Previous news story    Next news story

Canon G1 X preview updated, ISO samples added, gallery to come

By dpreview staff on Jan 13, 2012 at 14:30 GMT

We've spent a bit more time with the Canon PowerShot G1 X, and will be publishing a samples gallery from a pre-production camera in the near future. In the meantime, we've taken the chance to expand our preview based on our further experience and some real-world shooting with the camera. This includes observations about its behavior and a chart showing the camera's maximum aperture at key focal lengths. If you have any burning questions about the camera's behavior, write a comment and we'll do our best to answer when we publish our samples gallery (but do please read the updated preview first, to see if the answer's there).

Canon PowerShot G1 X sample images (pre-production camera) - posted Jan 13 2012

Note that these images were taken using a pre-production camera, and may not be fully representative of final image quality.

Comments

Total comments: 288
123
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 14, 2012)

Pt. 2) I'll list out a few missed opportunities I feel Canon has either intentionally or unintentionally left off of this otherwise great camera.

*No Remote Capture ability with EOS Utility (Rebel has this feature)
*No ability to control Wireless Flash Groups (Rebel has this feature)
*HDR Mode does not record to a RAW file
*AE Bracketing limited to only 3 Frames (Pan "G" and Oly E-"P" go up to 7)
*No Video 3-10x crop mode in 1080P HD (Rebel has this feature)
*No 1080p @ 30fpx, or 720p/480p @ 60fps (Rebel has this feature)
*No Stereo Audio Input for External Microphone (Rebel has this feature)
*No TTL Viewfinder
*No 100% (or close to 100%) Frame Coverage in Viewfinder
*No Viewfinder Info??? Seriously???
*No ability to use a Lens Filter and a Lens Hood together

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Jan 14, 2012)

it looks more like "how I see digital camera of the year 2030"

3 upvotes
RickBuddy
By RickBuddy (Jan 14, 2012)

I'd like to expand on this list:

* No Alfred Stieglitz, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Ansel Adams, Diane Arbus settings (Canon, who are you kidding?)
*No ability to go back in time in case a shot is missed
*No magic powers setting to allow user to fly
*No force shield to protect user from Romulan attack
*No mount to allow attachment of heat seeking missiles
*No option to turn lake effect snow into food to feed the world's starving children

And they charge, what, $800 American for this?

"Worst camera ever!"

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
19 upvotes
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 14, 2012)

LOL!!! That is very creative, and funny Rick... :0)

2 upvotes
jmellas
By jmellas (Jan 15, 2012)

A G1X with all of these features (in it's first iteration) would make all of those Rebels, T2's, etc a lot less needed! Lol.

It'll take Canon a few years (say, G3X?) before they give us the juicy stuff! I just hope they are making the right decision...

0 upvotes
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 15, 2012)

@ jmellas...You are getting close to my point. So, if we are to believe Canon that they do not intend to do away with the G12 series type of camera, then we should at least expect it to be rolled into the proverbial closet, so future generations on the G12 platform won't compete with the G1 X!!!

See my frustration? Now, we can expect to pay, at least, $800.00 for a somewhat serious P&S, if we chose to give Canon our business. BUT...even that camera will not be as good as it should be... :0(

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Jan 15, 2012)

Seriously R Johns, you don't see why there is no viewfinder information in this ? And you want 100% coverage ? Seriously ? Have you ever seen/held a Canon G series ?

1 upvote
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 15, 2012)

Yes I have, and the non-TTL optical viewfinder is one of the primary reasons the G-series cameras have never appealed to me. I happen to like a camera that frames my subject accurately and shares information with me, while I am using the viewfinder. Call me wierd... :0)

0 upvotes
Dick Sanders
By Dick Sanders (Jan 15, 2012)

Believe it or not, some people don't want these things, or can get around the slight drawbacks of a couple of them. All cameras are tools, and each photographer has to find the tool set that works best for him or her. This camera is pretty much everything I want for my 3rd camera, the one to grab for good quality snaps. The price will soon be $700, and that's a fair price for a camera this good, considering today's devalued dollar.

1 upvote
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 14, 2012)

Pt. 3) I know I could go on, but I think I have made my point rather clear. That point, again being, the only premium upgrade this camera has is in the sensor. It is a remarkable improvement, but not enough to demand an increase in price over the G12, simply because it does not improve much on the G12's other features, and the G1 X falls far short, from even the Rebel’s feature set.

So, if Canon is going to market this camera as "The PowerShot G1 X digital camera will inspire advanced amateurs who have embraced the G-Series to explore new realms of photographic expression, and give pros an excellent camera that complements their creative demands." I would advise them they better get on the ball with the G1 X MKII, because the competition is growing and is very impressive.

Why does Canon skimp on features? Regarding the G1 X, I think Canon should have spared no detail. Don’t you?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
tfeltz
By tfeltz (Jan 14, 2012)

Well summarised! It's hard to justify the cost solely on the basis of a premium quality sensor. Canon's DSLR lineup has similar sensor quality but starts at far less than $800. It also misses the designer's appeal and good looks to justify a premium price (I think it looks pretty dull), missing the opportunity of creating something that looks like a Fuji X10 or perhaps a remake of the beautiful original Canon rangefinders of the 1960s, or even the handsome Canonet QL17 from the 1970s.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

Canon has never been shy about clearly delineating their market segments. Not only that, they've chosen to push the envelope with a non-interchangeable lens camera that isn't quite a point and shoot but is also not an SLR.
What I wish is that people would quit talking so much about the next generation of technology. It makes it seem as though you don't realize that features cost money, partially and most often because the hardware they depend on costs money. When I bought the 10D it didn't have a spot meter. A spot meter for goodness sake! I paid $1,500 for that thing. They chose to balance the price and features so I'd be able to buy a piece of technology that two years earlier was either not possible in a commercial product or would have been prohibitively expensive. So please, if you don't care for the balance, move on. If your asterisk next to the feature contains the word "Rebel" you've answered your own question.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 14, 2012)

@ tfeltz... I could get past the look of the camera, but they did have a grand opportunity to do just what you suggested. The irony is, Canon states the G1 X is not a replacement for the G12, yet it looks just like a G12 with a larger sensor shoehorned inside...

@ Howardroark... In today's economy, $800.00 is a lot of money to shell out for a camera that is pretty limited on specs that most other cameras in this price range are festooned with. Take the Panasonic G3 for example; it, combined with the new collapsable lens, cost about the same, yet the G3 has features galore over the G1 X. And if one gets bored with the lens, they can remove it and replace it with something longer, faster, more closer focusing. The Olympus E-P3 is another fine example.

I just believe that since Canon decided to go the route of an all-in-one design, to compete with the other designs on the market, they should have pulled out all of the stops, and they choose not to...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 15, 2012)

I appreciate the constructive comments and your good humor, Johns. I have a DSLR, the Canon 7D. The convenience of a point and shoot is partially in the fact that its lens never comes off. If I want to shoot something that I plan to print at 20X30, I haul my 7D around. The G3 and E-P3 have their own problems: size, lens selection, image quality. The G3 appears to be discontinued. The E-P3 would require hundreds of more dollars for a lens to reach as far as the G1X does.
Canon didn't pull out all the stops because they weren't shooting for people who love SLR's. They weren't shooting for people who love tiny point and shoot cameras. There were shooting for people who want point and shoot convenience with a great, large sensor.
Another consideration with Olympus and Panasonic is usability. Menus, control layouts, and an adjustable display are all important considerations. Canon excels in ease of use, control layout, ergonomics, etc.

2 upvotes
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 15, 2012)

@ howardroark... I too shoot Canon DSLRs, and I agree with you to that point. I also own an Olympus XZ-1 for times when I don't want the added bulk. Had Canon used a smaller sensor that would be a compromise between the 1/1.7 size in the G12 and where their new sensor lies, and then focused as much attention on a faster lens with perhaps more range on the wide end, we would be having a different discussion.

One has to acknowledge the apparent low-light virtue of this new sensor is somewhat mitigated by the slow lens, which is almost 2.5 stops slower than the XZ-1 on the long end. I'm just saying that a prudent increase in sensor size, coupled with a faster lens that has more range would still fit in the same package, but have a broader appeal.

I would end with this...for Canon to say that the G1 X will inspire advanced amatuers to explore new realms of photographic expression, without the features to actually allow them to do so, is what I would call bold marketing spin... :0)

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 15, 2012)

I think you overestimate "advanced amateurs." And I think the quality of this sensor and lens is being underestimated. Agreed that Canon's marketing is exaggerating the revolutionary nature of this camera. Most amateurs with nice gear still don't do a lot of really advanced work.
As for how fast or slow the lens is I'll just say I'm more interested in detail. The images I've seen so far lead me to believe nothing else this size can compete. The balance of convenience and quality is at issue here.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 15, 2012)

I can and do appreciate your points Howard...

I am an advanced amateur photographer, who has worked some in photojournalism and event photography, so my comments come from this perspective. I want to be clear, I think the samples show this is a really good sensor.

I would just go back to the Panasonic G3 for example, and mention that the G3 and a good prime lens will most definitly out-perform the G1 X in a low-light environment. Imaging-Resource has even declared the G3 to have better 20x30" prints than the 60D!

I know I've turned this into a G1 X bash session (sorry!), when my original intent was to highlight how impressed I was with Canon's progress with their sensor/processor technology, so I will end with my final comment.

Speaking as an advanced amateur photographer, who is in the market for a more capable P&S style camera, I am finding the G1 X to be a one-trick-pony...maybe two, because I do appreciate swivel LCDs. I cannot justify spending $800.00 on this camera...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 15, 2012)

One trick ponies are fine in my book as long as that trick is a great trick. $800 for a great zoom range, sharp images, amazingly low noise, SLR level dynamic range....etc etc etc. I don't even bother with primes on my 7D. Panasonic would have to make serious changes for me to care about any of their cameras.

1 upvote
fuxicek
By fuxicek (Jan 14, 2012)

The sensor has the same pixel density as the one on Canon 600D. Maybe its the same old sensor, just doesnt use the whole area (cropped to 4:3), but new is the connection with the Digic 5 processor, thats why it performs slightly better ;)

0 upvotes
Wahoo
By Wahoo (Jan 15, 2012)

Yes, and a new Rebel with Digic 5 should be announced soon.

1 upvote
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Jan 14, 2012)

The low light ISO seems remarkable and better than 18MP sensor of 7d/550d/60d/600d. However, as many noted, this is a well-lit scene and not what you'd get in low light in real life. I am sure Dpreview will do real-life low light situations late at night or inside bars/restaurant which are not well lit.
I am not as much concerned with 3.5-5.6 F on the lens as with its range and af speed/ability in low light conditions. If the lens was 24-120 I'd be closely looking at it for my wife (I am getting T2i with 18-135 for her instead)

David

0 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Jan 14, 2012)

the rule I use for ISO studio tests - subtract 1 stop.
So if you see studio light test @ISO 1600 - that is how ISO 800 will look like in real life.

2 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Jan 14, 2012)

Wow, the lens is still "muddy". To those who find it passable, here's mud in your eye. We have better, less expensive lens choices, and that's my point. I'm getting sick of combined goodness, being taken out, by one poor design aspect.

Kudos for the bigger sensor, and it's noise floor. Too bad it shows the lens quality huh? Do you really think people don't notice lens quality, and combined sensor quality, and then the rest (size, cost, usability, including sporting speeds, and at a value price)?

Even the most rank novice photographer, can see the output! We are not making throw away kids cameras, here. Make a better camera!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

Muddy compared to what? Low ISO detail is impressive. High ISO detail is on par or better than pretty much every other sensor/lens combo on the market other than maybe the pro level stuff. I've spent hours and hours looking over tests, MTF charts, and real world shots on many, many lens/body combinations. I don't see perfection, but I also don't see mud.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

I REALLY hope the lens won't be THIS bad in the final version. I want a Sony R2 :)

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Jan 14, 2012)

I made a composite of images of the X-Pro 1, Canon G1 X and my choice of second camera, the Nikon D5000. In the absence of the actual equipment, it helps to come to conclusions about how useful each of them might be as a second camera.

Have a look at www.flickr.com/photos/contrajur/6695505971/in/photostream and, if you click on the image, you can see it larger and clearer.

There are also links there to so far to a small number of my photos to prove that I do not spend all my time on such trivialities!

2 upvotes
knowledgeseeker
By knowledgeseeker (Jan 14, 2012)

Interesting comparison. Thanks.

Your "real" photos are excellent. What would you pick as your carry-around "tween" camera, when the smartphone is not enough and the DSLR too much?

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Jan 14, 2012)

As a smaller, lighter camera the Nikon D5000 with 18-55mm VR at 825g must seem absurd. However, that saves me 678g against my D300 with Sigma 12-24mm. It is the best compromise for a second camera, since I am not prepared to use one where I have doubts the quality is good enough to make fine prints as large as A2.

One magazine described the D5000 as having the best dynamic range of entry level DSLRs. I like HDR lighting in most of my landscapes, so that was a factor. I decided against compacts because their sensors are too small to give good dynamic range and sharpness. Lenses for compacts and mirrorless cameras with interchangeable in APS-C and Four Thirds all have too much distortion, especially in wide angle. I expect the Canon G1 X will too. I shoot RAW and want to have no constraint on which RAW developer I use, so distortion correction would be an issue, probably not for the Fuji X-Pro 1. I also wanted an optical viewfinder but the X-Pro 1 is too expensive as a second camera.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
1 upvote
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Jan 15, 2012)

Keepreal, I'm in the same boat, D300 and D5000 (well, in my case D5100 with 18-105mm) user and I also find the later with a kit lens to give me the best compromise in size and weight vs image quality. It gives an excellent sensor and a very good lens, of course with many other choices from my collection as alternatives. I would sometimes like smaller and am following the progress in the mirrorless/ high-end compact camp, but think an entry-level DSLR is still the best 'back-up' if you are serious about IQ and on a budget right now.

0 upvotes
jwalker019
By jwalker019 (Jan 14, 2012)

I think the samples are remarkable - color is consistent from 100-12800 and detail is retained far better than I'd have expected. I think Canon has a real winner here.

1 upvote
ThomasX
By ThomasX (Jan 14, 2012)

I like the G1X approach - much better than the Nikon 1.
My only concern to be honest is the 20cm minimum macro distance. Will that be sufficient? I like to shoot macros.

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Jan 14, 2012)

A Canon rep said "it is a contrast detect AF like prior G series, but the speed is a bit faster than the G12 in most cases. The only time when that might not be true is in extreme macro situations."

It sounds like an entry-level DSLR, or maybe even a Nikon 1, would be better for moving subjects - dogs, kids, sports.

2 upvotes
HSway
By HSway (Jan 14, 2012)

Just as lumix g1 marked one beginning, canon with this release is launching a second type/branch of large sensor compacts users were calling for years. You will hardly ever please everyone (the line sure will have its own evolution) but I can’t help but appreciate this piece of work. And I like the natural transition from their G series which in form of GX looks like a nice continuation of the G line success. Hard to tell why they delayed this solution that long, not exactly tactical, too. But they carry on what they were excellent at by bringing it on a new and adequate level and it indeed is imo enough to make it a meaningful alternative – in pretty saturated market. Making interchangeable-lens cs is still an option - if they want. Unlike the Nikon1, I see it a distinct and making sense move.

8 upvotes
PIngp0NGMW
By PIngp0NGMW (Jan 14, 2012)

Agreed. I've been stunned at how much negativity there has been regarding this product while it strikes me as being a very perceptive strategic product. For me, this camera represents the perfect back-up body to my DSLR kit or indeed, a worthy travel camera when I need a less obtrusive and heavy photographic tool. I am not looking at investing in another system, I just want a competent, reasonably small, good image quality package that handles low light well. The G1X seems to fit the bill nicely.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

The attitudes come from people who have adopted earlier technology and are now faced with a product that makes them feel less confident about their choice. Remember the line "the lady dost protest too much, methinks"? Anyway, when I see a camera that I don't like I move on and leave the people who like it alone. I also don't delude myself into thinking I know what is good for other people....although I'll give them my opinion if they either ask or push.

3 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Jan 14, 2012)

It looks to be 1-2 stops better at high ISO than my Panasonic G2.

However, my lenses are 1-2 stops faster, so it's a wash.

I'm not sure how this camera would compare to the G3 and the other newer cameras with better high ISO performance.

I'm not saying I wouldn't use the GX-1 if somebody bought it for me, it looks like a nice camera, but at this price I would prefer to wait and just to pick up one of the m43 lenses that I don't have yet.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Jan 14, 2012)

its not a wash if youre shooting at base iso.large aperture isnt going to replace a poor sensor

3 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Jan 14, 2012)

exactly Jogger

3 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

"It looks to be 1-2 stops better at high ISO than my Panasonic G2."

I've thoroughly compared the results in the French ISO series and found out that the difference is about 2EV with the latest-and-greatest (and, with the 14-42X, $150 more expensive) GX1.

0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Jan 14, 2012)

I guess it depends on what you want to use the GX-1 for.

I printed some photos out of my 2005 Olympus C7070 last night at 8x10, and its 7 megapixels on a tiny sensor are more than enough quality for me. I'm not sure that many DSLRs of any make would have given me better picture quality at 8x10 than does my C7070. And the G2 has better image quality, even pixel peeping.

So I don't know what you mean by "poor sensor". I know for a fact that these forums are filled with shills for the camera companies, so if that is your job and you get paid for it, so be it. If it was an honest comment, then I'm confused. DPReview called the G2 a "great camera". It does not have a poor sensor. It prints tack sharp to 13x19 by my own experience, and beyond according to what I've read from other posters.

All of this high ISO fever is just the latest way of trying to boil down cameras to a single spec, now that the megapixel myth has been punctured, anyway

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

"DPReview called the G2 a "great camera"."

In July 2010 (see http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCG2/ ). One and half a year ago. One year before the Nex 5n/7 (and even more before the Nikon System 1), which have completely changed the scene.

"I know for a fact that these forums are filled with shills for the camera companies, so if that is your job and you get paid for it, so be it. "

Come on - if I were paid by Canon, I in no way would have been the first to widely publicize the major lens decentering issues visible in the first studio shots of DPReview's S100 preview. And I wouldn't have pointed out the French review also shows some major lens problems of the G1X, much-much worse than even the (otherwise, not stellar) native E lenses on the Nex 5N...

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

Besides, you can also check out the French article (and my, to put it mildly, lens quality-wise, not very flattering remarks) yourself: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&thread=40291776 . There is some MAJOR ISO differences between the cameras. And I doubt the G2 will be nowehere as good as the Canon, DR-wise, either...

0 upvotes
wfektar
By wfektar (Jan 14, 2012)

OK, format-wise this is basically a u43 camera, only not for reasons of ... what, corporate perverseness? $800 for a somewhat larger than typical u43 with a slow, fixed lens? From a technical performance perspective surely they could have gone u43 and made the lens separately -- those who like the all-in-one kit lens would never have to get anything else anyway, those who don't could access a wide range of existing lenses.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Jan 14, 2012)

OK, format-wise, ALL u43 cameras are just dcams with interchangeable lens hardware... remember, dcams were around long enough, so any u43 isn't novel, just a variation.
Large sensor prosumer oriented bridge cameras with nice sized sensor (like my old Sony R1) are mirrorless too, so what, all dcams are just that. Although the G1 X finally gets the decent sensor upgrade, it isn't the largest either.
Looking at u43 now, one has to realize, all of a sudden, given their smaller sensor, why their bodies are still so bulky, worse, their u43 lenses slower if not 'equal' (their other zooms aren't faster lenses either (i.e. 43d zoom lenses are yet slower too)).
compare same zooms with same zooms... not fast flat primes, primes always easiest to make fastest.

1 upvote
Swingline
By Swingline (Jan 14, 2012)

The French site has shots for the Nex 5-n, Panasonic and other cameras. I only looked at the NEX5n and it is a little sharper at 6400, the folding camera in the lower left but that might be a matter of corner sharpness.
http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-1354/compact-canon-g1-x-powershot-bruit-electronique-12.html

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Jan 14, 2012)

interesting, much will however depend on which distance was focused on, surfaces with the highest intricate detail or not (like the tiny texts) or map details (tiniest numbers, geo-relief contour lines, letters of place names), etc.
Sony NEX's NR mottling and detail distortion is quite evident, than the G1 X, as ISOs go up (e.g. ISO 6400).

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Jan 14, 2012)

I'm Pentaxian for long years...But I like this camera. I think it could be good travel camera with high quality picture. JPEG's engine is good. ISO1600 is good too. I see huge potential if to shoot in RAW. It seems to me this sensor is very close to APS-C...Good job of Canon. And I like design of camera: a bit old fashioned. IMO.

4 upvotes
lajka
By lajka (Jan 14, 2012)

Hej One Guy Illuminate me if you can. Is there difference in the noise in deep shadow at 3200 in the picture taken at night and at day? I thought that if you expose correctly the piece of coal will have the same greynes value be it noon or evening.The only factor I would accept is the at daylight there`s more bluue light thus more intence blue channel, which if I remember uese to be the noisiest one. Or I am completely wrong.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Darcy Perkins
By Darcy Perkins (Jan 14, 2012)

Ummm doesn't this have to do with the fact that the longer the exposure/shutter speed, the noisier things get?

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Jan 17, 2012)

I agree with you lajka, you are completely wrong.

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Jan 14, 2012)

Forcing ISO to high level at good illumination does not do it for me because I think the sensor response is non-linear. I want to see the ambient light to be so low the camera selects 3200 (etc) and then I can see how the shadows look like (noise, color, artifacts). Is dpr really trying to insult the audience?

What is most egregious here is doing these shots with an ad-hoc scene with primary colors while dpr has much-touted studio scene, which, incidentally, I like.

Dpr still did not say much about AF. Actually, dpr said nothing about AF. It reminds me of the VW Beatle ad from the 80's.
Q: 0-60?
A: Yes

4 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Jan 14, 2012)

One always chooses ISO based on the effect one wants, whereas auto-ISO is like all other P&S AE modes, where absolute control is handed over to the camera to give you a 'neutral' capture, not a creative capture.
This camera is meant for that kind of creative control, and usage of M is what bests takes advantage of that control.
Don't insult shooters who know how to expose and choose a sensitivity under the darkest conditions (starlight & moonlight), even candle light is considered glaringly bright, but you have to know how to use your settings without resorting to any 'auto' modes (all 'compensation' adjustment does is give an alternative variation (brighter or darker) to that initial 'neutral' look). An 'auto' induced 'neutral look', is not a 'correct' exposure by any standard, just a good safe starting point somewhere in the middle (average).
If you are getting terrible shadow details, obviously you haven't found the proper settings to shoot in that lighting (or lack of any).

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Jan 14, 2012)

You have a point about the AF speed. The fact that Canon and anyone who has used the camera are so hesitant to give their impressions of it does not bode well.

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Jan 14, 2012)

@OneGuy: " I want to see the ambient light to be so low the camera selects 3200 (etc) and then I can see how the shadows look like (noise, color, artifacts). Is dpr really trying to insult the audience?"

If you take a moment to look at the exposure data of these samples, you'll see that if you wanted to shoot this scene handheld you'd genuinely need to use high ISOs. They're shot at 112mm-equivalent, and even at ISO 3200 the shutter speed is 1/30sec, so you'd be heavily reliant on IS to get a sharp image. The shutter speed only reaches 1/125sec at ISO 12800.

So no, we're not trying to insult the audience at all.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
10 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

@josh152. Give the poor sob's a chance to do some testing. I've never seen such a demand for INSTANT reports from people using PRE-PRODUCTION cameras. We usually get little to no info until a real review is posted.

4 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Jan 14, 2012)

@ Andy Westlake:
Noticed the -0.7 EV compensation for all shots @ 112mm (equivalent), which meant using f/8:
so for the shot for ISO 12800 was limited to1/125s... would the limit be shorter, if f/5.8 had been used instead? Or does ISO 12800 actually limit it to 1/125s (appropriate for 112mm focal length handheld).
Either way, it makes sense to reserve hi-ISO sensitivities for low light conditions where longer shutter speeds are more likely to be needed anyway (tripod, too).

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Jan 14, 2012)

It isn't unreasonable, given all the speculation about it, for them to just say "here are some test shots and by the way in our preliminary test the af seemed to be as fast/slower/faster than the G12.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

If their non-disclosure agreement says they can't discuss performance, then it is unreasonable to expect that. This is still a pre-production camera. I am shocked we've gotten test shots this early. Every single other useful performance measure is left out, so I see no reason to throw in that particular one.

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Jan 15, 2012)

That was kind of my point, If the AF is so great, why doesn't canon want people saying so?

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 15, 2012)

Because it is not the final firmware. NO camera maker wants something that is not the actual camera consumers will see on the shelves to be treated as though it is. Zero. Never. None.

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Jan 15, 2012)

@sdyue - I'm really not at all sure what you're asking here. I chose F8 because it gave the optimum balance between sharpness and depth of field, and -2/3 EV to get the brightness right. That happened to give a shutter speed of 1/125 at ISO 12800. It's no more complicated than that.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Jan 14, 2012)

Fine details, such as the focused areas of the wood grain pattern of the platform, dusty Chinese Warrior Figurine (the dust can be seen distinctly), faux fur of the mechanical mouse, light glints in the eye/nose, paint strokes/reflections on the porcelain muffin, dents in the color crayons (taken a beating over time) are very easily made out for ISOs 100, 200, 400, 800.

However, the MOST DISTINCT drop in details come higher up, but it is a slow progression of NR that starts to obliterate those distinct fine details until one never knows whats there for certain:

The ISO jump from:
800-1600: slight loss
1600-3200: noticeable loss
3200-6400: big clear jump in loss
6400-12800: biggest worst loss

Significant is that NOISE is very acceptable throughout the entire range, especially for gross details or larger areas. So the typical reduction for presentation sizes (whole image) are all VERY usable.
However, as fine details are lost, creative closer cropping options go down.

I am Impressed!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
tobias2003
By tobias2003 (Jan 14, 2012)

Certainly impressive.

0 upvotes
timo
By timo (Jan 14, 2012)

Not sure how much those shots really tell us. Haven't looked at them all - the hair on the mouse at 1600 ISO shows some very unpleasant noise reduction effects. Most of the set-up consists of flat surfaces without much texture, which heavy-handed noise reduction will tend to flatter. (Or flatten, if you prefer!)

Jury still out, as far as I'm concerned. I want to see some raw conversions of more revealing subject matter - and also some indication as to whether the OVF is any more effective than that of the G12. If it is not, the X10 may still get my credit card attention, orbs or not ...

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Jan 14, 2012)

Opposite for me. I have the X10.

I am quite likely to move across to the Canon because I already like the G11 and G12.

I may have a deal for people who want the X10 because for me nonfixable orbs are a deal-breaker.

0 upvotes
lbpix
By lbpix (Jan 14, 2012)

I'm fully with Timo here. Especially we need info about the OVF, how accurate is it - not just the percentage. My G9 has a terrible OVF - have they improved it? I too am considering the X10.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Jan 14, 2012)

Regarding the OVF, it actually is discussed briefly on p.3 of the preview.

"The G1 X does nothing to upset tradition, and sports an optical finder that's very much the same as those on previous models. Which is to say, useable if necessary, but not exactly what you'd call good."

0 upvotes
Erik Visser
By Erik Visser (Jan 14, 2012)

This sample does not do anything to show the qualities od the camera. I need a comparison... It feels that companies are buying their DPreview news slots. It looks this one is one of them. Too many separate Canon G1 X articles.
I am looking forward for anyone suggesting a better site for camera reviews. Time to erase my bookmark.

1 upvote
arno bothof
By arno bothof (Jan 14, 2012)

I made that stap several years ago :)

0 upvotes
EOS Photographer
By EOS Photographer (Jan 14, 2012)

What a childish comment Mr. Erik.

Looks like you can't stand it that Canon finally did it right!

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
stlsportscom
By stlsportscom (Jan 14, 2012)

Erik: I do not plan to buy the G1X. I enjoy my S95, my Rebel XT, and my 40D. The G1X does not fit my needs.

But your comment is out of line...way out of line...on so many levels...that I feel like I'm wasting my time, even now, responding. to you.

But I am.

My loss of two minutes, I guess.

2 upvotes
Peet Venter
By Peet Venter (Jan 14, 2012)

I found my camera! Thanks for the information DPR, you are great!

4 upvotes
avgcitizen
By avgcitizen (Jan 14, 2012)

Is this DPReview's new ISO test subject?

Where's the variety? Where is fine text and smooth gradients to evaluate for noise reduction tricks at high ISO?

This French site has a better test target: http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-1354/compact-canon-g1-x-powershot-bruit-electronique-12.html

How about a DPReview Challenge for best test scene?! Winner gets used in all reviews!

(It does look like Canon has succeeded in beating the Four-Thirds competition for IQ, but not the larger NEX-5)

4 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth. One vote here for a "dislike" button on this site.

7 upvotes
saralecaire
By saralecaire (Jan 14, 2012)

those are great sample on that french site. it also shows some wonky focusing if you look at the map at the top-left. the edge focus is good, but gets slightly blurred slightly further in strange...

1 upvote
Model Mike
By Model Mike (Jan 14, 2012)

Read the heading - it's an expansion of the preview not a formal test. For what it's worth, and assuming these are from in-camera JPEGs, the results are IMO quite promising.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Swingline
By Swingline (Jan 14, 2012)

focus-numerique has comparison shots for other cameras on the same page. NEX5-N might be a little better in the corners, eg the folding camera lower left but it is pretty close.

0 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Jan 14, 2012)

No

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

Wow, those samples are stunning. The Nikon 1 and M4/3 systems have serious competition. In my case, there is no competition. This is EXACTLY the camera I've been waiting two years for.

10 upvotes
Fraxinus excelsior
By Fraxinus excelsior (Jan 15, 2012)

In case you havent noticed. The camera has a lens that wont come of! Its boring and no alternative for a wastly more flexible 4/3 or Sony NEX system camera. Further those cameras are in a fact smaller by a large margin than this new boring Canon. The Nikon i regard in the same category as the canon: toy cameras!

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 15, 2012)

I don't want a lens that will come off...I just want a good lens. I already have an amazing camera body with several expensive lenses. Once you put a lens with a reasonable range on the end of those tiny camera bodies, not smaller any more.

0 upvotes
jmellas
By jmellas (Jan 14, 2012)

These results, though further analysis is needed, are fantastic, in my opinion! Now give us quick focus, and fast shot to shot times Canon and u have a buyer in waiting. Though next years likely iteration with a 24mm lens would be even better!

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Jan 14, 2012)

It is Adobe's role to keep flooding us with updates. Now DP Review is doing it. Articles on the Canon G1 X, that and several threads already on the Fuji XPro-1 and who knows where else and all within less than a week. DP Review now also has a high proportion of useless articles like software to put on your mobile, rubbish to buy a week before Christmas and what you can waste up to $20 or more on.

I worked in Misinformation Technology for 40 years and hated it. (I only stayed because I could not earn enough to raise a family in another field.)

Changes on a whim every few days, too much information, too much email, even if correct or more up to date is not useful. It is a nightmare. Metaphorically, the ink has not even dried before it is updated or out of date.

It is bad enough with camera models being superceded every few months. Please just shut up. Those sample images above on their own are a complete waste of time.

1 upvote
jmellas
By jmellas (Jan 14, 2012)

The reason DPR is "flooding us with updates" is merely because we expect them too!! All one needs to do is check within the various forums to see the pressure that must be felt by DPR and others in their field. The competition to produce articles and reviews "now" is immense! I, for one, am glad that all I have to do is read them. So cut them some slack... after all why are you here?

12 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Jan 14, 2012)

The internet is a strange world. There are those who clamor for more reviews and updates, and those who whine when there are frequent updates related to new exciting products in the market.

Keepreal: The last time I checked, DPReview is still a free website, so you can jolly well disappear and no one is gonna miss you one bit. So, shoo, shoo...

14 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Jan 14, 2012)

I whine when there are frequent entries that add little or nothing. I have an RSS feed and I thought it was worth having and that when I was informed there was something here it was not merely the pretence of something. It would make more sense when the updates had enough to add and that another visit was worth making.

Nevertheless, point taken. You are right. What has sense got to do with it? So goodbye.

0 upvotes
Len_Gee
By Len_Gee (Jan 14, 2012)

could be you are in serious need of another pastime other than being on this site.

1 upvote
848848
By 848848 (Jan 14, 2012)

Its great your able to have a rant and create a bit of a fuss. DPRevew like you has choices to make and you may not agree with theirs but as your not their focus of attention I will help and listen to you.... Agh, do you feel better now. The sample images illustrate that the ISO either at 100 or 400 makes little difference in this particular scence and I enjoy the study and it was FREE!

1 upvote
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Jan 14, 2012)

So... just close your eyes when you visit the site.

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Jan 14, 2012)

In deference to those in this sub-thread, especially Len_Gee I made a composite of images of the X-Pro 1, Canon G1 X and my choice of second camera. I am not in serious need of another pastime as Len_Gee suggests but I am retired so have much time to waste when I choose.

Have a look at www.flickr.com/photos/contrajur/6695505971/in/photostream and, if you click on the image, you can see it larger and clearer.

(There are also links there to so far to a small number of my photos to prove that I do not spend all my time wingeing!)

0 upvotes
graybalanced
By graybalanced (Jan 15, 2012)

How dare DPReview flood us with more frequent updates. I have enough trouble paying for my updates for all my other hardware and software, I don't need to pay for...oh wait...this entire site is free.....

0 upvotes
Peter 13
By Peter 13 (Jan 14, 2012)

ISO performance makes sense only tested against loss of detail in NR. The scene lacks any fine detail so the test is useless.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Jan 14, 2012)

What about the fur on the stuffed mouse? You can really tell a differnce in fine details between iso 100 and 3200 if you look there.

Personally I want to see raw files with no noise reduction applied. In camera NR is usually way too heavy handed IMO.

2 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Jan 14, 2012)

Indeed, I want to see RAW files with no NR. Adobe is typically used to keep the playing field level. When are we seeing support for the G1X?

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Jan 14, 2012)

Even at 100 the detail does not look good

0 upvotes
Haakon Dewing
By Haakon Dewing (Jan 14, 2012)

doesn't look as if Canon have seen fit to re-introduce remote capture support, last seen on the G10. Shame.

2 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Jan 14, 2012)

Does the camera display the current focal length of the lens?

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

- Great high-ISO performance

- no discernable noise in the blue color channel at ISO 100 (even m43 cameras are plagued by that)

- while the setup doesn't really let for scrutinizing edge / corner performance (actually, as the traveling bag in the upper left quarter is in the background, the camera couldn't even keep it in focus because of the relatively shallow DOF) there , the lens still seem to be better than that of the French article (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&thread=40291776 ), particularly in the lower left quarter. However, again, the test setup doesn't let for reliably checking corner softness and generic lens decentering.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

BTW, focus-wise, compare the sharpness of the head of the Chinese soldier, the rat tail and the toy box in the background. The first is completely in focus (and very sharp), the second is considerably in the background and is already out of focus and the last is really out of focus. As these three things are almost at the same image position close to the center of the image, it can safely be stated that this is just simple DOF-based out-of-focus and not a lens decentering issue.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jan 14, 2012)

Our goal with these images is to show basic ISO performance. There will be plenty of time to obsess over corner sharpness and the like when we release our studio samples from a production camera.

3 upvotes
slabby
By slabby (Jan 14, 2012)

so high iso performace looks great but....

at iso 100 f/8 the Samuri is Sharp but the Lunch Box is Blurry. What's up with that?

Let the @#%$storm begin......

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

As I've also pointed out above, the setup doesn't really let for scrutinizing edge / corner performance. The traveling bag in the upper left quarter is in the background; this is why the camera couldn't even keep it in focus because of the shallow DOF.

0 upvotes
slabby
By slabby (Jan 14, 2012)

Does that not seem like a ridiculously shallow depth of field for f/8? Could the metadata be wrong?

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

For an almost APS-C camera, with stuff so close to the camera, it's pretty understandable DOF won't be very large - particularly if you put one of the subjects (here, a travelling bag) quite a bit away from the rest.

The travelling bag is simply defocused because of the DOF - there doesn't seem to be a lens decentering issue there.

2 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Jan 14, 2012)

@slabby: "at iso 100 f/8 the Samuri is Sharp but the Lunch Box is Blurry. What's up with that?". This is purely depth of field: it's a 3-dimensional scene shot at 60.4mm F8 and fairly close distance (about 1.5m). The EXIF isn't wrong.

3 upvotes
IcyVeins
By IcyVeins (Jan 13, 2012)

This could be a great camera for those who would normally just buy a DSLR and never change the lens. But it's not a serious competitor to mirrorless system cameras.

1 upvote
Uri Ben
By Uri Ben (Jan 14, 2012)

Why not? IMO writing a statement should be backed up with some evidence. I am intending to exchange my Nex 7 and 5n with the G1x: As you can see above the IQ of the G1x in all ISO levels is amazingly good (OK- not like the Nex but still amazing) , I hate to change lenses- but I love the ability to change parameters with out swimming in menu deep like the Atlantic . So I believe that the G1x will be The answer for my current photography needs.

4 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

"As you can see above the IQ of the G1x in all ISO levels is amazingly good (OK- not like the Nex but still amazing) , "

The French article (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&thread=40291776 ) directly compared the 5N to the G1X. I've scrutinized the shots and found out that the G1X is about 0.5EV worse than the 5N but definitely not more. (For comparison, the Pana GX1 is about two(!!!) EV's weaker at 12800.)

5 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (Jan 14, 2012)

AF is too slow to complete with mirrorless.

2 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Jan 14, 2012)

AF speed only matters if you need it. Besides we don't even know how fast the AF is.

4 upvotes
IcyVeins
By IcyVeins (Jan 14, 2012)

Lol, evidence? What is this, a court of law? What's hilarious is how you preface your demand for evidence with "IMO." Talk about cognitive dissonance!

If you hate changing the lens, you shouldn't use the 18-200mm lens on the NEXs, you get more zoom range and roughly the same aperture n a camera with more features, a better sensor, and one that looks nicer. Of course it costs more too, but your paying for performance and versatility that you just can't get on a fixed lens compact.

1 upvote
Jeff Palmucci
By Jeff Palmucci (Jan 14, 2012)

It's also a great camera for those who already have a big dslr, but want a small walk around. That's why I'm getting it. Also, I don't get the mirrorless af comment. mirrorless cameras lack pdaf, so they are slow to focus too.

1 upvote
FlashInThePan
By FlashInThePan (Jan 14, 2012)

" IMO writing a statement should be backed up with some evidence."

Lovely, can you back up your statement with evidence?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Jan 14, 2012)

Considering that Canon probably has data that shows that the majority of mirrorless and DSLR owners never use anything other than the supplied kit lens it does become a great camera.

The subtlety of the larger sensor will be lost on the mass that buys cameras IMO.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ispress
By ispress (Jan 13, 2012)

I'm dead center of the target market for this thing. Current S95 user. Got rid of my old DSLR because it was too big and clunky to carry around. Miss certain features and control that the DSLR offered. Willing to pay good money for a camera. Etc. However, $799 is a very ambitious price and this camera has some significant built-in limitations. The S100 is almost literally half this much and (if it's anything like the S95) is a superb travel camera. And for around the same money as the G1-X, I can get an A55 or pretty much any Micro 4/3 camera with a kit lens. Canon is really boxed in here, largely due to its highly optimistic pricing. For $599 (or even $649) I would be all over this thing. I hate being one of those guys who complains about the price, but skepticism seems warranted here. Maybe it will blow everyone away once a full performance review is performed?

8 upvotes
Lee Jay
By Lee Jay (Jan 13, 2012)

The most similar alternative seems to be about $150 more:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/828150-REG/Panasonic_DMC_GX1XK_DMC_GX1_Digital_Camera_with.html

1 upvote
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Jan 14, 2012)

... and the GX1 has about 2 EV worse high ISO performance. And its DR may not be as good as that of teh Canon.

See http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&thread=40291776 for a direct comparison.

1 upvote
Peter Dhaeze
By Peter Dhaeze (Jan 13, 2012)

look at http://www.eoszine.nl/295893/Canon-PowerShot-G1-X-Preview.html for ISO 1600 and 3200 JPEG straight from camera. DPP not available yet. Also comparison with EOS 60D.

4 upvotes
akjos
By akjos (Jan 13, 2012)

Thanks for the link . Its almost like a slap in the face for dslr users. iso 1600 from G1X looks much cleaner and much less chroma noise in dark areas then one from 60D. Very impressive. I want one :)

1 upvote
AkinaC
By AkinaC (Jan 13, 2012)

@akjos: I think that's because the new processor DIGIC 5, also chromatic aberration is obvious, I think the lens does matter as well....(so the GX1 has better lens than 60D 18-135 f3.5-5.6?)

0 upvotes
Lucien
By Lucien (Jan 14, 2012)

There's just more noise reduction with the G1X and you can see actually more detail is resolved in center for the 60D (due to less NR).

That said the 60D kit lens is obviously not best with lots of CA and softness at the corners. It's 1 stop slower as well.

2 upvotes
R Johns
By R Johns (Jan 14, 2012)

The lens used on the 60D is the 18-200mm EF-S. This is a horrible lens. Chuck Westfall said the G1X lens is equivalent to the 18-135mm EF-S lens, which is much better.

Not only that, but the reviewer used f5.6 on the 60D, while using f8 on the G1X. Not what I would call a controlled experiment, but it's good to see some sample anyways... :0)

3 upvotes
Jos van Eekelen
By Jos van Eekelen (Jan 13, 2012)

+1 for the shutter lag, but especially when using flash. With a G7 this is way too long regardless whether the built in flash or an external one is used, I tested this briefly on a G12 at Photokina 2010 and it did not seem to be any better so I'm curious about the G1 X.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
BabylonPhotos
By BabylonPhotos (Jan 13, 2012)

I am most interested in the performance of the camera in very low lighting, interiors, night photography, etc. specially I would like to know if it produces much noise. Thanks for asking.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
techmine
By techmine (Jan 13, 2012)

This is 1 camera, I am really waiting to be reviewed. It is promising for sure. If I am not wrong, this is first of its kind (large sensor, compact'ish body and fixed zoom lens). There is always a trade off between making a camera this small with larger sensor and putting a fast zoom lens f2.0-2.8 (like Fuji X10).

Having said that, if it provides truly APS-C like IQ and fast enough Auto focus, I am buying it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Michael Jardine
By Michael Jardine (Jan 13, 2012)

This and the Fujifilm X-Pro1, though the latter uses changeable lenses. I have to think if I'm really looking for quality, bokeh, etc I would be more tempted to look at the Fuji...but jury is out on both, and look forward to reading the reviews on both right here :)

1 upvote
_P
By _P (Jan 13, 2012)

With a lens THAT slow, there is no way I'll ever touch this thing ...

0 upvotes
Siemenj
By Siemenj (Jan 13, 2012)

Slow? Name me one Image Stabilised lens with equal zoom range that's faster than this one.
I think only one comes close: the Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC HSM OS which weighs as much as the whole G1X.

6 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 14, 2012)

With image quality that great, I'm glad I won't have to wait in line behind you to get mine. You could use it at ISO 6400 without a thought to noise. If you want depth of field, the 5D is still on the market.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
_P
By _P (Jan 14, 2012)

It's only about the DOF lads, only about the DOF. Stabilisation and ISO performance (which is very good BTW) has no meaning for me.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Peanut88
By Peanut88 (Jan 13, 2012)

Nonsense way of pricing their cameras nowadays !

DEFINITELY not buying it.

1 upvote
Graystar
By Graystar (Jan 13, 2012)

800 bucks...I just don't understand the pricing of this breed of camera when they can set an ERP on a Rebel T3 of $550...and that's got a bigger sensor and mechanical swinging mirror and pentamirror assemblies in it.

1 upvote
spidermoon
By spidermoon (Jan 13, 2012)

It's the price of silence. But you are right, for 800$ you can buy a 550d with the 18-135kit. But no articulated screen and no compact style zooming ;)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 13, 2012)

The sensor has more in common with a T3i/600D, and it offers a greater zoom range with similar maximum apertures, the intelligent IS system and metal construction. The list price is $100 below the T3i's list price.

5 upvotes
CG33
By CG33 (Jan 14, 2012)

But you cannot add super zooms, macros, "good/fast" lenses, nothing else. To me it does not make any sense to spend $800 when you can get a LOT more on a T3i or similar DSLRs.

1 upvote
Graystar
By Graystar (Jan 14, 2012)

The sensor has a 4:3 ratio and is smaller, meaning it has less shallow DOF than the T3 can achieve. How in the world does that sensor have more in common with a Rebel sensor than another Rebel??

And because it's smaller, the lens is smaller, and so can pull small-lens tricks like greater zoom ranges. It's a metal body, but so is the G12 and it's only 500 dollars.

Stop making excuses for Canon.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Andrei Todea
By Andrei Todea (Jan 14, 2012)

This camera doesn't replace DSLR's. A cheaper DSLR will take better pictures but you may not carry it around so often.

However, IMHO, since shutter lag will be smaller every year, AF speed will improve... this system might replace the new mirrorless systems at some point.

0 upvotes
cboudier
By cboudier (Jan 13, 2012)

Is this camera completely silent ?

1 upvote
mike kobal
By mike kobal (Jan 13, 2012)

+1

1 upvote
cboudier
By cboudier (Jan 13, 2012)

too late to edit...

"... makes the G1 X exceptionally quiet in operation (as long as you turn off all of the synthesised operational noises. Indeed it's almost too quiet - there's almost no feedback when you take a shot."

Will it possible to hear this in the full review please ?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
hobbit mob
By hobbit mob (Jan 14, 2012)

"Will it (be) possible to hear this in the full review please?"

Probably not...

0 upvotes
landscaper1
By landscaper1 (Jan 13, 2012)

I'd like to know if Canon plans to make available an accessory tele-extender like the one made for the G10/11/12 cameras.

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Jan 13, 2012)

Does this camera have manual zoom or is it electronically controlled?

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 13, 2012)

It's electronic, as with all the previous G series cameras.

2 upvotes
PC Wheeler
By PC Wheeler (Jan 13, 2012)

A camera with Auto Focus? What will they think of next? :)

0 upvotes
Superka
By Superka (Jan 13, 2012)

Auto Focus? Auto Focus? Does it work? Is it fast?

2 upvotes
HikerMark
By HikerMark (Jan 13, 2012)

I currently have the G12, and I'm very interested in this camera. However macro capabilities are important to me. How would the adapter and the Canon Close up 250D and 500D filters work with this camera? Thanks.

0 upvotes
EsVeeFoto
By EsVeeFoto (Jan 13, 2012)

Can you give us an idea of how good or bad the shutter lag is?

3 upvotes
PeterNMIF
By PeterNMIF (Jan 13, 2012)

The smaller sensor G-series cams have a nice macro, whereby as you zoom in you can still get a 1:1 equiv. macro and also have a bit of working room. For example, on the G9 as I recall at about 90-100mm equiv. you get about 2" distance between front element and subject and fill the screen with a subject about 38mm wide.

I saw the G1X spec about closest focus at wide angle. That's fine but not too useful if you want working room or some light to hit the subject.... But how about zooming in a little? Can you get a reasonable macro at say 2x, 3x, or 4x?

Peter F.

0 upvotes
pppp
By pppp (Jan 13, 2012)

Hello,

what about the AF speed ? The Fuji X Pro 1 is slow...

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (Jan 13, 2012)

+1 Are we talking S100 speed or comparable to mirrorless (good light and low light). This is the #1 question for most people.

3 upvotes
LukeDuciel
By LukeDuciel (Jan 13, 2012)

So you got one production sample of X Pro 1?

3 upvotes
Cpt Haddock
By Cpt Haddock (Jan 13, 2012)

That's the funny thing about the comments on this site, indeed... Based upon a video posted somewhere by a vietnamese guy shooting randomly whatever might be in front of the camera on the Fuji booth, in macro mode without macro lens, the unanimous opinion is that the X-Pro1 autofocus is slow. I have no idea, may be it is. But maybe could we wait for some serious tests and reviews before deciding it's a given fact?

8 upvotes
Rotlex
By Rotlex (Jan 13, 2012)

This. Shutter lag and AF speed. I've always been happy with the G series otherwise. Any hints or changes? Does it even approach a DSLR in the regard?

2 upvotes
Richard Franiec
By Richard Franiec (Jan 13, 2012)

Since this was not mentioned in a preview, I don't have much hope, although I will be nicely surprised if there is marked improvement to previous G models on both counts.

0 upvotes
UnChatNoir
By UnChatNoir (Jan 13, 2012)

At least, its AF speed will be a lot faster than a Leica M9 ;-) . Does it matter? If you want to do sports, buy a D4. or a 1D. My D90 isn't also a super fast focussing camera and I can even perfectly live with the X100's AF. Depends of what you're doing, but there's more then just AF performance at specs.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Jan 13, 2012)

Is the flash only opened by manually flipping the switch? Once the flash is up, can it be electronically disabled or is that only accomplished by forcing it back into the camera body by hand?

0 upvotes
Ian
By Ian (Jan 13, 2012)

I'm looking at replacing my Panasonic LX-5 with the G1 x if the larger sensor can overcome the far slower aperture of the G1 x lens in low light, which certainly seems possible. I see you discussed this in relation to the Olympus XZ-1 and Fujifilm X10 but how about smaller advanced compacts like the LX-5 that have fast lenses but comparitively tiny sensors?

0 upvotes
Bart Hickman
By Bart Hickman (Jan 13, 2012)

You can do the math based on the sensor dimensions. The LX-5 sensor is 2.3x smaller, so you multiply the F-stop by 2.3. Eg., F/2 on the LX-5 is equivalent to F/4.6 on the GX-1. In other words, the Canon wins easily.

0 upvotes
AlfBundy
By AlfBundy (Jan 15, 2012)

I disagree with Bart Hickman.
His conversion only applies to depth of field, not light gathering ability.
In low-light situation, the canon's f2.8 will "beat" your LX-5's f2 only if its newer and bigger sensor can overcome a full stop of light handicap.
Time will tell.

0 upvotes
Bart Hickman
By Bart Hickman (Jan 16, 2012)

What I said holds for both DOF and light gathering ability--they can not be controlled independently. Put another way, if you put the same F-number in front of both sensors, they both get the same light intensity per unit area, but the Canon sensor has 5.3 times the surface area and thus gathers 5.3 times the amount of light (ie., 2.4 stops). So the Canon sensor will easily win even if it's the same technology node. Panasonic sensors are notoriously poor, so the difference will likely be even more severe than this.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 288
123