Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G1 X review

By dpreview staff on Mar 29, 2012 at 20:48 GMT
Buy on GearShop$549.00

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
29
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Canon PowerShot G1 X

Comments

Total comments: 525
123
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Mar 30, 2012)

I think the award given by DPR is just right since the IQ is really good. I hope it gets cheaper soon.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

Quirks aside, this still gives you all the quality of an APS-C DSLR with a 18-75mm lens attached in a package that is smaller than any equivalent interchangeable lens solution. The lens folds up mostly into the body and you could throw it into any bag or on a belt clip and not worry about a lens kit. It's not going to replace a full DSLR or m4/3 kit, but it would replace a rebel or m4/3 with kit lens kit easily while costing about the same.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Apparently nobody cares to try to argue with that point. Spot on.

0 upvotes
Richie Beans
By Richie Beans (Mar 30, 2012)

This is the progeny of Canon's A-Series cameras, the most perfect P&S cameras ever created? As it is, too much inbreeding has created a hunchbacked, idiot-savant of a camera; perhaps likable and skilled at one or two things, but one-eyed and too slow to be of much use.

Canon- I've patiently waited years for your entry into the MILC market. You've deeply disappointed me.

5 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes, being skilled at one or two things like taking excellent images from ISO 100 through 12,800 puts this camera firmly in the bell tower for the rest of its days. Keep up the good work, Quasimodo.

2 upvotes
kuklukklak
By kuklukklak (Mar 30, 2012)

Seems like its fashionable to bash every single Canon camera in this forums. Ok, my turn:

The camera is like trash, expensive, soft, noisy, brick heavy, I dont even like the fact that its black. Enough? Vote for me plssssssssss. =))

13 upvotes
Realfi
By Realfi (Mar 30, 2012)

Gotta say that I'm a little surprised at the rating considering the review and the list of "cons".

8 upvotes
BJL
By BJL (Mar 30, 2012)

Another point in common between G1X and GX1: for this price, the lack of an EVF is hard to accept. But at least Panasonic offers the option of an accessory EVF. I swore of peep-hole OVF's years ago, simce they are useless for both manual focus and accurate framing.

3 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Mar 30, 2012)

More like a Copper Award, no? I think what DPR is trying to say is yes, a bigger sensor is better but unless you are leaving on a trip tomorrow, wait for the G2X or at least a very good deal on a G1X.

2 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

When people advocate waiting I wonder who they think their audience is. If I was incapable of reading then I might be ignorant enough to take your advice....oh, the irony.

2 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Mar 30, 2012)

Not as EPIC FAIL as 5D3.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

The most humorous part of your post is that it required an edit.

2 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Mar 30, 2012)

Thanks

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Without the caps lock on I'm sure it lost some of its oomph.

0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Mar 30, 2012)

How is the 5D mk III "fail"? That it doesn't have the megapixel count of the D800? Is it so that there can be only one "winner" and every other camera is poop?

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

He's probably referring to a Nikon with more megapixels....since that's the only important part of a camera.

0 upvotes
Bob Meyer
By Bob Meyer (Mar 30, 2012)

The overall rating seems like a real stretch to me. Has DPR gotten to the "don't say anything too bad about anything" point, to make sure their advertisers are happy?

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

I suggest rather that just about all cameras these days are so good that it's hard to come up with much in the way of negatives that doesn't come across as nit-picking.

The sad result, however, is that dpreview reviews have become dead-boring. I honestly can't bring myself to do more than scan the conclusions anymore.

4 upvotes
unlearny
By unlearny (Mar 30, 2012)

The Lytro got a bad review.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

They are smarter than many of their readers.

5 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Mar 30, 2012)

Too little, too late, for too much.

4 upvotes
Ben Raven
By Ben Raven (Mar 30, 2012)

NAILED IT !!

1 upvote
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Mar 30, 2012)

A nice compact camera for business travel.
But not fit for serious photography; still a lot of areas need to be improved.
Anyway, I would like to buy one.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Define "serious".

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Mar 30, 2012)

But is it really "compact"?

2 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

?Definition of COMPACT from DPR reviewer???

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

howardroark, serious means you take the picture for a specific purpose, not general use.
T3, I tried this camera in a camera shop last week; when it is power off, its size is just a little bit bigger than G12. A really good choice for travelling.
minzaw, I don't care DPR's definition of Compact. As long as I feel it like a Compact then it is a Compact. The reason is I paid the money to buy it, not DPR.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

A "specific purpose" in this case is that it is small enough and flexible enough to always be with me and I don't have to worry about looking at the IQ afterwards and feel like I wasted my money. I take my 7D with me when speed is essential or I need the fastest lens possible for extremely demanding situations. In many cases though, the 7D can make people in a social situation nervous, can't get it into concerts whereas the G1 X I easily can, and I can get angles with the G1 X I can't get with the 7D. Remember, a camera body with a lens on it doesn't serve a specific purpose either because you have to choose a lens. If you put the 18-200 $300 lens on an $1,800 7D body you don't have a sharp and fine scalpel, you have a heavy and expensive machete.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
starwolfy
By starwolfy (Mar 30, 2012)

I think this camera is great for journalists.
Still small, good IQ, good Iso, good Zoom, well built. This is great.
Most of journalists I know use Canon G series cameras and this new Canon seem tempting.

2 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

BIG-NO Macro capability-Poor AF-Poor Video-$800-NO value for money
?tempting?
I am afraid NO

2 upvotes
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (Mar 30, 2012)

Taking into consideration the Cons that camera should be a sheet!

0 upvotes
VadymA
By VadymA (Mar 30, 2012)

Despite all criticism from skeptics, the G1 X group on Flikr has already exceeded 240 members in just a few weeks and growing fast. Looks like people like this camera and it is selling well.

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

The G1 X, GX-1, X-1 pro, and X1. I'm so confused!

2 upvotes
JohnFredC
By JohnFredC (Mar 30, 2012)

My perspective: Pros: Image quality adequate. Cons: Zoom range too short (4x?). Sensor too large for my personal use (yup: I want as close to infinite depth of field as I can get). Close focusing inadequate. Camera physically "way" too large. Loss of ISO dial (from G series) inexcusable. Viewfinder unacceptable.

But even conceding the sensor size in favor of smoother images and compromising on all the other issues, Canon has completely missed the boat here.

For 800 bucks (800!) I want a dual mode (visual/electronic) viewfinder and a better zoom (6x, minimum) with real close-up focusing... otherwise it is just a step backwards into the past of more limited capabilities. The image quality is not THAT much better than my G11 for most purposes and careful adjustment of the G11 images can close the gap substantially.

The concept of such a camera is great, the execution of the G1X much less so.

3 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 30, 2012)

Refined and true. High ISO looks good. But add a value surprise: 24mm at wide end or a real superior optical viewfinder. Look what Fuji and Sigma are doing-trying to innovate.

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

Combining a zoom lens and an APS-C sensor in a compact camera is going to require serious compromise. For some it will be worth it. A lot of people, like you, will decide that it is not.

m43 seems to sit closer to the sweet spot, with a nod towards the Nikon 1 provided they get their act together for gen 2.

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

I hear Canon has an opening for an unpaid giver of unsolicited advice. The image quality is THAT much better than your G11.

0 upvotes
JohnFredC
By JohnFredC (Mar 31, 2012)

@howardroark. The low light performance is good, obviously. But besides that, for general use, IMO it is too limited in the kinds and circumstances of pictures one take with it. And if Canon continues to ignore my "unsolicited advice", then I will take my business elsewhere. Maybe to Sony.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 31, 2012)

And I assure you they have no delusions about trying to make everyone happy. Why go into a crowded market with some reheated gimmicks when they could do exactly what they always do: create an entirely new market segment. Nikon did it with their 1 series and while I found those cameras interesting, I already owned a DSLR that put those poor cameras to shame. So, Canon finally announced the point and shoot I'd been wanting for years and I bought it. Once you get about a million like-minded consumers to sign on to your camera manifesto then maybe Canon will notice you exist. Until that day they're too busy hauling all their money to the bank received from thrilled G1 X owners like myself.

0 upvotes
rocklobster
By rocklobster (Mar 30, 2012)

Pocketable? I don't think so - well not compared to the S100, ZX1 or LX5 and even the M4/3 units like the GX1/GF3/E-PM1 with pancake lens are much smaller.

But, where it does shine is at high ISO and it looks like it even beats the benchmark NEX-5N but not sure about dynamic range.

As a forerunner of a Canon mirrorless solution it looks promising but as it is, with its slow performance, you would want to love the G series ergonomics to really prefer this camera.

Cheers

1 upvote
Loring von Palleske
By Loring von Palleske (Mar 30, 2012)

doesn't beat nex5n or nx200 in raw...

0 upvotes
tipple
By tipple (Mar 30, 2012)

No camera is perfect. If you know what you are buying then you know that you are buying the G1X for picture quality and not for 6-10 fps. Sure the macro could be better but, I didn't buy this camera for macro. This camera delivers excellent low light high ISO performance. Sure $800 is a lot of money for a "point and shoot" camera but this is not an ordinary point and shoot camera. The image quality for this very portable camera is very good. Will the second generation of this camera improve on certain aspects? Sure, but that is the progression of camera development. There will always be a "better" camera. But if we wait for the best camera, we will never buy one. The best camera is the one you have with you.

6 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 30, 2012)

Surprise us. Bring it in at $500. The subsystems for all these cameras are tried and true.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Subsystems that exist in many different systems. As an engineer I find this type of discussion both amusing and maddening. You probably do hours of research on WebMD and then go to your doctor already knowing what you have. When you tell him you have headaches and that you have a brain cloud you probably would be offended when he laughs in your face.

3 upvotes
Zhiyong Sun
By Zhiyong Sun (Mar 30, 2012)

I am surprise there is no mentioning of equivalent choice in the interchangeable lens system field. Just because it is Canon's first, or a fixed lens unit, you shouldn't compare? Why would someone choose this over a interchangable lens mirrorless camera like the Panasonic G3? Cheaper with slight less zoom, all other feature almost equal or better (better EVF, AF, fps, etc.), and having the ability to put another lens on. It's not like this camera is that small (in fact it is big by MLC standard).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Mar 30, 2012)

What makes it small is the lens. No ILC camera offers a 28-112mm equivalent lens this size. In fact most ILC kit lenses are bigger than the G1 X lens in its retracted state.

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

Zhiyong, this camera is definitely an excellent choice for business travel. We need a camera with relative good image quality in a light and compact body. This will make our life easier.

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

@Lars

Zhiyong already accepted that the zoom range drops a little, but the point is the overall package of the GX-1 and G1-X (gah!!) compare very closely in size, price, and features.

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Mar 30, 2012)

Yep I agree Lars, pretty obvious, how that can go unnoticed is beyond me :).

C

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Because people see this and that and so many things are so close why not just put them all together. If it was that easy engineers wouldn't have a job.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 29, 2012)

A Silver Award for the Canon G1X and nothing for the Nikon V1, with it's revolutionary features like Phase-Detect AF on the sensor and high fps, and much better manual video mode and viewfinder? Puzzling indeed.

3 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Mar 29, 2012)

The Dpreview Award system is not linked to the score of a camera. We give awards to cameras that we really enjoy using and with the G1 X that was the case. It's a real 'photographer's camera' with an abundance of external controls and excellent image quality. As a bonus it's small enough to stick it in your backpack on a hike. But then again, it might not be the best choice for you.

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

marike6,
I don't see there is any innovation in V1 or J1. They are just the miniature cameras of those Olympus, Sony and Panasonic mirorless cameras. Unfortunately, the sensor of V1 and J1 are too small.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Marike6, if I crammed a GPS unit in a tampon would that be a revolutionary feature?

0 upvotes
JacquesBalthazar
By JacquesBalthazar (Mar 30, 2012)

Agreed marike6. DPR's review of Nikon 1 missed the point. The V1 with kit zoom(s) gives the G1X a run for its money at so many levels ( speed of use, video, AF, EVF, etc). On the IQ front, the Nikon 1 is in fact very good and the results contradict dominant assumptions on sensor size. It is likely that the G1X will allow larger prints at 3200 ISO and above, but for 90% of real life situations, the V1 is probably a better proposition. One day there will be f1.4 native lenses for V1. That is impossible for G1x. For those reasons, I also disagree with DPR's rating in both cases.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
minzaw
By minzaw (Mar 30, 2012)

Totally agree and it is a SUBJECTIVE scoring

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 30, 2012)

Well if GPS on a tampon was as useful as fast AF due to Phase Detect AF on the sensor, then by all means. But innovation in this case means Nikon implemented a feature that none of the other players in the mirror-less space had been able to. The slower Contrast Detect AF issue? Solved in the V1. Innovations like these should be factors in a review/rating.

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
XX CANON G1X XX
By XX CANON G1X XX (Mar 30, 2012)

"By howardroark (6 hours ago)-Marike6, if I crammed a GPS unit in a tampon would that be a revolutionary feature?" =====> Well, in your case that is about the only way you will ever find pussy.

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Ha! Or I could just put a Twinkie out on the front porch and wait five minutes for your mom. :)

1 upvote
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Mar 29, 2012)

I must say despite the criticisms of slow af, poor optical viewfinder etc the images I have seen here and elsewhere are consistently very good indeed (I have a Fuji X 100 so am used to great IQ). I think we need to regard this as a super G12. Mind you the main reason I swopped to the Fuji was the amazingly clear and useful optical/EVF viewfinder. The amazing low light and IQ was a surprise (I was one of the first to buy).

0 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (Mar 29, 2012)

It's amusing to see the poor optical viewfinder show up in the "pros" list. It's a little better than nothing, but a camera this big could incorporate a better EVF.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 29, 2012)

Most compact cameras don't have any viewfinder at all, so the inclusion of one, albeit a mediocre one, is a good thing. Had this been a DSLR, then surely the viewfinder would have been listed as a con.

1 upvote
Button Pusher
By Button Pusher (Mar 29, 2012)

Most compact cameras don't cost even close to what this does. the ovf is a joke and should have found its way into the negatives.

1 upvote
deep7
By deep7 (Mar 30, 2012)

Plenty of cameras of a similar size (the "barely compact" class!) cost this much and have no viewfinder. I've tried a G1X and the viewfinder was bright and clear, so it's not rubbish and way better than nothing. Limited, yes, but definitely a positive feature.

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

@deep7 Which $800-900 barely compact class fixed lens cameras cost this much and have no viewfinder are you referring to?

1 upvote
deep7
By deep7 (Mar 31, 2012)

The day I looked at the G1X, within a quarter of the price would have got you an XZ1, an LX5, an EPM1, an EPL3, an NEX Sony etc. etc. I didn't say fixed lens. I have no idea what the little Sigmas cost but they have no viewfinder and the Leica X1 is exactly three times the price here. The same money gets the Ricoh modular system with one module and no viewfinder - the lens is semi-fixed.

For reference, the G1X in the first shop in town that sells them is $NZ999, so cheaper than an EP3 with kit lens by $96.

0 upvotes
turretless
By turretless (Mar 29, 2012)

That's exactly the camera I wanted when I was buying my G11. Oh, well... :(

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Mar 29, 2012)

Indeed. Released a year or so too late really. We do have to remember the 2011 Tsunami and it's huge impact on the Japanese. That fact they are releasing new products at all is amazing. And we are so spoilt and more and more demanding. Imagine the fuss over this camera if it was released just 2 or 3 years ago...

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Mar 29, 2012)

Hmmm .. this looks like a camera I would like ... except for

1. the focussing speed

2. the non sharp paper clips.

In the comparison image there are lots of areas that are unsharp. Whats this all about? Its sharp in other areas. I dont want a camera that has uneven sharpness in the focal plane.

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 29, 2012)

Have you read the note at the top of the comparison tool that explains that the G1 X struggles with the close focus distances of our test scene but it better behaved in the real world?

1 upvote
deep7
By deep7 (Mar 30, 2012)

When I tried one, I was stunned at how far away you have to be. Very poor close-focus and the reason I dismissed the camera and continue to look elsewhere. Having said that, it was really nice in other respects.

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

Hmmmm ... so the camera is really focussed behind the scene? Sounds weird. Sometimes the real world is not several meters away. Pity. I really like my G10 and was looking forward to this camera. But ... it seems like its not for me.

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

Hmmm .. I have taken yet another look at the IQ comparison. And - no - its not only a focussing issue. Sure - it is focussed slightly farther away - but thats not the main issue. The main issue is that the lens is bad. Its only sharp in the middle. Nothing is sharp at the edges.

Maybe its better at some other focal length or at some other aperture?

0 upvotes
photoholiko
By photoholiko (Mar 29, 2012)

I don't understand why Canon came out with a camera like this without interchangeable lenses, it doesn't compete with NEX, Fugi or even
Pentax K-01.
There are better choices with better zooms.

3 upvotes
NetMage
By NetMage (Mar 29, 2012)

I don't understand why Toyota/Subaru come out with a two door four seat car - it doesn't compete with any four door car.

3 upvotes
turretless
By turretless (Mar 29, 2012)

Maybe because they didn't want to cram another camera into the over-saturated compact ILC market, cannibalizing sales of their own entry-level DSLRs along the way?

1 upvote
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

maybe ICL version is coming?

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Mar 29, 2012)

Fugi? Is that a type of mushroom? : ) I think the concept is good but the execution is lacking. If it looked better, had faster af and a decent viewfinder I would be interested for sure. This is a compact for those who don't want to change lenses. As it is I think the NEX 7 or even Fuji x-Pro (with a zoom lens) will be my next step or the OM-D E-5. Still love my X-100 though (even more so after the recent 1.20 firmware update)

0 upvotes
tlinn
By tlinn (Mar 29, 2012)

I agree and I think you are getting at the point I was making about price. If this were cheaper than the ILC alternatives or dramatically smaller or offered higher image quality then one could make an argument for it. The thing is, it isn't. Not being able to change lenses is not a feature, it is a limitation. All other things equal, if you could get an ILC with the ability to change lenses for the same price or less, why wouldn't you? Even if you never planned to buy another lens, there is no downside to having that option. It's not like the fixed lens on this camera is particularly great or more weatherproof than an ILC. The only argument one could make is that when its lens is collapsed it is somewhat more compact than most ILC's with most lenses. Now if it were less expensive than a good ILC then there would be a reason to accept its limitations. At $800, the primary reason to purchase it would be familiarity with Canon's ergonomics or just blind loyalty to Canon.

2 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 30, 2012)

Well said. Looked at a Panasonic GF3 recently. Appealing camera with excellent manual focus. And it can take legacy lenses with adapters. I think it's down to $500?

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

Do you think that because mirrorless system cameras exist, you cannot make cameras with a non removable lens? What a strange notion.

As far as I can see - this camera has one problem - focussing. It is bad at focussing and its even badder at focussing close.

This makes it a no buy for me.

0 upvotes
tlinn
By tlinn (Mar 29, 2012)

Folks can disagree about features and performance—what it should and should not be able to do. For me, this conversation cannot be divorced from price. At $500, this camera would be great. At $800, I think it offers such low value per dollar that I find it laughable. There are too many alternatives that offer more for less.

24 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

And if that's your 2 cents I wouldn't give you a penny for it. :)

0 upvotes
pixelmess
By pixelmess (Mar 29, 2012)

"At $800, I think it offers such low value per dollar that I find it laughable. There are too many alternatives that offer more for less."

AGREED COMPLETELY.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
tlinn
By tlinn (Mar 29, 2012)

@howardroark

I have no problem with you disagreeing. Opinions vary. However I have noticed that you've been vigorously defending this camera against anyone who does not love it. Do you own one of these? Is this your dream camera? Do you just like talking gear? No problem with any of these. I'm just curious.

5 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Mar 30, 2012)

It's unlikely to stay at $800 for long.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes, I do own one. And for me and other owners the discussions people have are as if people are talking about an entirely different camera. I "defend" this camera by pointing out some misconceptions people have, and I also try to discuss the fact that the G1 X is being judged on pricepoint rather than merits. It isn't a point and shoot and it isn't a DSLR, at least not in the conventional sense of either. Saying $500 is a fair price is, well....ignoring reality. My dad just spent about $450 on a G12. Great point and shoot. The G1 X has a sensor 6X larger. If you have any concept of how digital chips are fabricated you'd know that the relationship between size and cost is not linear. Say the G12 sensor is $50....no, let's say $20 for fun. 6X the size would imply at least 6X the cost, so $120 for the G1 X sensor. But as size goes a single chip failure takes up 6X the area, so if 1 in 6 G1 X sensors fail, that's like 6 G12 sensors failing. If failure rates are the same....

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Then you lose 6X the area for every chip failure over the G12. So maybe the G1 X chip isn't 12X as expensive, but it's also not just 6X. Anyway, to each his or her own.

0 upvotes
Richie Beans
By Richie Beans (Mar 30, 2012)

"It's unlikely to stay at $800 for long."

-Unless there's another tsunami in Japan, or a flood in Thailand. Given this camera's unique place in cameradom, it'll stay at $800 well into next year.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

What alternatives? A $600 APS-C DSLR body with a mythical under $200 18-75mm f2.8-5.6 lens? A Gx1 with a slower and short 14-42 and 1 stop worse noise performance (Which incendentally costs more than $800 as a combo)?

The G12 was $500 and it had a sensor about 1/4 this size. So I don't see how anyone can expect them to cram a larger sensor and lens in a similar body and charge the same amount.

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

Nice theories Howard. They do fail on one thing though. There are lots of APS-C cameras and (m)FourThird cameras. Cameras that are much more complex than this camera, and still sell at lower cost.

No - I think the price is carefully chosen by Canon to match what they think the buyers of such a camera is willing to pay.

0 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (Mar 30, 2012)

I agree tlinn, but apart from price it doesn't do anything that well.

Slow lens, slow FPS, bad viewfinder, big body for a compact, far too expensive.

Much better alternatives around

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

Glass. You have to pay for the glass as well, and glass isn't cheap. As stated by a DPReview rep further up, this glass is quite unique. You can analyze one variable at a time but you'll never see the whole picture that way. Forest....trees.

0 upvotes
redeye47
By redeye47 (Mar 30, 2012)

" but apart from price it doesn't do anything that well."

-The G1x looks to have really good high ISO performance in a pretty comptact package.

1 upvote
Joesiv
By Joesiv (Mar 29, 2012)

I would have liked to see examples of the distortion correction highlighted. I was shocked at how much correction was required. I assume less correction is needed at the telephoto end (which the studio scene was taken).

Also, great job with the depth of field and bright/dark lens comparison with the XZ-1, it really puts it into perspective.

Very interesting camera that seems to be half baked, or purposefully crippled by Canon (not an unusual practice for them IMO). I'm glad they introduced it, I hope the G2X fixes some of the manual control limitations.

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Mar 29, 2012)

You can download any wide-angle shot in our reviews gallery and check the edges of the frame, distortion correction will have been applied to all those shots.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Mar 30, 2012)

FOV 28 - 112mm
XZ-1: f = 6 - 24 mm @ f/1.8 - f/2.5 = 3.3mm - 9.6 mm
G1 X: f = 15.1-60.4 mm f/2.8 - f/5.8 = 5.4mm - 10.4 mm

FF: f = 28 - 112mm
Wide:
3.3mm = 28/3.3 = f/8.5 (XZ-1) high dof
5.4mm = 28/5.4 = f/5.2 (G1 X) med dof

Tele:
9.6mm = 112/9.6 = f/11.7 or f/12 (XZ-1) very hi-dof only
10.4mm = 112/10.4 = f/10.8 or f/11 (G1 X) very hi-dof only

For portraiture, I prefer WA, such as 24mm, but here, 28mm is the 'acceptable'. Anything beyond 50+mm is unflattering. (for my ethnicity and facial features.) Those with 'bigger noses' would prefer 85+mm instead, where it de-emphasizes it; whereas on my kind, worsens it by flattening the face... the Western 'stereotype' flat-faced east-asian comes specifically from this approach.

what kind of dof do the above aperture diameters offer in WA?

FF: f=24mm prime (like on my FF dSLR)
3.3mm = 24/3.3 = f/7.3 (XZ-1) clearly common dof of digicams
5.4mm = 24/5.4 = f/4.4 (G1 X) clearly uncommon dof of digicams; but typically exclusive on dSLRs

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Mar 30, 2012)

Portrait @ 1.5m using 28mm FF equivalent FOV: widest available aperture.

XZ-1: @ f/1.8:
DOF = 2.03 m (relatively deep digicam dof territory)
Near Pt: 0.997 m (0.503 m in front of subject)
Far Pt: 3.03 m (1.53 m behind subject)

S95: @ f/2.0:
DOF = 2.25 m = relatively deep (digicam dof)
Near Pt: 0.997 m (0.503 m in front of subject)
Far Pt: 3.23 m (1.73 m behind subject)

S100: @ f/2.2:
DOF = 2.70 m = relatively deep (digicam dof)
Near Pt: 0.944 m (0.556 m in front of subject)
Far Pt: 3.65 m (2.15 m behind subject)

compared to:

G1 X: @ f/2.8:
DOF = 0.971 m = relatively shallow (APS-C territory or LT 1/2.1 digicam dof)
Near Pt: 1.16 m (0.34 m in front of subject)
Far Pt: 2.13 m (0.63 m behind subject)

APS-C: @ f/2.8:
DOF = 0.808 m = relatively shallow (1/2.5 XZ-1)
Near Pt: 1.20 m (0.30 m in front of subject)
Far Pt: 2.01 m (0.51 m behind subject)

FF: @ f/2.8:
DOF = 0.485 m = very shallow (1/4.2 XZ-1)
Near Pt: 1.30 m (0.20 m in front of subject)
Far Pt: 1.78 m (0.28 m behind subject)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Mar 29, 2012)

Typo, I think.

"Limited close focusing capabilities require frequent switches to macro focus mode
Built-in zoom lens is slow in comparison to
Slightly steep tone curve in the highlights can lead to blown highlights in high contrast scenes
DR correction, digital filters, noise reduction and other image parameters not available when shooting raw"

In comparison to?

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

whatever camera you can think of..

0 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Mar 29, 2012)

thanks, corrected

0 upvotes
csoberman
By csoberman (Mar 29, 2012)

I had a chance to use a G1X for a day recently. I currently have two G11's, and previously had a G9 and G7, so I'm quite familiar with the product line. I found the review to be generally accurate. Was quite happy with photo quality from the larger sensor. However, although focus was quicker than with the G11, it's not ready for prime time yet. This is very important to me, as I often use this camera as a backup (when not using a DSLR) for child and travel photography, and focus lag is the enemy!

One problem I had (as did the fellow who loaned me his early release G1X) was inadvertantly turning on movie mode. I did this two or three times when my right hand accidentally pushed the movie button.

I've tentatively decided to skip the G1X and wait to see what the next iteration will be....

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

I really hope the upcoming S110 and G2X will have higher res screen and up-to-date AF..Master mode will be very very nice,..

0 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 30, 2012)

It' amazing how certain camera lines seem to carry their heritage from the very first days of digital cameras, whether it's processing speed, focus adeptness, low light focus, macro, etc.

1 upvote
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Mar 29, 2012)

It's not the lack of interchangeable lenses that renders the G1X unattractive, it's the ridiculously out-dated out-classed AF for a 2012 camera that kills it. A clear sign that Canon has stagnated and is going nowhere.

4 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Mar 29, 2012)

Stagnated and going nowhere? Bit of a blanket statement. However this camera is a year too late. Come on Canon this camera with faster AF, a top notch EVF (or much better optical viewfinder) and brighter lens would compete! Ah but then who would want a 600D?
Odd choice really not to make it 4/3 so as to differentiate between models more clearly.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

Considering the AF that is available in other cameras of theirs, that is not an argument that holds much water. I think if anything it only points to compromises made to meet other design goals.

To me, your argument would be like saying a 1" sensor is laughable in 2012, so obviously Nikon cameras are terrible. Nevermind the D800 or D4, the j1 is all the proof I need.

1 upvote
D1N0
By D1N0 (Mar 29, 2012)

Great Camera but it should have interchangeable lenses.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

Yeah! And GPS! And WiFi! And everything else I want that goes against the very purpose of the camera's design intent!

2 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (Mar 29, 2012)

gps and wifi don't improve iq

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

hopefully we will see a Canon ILC soon

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Mar 29, 2012)

No, then it would be a 600D lite.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Mar 30, 2012)

@ howardroark- but the G1X isn't competing in the market against GPS and Wifi cameras. It's inevitably going to be competing against all these new ILC cameras that are more compact and offer so much more flexibility.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

T3. Every camera on the market is competing against every other camera. In what ways do ILC cameras offer much more flexibilty? Does every ILC lens offer stellar image quality? Ultra-fast minimum aperture? An ILC is a body, not a body and lens. Most of the lenses for ILC's are just as lousy as most lenses for DSLR's. You could buy the most awesome camera body in the world and then put a $200 lens on it and make it essentially worthless. This can be done just as easily paying $3,000 for the finest glass on the planet and then put a $20 filter on the end and make it produce the image quality of that fine $200 lens. Put a nice piece of glass on that ILC and you've got a huge camera.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Mar 29, 2012)

this would have been great 2 years ago. but, there are just so many options out there. i also think they have yet to bring out their mirrorless system

1 upvote
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Mar 29, 2012)

I am surprised by the long list of disadvantages and limitations in the Conclusions section and by the high rating in the end. It looks like in the end the camera was compared just with itself. And also surprised that the lens softness around edges is not mentioned.

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

It was mentioned on more than one occasion.

0 upvotes
MikeNeufeld30
By MikeNeufeld30 (Mar 29, 2012)

there is just simply way to much competition in the market as of today. t3i,nikon d5100, MFT cameras, sony new 5n and the list goes on. I will give it has a all in one uniqueness to it and good IQ.. For some it works and other not so much..

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Mar 29, 2012)

This is going to be a tough sell against all these new mirrorless ILC cameras that are available now, especially considering the size and price. And I say this as a Canon user. Hopefully, Canon will see fit to produce an ILC version with an EVF.

2 upvotes
Richard
By Richard (Mar 29, 2012)

It is a big fail. First to get notice from DSLR owners, It must have blazingly fast focus and a faster lens. It should at least compete with similar units on the market. Should perform at least to the level of a midrange crop sensor DSLR This camera looks almost pocketable, but it performs terrible. I think you can eliminate the DSLR rebel purchasers and those who own a 5d3. Who wants it now? Again, fail.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

That comment is a fail. I own the 7D and D10 right now. I have owned (in chronological order): Olympus OM2000 (film, fully manual), Sony S85, Canon 10D, Canon A620, Canon 30D, Canon SX20, Canon SX230, and now the Canon G1 X. That's not including all of the lenses I've owned and the many Nikon, Sony, Canon, etc. camera I've used. The autofocus is fine for a point and shoot. The lens is fine for a point and shoot (speed not being my only criteria when judging a lens). Performance is fine considering its size and image quality. The G1 X is given the unenviable role of sitting partially in the DSLR world and partially in the P&S world, which means P&S owners who want it do everything a DSLR can do will be disappointed, and DSLR owner who want it to do everything a P&S can do will be disappointed. Those who expect a little of both, like me, love this camera.

4 upvotes
Richard
By Richard (Mar 29, 2012)

I own both Canon and Nikon glass. My current Canon is a 7d. My 8mp Android phone takes all my snapshots now. I still have a Panasonic ZS7. Good reach, Decent outside pics, but it is slow. Slow AF, slow lens 1.8FPS, just slow but hey it was cheap and easy to shirt pocket. So now we have a bigger slower G1X point and shoot for 800 dollars, yep, a big fail. Until they fill the gap between camera phone and 7d with a pocketable or at least smaller camera like the GX1 with fast AF (as fast as a 5d2) 5 FPS and faster glass, there will be no place in my pocket for a GX1. If they can put a T3/2i in this price range, they should be able to get that into a GX1 as far as performance. When they do, they will attract the Low end DSLR purchasers as well as the 7d owners, they may even get the NEX croud when they see the lens slide in and you are able to slid it into your coat pocket.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

Pricepoint does not determine what can be done within the confines of physics and existing technology. The proportion of the total cost spent on a given camera feature determines how good that feature is going to be, but failing to balance all the features would make for a useless camera. Crappy lenses are cheap. Crappy sensors are cheap. Putting the 1D X AF sensor in the T3 won't increase the resolution or maximum frames per second it can shoot....would you pay an extra few hundred dollars for that version of the T3? Do you think many people would pay $10,000 for an EF 600 L lens to put it on a T3? Balance.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Richard
By Richard (Mar 30, 2012)

You go off on a tangent. Put everything that is in the T3 except the sensor and lens. Use the smaller sensor it has now then add a faster lens. You should be able to get it down into a T3 price range, maybe less. T2I specs with IS lens which is selling for 649.
Product Highlights
18.0 MP CMOS (APS-C) Sensor
Full HD 1080p Video
Advanced Live View
3.0" 1.04 Million Dot Clear View LCD
Up to 3.7 fps RAW, JPEG, or RAW+JPEG
ISO 100-6400, Expandable to 12800

Put the smaller sensor, and boost the FPS to 5 in with the 150 dollar price difference. We are not breaking the laws of thermodynamics here.The D90 has 4.5FPS at retail of 849 so. This is absolutely physically possiblewith in budget or maybe move the price to $ 899. That would be a great point and shoot camera, and yes I would buy one..

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

Then cram some high quality glass into a small package with that sensor and suddenly what was made easy by having lots of space, a mirror box, PDAF sensor, and putting all the AF mechanism off-board in a removeable lens is now making things much more difficult.

1 upvote
Prognathous
By Prognathous (Mar 29, 2012)

Looks like a great camera. Too bad it uses the worst kind of LCD articulation (side hinge), and a tunnel-view OVF instead of an EVF. Still, quite tempting.

2 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

Funny, I think the side mounted single hinge articulating LCD is the ideal version of an articulating LCD. What do the others do that's better?

4 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

agree with howardoark
single hinge is Canon's patent

0 upvotes
Joesiv
By Joesiv (Mar 29, 2012)

I like the side hinge, I had it with my CP5000, and S3 IS, it's great and very flexible for all conditions. I'm not sure what other version you prefer...
R1 style (top hinge)
FZ50 style (bottom hinge)
Sony Style (no hinge but just tilting

I've had bottom hinge and it's horrible for use on tripod, as you can't do self portraits (if it swivels at all while on a tripod shoe).

Tilt only ones do not work while in portrait position.

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Mar 29, 2012)

Have you used a side hinge LCD? I found it pretty useful on the A650IS and G11 as it is useful for portrait and landscape (orientation) shots eg up a tree etc

0 upvotes
Prognathous
By Prognathous (Mar 30, 2012)

Yes, I did you side hinge articulated screens, and they're the worst kind compared to virtually any other design. More details here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=37689663

0 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (Mar 29, 2012)

So, is it 76% or 78%?...

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 29, 2012)

It's 76%. Where are you seeing 78%?

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

i saw 78% im pretty sure.

0 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Mar 29, 2012)

I swear I saw 78% the first time I looked.

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

does it matter?

0 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (Mar 29, 2012)

@Mitsuoka: not really, just a matter of consistency. Lol, you're one funny bloke R Butler...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (Mar 30, 2012)

So it's a 76% Silver Award. Just to compare, the G12 got a 73% Gold Award last year.

0 upvotes
Tim in upstate NY
By Tim in upstate NY (Mar 29, 2012)

I don't understand why that awful viewfinder is listed as a pro instead of a con. It's barely better than not having any viewfinder and terrible compared to the EVF's that the competition is using.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

because it's optical...

0 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Mar 29, 2012)

As standard equipment, a mediocre viewfinder is better than no viewfinder. The latter is what many mirrorless cameras have.

3 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Mar 29, 2012)

An $800 camera that can't handle moving kids/pets. :-(

For about the same price, you can get a Canon T3i or Nikon D5100.

10 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 30, 2012)

Obviously if you shoot action, this camera was not designed for you. But the same could be said of the x100 and it sells well for a certain kind of photographer.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Mar 29, 2012)

Unless you need the zoom, there are other choices out there like the Fuji X100, Sigma DP1m or DP2m (when released), and a host of m4/3 cams if you prefer the small body design.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

And unless you need the image quality, user interface, etc etc etc all in one package.

0 upvotes
Tasveer Unlimited
By Tasveer Unlimited (Mar 30, 2012)

Are you sales agent of canon- howardroark? Don't be so blind towards G1X. In todays world, most have sense to analyze the features of a camera.

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

It's a crowded market, but the exact combination of features in the G1-X is so far unique, so if you want those features in that combination, the camera is attractive. Especially once the price settles.

It's not for me, but for the "must have big zoom range, big sensor in small camera" crowd it seems competitive.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

No, I'm a happy owner of the G1 X. I'm an engineer by education and a paper pusher by trade. Many new people don't know anything about cameras. For example, many people judge the quality of a lens by its maximum aperture. While that can be an important part of the lens, it says nothing for actual detail resolution. I'm trying to add some perspective, that's all.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

it´s the first version from canon.

i don´t realy need another compact yet.
so im happy to wait for the mark2 or mark 3 version. :)
im sure canon will put a faster lens in and a better AF.

then the G series will be a perfect camera for people who don´t want a interchangeable lens system. the build quality is great.

now canon only has to anounce the CSC system in august or photokina.

seems at april 16 we will see the canon 4K video camera.

and then ...maybe.... at photokina canon will announce the 30+ MP camera that will come 2013.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

No, I'm sure they won't put a faster lens or better AF on the next version. What would make you think that?

1 upvote
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Mar 29, 2012)

fanboyism..dream on

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (Mar 30, 2012)

Canon G2 to G6 f/2.0. What since? Olympus C-2040 with a f 1.8 lens. Etc. The camera makers spent more time on the lenses in the early days I believe. I realize zoom ratios have zoomed! But software is being used to cover a multitude of sins. That is what I miss from the film days-the idiosyncrasies of different, quality lenses.

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

@Gesture

Recent cameras with fast, small, and cheap lenses are heavily dependent of software corrections. On one hand, why not? On the other, it takes the fun out of the hobby somehow.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 29, 2012)

Sweet! I don't see anything all that surprising. Glad I didn't wait, although this is pretty quick turn around time between announcement and review.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RPJG
By RPJG (Mar 30, 2012)

Aah, there's nothing like confirmation bias to keep people happy! :-)

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 30, 2012)

I wasn't glad because my opinons were confirmed, I was glad because I would have had to go another month without a great camera. I didn't need a review to confirm or deny it, and whether you like the camera or not there are certain misconceptions that people around here are using to make decisions. I just disagree with some of their interpretations of various aspects of the camera.

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 525
123