Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G1 X review

By dpreview staff on Mar 29, 2012 at 20:48 GMT

We've just posted our review of the Canon PowerShot G1 X. Rather than going down the mirrorless camera route, Canon has opted to create a large sensor zoom compact. The result is the G1 X, a camera that offers a near-APS-C-sized sensor in a slightly enlarged G-series body. With its 28-112mm equivalent, F2.8-5.8 stabilized lens, it offers similar capability to an entry-level DSLR in a more convenient package. So how does the G1 X stack-up as a more compact Rebel replacement? Read our review to find out.

193
I own it
104
I want it
30
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 525
123
Carlos AF Costa
By Carlos AF Costa (Mar 31, 2012)

To Mescalamba. Ok I' ll send a G1X for Xtmas. Sure it will be youy nightmare.

Know what? I'll buy one for me. Why? Still compact enough and best IQ than any M43, an NEX 5N end NEX 7 and those bulky DSRL 600D D5100 and 60 and many others. For mi IQ is the main thing.
Be happy.

1 upvote
Dan
By Dan (Mar 31, 2012)

Better than an NEX-5/7? I think not. I just compared them at ISO 12800, and I much prefer the NEX-7. For me, a fast camera is far more useful. The G1X is a sloooooooow camera.

2 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Mar 30, 2012)

When you compare the G1 X to it's actual competition ("fixed lens mirrorless cameras, with big sensors") then it starts to look pretty good.

Compare it to:
* Leica X1 - it's a lot cheaper, and has a useful zoom range.
* Fuji X100 - it's a lot cheaper, and has a useful zoom range.
* Sigma DPX - it does much better in low light, and has a useful zoom range.

In fact, it seems like the G1 X is unique. It's the only large sensored compact with a fixed zoom lens.

Compare it to any high end small sensored fixed lens compact, and it costs more but provides better image quality. Even when compared to the Canon G12, Canon S100, Olympus XZ1 or Panasonic LX5.

If it is really true that 95% of the MILC camera buyers never buy a second lens, then there must be a huge potential market for fixed lens cameras. Unless people just want the option of buying more lenses, but rarely exercise that option...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

Unless people just want the option of buying more lenses, but rarely exercise that option...

Bingo.

4 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Mar 31, 2012)

I agree. I think many more people like the idea of being able to switch lenses than they do actually going to the trouble and expense to do it.

Plus the average person buying a camera in the $400+ range has no idea about sensor size and image quality. They just assume they're getting a good camera based on the price.

0 upvotes
anthony mazzeri
By anthony mazzeri (Mar 31, 2012)

"In fact, it seems like the G1 X is unique. It's the only large sensored compact with a fixed zoom lens."

The Ricoh GXR A16 Zoom was announced over a year ago and would have been released last November but for the floods, instead of around the same time as the G1 X. It even has a full 16MP APS-C sensor (as found in the D7000 and K-5) compared to the Canon's smaller m4/3-equivalent one.

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Mar 31, 2012)

Anthony, I don't think you can call the GXR a fixed lens camera. Because this is a modular system with many lens options.

1 upvote
anthony mazzeri
By anthony mazzeri (Mar 31, 2012)

The GXR isn't *a* camera, it's six cameras (so far).

The GXR is not an interchangeable lens sytem like a DSLR or a NEX/m43 etc of one camera + multiple lenses. It is an interchangeable *body* system for all intents, ie you swap the same Body Unit onto multiple different camera modules called Camera Units.

Only the GXR Mount A12 is an interchangeable lens camera (unit) and so has lens options. The other five GXR Camera Units are all fixed lens cameras.

All five of these fixed-lens GXR Camera Units have their direct market competitors in other maker's ranges of fixed-lens cameras each needing their own battery and SD card etc:

GXR P10 = compact zoom
GXR S10 = enthusiast zoom eg LX5
GXR A12 28mm and 50mm = Fuji X100 and Leica X1

and now the GXR A16 Zoom = Canon G1X

With the GXR 'system' you can swap your same body onto all six cameras and so keep your file sequence, settings, firmware, SD card, battery etc the same across all.

Ricoh needs to hire Canon's PR or marketing people.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 31, 2012)

Maybe non-photography people, but almost all m43 or APS-C shooters here on DPR do exercise the option of buying lenses, and have quite extensive collections of primes and zooms.

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Mar 31, 2012)

DPR is not a representative sample of the camera buying public. Most people buying MILC cameras buy them because they are expensive and therefore good or because some sales guy trying to get a good commission or a star on his sales chart, convinced them the need the flexibility of changing lenses even though both the buyer and the sales guy knew they probably would never actually change the lens.

Heck the average MIRC buyer doesn't know enough about cameras or photography to even know what lens they should put on instead of the one the came with the camera. The majority of people who buy MIRC cameras use them the same way the do a $50 fixed lens point and shoot.

1 upvote
Erik Johansen
By Erik Johansen (Mar 30, 2012)

Idi*ts expeckt too much......

1 upvote
acidic
By acidic (Mar 30, 2012)

I've had the G1X for a few weeks and shot around 100 frames with it in varying conditions (rain, sunlight, twilight, incandescent lights,...).

I really like the image quality. I like the handling. I like the size. I don't care for the exposure compensation wheel on the top plate, but don't really mind it (would prefer the rear dial controlled EV in Av mode, like Canon dSLRs). Macro sucks compared to earlier G series, but don't really mind it.

What I hate is the slow overall responsiveness from shot to shot (in single shot mode), especially when trying to make a quick adjustment between shots.

I also hate the price.

If the G1X were $650, I would happily keep it.
If the G1X were faster, I would happily keep it.

Since neither of the above apply, I shall not be keeping the G1X. In the meantime, I will be continuing to use my 5DII bodies for 90% of my photo taking, and using my just-as-slow-but-way-way-waaay-cheaper Olympus EPL1 for the rest.

That is all. Have a pleasant weekened.

6 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

One reason I'm an early adopter is the possibility of purchasing a return from people who will use a product (not just buy it and change their mind) and then return it....like they were taking it for a test drive or renting it.

4 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (Mar 31, 2012)

I'm with you here, Howardroark, too much abuse of generous returns hurts the honest buyers. I wouldn't mind if retailers seriously tightened those policies.

2 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 31, 2012)

Ditto. I may return things from time to time, but I probably take better care of them than they get at the store. And once I buy something and actually use it, unless it is defective I now own it and am not incosiderate enough to pawn it off on some poor unsuspecting sap.

2 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (Mar 31, 2012)

Buy from Amazon. They don't sell opened items as new.

1 upvote
infocus
By infocus (Mar 31, 2012)

I'm a recipient of an open-box G 1X. Looks like it was never used. And I got it for $80 off.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 31, 2012)

Congrats, infocus! Now with even more enthusiasm than a moment ago I can say....happy shooting!

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
jimread
By jimread (Mar 30, 2012)

Hmmmm I'll stick to my Panny G2 .... disappointed

3 upvotes
Seagull TLR
By Seagull TLR (Mar 31, 2012)

I rather trade my Panasonic G2 for the Canon G1X.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Apr 1, 2012)

"Hmmmm I'll stick to my Panny G2 .... disappointed"

Pretty much different beasts... the G2 sensor is laughably bad compared to that of the G1X.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Mar 30, 2012)

Im quite suprised by silver award. For this I would give Canon.. well, nothing. As mirrorless competition, well its no competition at all. As compact, well.. its not compact. Its a fail.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Mar 30, 2012)

Nothing? Come on Mescalamba, can't you give them at least 1% for trying? Be a sport...

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

LOL...thanks, I needed a giggle after a long Friday.

0 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Mar 30, 2012)

When I've saved up enough money I'm going to buy this camera for my girlfriend. Beats the crap out of the G1 X!

'Lomography has announced the Diana F+ Sahara special-edition medium-format film camera. Decorated with palm trees and pyramids, the Diana F+ Sahara is wrapped in printed leather and comes bundled with a flash unit. Using 120 Film, you can experiment with multiple exposures, long exposures and even pinhole shots. The Diana F+ Sahara is available for €99..'

source: http://www.photographyblog.com/news/diana_f_sahara/

0 upvotes
Button Pusher
By Button Pusher (Mar 30, 2012)

It is the G1 X.. Does it self destruct?

1 upvote
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Mar 30, 2012)

Slow AF means this camera isn't good for shooting anything that moves. That's a pretty serious limitation which essentially means it is NOT real 'photographer's camera'. Real photographers want their pictures to be in focus.

dpreview needs to be a little more objective in their reviews.

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

Based on our experiences of shooting with the camera, we've weighted focus speed in the scoring as much as we think is appropriate. We've then explicitly drawn attention to the issue so that people can draw their own conclusions if it's important to them.

I think that's a pretty fair way of dealing with it.

At which point, it sounds like you're not asking for objectivity, you're asking us to more closely reflect your needs and opinions.

15 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes...Bring the bad old days back when getting any most basic review of a new product required a pint of fresh O negative blood. I blame it on the mouse!

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Mar 30, 2012)

Your test shots rarely and scarcely include capturing anything in motion, so clearly AF speed isn't something you think REAL photographers value.

2 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Mar 30, 2012)

But Jimmy according to quantum mechanics there is nothing REAL in this world. It is all probability fields !

1 upvote
LaFonte
By LaFonte (Mar 30, 2012)

But we already have cameras for fast moving objects! They are called dslrs with phase focusing.
None of the mirror-less are really a sports camera. It is a common limitation of the larger sensor and contrast focusing.
I found the review very fair. It is not speedy camera ant it was said in the review so...?

6 upvotes
Dianoda
By Dianoda (Mar 30, 2012)

Jimmy, what in the world are you talking about? Real photographers are not some homogeneous group you can just pluck a collective opinion from, and I can assure you that each and every one of them will use whatever camera and lens they feel like using to get the job done. Sometimes those cameras don't even have AF at all.

Regarding test shots - the samples are designed to present potential image quality at various ISOs/settings, not image blur.

1 upvote
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Mar 30, 2012)

The are plenty of people who rather have an affordable light weight compact camera that is responsive instead of a sophisticated DSLR; including parents who want to take pictures of their fast moving kids or pets etc.

1 upvote
Dianoda
By Dianoda (Mar 30, 2012)

The contrast detect AF used in nearly all compacts and ILC's is inherently inferior compared to phase detect systems when it comes to determining whether a subject is approaching/distancing itself. It's just the nature of the beast - short of Nikon's J1/V1 series cams (which use phase detect AF when they have adequate light), you aren't going to find great tracking performance in a smaller than DSLR/SLT package - a large sensor, compact camera with truly great AF just doesn't exist yet. Fast moving children and pets can easily outwit the best contrast detect AF systems - if you want keepers in situations like that, your best bet is a DSLR/SLT with phase-detect AF or well timed manual focus.

0 upvotes
Seagull TLR
By Seagull TLR (Mar 31, 2012)

@Jimmy jang Boo What is YOUR definition of real photographer?

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Mar 31, 2012)

I'm not sure that I'd call the autofocus that slow. I tried one in a shop and it just worked, focussing as quick as I wanted. The bigger problem was the first shot I took, in typical CDAF fashion, was focussed on small, contrasty bit of background, not on the main subject, but the viewfinder couldn't tell me that. The next shot wouldn't focus at all because I was too close.

A real photographer would learn those limits, work within them, and continue to take excellent photos....

1 upvote
Tape5
By Tape5 (Mar 30, 2012)

I don't know why anyone would want to get this as a compact camera when Leica M10 is about to be released. For the same money you could get an M10 and a box full of Leica primes ;)

3 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Mar 30, 2012)

Troll much?

0 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (Mar 31, 2012)

uh, why would I want a box of primes when I can just have one zoom lens? silly Leica people =)

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Mar 30, 2012)

Slow AF and zoom? compared to what? If the AF benchmark is that of compacts or P&S, then maybe the G1 X ain't so bad. DSLR zooms are manual anyway, and some P&S zooms function slowly, so maybe the G1 X ain't so bad by that measure either.

Well, if the G1 X can't shoot more than one picture every 1.9 seconds, that's still alot faster than the 2011 Sony pocket zooms, which lock in a seizure in between shots, especially in the gimmick modes.

Really, this is a camera for the person who wants something like a compact, but with a larger sensor, and none of the fuss of interchangeable lenses and dust. Manual control over video is useless or 95% irrelevant to hand-held situations. The fact that the ND filter can slow the shutter and smooth some motion is handy.

However, it's not something I'd buy without holding it in my hands, checking out the AF and finding out what weight and size economy it offers relative to either a T3i, G3, D3100, or a NEX.

4 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (Mar 31, 2012)

You seem to be out of the loop. Let me tell you that the Sony HX9V has an AF lag of as low as 0.13 seconds. That's almost twice as fast as the Nikon D4.

Gimmick modes? Have you even tried one of those modes? I've never seen low-light handheld results as good as those coming from the HX9V. It's cycle time is 1.7 seconds, so you're wrong again. The HX9V is faster.

I am in the market for a pocketable camera at any price, and I'm not even remotely interested in the G1X. In fact, I've chosen the Sony HX30V as the ultimate pocketable camera for me. No other model fits my needs better than the Sony.

0 upvotes
Sergio DS
By Sergio DS (Mar 30, 2012)

So between this and a K-01... I'd rather have a Nikon D5100! :D

Now really, I'm a K-X user, I love it, I'd never buy a K-01, i think it's a very flawed camera, yet it's more compact than this (albeit more heavy & without lens) apparently better IQ, faster frame rate, timelapse recording, and to my eyes, better looking. A last year's NEX or m4/3 might be a much better buy for those who want a small camera... The D5100 is probably the best bang/buck consummer DSLR in the shops today... I understand the idea of this camera, but would't call it a success... this 76% rating... complete nonsense!

2 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Mar 30, 2012)

The D5100 is a nice camera, no doubt. It has stuff like an intervalometer built in. But the kit lenses are not compact, there is no auto zoom in video, and the video AF is sluggish and makes noise that encroaches on the audio. Whether the G1 X or K-01 are any better, I'd not judge until toying with each. Meanwhile, a NEX-5n and maybe the G3 sell for less.

1 upvote
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Mar 30, 2012)

Instead of this buy any m4/3s and forget G1 X exist.

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Why forget a camera exists? If you buy a camera that suits your needs there should be no reason to ignore anything on the market.

1 upvote
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (Mar 30, 2012)

Highest rating ever for a camera with so many Cons. I guess the biggest con is....you get the point.

5 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Mar 30, 2012)

I dont, but I would say.. that it even exist and that its supposed to be "Canon answer to mirrorless". Which really is disappointing. Nikon at least made their 1 series (sure no wonder either, but it is mirrorless and you can use different lens with is, no matter how much it sux).

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

That's really using the old noodle there, Mes. A small sensor is fine as long as the AF is fast and you can swap lenses out. Moronic. Sub-moronic.

0 upvotes
GabrielZ
By GabrielZ (Mar 30, 2012)

Personally for the kind of photography I do this camera seems almost ideal! Slow AF and frame advance speeds don't bother me that much, DSLR image quality and light weight are the main things of importance. I really like my Canon DSLR, but its weight and bulk bother me often, as I walk around a lot for my photography. Add better high ISO performance than even an EOS-7D and reasonable cost of purchase, I'm seriously considering this as my new secondary camera.

2 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 31, 2012)

Yes. You make excellent points. Then, for that more deliberate photographer who isn't handling family events, etc., spend some more time on the viewfinder and metering. I will have to check the review, but in a serious camera like this I would like assurance that I know where the camera is focusing when I use the optical viewfinder and I would love integrated spot metering readings-a la my many years old Olympus C-2040!

0 upvotes
Mannypr
By Mannypr (Mar 30, 2012)

Although the camera has some negatives the samples dpreview showed seems to indicate that the camera has excellent image quality. It is important to have fast autofocusing and FPS capability but no matter what the camera can do if the IQ is not up to par to what is expected of it , it's a downer . Personally I could live with it's short comings if the image quality of the camera is good.

4 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Mar 30, 2012)

With slow and cumbersome AF, this cam is not in the (modern) point n' shoot category.

Flare not tested and sensor dust protection not commented upon, I don't know what category this cam can even make.

5 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Now I have to take mine back! Excellent argument. I never thought of it like that. A whole month of shooting and a few hundred pictures right down the drain. :(

3 upvotes
Valentinian
By Valentinian (Mar 30, 2012)

I don't get it: sensor dust protection? this lens .... ok, forget it....

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Mar 31, 2012)

A smart reviewer understands the differences in technologies and, if he deals with it, the reviewer also respects the intelligence of the readers.

Canon G series has a history of dust getting onto sensors, which is expensive to clean and likely retires the camera (cleaning is around $250).

Having a removable lens allows me to get the ones with the specs I want. Flare is included in tests of removable lenses. A good reviewer understands that if a fixed lens has good flare suppression, the cam could begin to compete in other categories. In the case of G1 X, however, dpr does not deal with flare and treats it as if it were a run of the mill p&s cam.

1 upvote
Gary Leland
By Gary Leland (Mar 30, 2012)

This ticks my boxes quite nicely. I am especially pleased to hear how effective the IS is and I only shoot JPEG. Would love a little more Zoom so ... would any owners be willing to speak to the digital zoom as to it's usefullness? Thanks.

0 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Mar 30, 2012)

I don't bother with digital zoom.
If my lens isn't long enough, I'll crop it in photoshop.
If my cropped image isn't large enough, then I'll interpolate.

Digital zoom degrades IQ. Cropping will preserve it as long as final cropped size is adequate. Interpolating in photoshop will also degrade IQ (at the pixel level), but not as bad as digital zoom and with more control (ie only interpolate up to the size you need).

0 upvotes
Gary Leland
By Gary Leland (Mar 30, 2012)

Thank you very much for the response. I have digital zoom on my present camera and I do not use it either. But are all digital zooms equal? Does one camera do it better than another or are the all doing the exact same thing? Thanks again.

0 upvotes
Febs
By Febs (Mar 30, 2012)

Image comparison of G1X at DPREVIEW vs. DXOMARK doesn't match at all.

DPREVIEW rate it very high.
DXOMARK rate it relatively low.

Either one or the other got it completely wrong...

2 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 30, 2012)

I've stated here in the forums right after DxO had published their results they can't really be taken seriously.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

And, since we provide plenty of real-world image samples, what do you think?

Also, bear in mind that DxO assesses the quality of the raw data of a sensor, we review cameras. Consequently, even if the sensor doesn't match up to the best DSLR sensors, the image quality could still be much better than a comparable camera.

6 upvotes
Mannypr
By Mannypr (Mar 30, 2012)

What I think is happening is that we are putting to much enfasis on the sensor which I admit is one part of the equiation but there are other things happening when you take a digital photo that puts it's mark on the image quality . No matter how good a sensor might be if you don't design an image pipeline capable of extracting every bit of performance from the sensor you will not see what that sensor is capable of.

1 upvote
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Mar 30, 2012)

"You guys have different results than DXOMark" seems to become photography's equivalent of "you review diverges from the Metacritic average".

0 upvotes
attomole
By attomole (Mar 30, 2012)

Warts and all, still want one.

2 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Mar 30, 2012)

I expected such camera. I want to buy such camera. But I can't convince myself to pay that much for the price/performance.

There is just too much of Canon G in the Canon G1X. There should have been more X, like e.g. in GX1. :)

What I want, putting it in modern terms, is Nikon 1 but with the fixed zoom lens of the range similar to G1X's, and similar in size. Keep EVF from the Nikon 1. And even the sensor. That I would have bought even at $800. If the lens would be sufficiently bright wide open, then I probably wouldn't even need my DSLR anymore.

2 upvotes
MP Burke
By MP Burke (Mar 30, 2012)

Neither the viewfinder nor the AF performance are comparable with those available on dslrs or the best interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras.
The presumption that it can be compared directly with interchangeable lens cameras is highly questionable: in the past one could buy fixed lens rangefinder cameras, such as the Yashica Lynx 14, that were significantly cheaper than interchangeable lens alternatives. This is not the case with the G1X, which seems to have been very generously received by reviewers.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
tipple
By tipple (Mar 30, 2012)

The G1X takes excellent photos. Not the smallest but smaller and easier to carry around than a DSLR with attached lens. I have numerous Canon DSLR cameras but the G1X is easier to tote and with all the comments, pro and con, Canon must have struck a nerve. Bottom line: the G1X takes very good pics.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

I'm getting tired of reading all the "this should be $500" remarks. All the alternatives with a similar sized sensor at that price point DO NOT INCLUDE A LENS!!! And certainly not a 28-112mm equivalent lens starting at f2.8.

9 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

It seems that many people tie one single variable to the cost. For example, "for $800 it should focus as fast as the fastest $800 camera available." Nevermind whether that particular camera is huge, has a lousy lens on it, produces lousy IQ, etc. If you consider one variable at a time you'll have 20 cameras in your arsenal and not one of them will do what you want it to do.

4 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Mar 30, 2012)

> All the alternatives with a similar sized sensor at that price point DO NOT INCLUDE A LENS!!!

Hu? German prices.

Panasonic G3, street price is 440€

Panasonic 14-42X, a pancake zoom, street price is 380€

Total: 820€

Range is not the same, but price is quite comparable.

Size: G3 is only bit larger.

Performance: G3 wins hands down on pretty much every account.

But for the final verdict, let's wait for G1X to get a stable street price too.

4 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 30, 2012)

"Performance: G3 wins hands down on pretty much every account."

In speed sure, but in IQ? Hardly... particularly not with the (comparatively) lousy 14-42X.

2 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Mar 30, 2012)

There was once a bad (GM) car rated "unsafe at any speed."

G1 X is deficient in so many areas I think it is "not a cam at any price."

If somebody thinks its a $500 cam, that is a pretty high rating.

2 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 30, 2012)

"G1 X is deficient in so many areas I think it is "not a cam at any price."

If somebody thinks its a $500 cam, that is a pretty high rating."

So was the R1; still, it was the P&S (read: ones not wanting to swap lens) folks' dream back in 2005-2006... and IQ-wise is still among the best APS-C cameras (also regarding DR if you use the ISO200/400 mode). It's "only" at AF speed that it sucks.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

OneGuy, you obviously like M4/3 and Panasonic. Your inability to understand the G1 X thankfully has no effect on the ability of others.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

ThePhilips, you both missed and proved my point. The nearest alternative is slightly more expensive when you include a (lesser featured) lens. The only examples of similar cameras at the $500 point people are mentioning do not include the lens. The Canon comes with a fairly complex lens so you can't expect it to be the price of a body only camera.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
jonikon
By jonikon (Mar 30, 2012)

After checking the samples for image quality, the $800 price tag, and reading the review describing the sluggish performance and numerous shortcomings of the G1X, I think DPReview was in a VERY generous mood when they wrote the conclusion and rating for this camera! ;)

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
13 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

What's really impressive is that despite its shortcomings those issues fall into a range where such defficiencies are no longer all that noticeable. Yeah, if you need DSLR speed AF, the G1 X will be disappointing. If you need P&S AF, you won't really notice much difference. The authors had some idea of what to expect, and when they sat down in front of a monitor and looked at the output from a P&S they saw what they'd expect from a DSLR or ILC. I'm sure that was a "wow" moment.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

There was no 'wow' moment, because we already knew how big the sensor is.

To put the MSRP in perspective, it's $100 more than an E-PL3 with kit lens, $100 less than an E-P3 with kit lens. It's also $100 less than the 600D/T3i with kit lens. It offers a sensor of comparable size to these other cameras, while offering a more flexible lens range, in a smaller body more more direct controls.

At which point, the price isn't unreasonable (and, after it's been on the market for a while, it'll settle down to around the price those older cameras currently go for). Since the vast majority of buyers of cameras at this level never buy a second lens (greater than 95%, according to one manufacturer), then it becomes irrelevant that you can't swap lenses.

The AF performance is the big problem for the camera but, for people who can live with it, there's little available that offers so much capability in such a small package.

6 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

I guess my "wow" moment came when the camera was announced. My sigh of relief came when I saw the images and they were on par with my 7D and 15-85.

0 upvotes
Valentinian
By Valentinian (Mar 30, 2012)

if I may, with all due respect, my opinion is different: This is a point and shoot camera with a large sensor, a slow lens and a slow AF. The majority of buyers of this camera should buy instead a "premium" p.& s. compact for much less money. Only for a tiny percent of its buyers their choice of this camera makes sense if the slow lens and AF are not important for them.

4 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

You're more than welcome to disagree (and our reviews are designed to provide enough information and samples to draw your own conclusions) but may I make the following points:

The lens isn't significantly slower than a DSLR kit lens and is faster than a Micro Four Thirds kit lens (if you take sensor size into account). And, as I say, most buyers of those cameras don't buy fast primes, so it will match what those cameras will offer out of the box.

The image quality trumps premium compacts and is competitive with the Mirrorless and DSLR rivals and the AF isn't disastrously slow, it's just not PEN fast.

I took a G11 with me to Cambodia a few years ago, knowing the size/IQ trade-off I was making, over taking a DSLR. If I had a chance to make the same trip today then the G1 X would be right up there on my shortlist of cameras to take, because it's about the same size and flexibility as a G11 but without the IQ sacrifices.

4 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 31, 2012)

Glad you are joining in on the comments.

0 upvotes
sh10453
By sh10453 (Mar 31, 2012)

Yes, and I was stunned when I reached the bottom of the conclusion page and saw the rating that DPR gave to this camera, after pointing out so many shortcomings.

My humble opinion is that this is a very biased rating.
There are too many shortcomings that the review pointed out to give this camera such a high score!
The integrity of this review is now marred by this questionable rating.

I am a life-long Canon user, but I will NOT be buying this camera, even if the price dropped to 50% of what it is now.

I think the coming days & months will tell if this camera is a hit or a miss for Canon.

My guess is that it will NOT be a big hit.

0 upvotes
nikonboi
By nikonboi (Mar 30, 2012)

I really don't understand the negative comments on here. I had the G10, the G12 and now the G1X. The G1X is an amazing camera with great IQ for its size. I take it along with me when I don't want to lug my DSLR and lenses. Yeah it's not pocket size like the S100, but it's not that much bigger either and is so much more versatile. It lacks the speed of a DSLR, but I knew that when I bought it. I think it could be priced lower, but the fact that I get a much larger sensor with great IQ, compared to the other compacts, makes this a winner IMO.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Macx
By Macx (Mar 30, 2012)

I think the negativity stems not from the fact that it's slower than your dslr, but that it's slower than comparable compact system cameras from Sony, Samsung etc. Technology is marching on and the smaller system cameras deliver a speed and a versatility this camera lacks, and they have a comparable IQ. The main draw of this camera seems to me to be the ability to use the Canon-flash you already have, and use a use interface similar to the one you're used to from your dslr, but even that could have been so much better if Canon had just allowed it to communicate via the on-board flash. I think this camera is much less appealing to someone who hasn't already bought into the Canon system.

8 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

So what's comparable?

0 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

DXoscoring for G1 X is 60 and the newest and the most verstaile K-01 is 79 on par with DSLR like pentax K5/Nikon d7000
Should buy a DSLR or K-01 for the same price
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-PowerShot-G1X-Review/DxOMark-measurements

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

DxO has its uses, but replacing your own judgement isn't one of them. The score they give is a very incomplete method of judging a camera.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

?What is your method of judging a camera?
I would like to learn you Method
Starts with a letter C and ends with N??

2 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

And apparently yours starts with a "P" and ends with an "entax." Juvenile jabs aside, I've done enough research on cameras and lenses to know what level of IQ and detail I expect from both. I don't need a score from a review site to tell me how well a camera fits those standards nor the standards specific to the use of a given camera. My 7D can't do what my G1 X can do and vice versa. They must fit usage requirements as well, which means no matter how well some aspect of one camera functions, if it doesn't fit the situation then everything else is irrelevant. If I don't feel like grabbing my backpack holding the 7D and lenses, then I'm going to miss some pictures. If I'm not headed to a specific shoot that will only be possible with the 7D, I can snag the G1 X and have many, many options should an opportunity present itself. You know what doesn't help me make those choices? The number "60" printed on a web page by someone whose judgement is a complete unknown.

1 upvote
Poul Jensen
By Poul Jensen (Mar 30, 2012)

From "Features", bottom paragraph:
"It's clear that Canon has implemented much the same electronic 'first curtain shutter' in the G1 X as is used by its EOS SLRs in Live View mode (although the G1 X uses an in-lens, rather than focal plane shutter) ... The physical shutter is only used to end the exposure."

How do you know the implementation in the G1 X is any different from that in other Canon compacts - that is, the exposure is completely controlled by electronic shutter?

Find some super-slow motion footage of a DSLR shutter doing a very short exposure (e.g. google "shutter 2000fps"). Then consider how the G1 X could possibly produce a reasonably accurate 1/4000 sec exposure initiated by the sensor and ended by a mechanism in the lens.

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Mar 30, 2012)

.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Chris Lofty
By Chris Lofty (Mar 30, 2012)

Well, I've been using the G1X for 2 weeks now and am really beginning to love it, even with the few niggles!
Why so many negative remarks? The reason I love it and bought it is that compared to my 50D and L glass it's like carrying a feather; size and weight are relative to what you are used to!
I'm a fairly fit Senior citizen but I am finding it more and more of a burden lugging my 'Big' gear around on my back whilst cycling and Hiking, I was looking for an alternative for these occasions but still retaining excellent IQ for my Hobby and sales to Microstock. The G1X is almost the perfect answer to this,
I accept the criticisms and shortcomings but overall I believe Canon has gone down the right route with the G1X and my aging back is already thanking me!
The G1X is not replacing my DSLR just complimenting it.

4 upvotes
infocus
By infocus (Mar 30, 2012)

Well, I'm not quite a senior citizen yet (but it's getting closer) and this is exactly why I bought the G 1X. And, shocking as it may be to some of you, this will be my main camera (and I am not just an enthusiast --taught photo for many years).

2 upvotes
csca3
By csca3 (Mar 30, 2012)

Did I hear you right? "...in terms of image quality they're pretty close to current Canon APS-C DSLRs, such as the EOS 7D and 60D" (Image Quality Test > Overall Image Quality/Specifics) Anyone see the I.Q. Image test of RAW? I don't know if I should spend more time on this review website...

1 upvote
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 30, 2012)

"Anyone see the I.Q. Image test of RAW? I don't know if I should spend more time on this review website..."

Yes, I did check those comparisons out. DPR is certainly right. It's only at DR that the G1X is definitely worse than the 5N - unless you use the ISO400 mode to add two stops of DR.

2 upvotes
Elieser
By Elieser (Mar 30, 2012)

Not Pocketable? Compare G1 X dimensions and bulk of any other "big sensor" Camera + Zoom Lens. DSLR are Howitzers, not small arms. Only Panasonic GX1 with power Zoom, and Fuji X100 are comparable. Fuji has not Zoom at all, and its price is twice more. Canon has more versatile, better and faster lens than Panasonic's power Zoom.

3 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Mar 30, 2012)

I definitely agree. Saying that G1x is too big, because one single CSC (with smaller sensor and smaller zoom) is a bit smaller is ridiculous. There is no APS-C sensor camera with zoom lens and VF which is smaller.
Even fixed-lens APSC cameras are fairly big e.g. (Sigma DP2) and still have the disadvantage of only one focal length.

1 upvote
adegroot
By adegroot (Mar 30, 2012)

Leaving the panoramic mode out is a big, big mistake. My G10 has a dust spot inside the lens, so it may be better to have it fixed after all. The G1x is kind of growing too big.

0 upvotes
Ibida Bab
By Ibida Bab (Mar 30, 2012)

all Canon had to do is add Full HD, AA operation and a little more zoom to the G12 and would have done just perfect. Instead, they came up with this that only a few will buy.

2 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

People are already complaining about the price and size as is.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 30, 2012)

"Instead, they came up with this that only a few will buy."

1. Are you joking? Noone will buy this stuff? As far as its IQ is concerned, it's the Sony R2, apart from the lack of 24mm WA. It'll sell like hotcakes. If (and only if) the forthcming Nokia 808 will turn out to be worse than my P300, I'll purchase it too.

2. The features you asked for would definitely make the camera considerably bigger. Frankly, I prefer purchasing some additional (even third-party) batteries to using bulky, heavy and unreliable AA's.

2 upvotes
645D
By 645D (Mar 30, 2012)

Canon is on drug or something these days. There is no advantage to buy Canon. For lower end, I would rather buy NEX or NX, which offer smaller body with equal or better IQ and similar price. For higher end, D800 is hands down winner.
For the record, I am no hater of Canon. I own Canon stuff for 20 plus years, still have 2 F-1New, original EOS-1 (film), EOS-RT, and current 1D mk3, with over ten Canon glasses. These Canons were the technology leader at their time. Last week, I was tempted get a 60D for $685, but passed, considering that I could get a NEX 5N or NX200 for similar price and easier to carry around.
Canon doesn't offering any "wow" stuff now:-(
It's Nikon and Sony and even Olympus now keep offering great surprises at great prices:-)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Mar 30, 2012)

Exactly, the 'wow' stuff. Canon has a serious marketing problem. If you buy a Nikon you're sexy, if you buy a Canon you must be old and lame. At least, I think that's the feeling (too many) people get. D800? 36 MP, wow! 5D mark III? Same old stuff.

As a starter in photography I cannot judge the technical side but it seems the majority of the pro's use Nikon.

7 upvotes
Thoughts
By Thoughts (Mar 30, 2012)

As it is rumoured, Canon is joining the mirrorless feast very soon. It will be interesting if they come up with anything 'wow' . :)

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Mar 30, 2012)

@rubenski: the majority of the pros use Canon. When I saw the best pictures of Formula 1 2011 season, 10 out of 10 were taken with Canon (1Ds or 5D Mk II). Maybe a coincidence, but it was like this.

2 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Mar 30, 2012)

@Rubenski No, I don't see anything "sexy" about Nikon brand. (They are endorsed by The Dumb Kid from That 70's Show.) As for pros, my perception is that Canon DSLRs dominates the sports photography field. The Nikon 1 is deeply flawed, so that company doesn't always get things right either. But yes, Canon seems pretty conservative and uninspired. Perhaps their Fall 2012 releases will be better.

1 upvote
Nerdlinger
By Nerdlinger (Mar 30, 2012)

Don't forget Pentax...have been and still will make outstanding IQ cameras for significantly less $ than the big 2......

3 upvotes
photoholiko
By photoholiko (Mar 30, 2012)

I agree!

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

Don't forget Pentax? Have you seen the K-01 and Q? Add that to the GXR from parent company Ricoh and you have quite a gang of misfits far more quirky than this Canon.

0 upvotes
infocus
By infocus (Mar 30, 2012)

I think the issue is that this camera is not easily pigeon-holed into any other class. So comparing it to, say the NEX, which is unwieldy IMHO, isn't quite fair. There are so many categories for comparison, each of us has our own important things we're looking for.

Unfortunately, people keep reiterating and reiterating them. Personally, I'd like to move on and discover other insights everyone has.

0 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Mar 30, 2012)

G1 X: too big to carry everywhere, just a little too many shortcomings. I'll stick to my S100 (which is with me even when I go to the supermarket) and pack my 7D when I plan a trip. If I wanted something this size I would go for the EM-5.

12 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Mar 30, 2012)

This seems to be an ideal pack. I have also an APS-C DSLR and as a supplement or back-up camera the S100 (extremely small and pocketable, yet making good pictures and offering a lot of control).

0 upvotes
ZorSy
By ZorSy (Mar 30, 2012)

I think Canon is cautiously checking the market pulse. Without doubts they could add new mount and replace OVF with EVF version and be done with their first mirrorless. New mount and new lenses - easier to be said than done. It just cost a lots of money. For a traditional company like Canon that would still mean rather same number of buyers - but the profit? IMO mirrorless talk is just that - the price of Olympus m4/3 Pen has dropped down significantly and it appears even with such reduced price, the stock is slow moving. Or at least did not take the market as "predicted" by the fans of mirrorless cameras, drastically reducing the sales of classic DSLR. Even Nikon cautiously went with their One series which does not directly bite in DSLR territory. The bottom line is something everyone noticed - the AF speed is still lagging - be it with bolted on or interchangeable lens (which would in kit version still be a slow one on the long end, just much bigger). As a try - nice one.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
645D
By 645D (Mar 30, 2012)

Actually m4/3 is selling very well. If you check the Japan sales rank, E-PL1 is always on top 10 or top 5. As a long time Canonian, I just bought an E-PL1 for the price a compact camera. Considering I used to paid more for a Canon G2, and a couple of Canon A100 a few years ago. These Pens are no tech leader, but they are the price leader. Olympus is keep selling these to capture the market share.

4 upvotes
ZorSy
By ZorSy (Mar 30, 2012)

Then we in Australia are a bit slow to catch up that trend, I guess. People are crazy and buy heaps of iPhones, iiPads and other electronic gadgets but I rarely see anyone (including loads of tourists, including those from Japan) wearing anything but black bodies with familiar writing. Once in a blue moon you can see people with NEX, mainly Uni students taking social snaps in nearby restaurants/coffee shops. I'm in the Sydney CBD daily and can only say my observation - not a single PEN out there. For a kit at AUD$450-550, depending on model, it surely is good value for money, yet people getting "serious" about photography (read parents who want decent pictures of their kids in various activities and had tried numerous P&S/phones) rather opt for traditional DSLR kit. Yet, Pentax Kr with kit lens cost the same $450 - people buy Canon or Nikon. Confusing, eh?

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

EPL-1 is a decent seller, but only because they are still trying to dump all their old stock at $200-300. I doubt Olympus is making any money on those bodies and just hope that those tightwad customers pony up for more lenses.

0 upvotes
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Mar 30, 2012)

ZorSy wrote: "...people buy Canon or Nikon".

Yes, but people nearly always buy according to brand recognition. There is a feeling that if you buy a big, well-known brand you will get a good product without having your choice questioned by anyone. A lot of people, apparently, will only buy something if they recognise it from TV. Doesn't matter if it's schampoo or a camera.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Mar 30, 2012)

A great big, supposedly small camera, with a retracting P&S style lens.

Nice, Canon.

.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 30, 2012)

Good low light performance, but not as good as D5100, K-5, D7000, X100 et al. (Look at RAW, not JPEG).
Looks like a fun little camera but the slowish zoom and poor VF at that price make it a tough sell for many.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (Mar 30, 2012)

@ marike6 - I'm comparing RAW samples from the G1 X, D5100 / D7000, K5, X100 & Sony 5N... to be absolutely honest... there is not much difference in output between these camera's at ISO 3200 & 6400...

Even if you read DPR's review... it clearly states that this camera has the same level of RAW noise performance comparable to the best crop APS-C sensors on the market...

Yes, agreed the fixed lens is slow... thats Canon's fault... but all things equal... there is virtualy no difference in sensor noise or detail retention levels...

And consider the fact that this camera meant to serve as a DSLR backup... not intended to replace a DSLR altogether...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 30, 2012)

I'm not saying they are dramatically better at ISO 3200, but they do have less noise. If DPR states that the G1X and K-5 have the same levels of RAW high ISO noise, they are not looking closely enough.

0 upvotes
Loring von Palleske
By Loring von Palleske (Mar 30, 2012)

Comparing it to similarly sized csc/mirrorless shows the samsung nx200 and sony nex5n easily outpacing its iq 800-3200 after which all of them look like crap.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

One should expect SLIGHTLY more noise as the sensor is a like 10% smaller. It's a stop ahead of m4/3 easily, though.

0 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (Mar 30, 2012)

This camera is so nearly good, but it falls neatly between every stool.

It's more expensive than a base dslr or 4/3rd cam
It's lens and FPS are too slow to make it usable for anything other than static subjects
It's too big for a compact - if you're going to take this why not a 4/3rds?
It's viewfinder isn't good enough

All in all a fail

8 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Mar 30, 2012)

A 4/3 or NEX with kit zoom is too big when compared with G1x when it is power off.
G1x is a better choice when space is a concern.
I don't think you will use G1x for any professional job. It is for the people who like a compact size camera with better image quality.
It serves another segment of the market, I don't think we need to compare it with DSLR or the mirorless cameras.
As long as people like it and buy it. That's it. Who care to compare it with other cameras.

3 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes I know what the size is, the point is that as soon as a camera isn't pocketable there is no point using an inferior camera bacuse of it's size.

Take a G1X you may as well take a Rebel or a 4/3rds

3 upvotes
infocus
By infocus (Mar 30, 2012)

It may not fit in my pocket but it fits nicely in my small backpack. And I have a case that allows me to wear it on my belt if necessary. Good enough for me.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Mar 30, 2012)

I have now looked again at the RAW IQ comparison. Unfortunately the lens is bad. Its only sharp in he middle. And you cannot set aperture and focal length in the comparison tool. So ... you cannot check if DPReview have just chosen a bad combination.

4 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

No, but it should be obvious that we shot a wide variety of focal lengths and apertures before we came up with this.

Ultimately, the lens only looks like this at close focus distances - the real world images show why we don't use our test scene to test lenses.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Amazing how the real world is more comprehensive than a single test range. Thanks, R!

1 upvote
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Mar 30, 2012)

So - you say that it is not a good camera for close up photography? Thats good to know. What sharpness tests have you made at greater distance?

1 upvote
topstuff
By topstuff (Mar 30, 2012)

I think you've got to really want a Canon to love this camera.

Too big to be compact.

Lens is too slow and the AF is'nt great either.

The slow lens rather neutralises the benefits of what seems to be a nice sensor.

But the sensor is very nearly the same as m4/3d in size. And m4/3 cameras have better AF and much better lenses.

I am sure many people will be happy with this camera just because it is a Canon. But I think it is way too cautious from Canon, who clearly do not want to affect DSLR sales.

I fail to really see the point of this camera.

8 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Mar 30, 2012)

I think you wrong other peoples motives. I am not a Canon guy, but I love my G10. Its very robust. Feels very well to use. And it has the functionality I need. Sure - somewhat more heavy and clunky than the normal compact camera. But ... I think that adds rather than subtracts from the value.

And I think I would have liked this one also. But ... it seems to have some unacceptable problems. Focussing, shortest distance and lens quality comes to my mind.

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Define "lens quality". At very short focusing distances, at wide angle, there is some mild field curvature. Other than that, the lens produces as much detail as some L quality lenses. Shortest focus distance -- again, DSLR size sensor means DSLR size min focus distance. And focus speed hasn't been an issue for me so far.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Mar 30, 2012)

For a starter - the other cameras it was compared to did not have the problem. And look at the paper clips. I hardly call that mild.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

The other cameras it was compared to don't have a 4X optical zoom crammed into the smallest package a 4X optical zoom has ever been crammed in to. Yes, some compromises had to be made, but fortunately those apply to a very limited number of scenarios and are not noticeable in the hundred of real world shots I've personally taken over the last month.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Mar 31, 2012)

So Howard, R Butler claims that the camera only has a problem with close ups. Thats why the paper clips looks so bad. Might be so. What do you say - that have the camera?

0 upvotes
bradleyg5
By bradleyg5 (Mar 30, 2012)

the Dpreview guys just absolutely love the Canon G series styling and form factor. I mean just look at how well they rate the G12 which I would consider to be awful styling for a compact.

Regardless of anything, if Canon releases a camera that looks like a G series it will get a favourable review from dpreview. Simply read their other compact camera reviews, if a camera does anything different than a G series it's seen as a flaw.

There is so much about the G series cameras they perceive as perfect, you cannot add advanced usability to a camera in ANY way if it results in it not doing something a G series can do.

If canon released a full frame G-series with the same awful zoom design and hideous styling dpreview would give it a perfect 100, I don't think there is much question in that.

8 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 30, 2012)

Actually, some of us think (and argue) that the G series has been too big and awkward, no matter how nice the controls make it.

However, the G1 X finally offers the sensor size and image quality to justify the brick-like form factor, while retaining a lot of the controls.

1 upvote
Canisminor
By Canisminor (Mar 30, 2012)

Putting the rating chat aside, the G1X is a really interesting camera. The shortcomings, in my opinion, are more along the line of a desire to see Mid-end DSLR camera features in a Powershot. Along with the oft observed slow AF and slow shooting speed, I believe Canon missed a few key, yet simple to add, features that would make us really sit up an take notice:

1) A fast lens. I am still a G3 owner. The key selling point was the f2.0 lens. It was only after the G5 that Canon ripped out features, and then added them back one by one in future generations. But the G3 was the full box. With the G1X, an f2.0 on the wide end would be very welcome

2) Bulb. Really, it's time for someone to bring bulb exposure in a camera like this to market.

3) Optical viewfinder. On the newer G-Series, are folks really still using the Optical Viewfinders? It is a nice to have, but is it essential? This camera was Canon's opportunity to press "reset", and strip out the OV.

0 upvotes
Manfred Bachmann
By Manfred Bachmann (Mar 30, 2012)

this rating is ridiculous! OK, imagequality is good, but all the other things are very bad against the Nikon V1, which earns 69 points.

5 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 30, 2012)

But DPR gives more weight to IQ than other factors, as they explain elsewhere on this site. It's their choice, and if you disagree with their weighting you should just ignore their scores, and draw your own conclusions from the review.

5 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (Mar 30, 2012)

"But DPR gives more weight to IQ than other factors"

They also consistently give more weight to Nikon than Canon

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

The Nikon 1 series put size and ILC ahead of image quality. And yes, the implication with ILC is a DSLR-like AF system and other related features. Canon had to make some compromises for an all-in-one solution, but very little of that was a compromise in image quality.

0 upvotes
jonikon
By jonikon (Mar 30, 2012)

I agree. the Nikon V1 is a much better camera with interchangeable lenses, an EVF and super fast phase detection auto-focus capability. All of which the Canon G1X lacks, (along with a long list of other features common to cameras these days).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes, being concerned more with image quality in a camera that is obviously centered around that principle is, apparently, a vice. So a camera with a sensor considerably smaller than APS-C behind a removeable lens is a revolutionary idea but puting a near APS-C sensor in a P&S is dumb? The Nikon 1 has its advantages, and good for Nikon innovating on the AF front, but I can think of plenty of occasions where I wouldn't bother with the Nikon 1. If I want AF speed, I already have my 7D. Just for the record, I have recommended the Nikon 1 to friends looking for small, fast cameras. They've typically chosen to go with a Rebel or better.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HSway
By HSway (Mar 30, 2012)

The interchangeable-lens mirrorless compacts are booming (thankfully) but Canon does good to carry on their G style (legendary) camera (great) job and bringing the G distinctive step further. Not quite popular or largely fitting today’s mood but a very good work on a camera that manages to stand out - not that easy.
Other sites downright excited in the past about the G series results/camera are far more absorbed by the moods. That is telling about a solidity of the base of their views – and about their genuine photographer approach. I see a line between photographers and the obsessive toy-boys. The first are interested in photography, the others in messing about with gadgets (best expensive ones) for sake of the messing about.
And a clever move. There is a way how to make it cost-effective and drive the competing segment nuts also in the future.If you don't want the G1x wait for the 2 or g3x, they will be improved.
Ow' surely, canon will come with an interchangeable-lens compact tooH

1 upvote
Rmano
By Rmano (Mar 30, 2012)

It seems a nice camera. I understand that's a minor issue, but can DPR confirm/deny the problem shown in http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/03/21/canon-g1-x-exhibits-light-leak-or-internal-reflection-in-certain-conditions ?
Thanks!

0 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Mar 30, 2012)

I did actually try and replicate it and couldn't. This doesn't mean it would never occur but I'd reckon the chances of any G1 X user seeing this phenomenon are pretty slim.

1 upvote
Rmano
By Rmano (Mar 31, 2012)

Thanks for the answer Lars. I reckon that the conditions (strong light with high ISO) were quite unusual, but well...

0 upvotes
Deeso
By Deeso (Mar 30, 2012)

For a pocketable high quality alternative I rather get a Fuji X100...

0 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (Mar 30, 2012)

Has the G1X better low light/high ISO performance than the K-5 and the D7000?...

0 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

BUT K5 got the GOLD award from Dpr review
Nothing came close for the verstility of K5 nor the D7000
with the same price tag better buy a DSLR

1 upvote
lensberg
By lensberg (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes... without a shadow of a doubt... the Canon G1 X has much better noise performance from ISO 3200 compared to the Pentax K5 and Nikon D7000...

You can clearly see it in the DPR review as well... the cleanliness of the black & grey levels is absolutely incredible... The JPEG's look great all the way uptill 12800...

The only camera that equals this level of noise control is the FujiFilm X-Pro 1

Unfortunately this is a fixed lens camera... so definitely suffers in the form of versatility...

0 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (Mar 30, 2012)

As a 5D2 shooter who also has a Pentax K5, I can honesty say that your statement above is 100% BS.

K5 has much, much nicer IQ than the G1 X could ever dream to have. K5 wipes the floor of the 7D ( i know I have owned both) so there is no way the G1 X will get close.

Thanks :)

3 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (Mar 30, 2012)

Granted... with a good lens attached... there's no doubt that the K5 will have better image quality compared to the G1 X... but thats only at lower sensitivities...

Up the ISO ante to 3200 and beyond and the tables turn dramatically in favourof the G1 X... that was my point...

AND... the K5 doesn't "wipe the floor" like you're insinuating with the likes of the 7D... be sure about that... Its better at ISO 6400 + but by a small margin... At base ISO till 1600 there will be next to no difference between the two...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 50 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 30, 2012)

Of course the G1X does not have better low light/high ISO performance than the K-5 or D7000. Look at RAW as JPEG is meaningless. JPEG is only a demo of NR to suppress noise.
When you look at RAW at ISO 3200, the K-5, D7000, et al are much cleaner with less noise.

2 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (Mar 30, 2012)

Well, I asked because if you add the K-5 and the D7000 to the comparison chart table at the conclusions page, then the G1X appears to have better low light/high iso performance than the two. Then again, DxO gives the G1X a mere 644 score compared to the 1200ish of the other two. I'm not that much of a numbers guy, but hey...

0 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (Mar 30, 2012)

Also, the DPR states "G1 X's high ISO performance is among the best we've seen from APS-C (or similarly sized sensor) cameras".

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 30, 2012)

Ignore JPEG high ISO and look at RAW. It's the only thing that matters. RAW performance, SNR is why DxO mark give the G1X a lower score.

0 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

I shoot 99% of my shots in day time
99% of my collection is day time
High ISO or Night time shot represents 1% of my collection and shot combined
Again $800 buy a decent camera or a proper DSLR not a handicapped GIX which is good for ?high ISO only
Should be a Night watcher 's camera
No value for money

0 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

It should be BRONZE or NO award of this BRICK

5 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (Mar 30, 2012)

Don't be THAT harsh. I think it's an excellent camera with its shortcomings of course, but which camera hasn't got any? It will find its buyers. I am tempted, too, but then I'd be happy even with the G12. As for the looks, call me pervert if you might, but I actually like the G1X very much. But then again, I also liked the K-01... (in yellow.)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Funny how ananimity makes people say things that make them sound like they've got a pair. It's like cursing and yelling at other drivers in your car. At least in that case nobody will every hear you. In a written format online we may never see you but we have to read your senseless statements. Thanks for zero contribution to the discussion.

1 upvote
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

The camera belongs to the loyal lame and old community

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

And what camera do you own, minzaw?

0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Mar 30, 2012)

minzaw, please go buy yourself a $50 Rollei point-and-shoot and go take some pictures. Get some fresh air.

1 upvote
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

Good for
Anyone who wants DSLR-like image quality and a versatile zoom range in a pocketable format.
form the conclusion section of DP review
?? pocketable
You must be joking

1 upvote
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

13 cons and 12 pros in the conclusion section and still received Silver award>???

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

It's not a math equation.

0 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

It is the numbers it counts and the number is 76% silver award
It is NOT a mathematical equation
It is NOT a rocket science it is purely SUBJECTIVE and conflicts of interest by the reviewers and believers!!

0 upvotes
Aotearoa
By Aotearoa (Mar 30, 2012)

I think it's a commendable camera by Canon.

I'm a Nikon D700 DSLR camera owner, and have a Canon S95 ... both of which I like. I also have an in-betweenie Panasonic GF1 which I am about to sell as it just sucks with its optional (expensive) EVF. A good photograph is a wonderful thing, but there's a lot of photos (in my case) to get just one. Squinting at a LCD on a larger camera is just not cricket.& Silky wotsit for RAW? I don't think so.

Maybe I'll wait for the 2nd edition of this, or buy a Nikon D3100 (soon to be a D3200?) Not too much different in size - small but you still have to sling it.

Either way, Nikon or Canon have decent software. Life's too short for a DSLR shooter to bother with m4/3rds.

0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (Mar 30, 2012)

I would never replace my small m4/3 system with this. Fixed zoom lens with slow aperture is just awfull compared to fe. the Zuiko 45/1.8. Perfect size and quality when small kit is better than DSRL.

And I shoot with a Canon full frame system too, when I get paid for it.

5 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Mar 30, 2012)

Personally, I beg to differ. I went from DSLR to m4/3 and feel no need at all to ever go back to a DSLR. Even the Nikon 300mm f/4 works very well on the entry level E-PL1. Yes, it is manual focus only, but with the high res EVF, that's no problem. I'd have to get a D90 or D7000 to have AF on that, but I'm not going to bother.

Your experience is based on the GF1, which is a 2009 camera. m4/3 has moved on considerably since then, so it would be better to look at the Panasonic GX1 now. This camera got a similar score as the Canon, but has the advantage of interchangeable lenses.

At the same time, the G1 X concept is interesting because of its bright and versatile zoom. Compared to a Rebel with a kit lens (which many people stick to), I think the G1 X is the better (albeit more expensive) option. But compared to m4/3 it's a different story.

2 upvotes
pc168
By pc168 (Mar 30, 2012)

wow ... D3200 is going to be a 24MP (rumour) entry level DSLR. I'm also considering getting one as a backup/light weight alternative of my D700.

0 upvotes
rallyfan
By rallyfan (Mar 30, 2012)

Could this be the world's best $500 USD camera? Quite possibly. Had they priced it correctly, Canon could have made a tremendous step sideways with this camera: the size is right, the specs are right, but alas the AF and speed are off. Some would still go for it (still photographers and such). The quality is very promising after all. If only the speed were there.

To those that like it and are paying... $800: more power to you. Don't worry about the naysayers; in fact, rejoice. They won't be in line in front of you to buy one (in fact it could be quite a short line...).

Judging from the review, the camera is poised to tax the wallets of those that must have the "next big" small Canon. Judging from some comments, the camera has already apparently taxed the emotional stability of some of the more vocal fans here.

As it stands the price is wrong. Rationalizing, proclaiming one's credentials and background, and self-aggrandizing won't fix this. Lowering the price will.

4 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Nor will your statement make your own opinion magically correct. This camera is a brand new combination of features never seen before, and considering the design and manufacturing difficulties involved I don't see an issue with pricing. People paid how much for the G12 and S100 when it first came out? Street for the G12 was $565 and S100 was $430. If you value low light shooting neither was a viable option. So the G1 X stickers for $235 more than the G12 started at. Not a bad deal.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 525
123