Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G15 studio sample images

By dpreview staff on Nov 7, 2012 at 23:10 GMT

Just Posted: Studio test samples from the Canon PowerShot G15. Although closely resembling the existing G-series cameras, the G15 is slightly smaller and features a faster lens than its predecessor. It also gains the latest version of Canon's 12MP 1/1.7"-type CMOS sensor - promising what should be a significant performance improvement over the now rather dated 10MP CCD in its predecessor, the G12. What difference does that sensor make? Have a look at our studio test images to find out.

We've added image quality comparison pages to our PowerShot G15 preview, but the images are also available from other reviews or our standalone comparison tool.

144
I own it
31
I want it
14
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 144
ChristianRFriborg
By ChristianRFriborg (Nov 16, 2012)

Time to upgrade my G11! Canon is awesome.

On second thought, why'd they remove the swivel screen? :-\

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ericsan
By ericsan (Nov 15, 2012)

interesting query as i plan to get the speedlite 90EX for the G15 !
Will wait for an answer before buying it...
Cheers

0 upvotes
Chuckmet
By Chuckmet (Nov 15, 2012)

If anybody has this camera could you tell Me if the shutter lag time has improved when using an external Canon flash. I have a G9 which I love but when using an external flash shutter lag is unacceptable. Reviews never seem to address this issue.

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ericsan
By ericsan (Nov 12, 2012)

I was wondering if a new investment in this P&S camera was a good idea as a back-up camera, well yes it is !! superb IQ,razor sharp images, small,light,easy to use, overall operations much quicker than the older generations ( i had the G10 which was VERY slow) and fixed screen which is what i was looking for !!
small sensors can be damn good these days ! forget the boring "blah blah" that has decided as a common rule that small sensor are bad, bigger sensor are much better...I will enjoy this camera and probably use it more often than my dslr gear...

0 upvotes
photopoet55
By photopoet55 (Nov 10, 2012)

I was Looking at the Fuji x10 untill i saw the G15.My next street camera for running and shooting streetphotography.The fixed lcd is a plus for me and size.
Now waiting on the real world samples shots . The price on both i can live with.

0 upvotes
wazandreg
By wazandreg (Nov 9, 2012)

You always get comments that show people have never used a particular camera and are repeating what they have read. Such as try fitting a g1x in your pocket or focus in the dark. Both can be done easily. Probably not worth stating negatives about a camera unless you have used it. Canon g15 may not match the g1x for IQ but it is not aimed at the same users so doesn't need to.

3 upvotes
wallbreaker
By wallbreaker (Nov 9, 2012)

I wished it was 24-140mm or 24-200, 1 inch sensor,1920 x 1080 (60,30 fps)..it would have been the best point & shoot camera..

0 upvotes
missilemission
By missilemission (Nov 9, 2012)

very thankful for my G12's articulated lcd screen, check out some of the videos i shot here: autotechnolife.blogspot.com

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 9, 2012)

My conclusion:

New batch of small sensor cameras (with bright lens and BSI-CMOS 1/1.7") has advantage when shooting at above 60mm eq - the faster lens kick in. Their lens designs seem to perform well in wide range of scenarios (including closeups or telephoto).

The "invention" - on the other hand - can use the advantage of the larger sensor when shooting wideangles (below 50mm eq) but the lens sharpness drops (quite a lot) for close-ups.

Summary.
For shooting wideangle distant shots (such as family shots or sunsets), RX100 is a definite low-light king. In other scenarios (portraits, concerts), high quality bright lens still have some edge.

0 upvotes
Benarm
By Benarm (Nov 8, 2012)

hard to compare to RX100 since the studio shots of RX100 are out of focus

5 upvotes
highwave
By highwave (Nov 9, 2012)

The RX100 shots are not out of focus. That is really all that compromised camera lens is capable of.

You can crosscheck with imaging resource website and you'll see the same IQ level for the RX100. Which is lacking for me but it seems to have a certain audiance nonetheless.

2 upvotes
photoguy622
By photoguy622 (Nov 9, 2012)

@highwave: There's nothing wrong with the RX100's lens. It, like the Canon G1 X, doesn't focus well at that close distance so they seem soft, however, real world results are much better.

2 upvotes
highwave
By highwave (Nov 9, 2012)

Perhaps. I don't know. An issue like that would explain why a lot of very good photographers endorse it and do not report a lens issue.

On the other hand I do have a look at snaps taken by it on forums. It is a great point and shoot but I feel like it's closer to the Canon G15 and other P&S rather than SLRs.

It's a great camera but I can't help but feel it's overhyped.

0 upvotes
jasonasselin
By jasonasselin (Nov 9, 2012)

These lenses are almost equally sharp, if you change to the raw you can see them without adding contrast, clarity and sharpening. Canon is known for having really nice sharp and punchy .jpg's so that's why it look sharper.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
tojkr
By tojkr (Nov 8, 2012)

why is powershot G1 s image is better in all sensitivities than G15? is G1 a different camera lineup?

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (Nov 8, 2012)

Try a different manufacturer instead! This response was intended for comment below. Sorry, tojkr.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

are you talking about G 1X or G1 ?

1 upvote
Fox Fisher
By Fox Fisher (Nov 8, 2012)

I had canon g7 and g9, and after all these years, canon is still selling us the same model with minor improvements... this model line up needs a major overhaul.

1 upvote
Gary Martin
By Gary Martin (Nov 8, 2012)

Seems like Sony has outflanked everyone in this category. I see a bigger sensor coming for the next G Series model - too late for this one.

3 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Nov 8, 2012)

Hate to break it to you but there already is a big sensor G series model. It is the G1X.

11 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

And it came months before Sony's invention. :-)

3 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Nov 8, 2012)

True if anything Canon outflanked Sony.

0 upvotes
Fox Fisher
By Fox Fisher (Nov 8, 2012)

Try fitting G1X to your pocket then :) Also try focusing in low light with G1X, its so much fun, it takes agessss.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

Fitting in my pockets? Very low on my list of priorities for great photographs. Focus in lowlight? You have not used one have you?

2 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

I think Canon need to work harder to produce G2x to make more people happy. The G 1X performance is Not good enough. Yes, it has big sensor, but performance is slow, and many problems there. so I hope G 2X is much better

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Nov 9, 2012)

There are several types of pockets a G1X will fit into. Just because it won't fit in the back pocket of your skinny jeans doesn't mean it isn't pocketable. Beside fitting in a pocket is not relevant to this discussion. Don't forget to that the Sony has a much smaller sensor so of course it will fit into a smaller camera than the G1X sensor.

In the end it is really just down to how much low light preformance you want to sacrifice for the convenience of the camera fitting into a slightly wider variety of pockets.

1 upvote
oselimg
By oselimg (Nov 8, 2012)

Sometimes I wonder, how some of the comment writers look at the pictures. Is it so difficult to see the Sony has better sensor performance with its resolution advantage and also with arguably less processed look but the contrast levels and black performance slightly lower than G15. On the other hand the Canon seems to have a better performing brighter zoom lens. I ain't got non of these cameras. In fact I still use a 7 years old digital compact. But to say Nikon has a better low light performance is plainly erm...silly. If G15 is not for you don't buy it. But some people might prefer it over the other cameras because of the brighter lens and-though crappy- viewfinder or some might chose the Nikon for the extra zoom reach or the Sony for its resolution and a slightly better low light performance. Can some of you grow out of your adolescent squabble and think about the functions and how those might serve your photography needs. If you are aware of them of course.

2 upvotes
Optimal Prime
By Optimal Prime (Nov 8, 2012)

'Nikon'? Surely you mean 'Canon'.

1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Nov 8, 2012)

Actually, it IS difficult to see that the Sony has better sensor performance.

Have you looked at the comparison images?

The Sony looks good in the middle of the frame, and like garbage anywhere near the edges. Compare it to the Olympus XZ-1, for example, a last generation camera.

I hope this helps.

5 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (Nov 8, 2012)

@bobbarber...I would like to draw your attention to my comment stating that the Canon seems to have a better performing zoom lens. It maybe because of a focusing fault or simply because the Sony lens doesn't perform well towards the edges I'm not in the position to be able to tell which. But where the Sony lens is focused there is certainly visible resolution advantage and more fine detail even on high ISO than the others in comparison. Again I think it's down to the individual for which camera they would part with their money because the output differences are subtle rather than obvious in day to day use unless you print everything at pixel level. So one chooses the camera suits one's photography style best.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

oselimg, it's also because of the barrel distortion needed to get the Sony lens to work with the Sony sensor. You will see this immediately if you look at the RAWs. You can process this out, but it does effect definition. All small cameras do it, but I find the Sony extreme.

5 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

I think Canon need to improve ISO 3200 and up. ISO 1600 and below is good enough. I hope they do it by firmware update before dpreview review

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Nov 8, 2012)

The Nikon P7700 looks better with low ISO jpegs, but Canon looks better at 1600 (not sure why DPR uses 3200 to show default high ISO with these smaller sensor cameras). Raws are more even. I'd say look at the camera's other features and decide that way.

The RX100 doesn't really distance itself from these smaller sensor cameras here. It does have the resolution advantage but it makes softer images (especially off axis) and noise performance isn't much better. Of course resizing the RX100 image to 12mp will show its clear advantage but you pay the price in the wallet and zoom range.

0 upvotes
Slanicka Tomas
By Slanicka Tomas (Nov 8, 2012)

Compare 3x bigger sensor from RX100 with P7700/G15 is nonsense. It's the same as if we compare RX100 with APS-C sensor.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Nov 8, 2012)

I don't think that resizing the Sony images shows an advantage.

Have you tried it?

I up-rezzed some Olympus XZ-1 OOC jpegs (not a good test of the camera's quality, since the XZ-1 has a flawed jpeg engine) and compared them to OOC jpegs from the RX100. The images were of the same scene, taken for another photography site.

Conclusion: The RX-100 had more detail and better dynamic range in the middle of the frame, but was handily beaten by the XZ-1 at the edge of the frame, and not just the very edge of the frame, but as much as a quarter of the frame in.

If you look at the edges of the studio image here at dpreview you will come to the same conclusion.

The reason of course, is that the Sony lens is much inferior to the Olympic lens. So we do not have a case of the larger sensor winning, "all else being equal", because all else is not equal.

I hope this helps.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

@ bobbarber:
That's a bit too simplistic. This is a close up scene where field curvature etc. hamper the RX100 lens the most. For more distant subjects, the lens performs much better, as also noted by Dpreview.

1 upvote
photoguy622
By photoguy622 (Nov 8, 2012)

The new G does very well compared to the competition. I was expecting a greater difference between the RX100 and the G, but that's not what I'm seeing.

All of the cameras are great, and I'm sure that there will be many buyers for all of them.

0 upvotes
jorg14
By jorg14 (Nov 8, 2012)

I think a cameras appeal depends on use.
I take mostly macros down low (flowers) and the G12 with it's articulating LCD is essential. Also with my Nex 7, I find the movable LCD useful for shooting over crowds. Much as I like the idea of the larger sensor RX100, I don't see that much of an IQ difference. I doubt in the real world where image content trumps technical quality, most other people would either.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (Nov 8, 2012)

Sample postings are useless. Only real-world experience on your computer and in print matters.

1 upvote
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

They give a good idea what to expect in the circumstances displayed.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 8, 2012)

Thank you TrojMacReady. We're also looking to develop our next test scene so that it tells you what happens in a wider range of circumstances.

2 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

No problem, one can only take so much criticism when it's unwarranted... I'd think.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (Nov 8, 2012)

Circumstantial evidence is no more useful in photography than in a courtroom, but it sure generates controversy.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

Yes, we need real world sample.
Indoor, sport, low light, kids, beach and many more.
so we know how good it is
Thanks

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 8, 2012)

High ISO looks worse than Nikon P7700, but better than Fuji X10, which is commendable.
Look at the globe for clear difference in readability.

RX100 is of course much better.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 8, 2012)

I am looking at the globe now, like you suggested, in the ISO 3200 setting. The P7700 colors are rather drained out... it's almost obvious Nikon has performed color noise removal to their raw files. As for the RX100, it's less than a stop better.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

"As for the RX100, it's less than a stop better."

Make that well over a stop when normalized to the same output.
In terms of DR probably also well over a stop (ignoring the usual Canon CMOS banding, which in practise would make that even more).

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

"Make that well over a stop when normalized to the same output."

From DxOMark which normalizes to 8 mp, AFAIK.

Low-Light Score
------------------
RX100 390 ISO
Fuji X10 245 ISO
Canon G12 161 ISO

If I had to guess I'd say the P7700 and possibly the G15 will score between 160-200 ISO. So the low-light advantage of the RX100 is a lot less than you think, especially vs the Fuji X10, but vs the better 1/1.7" cameras as well.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
1 upvote
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

Instead of guessing, just resample the RX100 to 12 MP (or upsample the Canon to 20MP) and compare the output at ISO 3200 from the RX100 to ISO 1600 from the G15.
Here's the result from ACR with NR turned off:
http://i49.tinypic.com/1z3w6f5.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/4tpnhj.jpg

Pretty clear that despite the stop difference (and despite the Tinypic artifacting...) the RX100 shows quite a bit less noise still.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

@TrojMacReady

Well, depends on focal length. At tele end (100mm) it's f2.5 vs f4.9. That translates to 2 stops in lens speed, ie. comparing ISO800 vs ISO3200.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 8, 2012)

Who shoots these cameras at tele end at anything but good light? Why?

1 upvote
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

So towards the tele end, you gain up to half a stop in noise with the G15, but the less you zoom, the more you gain with the RX100, up to a stop and a half at the wide end. That's about the difference between a FF and APS-C camera from the same generation in terms of noise.

And let's not forget we're basically comparing coat pocket and jeans pocket cameras here, i.e., different size (and weight) class.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Dimitri Khoz
By Dimitri Khoz (Nov 8, 2012)

At all focal lenghtes from 34mm -100mm
G15 is faster by 1 full stop or more.
Now you see, that RX100 is loosing in low light completely
unless you resort to 28mm and soft corners with RX100.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

@peevee1

concerts ? parties ? ... Bright lens allow you to use it in not so good light as well

0 upvotes
Dimitri Khoz
By Dimitri Khoz (Nov 8, 2012)

Do not forget, G15 has better IS than RX100 as well.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

@Dimitri:
"Now you see, that RX100 is loosing in low light completely
unless you resort to 28mm and soft corners with RX100"

Seems like you missed the comparison above that shows the RX100 sensor has a benefit of about a stop and a half to begin with. So "losing completely" is typical Dimitri talk. Rather quite similar, with a clear benefit at the wide end for the RX100.

And the IS claim is just that, a claim.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

@TrojMacReady

First it was 1 EV, now you say 1 1/2 stops better. I'm pretty sure you can read the DxOMark Low-Light Score numbers I posted above. The RX100 doesn't even perform 1 EV better than an X10, and it's just about 1 EV better than a G12.

As far as the RX100's advantage being at the wide end, that would be good if the RX100's lens wasn't so soft at f1.8-f2.

0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

The G15 ISO 3200 need to be improved by firmware update

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Dec 3, 2012)

@ Marike:
Can you not read? I started with "well over a stop". Does about a stop and a half not qualify as "well over a stop"? Yes it does.

DXOmark says a stop and a third, which is well over a stop indeed. Visible it could be a hair larger difference due to typical pattern noise for which Canon is known. Either way, it's more than 1 EV.

And I've seen plenty nice shots at the largest apertures in low light that would have been well over a stop noisier at that wide end with the Canon.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

Looking at RAWs at base ISO, there is very little to choose between the G15 and P7700, but the G15 has better color. Higher ISO settings the P7700 is cleaner than the G15 and does extremely well.

The "invention" looks soft, even blurry in most crops. Have a look at the watch, Queen of Hearts, or batteries and you'll wish you hadn't.

5 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 9, 2012)

Sony makes great sensors. Sometimes good cameras. But rarely, if ever, good lenses. :) Just look at their lens line-up for E and A mounts.

Sony is still stuck in their electronic gadget mindset. Was never into serious photography gear and looks like it never will.

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 8, 2012)

There is only so much you can extract from a typical 12MP, 1/1.7" CMOS sensor.

.

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

Extract? BS. Camera sensors are getting better and better and now with BSI CMOS sensors you are getting superb performance. Olympus seems to "extract" quite a bit with it's new XZ-2. These samples look as good any RX100 images. I'll take a good fast lens and a small sensor over a mediocre slow lens on a larger sensor any day.

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2012/10/olympus-stylus-xz-2-review-street.html

The RX100 isn't distinguishing itself in the above tests where the other 3 cameras have no problems extracting detail from the scene.

3 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Nov 8, 2012)

When comparing RAWs at ISO1600, G15 delivers decent quality, no other competitor is noticeably better. Unlike many others I do not see the omission of articulated screen as a big problem; it enabled to make the G15 thinner and more pocketable.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 8, 2012)

RX100 Raws are better by a margin with both 1600 and 3200 ISOs.

3 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

You should compare RX100's ISO1600 with G15's ISO400. That is the difference between f2.5 and f4.9

3 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Nov 8, 2012)

@Rachotilko: no I should not. Even if the lenses were wide open, on that focal length DPR shot the pic the G15 would have f2,3 (my guess) at best and the RX100 would have f3,2 (measured) at best. So the difference is cca. 1 EV, in your example RX100´s ISO 1600 vs. G15´s ISO 800.

1 upvote
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 8, 2012)

I fail to see how impressive the RX100 RAW shots are. They are better but not more than 0.5 stop.

4 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

I was comparing the low-light capabilities at focal length 100mm eq.

2 upvotes
EDWARD ARTISTE
By EDWARD ARTISTE (Nov 8, 2012)

that swivel screen kept me from buying. The new lens (and hopefully better AF) would have made this almost and instant purchase for me. instead, ill wait until next year.

the g12 is just a great, great camera, image quality limits notwithstanding. the flexibility of the flip out screen is not to be underestimated.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

Guys, stop the RX100 BS, please !

With its f/4.9 at tele end, it has to resort to ISO1600 when these small-sensor marvels can use ISO400 to keep the same shutter time for the same scene.

This ISO1600 vs IS0400 handicap can not be offset by the advantage provided by its larger sensor.

So: enjoy your "invention", and let the rest of us enjoy the fast lens.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Nov 8, 2012)

The test pics are not taken at the long end. DPR always uses the middle of focal range for (theoterically) best outcome. Likewise they stop down every lens to achieve optimal sharpness.
You can check this by pointing at the symbol in the bottom right corner of every picture. E.g. the RX100 was set to 50 mm eq. and f6,3.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

@iudex.

It is completelly irrelevant what f-number was chosen by DPR when they did the studio shots. What I was refering to is that in the low-light scenario, you may choose f2.4 with these fast-lensed small sensor compacts, even at tele end.

With RX100, you cannot go faster than f4.9 at tele end. This has obvious implications to shutter speed & ISO choices.

2 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Nov 8, 2012)

Just to correct you: G15 could have f2,8 at best at tele end, not f2,4. But yeah, I know what you mean to say. I like the lens speed of G15 and would choose it from all enthusiast compact nowadays.
On the other hand I have S100 with the same 12 MPix CMOS sensor and according to my experience the borderline for good pictures from this sensor in low light iis ISO1000.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

@iudex

G15 is f2.8 at 140mm eq., so I presume it is around f2.4 @100mm

RX100 focal length maxes at 100mm, with max aperture f4.9

S100 has prohibitively slow lens at tele end. So there is a substantial usability gap between G15 and S100, despite similar sensors.

2 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Nov 8, 2012)

You are absolutely right (the slow lens of S100 is what I keep critisizing) and S100 will have to use higher ISO under similar light conditions, but the thing is, at equal ISO the outcome from S100 and from G15 will be equal. And it means ISO1000 will be the limit also for G15.
P.S. Keď už je to debata len nás dvoch, to už môžme kľudne po slovensky.;-)

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 8, 2012)

Not everyone shoots at the long end all day long. At the shorter end you have close to a stop and a half benefit over the smaller sensors in terms of noise, probably the same in terms of DR. And that's in a much smaller package and the G15 weighs almost 50% more too.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Dimitri Khoz
By Dimitri Khoz (Nov 8, 2012)

G15 has 1 full stop of advantage at 34mm+
which increases to 2 stops at the tele end.
People who take pictures at 35mm/50mm/80mm will be better off with G15.
IF you shoot 28mm only, enjoy soft corners of RX100.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

@iudex:
Tak predsa sme to tu rozprúdili ...
Áno, ISO1000 je limit, ale s G15 a podobnými strojčekmi najnovšej generácie (XZ-2, P7700) si vystačíš s odosť nižšími hodnotami.

0 upvotes
FartIng
By FartIng (Nov 8, 2012)

I returned teh G15 last week and swapped with G1X awaiting delivery today. The articulated screen is a great invention -Is Canon pushing buyers to the G1X for the articulated screen? - looks like it.

The video quality is improved on G15, but once again, a lot of noise above even 400 ISO - especially video footage in HD - The same happened with my G12. It must be due to the small sensor? It has more video features than my old G12 - 90% of them never used. Also, the G15 feels very rough, plasticky and cheap compared to the solid G12. Are these camera's weather sealed??

I hope the G1X fares better - or I will be dumping Canon for compacts.

2 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Nov 8, 2012)

IMO there are 2 reasons for the G15 not having articulated screen:
1. the camera became much smaller and more pocketable. When you compare the thickness of G15 and it´s peers (P7700, G12, LX7), it is fairly narrower. While the G12 was almost as big as the G1x, the G15 is noticeably more pocketable.
2. Canon has something to give to the successor (G16) and praise how they upgraded the G15. ;-)

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Nov 8, 2012)

More and more I am starting to not see the value of the G line; even though I have been a fan of the G series for many years.

It's a very flexible enthusiast POS camera with decent IQ but sandwhiched between camera's like the RX100 being smaller and more pocketable without losing much in IQ and the micro 4/3, the G's lost me completely.

My last G was the excellent G11 that has shown its age when I compare it to the roughly similar sized (and cheaper!) Nex C3 which produces images so far in IQ difference you can't help but notice.

Over here, these Canon G's cost about the price of a very good ILC with kit.

for example, a brand new G here will cost up to SGD$1100. An EM-5 costs $1600 with kit zoom. Or you could spend SGD$800 for a micro 4/3, Nex C3-5N.

I just don't see the G being relevant at all now. equalled by the RX100, bettered by cheaper mirorless ILC. Both ends being cheaper options as well!

6 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

There goes that varying mileage. For me, it's the RX100 when compactness is more important than IQ, G1 X when I want a good compromise, 5D Mk III when I want to focus on IQ, and 1D MkIII when I need to machine gun shots. I have a Micro Four-Thirds system but plan to dump it. The lenses are slow and/or expensive and it's neither fish nor fowl. (The RX100 only equals G1 X in some people's dreams.)

I also like the external, convenient, controls on the G series. Not a fan of rotating lens rings and menus.

Choice is a wonderful thing. One person may well choose what another will not, but for now, that's my favourite line up.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Nov 8, 2012)

It's not that whole G lineup is pointless, it's this G15. The physical size versus the sensor inside is not competing in today's time. Save up and go for the G1X instead.

1 upvote
RXVGS
By RXVGS (Nov 8, 2012)

I think you what you meant to say was:

Its a flexible enthusiast 'P&S' camera with decent IQ

(I could be wrong though). :P

3 upvotes
ZoranC
By ZoranC (Nov 8, 2012)

Lies, damn lies, and camera tests, it's so easy to end up seeing only what one wants to see or what others end up making you see. It is impossible to judge camera through single set of studio shots so I prefer to test myself in real world. Below is P7700 vs. G15 side-by-side (Nikon on left), first upper right corner and then lower right corner, shot at practical infinity. Make sure you see them at full size, remember DPR reduces quality of uploaded images, and form your own conclusions.

Also, people like to parrot that G15 has faster lens. Yeah, that is true. But in side-by-side shooting I have been getting more sharp keepers at same focal length from Nikon's slower lens than I was from Canon. I was even getting more sharp keepers from Nikon at 200mm F4 than I was from Canon full tele at 2.8, that's how good VR on P7700 vs. IS on G15 was working for me.

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/21966991/download/2305547

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/21966991/download/2305550

1 upvote
nilsch
By nilsch (Nov 8, 2012)

I got to try both for a few days (G15 and P7700). The VR on Nikon was what made me choose P7700 too. Very good! Swivel screen and zoom to 200mm sweetened the deal as well. This is the first Nikon compact I liked. Have only had Canons before, despite having Nikon DSLR. Also have Canon S100, hated the VR on that (I don't have the steadiest of hands due to essential tremor...)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Nov 8, 2012)

Even at ISO 100 there is a visible amount of grain in RAW mode. ouch.

0 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Nov 8, 2012)

Yea...The switch from CCD to CMOS is there. But now the cameras can do 1080p video. You win some you loose some.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 8, 2012)

But ISO800 from BSI-CMOS is substantially better than ISO800 from CCD.

0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

so the problems in the sensor ?
I hope canon learn this experience and next time produce better sensor

0 upvotes
SammyToronto
By SammyToronto (Nov 8, 2012)

My two favorites spots to compare in the test scene are the old woman and the roman statue faces to see how each camera handles the fine details in those areas as the ISO goes up. When I did that comparison, the G15 did pretty well against the RX100, X10 and P770; it basically tied with the RX100 and was better than the other two. Given that it has a faster lens than the RX100 (once you leave wide-open) and based on those results, the G15 should be the better camera to use in low light conditions.

Having said that, the RX100 test image seems to be blurry in certain areas (e.g. the queen of hearts), so not sure if the quality there represents the best the RX100 has to offer.

1 upvote
GeorgeZ
By GeorgeZ (Nov 8, 2012)

Oh the studio shots. Now that those are done and that Jeff has just published his review I guess they could be combined to the dpr review by Christmas ;-)

1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (Nov 8, 2012)

I was hoping by now DPReview would have the newer studio shots ready, but I guess not. Imaging-resources samples are better, and they show why RX100 is better than the smaller sensor cameras.

1 upvote
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Nov 8, 2012)

?? Thank you for your useless comment....I am happy that you love your rx100. Keep it to yourself.The next time you want to mention the RX100 being better then smaller sensors...keep it to yourself.

5 upvotes
zxaar
By zxaar (Nov 8, 2012)

@ Combatmedic870 , WHY???

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 8, 2012)

I love that he comes on DPR to tell people on DPR how much better he thinks another sites samples are. Its like going into a resturant, not ordering food, and telling all the people around you how much better another resturant's food is.

Brilliant!

Straight jacket time. Him and Zxaar are on the same team too.

C

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
zxaar
By zxaar (Nov 8, 2012)

@Carl, it needs little commonsense to understand that if other wellknown site's sample are much better than this one than it is possible to have better samples from the camera. It also proves that this site did goof up. If this is the only site whose opinion count than whatever you write on your blog is piece of ####t by your own logic.

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 8, 2012)

So in other words I'm completely right, but I knew that already. You're childish insulting replies are at least consistent, thank you again for not letting me down! Keep up the good work Zxaar, entertaining to us all.

C

3 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Nov 8, 2012)

As expected.....Very VERY VERY close to the P7700. It would most likely be impossible to tell them apart.

I think what sets this camera apart from the rest is the, now, pretty dang fast lens at a longer FL.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 8, 2012)

And between the G1 X, G15, RX100, and P7700 the G1 X takes a healthy lead, RX100 a distant second, and on tail end is the G15 and P7700 tied four third.

1 upvote
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 8, 2012)

There have been many raving reviews about RX100 sensor, but I really don't see it here. Yes, it's better than the one in G15, but only slightly (~ 0.5 stops). I am looking at the color patches at ISO 3200.

The much faster lenses in Oly XZ-2, Panny LX7 and Canon G15 should more than make up this slight difference in sensor performance, no?

4 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 8, 2012)

Yes :)

2 upvotes
aekn
By aekn (Nov 8, 2012)

limlh-what's your idea of a better camera and why?

0 upvotes
limlh
By limlh (Nov 8, 2012)

There are plenty of other choices.

0 upvotes
rpm40
By rpm40 (Nov 8, 2012)

Why bother to reply if you're not going to answer the question?

2 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 8, 2012)

And why bother reply to the guy who didn't reply if you're not going to answer the guy who is still waiting for a reply.

'The camera that makes you feel good.'

0 upvotes
limlh
By limlh (Nov 8, 2012)

Put the G series to a merciful end or it's the end for Canon.

10 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

It's an extremely popular series for Canon that has always been at of near the top of the enthusiast P&S segment. If it's not for you, there are plenty of other choices.

14 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

limlh, talk sense man.

2 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 8, 2012)

Seriously GaryJP. The G series line is the most successful enthusiast compact/point and shoot cameras ever. No wonder it attracts crazy comments like that.

C

0 upvotes
radissimo
By radissimo (Nov 8, 2012)

I beg to differ, I bet this model will sell less then half the previous model... it is not that different from competition, 2 years ago? It would be different...

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 8, 2012)

You'll bet, and how will you deterimine that? Also, I'm talking about the G series line and how popular it's been since the G series first came out. Always a popular line, the most popular.

Remember the G15 has to split sales between itself and the G1X as well. So you just may be right about it selling half as good as the G12 did, which still means the G series line is the most popular enthusiast camera line of all time.

C

1 upvote
EDWARD ARTISTE
By EDWARD ARTISTE (Nov 8, 2012)

Thats a pretty dumb bet. Sorry bro.

0 upvotes
HenriLG
By HenriLG (Nov 8, 2012)

Why the RX100 images look more blurred?

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

Remember that the objects in the test scene are not all the same distance from the camera. And with the more shallow DOF of the RX100, you'll get softening of objects in front or behind the focal plane to a greater extent than you will with the smaller sensor cameras.

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 8, 2012)

We've stopped the RX100 down to try to compensate for that.

However, the RX100's performance at close distances is not its strong point and the working distance of our test scene means these shots are not totally representative of how well it performs in the real world.

14 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Nov 8, 2012)

I tried every part of the scene and RX100 looks ordinary everywhere. I think the lens is a dud.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

That's good to know Richard. Maybe that's why I never really liked the close up or macro performance of the RX100 when I had it vs a camera like the X10.

0 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Nov 8, 2012)

By that logic all the DSLR test scenes must have planes which are even more out of focus than those RX100 shots. which isn't the case.

0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Nov 8, 2012)

The RX100 lens can't be that good, particularly at the edges, given its size and the area of the sensor it has to cover. If you mention that on RX100 threads, you get shouted down. With a smaller sensor, it is easier to build a smaller lens that is sharp edge to edge.

I think that the greater DOF of small-sensor cameras is also an advantage, especially in things like macro. You get shouted down if you bring that up too. The idea of equivalence by stopping down and raising ISO doesn't work for me. It doesn't seem to me that noise is linear. These small-sensor compacts with fast lenses are cleaner to my eyes at base ISO than m43 and APS-C cameras at ISO 800 or 1600.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

The lens isn't that good. The sensor is. And to get that lens and sensor to work in that compact a body, in terms of physics you have no choice but to create images with barrel distortion, which is then processed out in software. Many cameras do this, but the very features that make the RX100 useful also make it imperative it do it more than most other cameras. I know this infuriates the Sony faithful, but it's the reality. And the optics are not of the best either.

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
ijustloveshooting
By ijustloveshooting (Nov 8, 2012)

didn't you noticed thus far? I've XZ-1, G15 and yesterday night i got mine Rx-100....after my 5th shot, i come a conclusion that RX100 close up performance not near of XZ-1 and G15...However for portraits which i like to shoot, RX100 shines, much better than XZ-1 and G15 despite it's slower lens even in dim light conditions. Cranck up the iso, you get very clean photos,,,

0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

I hope to see real world test. so we can know how this cameras compared to other and can decide it to buy or buy other

0 upvotes
Jan_Shim
By Jan_Shim (Nov 7, 2012)

I love the G series and I own a G11 - vari-angle LCD and 1cm macro are two very strong features of this camera. CMOS sensor in current offering holds a lot of promise but it saddens me deeply that current model (G15) took away the two key features that matter the most (as above). So devastated. I hope future G series bring them back.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 7, 2012)

Personally, I'd rather have the smaller size of the G15 than the flip-out, swivel screen of the G12, but I'm not a big user of tilting screens.

10 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (Nov 7, 2012)

Specs still show 1cm macro.

2 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 8, 2012)

I have a G1X. One of the things I don't like is the really annoying folding screen! Can't please all of us.

(Anything resembling macro on the G1X, by the way, needs help from supplementary lenses.)

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

I love the folding screens on those of the G series that have it, both for waist level photography and for high level shots over crowds, which I often deal with. However, if you don't like folding screens, flip it screen out and never touch it again.

4 upvotes
Dimitri Khoz
By Dimitri Khoz (Nov 8, 2012)

Same here, I am in love with swivel screen of G1X.
G15 does not have it but it helps it to be trully pocketable.

0 upvotes
h2k
By h2k (Nov 7, 2012)

Well, would be great if we soon could compare the main ambitious compacts (esp those with vari-angle screen) including
- Nikon P7700
- Samsung EX2
- Olympus XF-2
- Powershot 15 (no vari-angle, but interesting)

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 7, 2012)

All of the above are on the list to be tested soon.

5 upvotes
anchorite64
By anchorite64 (Nov 7, 2012)

No vari-angle but equally ambitious is Panasonic LX7

0 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Nov 8, 2012)

Don't forget about the X10 ;)

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

I wish I could I'm thinking of selling mine.

0 upvotes
OldDigiman
By OldDigiman (Nov 7, 2012)

Isn't the G series sort of old tech by now?

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 7, 2012)

Brighter lens, new sensor and smaller body - it's doing its best not to be. (Better IS and faster focus help, too)

7 upvotes
Dianoda
By Dianoda (Nov 7, 2012)

Well, the G-series has been around for awhile. But it's hardly obsolete.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (Nov 8, 2012)

Cameras by definition are 'old tech.' Nothing about them has changed since the invention of photography in 1839. Cameras are still just light-tight boxes with a shutter and lens at one end that projects an image onto a a light-sensitive array which then uses the photons to create a two-dimensional picture. It's all just refinements of the original idea. So yes and no. The G-series is part of the same old tech, but it's still better than what came before it.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 8, 2012)

Rangefinder cameras and Hasselblads are old tech too. Sometimes old tech last because it works, and for those that like mechanical dials for quick adjustments, the G series is a wonderful choice. I do not like adjusting everything through menus.

6 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Nov 8, 2012)

Why? The G15 is the first serious G-model in a long time.

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 8, 2012)

Maybe to you it is old tech. Are you asking if everyone should think that too? If so, you might get laughed off stage. The G series have a lot going for them and stay one of the most sought after serious compacts despite competition from CSC' etc. Those that don't get the G series line just don't get it- but that changes nothing about the advantages it has which are many.

Canon needs to allow NR off on Jpegs for the G series, a sore that has been festering for a long time now. Along with eliminating some handholding programming in the firmware that resets the focusing type and metering type after you turn the camera off.

Otherwise, they are extremely appealing cameras and the G15 is no different. Handling, build, and other peformance measures besides the sensor and processing are also extremely important and valuable to shooters as well. Raw performance of the G series cameras is excellent, no matter what the sensor size and especially because they are smaller sensors.

Carl

1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (Nov 8, 2012)

Yes, they've gotten image quality to the level of a high-quality, mid-90s 35mm point and shoot, which is no small accomplishment. Those cameras were awesome. We didn't appreciate them enough. We thought you had to have a bloody SLR to be cool.

0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (Nov 9, 2012)

@ Michael: can you explain it more ?
I see the most good things is the fast lens.
Others are common

0 upvotes
Total comments: 144