filter and 100mm zoom (and lower price). No EVF though, but I prefer that to EVF and no tilt screen.
TimK5: Sony RX100III just got its butt kicked!
It remains to be seen if LX100 is really better when it comes to DR and noise performance as it only uses part of the m43 sensor, and m43 sensors in general aren't that much better than the Sony 1 inch sensor. For sure RX100-3 has a resolution advantage (50% more pixels) and a big advantage in size/weight for those who prefer really compact.
LX100 wins for DOF control (1/2-1 stop) and 4K video, but those are not the most important specs IMHO ...
hrt: The spec of this camera is impressive indeed. With 4/3 sensor + 24mm equivalent zoom + low light capability + control dials + EVF + light weight portability, this camera potentially could replace my APS-C DSLR.With an integrated EVF, there is no need for a tilting screen.Exterior looks of the camera doesn't matter, so long as it has a good grip, sufficient dials for control, and no sloppy covers that can easily be bent.Can't wait to see some test results.By the way, do you know whether it's weather sealed ?
so maybe Canon chose the better compromise in the G7X ...
brendon1000: As a Sony user I am happy more and more manufacturers are getting on the Vari angle LCD bandwagon. Those who don't need it can keep it in the default position and those (like me!) who love using such a feature is free to use it to our hearts content.
Nikon needs something like the dual AF pixel tech from Canon to take full advantage of the vari angle LCD though IMO.
A few posts below someone mentioned the RAW buffer as 12. Don't know if that is true but I seriously hope not given the D610 has a much larger buffer.
As a Canon user I think this is a great camera, and Canon should also put a tilt screen (and a lot of this other much better technology) on their 6D. But the screen refresh needs to be quick to be able to really use it, Canon Liveview is still too slow for anything that moves IMHO and Nikon seems to be even slower ?
Seems mostly a bigger and more expensive alternative to e.g. Olympus XZ-2 that offers some better technology (EVF, video) but little real advantage for images (slightly bigger sensor but slower lens).
Compared to Sony RX100 series it will be difficult to compete - maybe interesting for those who want a built-in EVF and lament the lack of longer tele on RX100-3 (and don't need the best possible image quality in small size ...).
Sirandar: I am fairly impressed with this camera, and if I hadn't bought an EM5 I would probably get one.
The dynamic range and low light performance isn't nearly as good and the FZ1000 seems pretty noisy above 800
To never have to change a lens actually outweighs both these cons for everyday practical use.
From my experience with the Pana FZ30, I found that the lack of dynamic range and telephoto end that was too slow to be useful are the only reason I am stilll not using it, megapixels be damned.
The dynamic range on the FZ1000 isn't bad .... may not be a limitation.
I have a suspicion that the telephoto end of the FZ1000 and may be still to slow to capture great pics in anything but the brightest light. That and the noise at high ISO, may limit this camera at the long end.
"I have a suspicion that the telephoto end of the FZ1000 and may be still to slow to capture great pics in anything but the brightest light. "
Why do you think that? Seems a ridiculous statement to me. f/4 for a 400mm lens (for this sensor size or bigger sensors) is plenty bright for most subjects, unless you want to work in near darkness which is not the typical conditions for a 400mm lens. There are f/2.8 400mm lenses but those are big and VERY heavy...
forpetessake: If you want a superzoom, just get any lightweight Nikon/Canon DSLR and attach an 18-200 zoom to it and it will be ahead of this Panasonic in every way. Or if you want a mirrorless camera, get a Sony A6000 with 18-200 zoom, or Samsung with 18-200, or Olympus with 14-150.Only those who are interested in half baked 4k video may find this camera interesting.
even the still image quality of the DSLR won't be better by definition. For the same reach you need a lens like the Tamron 16-300 which is a very compromised optic, more so than the FZ1000 lens. The DSLR may win easily on noise performance in low light conditions (I couldn't care less about that ...), and in DR (but only for Nikon, not much advantage for Canon DSLRs), but probably not for sharpness across the frame and across the zoom range.AF of the FZ1000 will probably be faster and more accurate than most 'lightweight' Canikon DSLRs with cheap consumer zooms, and the framerate will be much higher. Sometimes getting the shot is far more important than having the 'best image quality' while the subject has disappeared from the frame. Add to that the 4K video and many other features that don't even exist on DSLRs and it is clear how biased this 'DSLR is ahead in every way' claim is.
007peter: Incredible. This thing offer better value than buying a Canon DSLR with 100-400L, or buying Panasonic G6 + 100-300mm. I was leaning toward M43 for its 2x crop factor advantage in telephoto, but the more I think about it, the more incredible these LARGE SENSOR point/shoot are. Maybe they the are future. I can see myself carrying 2 L.S.P&S, one for zoom, and one with 35mm f/1.8 type of lens for wide angle portraits
"It should be noted though that on a small 1 inch sensor there is not much room for cropping quality wise."
I don't think there will be much more room for cropping on an m43 ILC or DSLR with a consumer level superzoom with its crappy optics (especially at the top end of the range). Yes, you can crop more when using an FF camera with a big white, but then we are talking about combo's that are 4-5 kg at least, so in a completely different league.
The equivalent aperture says a lot about 'light gathering': most of these combo's are relatively close in low light performance or DOF control. I don't see the value of 'Formal F-number' like having f/2.8 at 600 mm equiv. on an FZ200 when the tiny sensor means that you are stuck at low ISO. That 'advantage' is an illusion.
princecody: Curious how 17 people own this camera already when it hasn't shipped yet?
even more curious: how is it possible that 29 already returned the camera? I smell some anxious RX10 owners ;-(