Previous page Next page

Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review

May 2014 | By Jeff Keller
Buy on Amazon.com From $749.00


Review based on a production Canon PowerShot G1 X II

One of the most exciting cameras that debuted in 2012 was Canon's PowerShot G1 X. It featured a 1.5" sensor (which is only 20% smaller than APS-C), 28-112mm lens (albeit a moderately slow one), fully articulating LCD, and optical viewfinder (a rarity at the time). The result was one of the first semi-pocketable cameras to offer image quality that rivaled that of interchangeable lens cameras. The G1 X was far from perfect: the lens' maximum aperture range of F2.8-5.8 wasn't great, AF performance and minimum focus distance were disappointing, continuous shooting rates were poor, and battery life was downright lousy.

With the 'Mark II' version of the PowerShot G1 X, Canon has addressed many of the shortcomings of its predecessor. For a start, the G1 X II has a faster lens that covers a wider focal range and can shoot much closer to a subject. It also promises a faster, more sophisticated AF system, improved continuous shooting, dual control dials around the lens, and Wi-Fi with NFC. The LCD has also been redesigned: it now tilts upward 180° and downward 45° - instead of flipping out to the side - and touch functionality has been added, as well. The camera is also significantly smaller than its forebear, now looking more like an over-grown S-series, rather than an out-sized G12. Something that got sacrificed in all this was the optical viewfinder, but fear not, you can buy a tilting XGA EVF for $300.

Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II key features

  • 12.8 megapixel 1.5"-type CMOS sensor
  • Digic 6 processor
  • 24-120mm equivalent F2.0-3.9 lens with optical IS
  • Dual (customizable) control rings
  • Tilting 3", 1.04M dot touchscreen LCD
  • 5.2 fps continuous shooting
  • Maintains same angle-of-view at 4:3 and 3:2
  • Wi-Fi with NFC with remote control via smartphone
  • 1080/30p video recording
  • Optional XGA electronic viewfinder

The big story remains the G1 X II's 1.5"-type sensor which is around 5.6 times larger than the one found in Canon's own PowerShot G16. The result is still a fair bit smaller than the APS-C-sized sensors used in Canon's DSLRs, but then the camera is quite a bit smaller, too. It's interesting to compare the EOS-M, which is similar in body size, to the G1 X II: the built-in lens and smaller sensor allow the PowerShot to remain much smaller than the 'M' would be, were there an equivalent lens available.

While the total pixel count of 15 million is the same as on the G1 X, the G1 X Mark II only uses around 13 million (versus 14.3).

The G1 X Mark II's pixel dimensions show that it's cropping from a sensor that's larger than the imaging area, allowing it to offer the same angle-of-view for both the 3:2 and 4:3 aspect ratios - something that the original G1 X could not do.

The 18.7 x 12.4 mm sensor size that Canon has been quoting appears to refer to the 3:2 crop area - the sensor itself is the same size as the one in the original G1 X. To find out more, read our original first look article.

Another significant change on the G1 X II is in the lens department. Gone is the comparatively slow 28-112 equiv. F2.8-5.8 lens on the G1 X - replaced by a much more appealing 24-120mm equivalent F2.0-3.9 lens. The use of a smaller sensor area means these numbers aren't directly comparable, but the new lens is certainly brighter. Where the minimum focus distance on the G1 X was an unhelpful 20cm (and 40cm in most modes), the new lens can be just 5cm away from its subject. Canon has also improved the autofocus system, and claims that the G1 X has the 'the fastest in Canon compact camera history.'

The combination of the camera's fast lens and 1.5" sensor pays big dividends, as illustrated below:

The above chart shows the changes in 35mm equivalent aperture as the equivalent focal length increases. This chart allows you to see the effect of the different aperture and lens ranges, taking into account the different sensor sizes. The G1 X II starts off very well, and bumps into three other cameras (the original G1 X, Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II, and Canon Rebel with kit lens) at 28mm. That doesn't last long, as the G1 X quickly pulls away from all but the Rebel until you reach 50mm, at which point the G1 X Mark II is in a class by itself.

So what does this all mean? Simply put, it means that the G1 X II allows for shallower depth-of-field than the cameras that are 'above it' on the chart. One could also make the assumption that the G1 X Mark II has the potential for better low light performance than the other cameras shown.

Getting back to new features: the LCD has been redesigned and can flip up by 180 degrees (you know, for selfies) and down by 45 degrees. It's also touch-enabled, which allows for all of the controls that you'd expect from such a feature. However, this is a step backwards from the hinged, fully articulated screen on the original G1 X, that made it much more flexible.

While the optical viewfinder from the G1 X is gone (and to be honest, it wasn't very good), Canon offers an XGA (1024 x768 pixel) EVF that attaches to a special connector on the hot shoe and can tilt upward 90 degrees. The bad news is that the EVF costs $300.

One final feature of note shouldn't be surprising in this day and age, and that's Wi-Fi. You can control the camera remotely and send photos to social networking sites, cloud storage, or a computer. NFC (near-field communication) is also supported, which allows you to pair the camera with compatible smartphones by tapping them together.

Specs Compared

As you've probably gathered by now, there are quite a few differences between the G1 X Mark II and its predecessor. The chart below lists the more significant ones:

  PowerShot G1 X PowerShot G1 X Mark II
Effective resolution 14.3 megapixel 12.8 megapixel
Processor Digic 5 Digic 6
Multi-aspect No Yes (3:2, 4:3)
Lens focal range 28-112mm equiv. 24-120mm equiv.
Lens maximum aperture F2.8-5.8 F2.0-3.9
Minimum focus distance (Normal mode) 40cm (W), 1.3m (T) 5cm (W), 40cm (T)
Minimum focus distance (Macro mode) 20cm (W), 85cm (T) 5cm (W), 40cm (T)
Control rings None (front control dial) 2
LCD design Fully articulating Tilting (180 up/45 down)
Touchscreen No Yes
Viewfinder Optical No (optional EVF)
Continuous shooting 2 fps 5 fps
Max video resolution 1080/24p 1080/30p
Wi-Fi No Yes (with NFC)
Battery life (CIPA) 250 shots 240 shots

With the exception of battery life and degree of LCD movement (and, for some people, the optical viewfinder), the G1 X II has much more impressive specs than its predecessor. You can see the cosmetic changes on the Body & Design page.

Accessories

There's no shortage of extras available for the G1 X Mark II. The most notable are the electronic viewfinder and custom grip.

The EVF-DC1 ($299) is an XGA electronic viewfinder with 2.36 million dots (a 1024x 768 pixel display). As shown above, the viewfinder can tilt upward by 90 degrees. It has a built-in eye sensor, or you can turn it on via the button on its left side. While the resolution of the viewfinder is quite high, the refresh rate isn't nearly as nice as the main LCD.

There will be some people who decry the loss of the G1 X's built-in viewfinder but, given how small and imprecise it was, we feel the option to include of a considerably better finder (or not, if you don't want to spend the extra), is a reasonable alternative. It does, of course, mean that you need to spend more money to get a camera with a viewfinder, but that effective price increase over the G1 X also gains the faster, more versatile lens, smaller form factor and all the camera's other improvements.

Standard grip Custom grip

Those with large hands may find the G1 X Mark II's grip a bit lacking. Canon offers the GR-DC1A custom grip ($29), which is more substantial. Switching the grip out just involves removing a pair of screws, swapping the pieces, and then screwing the new one back in.

Other accessories include an underwater housing (WP-DC53), 58mm filter adapter (FA-DC58E), lens hood (LH-DC80), and remote shutter release (RS-60E3).


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
101
I own it
241
I want it
55
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 689
1234
rccasgar

I had it yesterday in my hands together with RX10, and could try them a little bit. Decision is done thanks to this and I will be upgrading my G1X to G1X Mk2... it feels so great in your hands, rings on the lens are extremely useful, size and manual controls are perfect for enjoying shooting with the camera (something I don't think that happens with RX100, that's why I was evaluating RX10)...

So as I think I won't be loosing IQ with the change, and I will be enjoying several things on the new model (close focusing distance improvement, rings on the lens barrel which will make much more comfortable manual focusing, tactile LCD, faster lens, faster autofocus,...), will go for it for sure.

2 upvotes
rugosa

I'll keep my G1X, this review doesn't make me want to go out and buy the new model. My G1X gives me great shots when I don't have my DSLR with me or when I'm diving. All cameras will clip highlights, that is what the EV adjustment is for. I shoot in Raw + JPEG at the same time just as I do with my DSLR in case I want to print a shot. No single camera will do everything perfect you just use the ones that match the way you take photos.

1 upvote
sheepr

Never mind the outdated sensor. Many people will still buy this camera, like me because its features fit perfectly my needs for a travel compact despite its relatively lower IQ. For similar reasons I have bought the Mk I despite the slower focus and lack of macro. Is it really that difficult for Canon to deploy a modern sensor in this camera? Probably not. In a year or so I believe, Canon will release the Mk III, with an excellent sensor, and may be with the optical viewfinder and fully articulating LCD put back in. Then they will grab another $800 from me. Isn't that how Canon usually do their business?

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Frenske

Sony pay attention: this is the lens characteristics people want to see on the RX 100 Mk III: fast and wide! A slow 28-100mm is just not cutting it!

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
1 upvote
splendic

Yeah, but Sony wants to continue to make the RX100 pocketable, so thaaaaat's not going to happen.

0 upvotes
cainn24

And the comparatively massive G1X II is "cutting" into my balls when I try to pocket it.

3 upvotes
smallLebowski

I'm surprised you guys don't know. It's not a secret anymore, Sony RX100Mk III specs are known already for a months or so.
1) Zeiss 24-70mm f/1.8-2.8 lens which is wider and brighter than the previous Zeiss 28-100mm f/1.8-4.9 lens
2) 0.39″ SVGA electronic viewfinder pop-up OLED viewfinder with 1,440,000 dots.
3) Built-in ND filter
4) XAVC-S video recording just like the Sony A7s
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-hot-first-rx100m3-images-leaked/
it will have FAST AF 10fps and much more.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Ken Heid

smallLebrowski said it perfectly. That is why I have the RX100M3 on pre-order.

If you were to get the EVF for the Canon it ends up $300 more than the RX100M3

If I were considering a larger camera as a second, I think I would wait to see what the RX10 M2 might be.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
MPA1

No OVF or EVF, no buy. I'd rather have a good EVF and lose the LCD to be honest.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
cainn24

Indeed. This camera is a tragedy for that reason alone. I'm generally cautious about laying down big bucks on fixed lens compacts, but I would have thrown some of it to the wind if there had been an EVF in this puppy. The price of the add-on accessory that supposedly makes up the difference is beyond ridiculous. Great marketing though, because people will more easily part with their cash if they think they are getting something "extra" for it (think G1X II with built-in EVF at $150 more [too expensive right?] vs the add-on EVF at $300 more [somehow that's not so bad, because, you know, it's an extra thing!]). But good luck using the EVF without the G1X. Enjoy your $1100 compact.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Solar Eagle

Why not cover the new macro capability in this review? It would be nice to know what kind of magnification you get from 5cm at 24mm, since Canon isnt telling us. Even a simple mention of the MM or coverage area would have been fine.

0 upvotes
Timmbits

wouldn't macro be quoted in something like 2:1, for example?
and wouldn't you much rather be doing macro at around 60mm or so?

1 upvote
Mike FL

For "Why not cover the new macro capability in this review", and here is the review from other source:

"...Soft-focus halo effect when shooting macro images at f/2..."

And more:
"... Inconsistent autofocus accuracy. Edges never sharpen, even at narrow apertures..."

3 upvotes
Timmbits

@Mike:
you don't shoot macro at f2. not ever if you want to capture more than a sliver of depth. it just doesn't make sense - that test is irrelevant - it's like evaluating a ferrari for it's capabilities as a dune-buggy in the mud.
testing macro at f/3.5 (or smaller) would make much more sense.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

The term macro is really being perverted when used as a synonym for close focus distance. Every lens has a minimum focus distance, and that isn't macro. They had to call it something I guess, but they should give the magnification in parenthesis along with the focus distance. Macro is 1:1 or better.

1 upvote
GaryJP

G1 X MkII shoots macros

You're welcome

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53672739

3 upvotes
Timmbits

@GaryJP: the images I see are not full size... they are cropped!
You seem to misunderstand what macro really is.
you're welcome.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53953449

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53958301

2 upvotes
Timmbits

Those images are very noisy. then I saw why. why are such high ISOs being used?
it is always hard to get lemons or keychains to stay still while doing long exposures.
or is it a question of getting rid of some halo effect that someone mentioned?

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
GaryJP

No. It''s shooting hand held in low light. Just knocked them off quickly at my desk when the sun was barely out. No sustenance for your beef there I am afraid.

2 upvotes
Timmbits

not beef. concern!
because I am considering this camera.

0 upvotes
infocus

I have the original G 1X and have loved using it. I find the image quality to be very good (and I used to teach college photography, if that means anything).

I looked closely at the image comparisons between the original and the Mark II, both on DPR and Imaging-Resource. I compared low light, high ISO to see the quality. IMHO, the Mark II sometimes produces sharper detail than the original G 1X, especially on the images from Imaging-Resource. Here on DPR, I saw a mix. Sometimes the original is a bit better and sometimes the Mark II is. They are very close as the review states.

That being said, I miss the 5x optical zoom of my G11. I'm not sure about the screen. I do like the fully articulating viewer.

0 upvotes
Valiant Thor

I had high hopes for this camera but unfortunately no 60p video and with the upcoming announcement of the Sony RX100 M3, I'm gonna wait.

2 upvotes
Timmbits

thanks for the heads up - I had no idea an rx100m3 was coming out. however, due to the smaller sensor size, it would need a much faster lens to compete with this f2 coupled to a larger sensor - but with an aperture wider than f/2 it would face considetable challenges as a zoom lens. I don't think that is going to happen with such a zoom range - but with Sony you never know.

0 upvotes
Mike FL

Timmbits;

From what I can see that you do NOT have any ideal about the performances of RX100M2 and Canon G1X-MK2, Sensors, Glass, or IQs...

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Mike, he has a very good handle on it. Some people like yourself hear what supports their opinion and ignore everything else. Unless you're doing focus stacking of about 10 shots with a G1 X II wide open the f/2 soft focus/halo is of no consequence because you should be shooting stopped down at least a couple of stops from wide open. Perhaps Canon should include that little warning in a firmware update or require f/4 or higher in "macro" mode.

2 upvotes
GaryJP

I shoot both. My choice in most situations of G1X Mk2 is based on hands on experience. But even if I did not, there's some info here.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53631243

Or indeed in the review, the part about noise, which shows the queen's head detail far superior

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii/9

0 upvotes
LiSkynden

"the kens element is so big that it cant have an auto lens cap" ... someone said when G1X was released.
Does this mean the lens is now smaller?
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii/images/versus-g1x-front.jpg

... or was it just a load of BS, like i thought?

0 upvotes
LiSkynden

*the LENS element

1 upvote
Timmbits

you actually care about that?

1 upvote
xzactly

I’ve had my G1X Mrk II for a few days.
I like it, but when I tried to use my (Buff) RF flash triggers,
In Manual mode, the display is black, as if it had no flash attached.
Setting 1/500th, f8, ISO 100, not recognizing the RF trigger.
Display lights up to focus, then black again. No flash control.
In Av it won't set the sync speed. Unless you release the flash,
then slide on the RF trigger, then it sets sync at 1/60th.
So, pretty much my RF triggers don't work.
They did on the G12, G9 and every Canon DSLR I've had.
Not sure if they'll do a firmware update to fix this.
Canon 580 II flash works fine, but I remote trigger my setups.
Wish I would have kept my G12 at this point.

Images look Good, Bokeh is nice, Still checking it out.
Odds are about 50/50, it’s going back at this point.

0 upvotes
Timmbits

if you do not see the value of this over a g12... and care more about an outdated flash that works with a g12, this is probably too much camera for you.

0 upvotes
splendic

Butthurt much? Or are xzactly's specific needs just too much photography for you?

0 upvotes
xzactly

The G1X is Not enough camera for me,,,
By not supporting third party devices, the hot shoe should be custom like Minolta did in the 80's. The reason I left that brand for Canon, and I felt they had the best auto focusing system,,, and they did.
Not being able to RF trigger studio setups is disheartening.
Yes, I can set to manual, lowest power, tilt it a different direction,,, What a pain, and outside,,,not so good. And in a wedding setting, flashes going off constantly,,, Nope.
I push my equipment, and love to control light remotely.
It is pretty cool you can steer the flash around, almost bounce it backwards,, a bit. Pop a post-um note on for a reflector.
Over all, I really dig this camera!!! Image is great! I'm sure the 5D III will have an edge with the "L" lens, what a great compact with a few boo boo's. Looking forward to the mark III.
And hoping this trend doesn't creep into SLR's, will they only recognize Canon OEM flash accessories too??

0 upvotes
Timmbits

Why were you talking about "studio setups" and cameras with a 1/1.6" sensor in the same thread? I came across as if you were b!tching about peripherals for a consumer camera with a tiny sensor not working with a better camera - I don't want to call it high end... but it is certainly in a completely different league than your g12 and g9.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RichRMA

Puts me in mind of an old movie, "Creepshow" where one of the characters in one of the stories said, "Mr so-and-so was a (deleted expletive) dinosaur that couldn't find its way to the tar pits." Yes, I know, the tar pits post-dated the dinosaur eras. But the point is that Canon by releasing this stuff is only postponing the inevitable, which is to enter properly the mirror-less market with a real camera with an EVF and a decent sensor.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Grobb

Using a different camera, with a different processor, lens and picture that are totally different will give you much different results, duh. You used the G1X mkI, DPR used the G1X mkII, so maybe, just maybe that is why their results were different from yours. Therefore, your test results are worthless.

1 upvote
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

My own attempt to recreate the review dynamic range/noise tests.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53648612

4 upvotes
meland

Ooops! If I was DPR I think I might be wondering how we managed to screw up that aspect of the review so badly. I guess mistakes happen but perhaps DPR would care to respond?

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

I think they've moved on. I tried to say that I thought their test was not really done properly and I was told it wasn't a test but they were showing their observations....but it says "test" on that page, so..... The point is there is no method, nothing I can repeat, and what is shown isn't something I know how to interpret. Is my test better than theirs? Were my shadows as underexposed as theirs? I think that is what's really going on here: if you have a high contrast scene and your shadows are on the verge of being crushed, all you have to do is crank up the Shadows slider to see noise and lack of detail. Shocking? Oh, another camera has a lower noise floor (uhhhhh.....I don't think I've ever heard that term, but okay)? What's the difference then? One stop or two or three? How underexposed can I get my shadows without hitting the floor? No idea. I personally have not yet been able to do it with several of my own G1 X shots.

0 upvotes
Grobb

Using a different camera, with a different processor, lens and picture that are totally different will give you much different results, duh. You used the G1X mkI, DPR used the G1X mkII, so maybe, just maybe that is why their results were different from yours. Therefore, your test results are worthless.

2 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

You really think the processor makes a difference? Same sensor means same sensor characteristics. The processor offloads data from the A/D converter and the RAW file is not altered. I'm afraid you don't know how cameras work.

2 upvotes
Noee

I, like others have been waiting for a formal review of this camera since February. Thank you Jeff; I remain impressed by your professionalism and extensive camera knowledge. As a Canon user for many years (G6, G11, G15, Xsi, T3i, 6D), I have become married to the line as a result of collecting the necessary accessories (speedlights mostly). I've been spoiled by Canon as I shoot in RAW mode and use their Digital Photo Pro (DPP) software to correct/fine-tune white balance/exposure, saturation, sharpness, DNR, etc. Pardon my ignorance, but what does Sony have to offer in the way of software vs. Canon? I've been happy with the G15 and wouldn't have a desire for a new camera EXCEPT that it doesn't have an articulating screen and the screen is SHINY! In South Florida (bright sunlight) one can't see what's being photographed. I much prefer the articulating (matte) screen of the G11/12. My G1Xii will arrive on Monday - I'm already shopping for an anti-glare film. Any suggestions?

2 upvotes
Heywoodphoto

If you have issues with glare perhaps the new EVF would be right up your alley? Did you order one as well? It does seem a bit pricey though.

0 upvotes
1360 mmm

G1 X quality is better G1 X Mark II..!!!

6 upvotes
meland

No, it's the same. Except at 24mm (FF equivalent) and in its close focus ability where the MkII is superior.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Nomorefilmman

TO: ANYONE WHO PURCHASED AND USED THE NEW G1X MARK II:

Dpreview report says several times: "Whole camera pauses for about 1.5 seconds after the shutter release is halfway-pressed."

Do you experience this? I own a G1X Mark I, and at the "Aperture Preferred" setting I mostly use, I normally experience approximately .75 sec delay for a response, or to shoot an image. I never experience 1.5 seconds, unless the camera is having problems focusing for some reason (darkness, featureless target scene, etc.).

If you experience this delay, under what circumstances?

I like my G1X Mark I a lot, having adjusted for its negatives; takes great images for me. I am interested in buying the G1X Mark II for its new features, but for the G1X II with 1.5 seconds delay each first shot, or halfway-pressing the shutter, I don't know if I could live with that; I could live with all of the other report negatives, having experience with the G1X Mark I.

Any help will be very much appreciated.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP

Dpreview report says several times: "Whole camera pauses for about 1.5 seconds after the shutter release is halfway-pressed."

Mine does not. I just tried it twice. Perhaps this only happens if it has a problem focusng, or it may be to do with some other setting. I advise going into a shop and trying it for yourself if you can. It just does not happen for me.

I have it set on AV, RAW, and with the smaller focusing area. I also have it set to magnify the focus zone.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Nomorefilmman

POSSIBLE EXPLANATION OF 1.5 SEC PAUSE?

Perhaps the 1.5 second camera pause only happens when working with the "inner lens dial", when it is rarely unresponsive?

As I looked back in the in-depth G1X Mark II Report to the places where the 1.5 second pause is mentioned, it is where the rare "inner lens dial" unresponsiveness is mentioned.

0 upvotes
GaryJP

If you can, I really recommend just trying it for yourself. I just can't replicate that behaviour. Perhaps see if you can. I have mine set so that the front lens ring delivers exposure compensation.

1 upvote
Nomorefilmman

GaryJP: Many thanks for your thorough checking and suggestions.

I'll try your suggestion about trying it myself when my local photo dealers receive back-ordered stock for display; right now none have the newly released G1X II. One dealer will only special order. I'm in no hurry, so I can wait.

0 upvotes
mcshan

It is .62448 for me.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Timmbits

omg 1.5 seconds would be disastrous!

that would remind me of a crappy 2mp tiny-sensor olympus I once tried a long time ago - it was just unusable.

anyone who can, please do report back on this when you have more info.

1 upvote
Davidbailey

Looking at the images when compared to the mk1 they appear inferior, I have the g1x mk1 and think I will be keeping it, this silly comparison with the tiny sensor sony is exactly that silly. The nearest comparison with the g1x is the fuji x100-ricoh gr. The rx100 is a fantastic small sensor camera I know I have had one. But to me it's nearest rival is the lx7 compared with size plus the sensor is nearer the size than that of the g1x. The original g1x might not have the fastest lens but the fact that it of high quality glass and you can use 1600 ISO with no loss of detail more than make this a match for a entry level dslr. Can't wait for comments on this.

4 upvotes
rccasgar

I also have G1X, but willing to move to a new camera as I really like the new options with rings in the lens barrel (manual focus with rear dial in G1X is quite uncomfortable).

This morning was comparing G1X Mk2 with Sony RX10 at imagingresource.com and it's true that resolution/sharpeness of RX10 is better (actually I think it can compete with 5D3/DF/others, at least in the samples in this site, only Olympus EM1 seemed better to me when chceking Resolution sample, at the bottom centerclogo/address). Anyway, I can live with G1X Mk2 sharpeness if I check not-lab samples, so I think decision is made finally.

3 upvotes
infocus

FYI, the URL is http://imaging-resource.com

0 upvotes
Robert Garcia NYC
4 upvotes
binauralbeats

Finally, an $800 camera that will allow me to take selfies.

5 upvotes
Le Kilt

I've been waiting for Canon to include all the good features in a G series camera, and they won't. Why oh why not Canon? Each time the G series camera has one or two of these nice features put back and one or two removed. Arrrg!

- Fast and wide lens (eg 24mm and better than f/2.8)
- Full tilt and swival screen
- Optical viewfinder

Grrr...

6 upvotes
JackM

I agree, leave ALL that stuff in the G1X, and make an S1X as the more compact version. I'd take less zoom (like 3x), no VF, no tilt screen, no hotshoe, just that nice big sensor and a great lens in a truly pocketable form.

This thing is somewhere in the middle.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Timmbits

I'm sorry. I didn't need the EVF as I hardly use it, and I hate the swing-out swivel screens. I should never have let my preferences be known.

It's all my fault.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Dailou

..........continuation from below the need this baby fulfills and is due to canons commitment to the underwater guys and gails, they always at the time of intro have a underwater housing you can get which in comparison to underwater housings is reasonably priced. with the better wide angle, nice viewing display , fast fstop, and decent sensor size, canons good build quality, and canons commitment to providing uw housings this will be a nice small package that should get good underwater results. (see the first half of my reason i like this camera). this is why i like this camera - by the way i have been shooting with this thing for the last 2 weeks and it is pleasant to use and the results are good

0 upvotes
Paul JM

Do you think that 'pleasant to use' and 'results are good' is the glowing endorsement that a new Canon camera would once have drawn ? They ought to be leading the pack, but have become reactive. My cupboard is full of old Canon bodies that barely see the light of day. I use the 7D for sports events, and the 5d mk2 for underwater use and video, but thats it. The brand has been left in the dust

3 upvotes
GaryJP

Canon is rich. Sony stock is junk. Define "left in the dust".

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
wkeller

I love my Canon cams, but for $201 more locally here, you could get a "junk" A7 body that, even wrapped in a sock, would embarrass that G1X Mark Second Attempt.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
GaryJP

And how will you use it without a lens or two?

I think you miss the concept of an all in one point and shoot versus a system. I have a M43 system, and, on another level, the 5D MkII, and the 1D MkIII.

I don't kid myself that the three different levels are the same. I am amazed by those that keep trying to do so. On the most basic point and shoot level, the only competition is RX100 MkII versus this. The Canon wins as far as I am concerned.

3 upvotes
BarnET

Not really the Panasonic GM-1 is also smaller as the g1x. Similar price and sensor size too.

BTW you prefer to buy Canon so that some filthy rich investor will get even more dividend. That is an truly ridiculous buying reason.

1 upvote
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Barn, Gary was just saying that people keep predicting that Canon will fade away into the sunset as its sales remain very strong. Why is that? Is it because they make cameras that don't get in the way of taking a picture and produce excellent images? Yep, that's it.

4 upvotes
GaryJP

BarnET. You seem to be having difficulties with the concept of the difference between a point and shoot and an interchangeable lens system camera. When I want the latter I'll use my OMD EM1, which does not replace the G1X MkII. And as for stock, well I do feel safer buying from a company that is not downrated to almost junk status.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2014/01/27/sony-credit-cut-to-junk-status-as-smartphones-cannibalize-its-tv-and-pc-businesses/

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
MarcLee

You are safer investing with a company making its investors rich than one making them poor.

2 upvotes
BarnET

Who cares about the difference of ilc and compact. The gm-1 and g1x fulfill the exact same role. An take everywhere camera with high quality versatility and limited bulk. The problem is that the sensor in the g1x is anything but quality.

The em-1 is the size of an small dslr so it's just more of a burden. It's great ergonomics make up for it though. That fulfils other needs.

0 upvotes
GaryJP

"Who cares about the difference of ilc and compact?"

People who have a need for a stantalone obviously. Like me. Even though I already have a good m43 system that thrashes the GM1.

" The gm-1 and g1x fulfill the exact same role."

No they don't actually. But keep bashing.

The only real competition here is between the Canon and the Sony, and having both on my shelf at this very minute I can tell you the Sony is no competition. Mostly on colour.

I can work with the Canon sensors. Dynamic range is an issue for specific SITUATIONS, not every image, and half those choosing to use it as a stick to beat a dog here (a) don't understand that, and (b) likely never shoot RAW and make the most of the DR of WHATEVER camera they have.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

The GM1 with a 24-120 zoom lens is how big again? You think this fills that need or that fill this need, but the G1 X I or II fills no need? Nice to meet you, Center of the Universe.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Menneisyys

"Even though I already have a good m43 system that thrashes the GM1."

A m43 camera that has significantly better IQ than the GM1? Which one?

"The only real competition here is between the Canon and the Sony, and having both on my shelf at this very minute I can tell you the Sony is no competition. Mostly on colour. "

So, why do you think the GM1 with the 12-32 doesn't qualify? It has a significantly better-quality lens than the RX100 (better resolution, MUCH better OIS, less need for in-camera post correction etc.; its only downside is being somewhat slower) and the overall package is almost as small as the RX100. And the sensor is WAAAY better than that of the G1X II.

0 upvotes
GaryJP

I have the OMD EM1 with the f2.8 lens.

A system camera is not a point and shoot. The lens is slower than the G1X, with about half the focal length at the long end. It's not much cheaper than the G1X. And it's a smaller sensor. Slow lenses were the big bane of the m43 for me UNTIL that f2.8 came along. I am not about to take a step backwards.

Imaging resource also shows me a little more noise and less detail on the GM1 even by ISO 400, and I frequently shoot low light at that speed or more. For my purposes the GM1 sensor in no way performs better.

incidentally, I HAVE used Panasonic M43, and found the dynamic range worse than the Canon.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/1795662.jpg?X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJ7ICBHXPIPPMTNCQ/20140512/us-east-1/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20140512T130408Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=e5da395c68da0b7a888209c157916c4bbc726a0b61286220997addfddb867965

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Menneisyys

"I have the OMD EM1 with the f2.8 lens. "

It's not really in the same category as the GM1 and the RX100... The latter two are (with the GM1, more or less) pocketable cameras, the EM1 in no way so, particularly not with any non-compact f/2.8 lens (particularly if you meant the Olympus M Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro).

This thread only compared pocketable cameras - they are what I too referred to.

0 upvotes
GaryJP

You asked me specifically which m43 camera had better IQ than the GM1. If you don't think you'll like the answer, don't ask the question.

And my comparisons were with the G1X MkII.

1 upvote
Menneisyys

"You asked me specifically which m43 camera had better IQ than the GM1. If you don't think you'll like the answer, don't ask the question. "

Yup, I should have stated I only meant P&S size category (the subject of this very thread), not large(r) ones.

0 upvotes
BarnET

the point is that even the EM-1 doesn't thrash the Gm-1. it's likely the same sensor. albeit with no AA filter and a better processor.

about panasonic bad dynamic range that is easy. the g3 and gh2 sensor found in many panasonic left a lot to be desired. But the GX7 GM-1 and now GH-4 are actually outperforming all canon apsc sensors.

besides the G1x sensor is not really bigger 1.92x crop vs 2x

0 upvotes
Dailou

i have this camera and like it , i was going to get the g1x but i waited for the next one and am glade i did. here is why. i am not a pixel counter or a tech guy i just love photography and am an old fart from the film days. i have a variety of cameras but each one has a niche, not much redundancy. i travel all of southeast asia and mostly do b&w street portraits and use primarily these days a leica monochrom and a m9. for the small amount of scenic or landscape projespcts i use a 4x5 and a fuji 6x17 - these cameras cover most every thing except just fun family stuff and underwater stuff i occasional am involved in. this is were this little jewl comes in. it is handy , does a good job and since i print most what i do - with this more or less 1/2 frame sensor i get pretty good results at a 13x19 prints ( sensor size matters the rest does not if you are getting a serious camera get the biggest sensor you can - not mega pixels sensor size!!!)

1 upvote
paqman

methinks if this had a nikon sticker on it dp would have gushed and not focused (sic) on its 'flaws'. :}

0 upvotes
BarnET

Look at the Nikon 1 series. It's also hated for it's IQ

0 upvotes
GaryJP

The strange thing about this review is that in its conclusion it compares the G1X IQ unfavourably with the RX100 but its own pictures show the opposite, in every aspect except dynamic range.

Apart from which I don't like the green faces Sony gives me (And I have owned BOTH RX100s) and I don't like their RAWS.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53631243

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii/9

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
1 upvote
armandino

I think the sensor size/lens combo is spectacular. Is it only me seeing this? If the sensor performance is half good and so the autofocus and controls, nothing really beats this in this market range. Yes the RX100 is far better in taking mediocre pictures.

2 upvotes
BarnET

green faces............. man on man never heard of lightroom have you. you have an slider. the one with the purple/green colour. just move it slightly to the right.

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Barn, when you have a color balance that's off a universal slider will solve one problem and cause another. Have you never USED Lightroom?

3 upvotes
GaryJP

BarnET, what point of "don't like their RAWS" is causing you problems. Their RAWS are not as adjustable as those of other manufacturers, apart from which many people never touch RAW. I always process from RAW, But when I've fixed a green face at the expense of messing up every other colour in the image, I am not a happy camper.

3 upvotes
ennemkay

No sweep pano, no auto hdr. Meh. The future is algorithmic photography and canon is a dinosaur.

4 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

LOL....and the future is smartphone photography, too. If you can't stitch an image together or do HDR without the help of a camera's processor then the machines will be in charge soon. I guess the plan is make everyone as fat and dumb as possible and then Skynet won't have much work left to do.

8 upvotes
ennemkay

No you should be developing your film in a dark room or you'll become fat and dumb #eyeroll#. Your jurassic attitude has a date with a meteor.

3 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Digital photographers are, by and large, some of the laziest and lousy photographers ever. Democrotizing photography with digital sensors only did what every other democrotizing technology has ever done, open up possibilities to a few disciplined people and tons and tons of people who have to be told to read the manual before they come to the internet asking questions. How often does anyone do a sweep panorama? How often do they take HDR shots? How often do people put a camera in green square mode and wonder why their shots look like crap? Digital convenience is great and all, but if you have to have the bleeding edge of digital manipulation built into the camera itself, you're relying on cheap photography tricks to wow your pals on facebook. At that point its more about having the latest technological toy than it is about taking a good picture.

9 upvotes
JackM

I love panoramas. Which is why I never use sweep panorama!

3 upvotes
Menneisyys

"I love panoramas. Which is why I never use sweep panorama!"

You certainly haven't seen the results of Apple's sweep panorama implementation. (Or that of Samsung. The latter is also stated to produce excellent results. I haven't played it with personally so I don't know how it compares to that of Apple.) Otherwise, I really wouldn't think you would state it's useless.

It's MUCH better than anything in-camera stitching (on iOS / WP) and, in my very thorough tests, consistently outperformed in stitching accuracy many desktop pano stitchers the latter running in automatic mode - for example, Hugin.

0 upvotes
GaryJP

"You certainly haven't seen the results of Apple's sweep panorama implementation."

Well I have. Nice toy. Not stunning photographs, particularly if anything is moving in your shot. . And the same for the Samsung which I now use having dropped iPhone.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"Well I have. Nice toy. Not stunning photographs, particularly if anything is moving in your shot."

Of course it can't beat proper framing & post processing in a decent pano stitcher. It isn't meant to beat them. WRT in-camera stitching, however, Apple's / Samsung's implementations are unbeatable. They do have their place under the Sun: quick, pretty good panos without having to do any PP's but still without major stitching errors and with respectable quality, unlike with other cameras' built-in(!!!) pano mode.

0 upvotes
JackM

Menneisyys, I have an iPhone. It's not better than Photoshop, but thanks for playing.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"Menneisyys, I have an iPhone. It's not better than Photoshop, but thanks for playing."

Can you run PS on your camera?

FYI: I've been talking about *quick* sweep panos that still have decent stitching. In that, Apple and Samsung are unbeatable and even Sony is way behind. Just check out the stitching errors of the Sony RX10 for example - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3655218?post=53489652&image=8 (linked from http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3655218 ). That wouldn't happen with an iPhone or a high-end Sammy.

I certainly know the difference of the quality a *decent* desktop tool can give compared to Apple's sweep pano. (Actually, I've posted tons of examples and comparisons of them to the forums here.) But all that requires PP.

0 upvotes
GaryJP

Mobile phone panos are like the dog playing chess. He never wins but at least he can move the pieces.

1 upvote
JackM

And I've been talking about real panoramas. Yes, for the panorama equivalent of a snapshot, an iPhone is fine to grab a pano that says "I was here".

1 upvote
Monvieux

I've been waiting forthis combination of features and price point in a camera. I will evaluate it for myself but nonetheless, the review is inciteful and does make me think twice. It always comes down to money and marketing and perhaps Canon had to make some trade-offs to meet a certain price-point. I can't help but think the Canon is in the midst of financial worries and this model release is reflective of that....!

Thanks for all the posts, they do help a lot

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Canon only has to worry about its finances if the 60 people in the forums here are the only ones left buying cameras. Most people will look at this review, say "what's RAW?", and buy the camera because it's in a class of its own. If my G1 X wasn't so incredibly useful I'd be much more tempted to upgrade to the Mark II right away. For now I'll see what happens with the 7D Mark II, take care of other financial priorities, and then see what I think in maybe a year. If users who know something about this camera keep posting pictures and bragging about performance I may have to change my schedule.

0 upvotes
Tripeiro

I doubt most people spending 850€ on an enthusiast compact don`t know what RAW is. But they will sell, the brand name alone sells, even among people that should know better.

1 upvote
ebbesen

People who ask "What's RAW?" shouldn't be looking at this camera; they'll probably be better served by other models.

Drop me a mail if you do change your mind and decide to go for the mark ii here. I got mine a week ago, and hate to say it, but I've more or less regretted the buy.

Having used Micro Four Thirds (GF1 + recently the GM1) as well as Fuji's X100 for the last couple of years the G1Xii has turned out to a bit of a let down.

When you're used to the speed of the Panasonics the Canon feels annoyingly slow; I have no idea what it's doing in the seconds it blacks out after a picture has been taken.

It lacks the heft of the MFTs (and of course the Fuji). To me it has the feel of a point-and-shoot, but lacks the compactness, and that's the thing that really ruins it for me. I figured this should be my carry-with-you-at-all-times camera.

The fast lens was simply too tempting; but overall the GM1 strikes me as the better camera, at least for me.

...dang, I'm a lousy salesman

5 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Really? Because I feel the same way about DSLRs and ILCs, and yet for some reason (cheap, good) people who don't have a clue about RAW love them. There are plenty of JPEG diehards even here, where you'd expect people to be more apt to shoot and edit RAW. If you own a camera that has RAW as an option, chances are you should find a use for it every now and then.....yet some people don't want to have anything to do with post processing or they don't want to fool with big RAW files.

0 upvotes
dynaxx

@Monvieux says the review is "inciteful" when he/she means "insightful" - let's save face and blame the spell-checker

0 upvotes
GaryJP

Canon is not in financial difficulties. Sony is.

1 upvote
Zerg2905

Pro-Sony separatists should organize a referendum. And separate from the outdated Canon tech. Forever. And ever. Cheers! :) :) :)

1 upvote
Dimitris G

"Fast lens with good focal range, capable of very shallow depth-of-field" For me these reasons are enough. It allows me to shoot: A. With low light B. To take really good portraits, something totally unique and C. Turn to 24 mm for decent landscapes. All in a compact package. Also the 8000 ISO shot of the cat is absolutely satisfying to my eyes and makes me feel confident for the night shots!

1 upvote
Roland Karlsson

The problems with low light is 1. noise due to the old sensor. 2. unsharpness due to not being able to focus in low light.

0 upvotes
Dimitris G

I trade the problem with the combination of the very shallow depth of field and the 24 mm/f2 lens. Also this "problem", in fact is really minor, when I consider all the spontaneous comments below the samples during the camera preview which were positive about the low light performance. So not really a deal breaker to my eyes.

1 upvote
Mikael Risedal

What many myths there are alive here, expose correctly, to the right etc etc etc.
A sensor has a dynamic range , noise and even also banding = Canon.

There are no correctly exposure, there are a scene with a dynamic range and how this can be reproduced with or with out any clipping and full color resolution in high lights and where also the deepest shadows can be reproduced / visualized with low noise details and no banding = DR
Larger DR 14 stop = better=Nikon
Lower DR 11-11,5 stop is inferior = Canon old sensor tech with 12 times higher read out noise than Sony

Believe is something, dynamic range some thing else

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Roland Karlsson

I think the point was only that the Canon sensors have a small DR, so you have to expose it more to avoid noise. Using a more modern sensor and you can expose less.

0 upvotes
naththo

Still in any Sony camera still have noise problem when underexposed in luminance noise and it looks terrible, you boost shadow recovery by 50 or more, noise still there. Nothing much difference from Canon. Same applies to Nikon or Pentax or anything else. If you want to take perfect shot, you should know how to control the exposure and take just right shot so you do not need to do shadow recovery and the noise will be much less and much cleaner result.

0 upvotes
Dr_Jon

1Dx has 1.3 electron read noise on 90K electron pixel capacity
D800 has twice the noise (2.6) on half the pixel capacity (45K)
I'm not sure I can allow for pixel counts and get 10x, or even as much.

Plus comparing a 1.5" sensor to a much bigger one isn't exactly fair (and you need a bigger sensor to get more base-ISO DR than about 12 stops).

Also recent Canons are pretty good at DR when it really matters, at high ISO, a 6D has more DR than a D800 at all ISOs over 1,000 for example. (BTW I don't have a 6D, D800 etc. just adding some discussion. I do have a RX100 and won't get a G1X.)

P.S. The RX100s get about 12 stops vs. 11 stops for the G1X, which are both quite enough for most people (as photos that pop have about 10 stops of DR, having a stop spare to allow for post-processing is good, having two stops to allow for poor exposure is good if you're inexperienced, having 14 stops is only of great use for specialised requirements or really rubbish exposure - which does happen.)

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

All excellent points, doc.

0 upvotes
Mac McCreery

rather disappointing........I was intrigued by the mark one- I assumed that the 'two' would make leaps forward- what I really despise is the need (Canon is not alone!) to buy a separate viewfinder if that is your bag........

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
alpha90290

There is youtube video that teach you how to DIY a view finder for the hot shoe. You hack saw off the view finder from a disposable camera and glue to a hot shoe cover, which you can slide into the hot shoe. it is useful for any camera that doesn't have a viewfinder but have a hot shoe.

0 upvotes
chillgreg

Good review Jeff.

That said, it's a pity that the beancounters that pay your wage insist on the Silver Award. Clearly the camera doesn't deserve any gong, and especially as this will be used by your affiliate to sell more cameras.

Here amongst enthusiasts 77% is an accurate assessment, although a sad result for Canon fans. At Amazon however, the shiny DPR Silver Award logo is a big thumbs up for the masses.

Poor and transparent scruples DPR management. :/

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

Photographers really are just about as egomaniacal group as you can get. Is it because knowing anything about photography is somewhat rare and when others invariably want to take a good picture they come to you bowing and scraping?
People here who have never used the G1 X or Mark II have no idea what a pleasure it is to use these cameras, although I can only speak for the G1 X.
These comments are like history repeating itself. After using my own brain to analyze images, features, lens, etc. for the G1 X I bought it before the reviews were out. Best money I've ever spent on a camera. People point to DxO or DPR scores like they mean something and yet they don't have any idea what they really mean. Scores are a reflection of one set of weighted parameters. How do you score this lens on a large sensor compact body? I even tried pushing shadows on my RAW files like they've done here....guess I need to buy a color chart to get the same results, because the shadows have amaxing detail.

1 upvote
Richard Butler

@chillgreg - the G1 X II is a camera that offers a unique (and really flexible) feature set. It does an awful lot well and offers both 24mm equiv and the kind of shallow depth-of-field portrait that cameras this small can't usually offer.

It has a couple of handling quirks and doesn't stand out from its closest rival as much as its specs might lead you to expect, but it's still a very good camera. It's easy to justify its Silver Award.

For the record:

There is no connection between reviewers' pay and awards given.

Nobody from outside the dpreview editorial team ever has any input into rating, nor have they even expressed opinions.

The reviews team will discuss the award (and opinions can vary), but they are the only people who are party to that discussion and the final decision always lies with the primary reviewer.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Revenant

Why would 77% be a sad result? According to DPR's explanation of their scoring system, 80% and above is to be regarded as 'outstanding'. In other words, the G1 X Mark II is just short of outstanding. No cause for sadness if you ask me.

1 upvote
MarcLee

It is the football team supporter mentality.

1 upvote
alpha90290

Sum up the review in one sentence :-D

"Need deep pocket to buy it and large pocket to make it pocketable"

11 upvotes
armandino

tell me the cost and size of anything that get close to a 24-120mm equivalent F2.0-3.9 for a 1.5" sensor that aliens did not bring to Earth

2 upvotes
iudex

In contrary to prevailing opinions I am not dissappointed. It is still a decent improvement from Mark I: the lens alone is such a huge improvement that allows to produce better pictures and - most notably - to work with DoF. On the other hand I understand what DPR meant by comparison with RX100: the difference in picture quality is not as big as would bigger sensor indicate; it is obvious that if Sony made a compact camera with 1,5" sensor, it would clearly outperform the G1X (just like Canon´s APSC sensors are outperformed by the comeptition). However Sony does not make such camera and even if G1X is not as potent as it could be - given the specs, it still has the advantage of big sensor and bright lens. And actually it is the only compact zoom that allows to work with DoF (for portraits etc.), what no other compact zoom allows.
If there is somethig I complain aout, it is the lack of built-in viewfinder: the external EVF makes the camera much bulkier and the combo very expensive.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
FriendlyWalkabout

I'll buy that lens when canon attaches it to a deserving body!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
peevee1

Or at least detaches it from that junk and releases it in m43. :)

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson

What a disappointment. Make a very nice camera with a very good lens and put an aged sensor in it with yesterdays performance. I was planning to buy it. But ... now I buy something else. Thank you DPR for this review!

The problem is only - what?

I have looked at A6000, GM1, GX7, RX100 and P5.

4 upvotes
Menneisyys

"The problem is only - what?

I have looked at A6000, GM1, GX7, RX100 and P5."

I'm in the same boat as you. Personally, I wait for the Sony RX100 MkIII announcement. If it does deliver the rumoured 24mm WA, is released here in Europe before July and the IQ isn't messed up, I'll go for it. Otherwise, I'll go for the GM1 with the 12-32 - it's not much bigger and has an excellent, albeit a bit slow, 24mm WA kit zoom.

4 upvotes
rccasgar

me also, but from a different point of view. I'm not looking for pocketability but for the best IQ in an all-in-one package which I enjoy using (manual controls with easy access mainly), so my other option is RX10, which has the same good sensor than RX100 II and a better lens... my only worries are not having Canon 180° tilting-tactile LCD and the weird sensibility of focus/zoom lens rings in the Sony. Size should be also worrying me, but I could live with it.

2 upvotes
Goodmeme

I'd go Fuji x100 or x100s personally. I don't have one yet - still use an old heavy 5d and 35mm prime or my phone. But apart from battery life (which is always an issue with small cams , especially that can't use AA eneloops or equivalent as tech improves), I can't think of any downsides for casual photography.

Big pros include viewfinder and lens, as well as nice touchy-feely manual controls. Plus one should never underestimate the difference a beautiful retro camera will make to portrait subject's comfort and thus smiles. :)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Angus Rose

If Sony announces RX100 III with a 24mm, then I'll be there in a flash!

1 upvote
DouglasGottlieb

With you on the X100s love, but that's a fixed prime lens camera, so not the best comparison to a fixed zoom. What I'd love is an X100s with a small, fast, X20 style zoom. Hopefully the X30 will bump up to a 1 inch sensor, or the Sony RX100iii will drink its milkshake

0 upvotes
Boky

since when does the jpg and raw quality of 55% mean silver award... a wait a minute, it's canon

Nick

2 upvotes
armandino

since when you have a compact camera with such a kickass lens and large sensor?
Ah wait, a minute you probably shoot only with your phone and have no idea of the value real lens.

3 upvotes
Boky

what's the point of kick ass lens when the end-result is mediocre at best?

I used to have L-glass, but sold all canon crap once I realized that canon can not achieve consistently accurate focus irrelevant of price i paid.

you psychic abilities suck by the way.

Nick

0 upvotes
infocus

I have the Mark I (love how the "Mark" moniker has been attached to the original G 1X) and the IQ is fantastic, especially in low light situations and high ISO. This is not mediocre considering its size.

1 upvote
zodiacfml

nice but too late, too expensive. Rx100, A6000, GM1, GR.

4 upvotes
Dr_Jon

I'm not sure I'd criticise it all that much on price, Canon launch prices are usually highly fictional very soon after a launch.
Graph for G1X here:
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Canon/Canon-Powershot-Cameras/Canon-PowerShot-G1-X
Launch price £700
Four months later available for £550
Was around £400 after just over a year, and stayed at that level for quite some time.

0 upvotes
rccasgar

If lense makes the difference (and assuming size is not a problem for a person who is not looking for a pocketable camera), G1X Mk2 or Sony RX10?

0 upvotes
armandino

Dear Sony RX100 lovers and Canon haters, the camera creativity is just as good as the lens in front of it and this camera lens put the Sony's into shame. Even more kudos for doing this with the challenge of a larger sensor. Sure if your are up for a pocketable body and average images go for the Sony. But for that my phone is good enough too.

3 upvotes
2eyesee

You could at least try to state your case with a coherent supporting argument. Unfortunately you've simply chosen to present yourself as a Canon lover and Sony hater, which really doesn't add anything to the discussion.

8 upvotes
Menneisyys

" photography is more than a tool,,its creativity, and from reading most post here, its the same "rancunes" that comes out of these so called arguments."

As has been explained millions of times, the better the tool (technically), (technically) the better images a photog can shoot.

Of course a lot of us are disappointed by the sensor of the new G1X. That's the Achilles' heel of the camera - the single one that makes it a no-go for me.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson

May favourite compact is a Canon G10, I use it all the time. Unfortunately it is aged, slow and with low image quality. So, I plan to upgrade. The G1X II was my main choice. So ... Canon hater? Hmmm ... Unfortunately, Canon blew it for me. Why upgrade if I get noisy shadows? Totally meaningless.

0 upvotes
badi

@armandino:
I thought the creativity is an attribute of the photographer. But as technology advances...

0 upvotes
armandino

@2eyesee:
here is the coherence for you
24-120 F2.0-3.9 vs 28-100 1.8-5.9 -28mm is not wide enough-
is a world of a difference
sensor 1.5" vs 1"
is also a world of a difference. The Sony is a wonderful little camera, yet for anything more than point and shoot trails the G1X big time and it is shocking how so many do not see that. The tiny dynamic range advantage of the sony is of scarce relevance a this level.

0 upvotes
armandino

@ badi
creativity is also function of degrees of freedom, and you get a lot more of that with the G1X than with RX100

0 upvotes
BPD7

Longtime Canon SLR user here. Also used their pocket cameras, which I never liked. Recently been using Fujifilm x100s, Sony RX100 and Fujifilm X-A1. The Canons are lacking. I won't ever go back to a point and shoot Canon. The Rx100 is so pocketable it's amazing. Why would I go to this camera when it's not as pocketable and I can get better results on the Sony?

Canon will continue to lose market share IMO.

3 upvotes
Angus Rose

If the RX100 had a wide angle, closer to 24mm, I would be there in a flash!

0 upvotes
photo nuts

"Canon will continue to lose market share IMO."

Everything you said is true, except for the above statement. Canon's market share for compact cameras is on the rise again, at the expense of poor Nikon... which is losing their market share in this department so quickly it almost appears as though they are pulling out of the market altogether.

1 upvote
Chronis

Boring boring boring....

I ve spent 000' on canon kit and glass but they ve end up a slow moving incumbent...

Id really like to see their a#@+* kicked by the likes of Sony oly and samsung

0 upvotes
oselimg

Somehow I don't believe you ever bought that glass even if you did you'd never tried it before you bought it. For a fast action shooting pro like yourself it's a very unwise purchase. how did you slip up this time?

1 upvote
Dr_Jon

I've spent 0000s on Canon glass (well, in the teens of thousands of pounds, not sure I make it to 20K if I throw in everything else) and like the fact they've been prudent during the financial down-turn, continue to make more money (as in net Income) than all the other camera companies put together and will be around for the foreseeable future.
I do hope they release some great bodies this year, but some of the glass to come out in the last two years has been just amazing... IMHO.
Oh, and I'd like all the camera companies to do well and don't see one failing as being a good thing...

0 upvotes
Chronis

I have the impression that both canon and nikon make their rich living out of "hostages" who are locked into their systems by releasing step wise improvements of their existing kit rather than something really innovative...

For one I really like sony to give them a run for their money... Maybe we d be around to see the day when a full frame body sells for less than 1K...

0 upvotes
vlad0

Hm... I can get better landscapes in the same resolution from my 808.. I don't think the optics are up to par

examples

4200x2900

http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/2014050507384e22B5.jpg

4100x2800

https://o1elvq.bn1302.livefilestore.com/y2pzQZSthCllYkB_5U2c657LrKoHzWWqqj_iQbYPrAub5semOS05ybz1C_Y6gMQUXbhl-UQfXoypUFSkFROQ8Tdamo_A6ckoad5ERC-0QR-l7g/20140501_135107_1.jpg

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/2014050507384e22B5.jpg"

BTW, you have some blurring, CA and vignetting in the corners. Blurring isn't common with the 808. On mine, there's not any kind of blur in the corners, not even in extreme ones when shooting in the nonstandard 41 Mpixel mode. Neither does the 808 tested by DPR.

Have you tried swapping your 808 for another one with Nokia?

0 upvotes
Paul JM

Just demonstrates to me the problems with where Canon is heading and the lack of imagination in their development dept.
This is really just a minor tweak of the previous model. It would appear that any thought of having a dramatic change of direction with real imagination and foresight is just beyond them. I had, until the last 3 or so year, bought nothing but Canon cameras for more than 2 decades, but now cant really see anything in their line up that appeal at all. My 5d mk2 remains an excellent SLR, but I would love to see Canon jump out of the pack, and produce something really exciting, say, and mirror less interchangeable lens camera with a full frame sensor, that weighs about half of what an SLR weighs (e.g. something along the lines of a Sony A7R) that produces outstanding stills, and high end functional video. There is a window for them here to produce the ultimate non-SLR travel camera. They have the sensor tech.

But sadly, I cant even imagine that this is on their radar

0 upvotes
robmanueb

Nice camera. Should take good pictures.

0 upvotes
Segaman

It might get a cool (not warm) review, but when you look at the picture on other forum, this is a very nice camera, the price will go down, and it will still be ahead of any other brand, cause people don't read reviews, they look at what th pictures, and that is enough for most people.
Who care if 40 fanboys don't like it, it will sell and it has a nice niche in that price range, viva la competition

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
GaryJP

There are enough positives, albeit inconsistent, in the the review for most of us who have actually used the camera. For example, in one part it admits the IQ is better than the RX100, but not better ENOUGH to justify the size increase.

"Overall, though, the larger sensor in the Canon is much of the reason that the camera is so much less pocketable than the Sony, yet the full benefits of that additional sensor size are not realized: the Canon's image quality advantage isn't proportionate with its greater bulk."

Add that to this: "The G1 X II does still have an aperture advantage, especially at the long end of its zoom. This means there are still occasions where it can use lower ISOs than the Sony,"

So that means, less noise in a comparable lighting situation.

The issue becomes whether its greater bulk is even an issue for you.

5 upvotes
GaryJP

In terms of image detail versus noise in an RX100 comparison, one can always use one's own eyes, and the DPReview tests

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53631243

Or indeed in the review, the part about noise, which shows the queen's head detail far superior

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii/9

Really, one needs blinders at ANY ISO to think the RX100 Mk II is outperforming the Canon on detail there. The review fails to notice that the Canon is either using a lot less noise reduction or still capturing a sharper image even above ISO 6400. Don't take my word for it, check it yourself.

The one hit is on dynamic range. Only individual photographers can tell how much of a hit that is likely to be for them. My images almost never demand the full dynamic range of the camera, and if that's all people care about, it amazes me that anyone owns anything other than the Nikon D800. If you do own anything else instead, then you too agree DR is not the only issue.

3 upvotes
juvx

I cant believe it got such a high score LOL the sony a6000 better get a 90 then. LOL it spanks it in every possible category for the same size and same price....

1 upvote
Marvol

...and a completely different category.

0 upvotes
peevee1

"you can keep taking photos until the memory card fills up, and there's no 'lock up' delay after a burst is taken. "

Looks like the camera has no buffer at all beyond just 1 "current" picture.

So many problems in a camera that expensive... Canon should stop making cameras and just make lenses. I would pay the same money the whole camera is worth for just the lens - with m43 active mount and weather-sealed. Canon can leave the rest (the junk) to itself.

2 upvotes
BarnET

I would even pre-order the lens. I can live with it's flaws at this size and speed.

0 upvotes
Zerg2905

Dpreview is not TIPA. And Sony is not Canon. And Apple is not Samsung. People still buy Apple. Lovely. Cheers! :)

2 upvotes
peevee1

"On the one hand, there's a risk is could seem confusing - the ability to toggle through three functions can make it hard to remember what the dial is going to do, next time you turn it. "

No other CINCERE way looking at it - second order of modality means bad interface squared.

0 upvotes
David Eicher

I am a long time Canon user. 1D MK I-IV, 5D MK I-III.
G 10, 11, 12, G1X.
For better or worse I am invested in Canon, comfortable with the menus and features, don't like using different systems at the same time. I travel a lot and quick, familiar use is valuable to me. I use DSLR for most work, a compact camera for "travel shots" or convenience.

I had a OLY OMD EM5, took pretty good shots but I just didn't get comfortable, and always wished I had SLR, I was changing lenses anyway.

I have averaged an 85% resale rate for 10 years.

I am trying out the G1X MK II to fill my role for a single carry camera with no lens changing. If I want pocket pictures I use my Phone as do most people.

Can't believe how negative the forums have gotten. I used to come on and share ideas and get advice. If I was an outsider reading this website I would think most camera gear is crap.

I still remember getting great shots with an OLY 5050 Zoom before I went to the first Rebel.

Just my 2 cents

9 upvotes
Tripeiro

You should smell the coffee... Canon is getting outdated in everything and brand loyalty is pathetic.

10 upvotes
Sidath Senanayake

I have been a Canon user for just under 10 years and have made several memorable images with them (link below).

Then I got the RX100 and was blown away by the dynamic range that little compact was achieving, in some cases eclipsing my 5D2. I recently got an A7R and within a month I sold my 5D2.

Canon is outdated. Their old cameras still take excellent photos, but what Sony is offering now is far ahead. You should try a Sony RX100 as your compact -- you might find yourself taking a similar path to me :)

http://www.fluidr.com/photos/sidaths

11 upvotes
David Eicher

Nice website. Great shots (love the waterfall/rainbow) I may give the Sony a look if I am not happy with the G1XII. I am not brand loyal so much as comfortable (SLR wise)
I have seen some excellent Sony system shots the last few years.

My gallery is at http://www.eicherfoto.com

1 upvote
samhain

Far ahead? In what? the pictures it produces? In reliability? In usability? In service & support? Canon's lens catalog punks Sony's, big time. And with sony's new crippled lens mount even more so. The only category Sony is 'far ahead' of canon in is gimmicks & gadgetry. Which is worth something, but sony is aiming at the techy crowd, enthusiasts & hobbits. Canon has the working pro's on lock.
I'll take sony seriously when they bring out a durable, reliable camera with a VF & fast professional glass, backed up with worldwide professional support.
Until then, Sony cameras are just... Cute.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
BarnET

Sony is ahead in raw image quality for years now. Their sensors have more dynamic range lower noise and high pixel counts as their canon counterparts. That's got nothing to do with gimmicky gadgetery.

As for lens line-ups and global professional support. Nikon uses sony sensors so just go that route It's that simple most people don't need this since it's not their livelihood.

As far as gimmickry goes. Canon has touchscrpixelWiFi not working hybrid phase detect in live view. And 1 gimmick that works the dual pixel.

So please get by our facts straight and put your L sunglasses down.

4 upvotes
Sidath Senanayake

@samhain: you have a point. In some cases Canon certainly offers more. I should have been more specific -- I was talking about Sony's sensor technology and the fact that they seem to be making an effort to innovate.

BarnET has it right though. If I cared for what Canon offers over Sony (wider lens support, professional services and so on) I'd go with Nikon.

I'm just an amateur who spends most of his time shooting landscapes, architecture and portraits. For that, the Sony A7r is great, and better than anything Canon offers. And, since it's smaller and lighter than a D800E, better than what Nikon offers.

If Canon overtake Sony again and I can afford it, I'll switch back. It's about the images.

If you think Sony cameras are just 'cute' you should give them a try. Your credibility as a commenter on this forum will thank you.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP

I love how the very first response here exemplifies the original poster's point. And I have tried the Sony cameras, dislike their inconsistent colours and dislike their relative inflexibility in RAW, so I will stick with what works better for me. The G1X SMOKES the RX100 on detail.

1 upvote
white shadow

I can't disagree with samhain. Although I am disappointed with the Canon G1X Mk2, I still think Canon is the best choice for the professional photographer. For the moment, it still has the largest selection in choice of lenses. Tracking focus is still the fastest so far. If one need to shoot sports or a reasonable fast subject, the Canon 1DX with the EF 200-400mm f/4.0L, for example, is still the best tool for the job. It simply get the job done.

Recently, many brands like the Oly EM1 and the Fuji X-T1 are trying to get into the "pro" market but they are still short in achieving it. Tracking focus is still not there yet and one might miss the shot, thus not reliable yet. Choice of Pro lenses are limited.

As for Sony, they are still experimenting with the market with various "new innovations". It may be exciting for the hobbyist but the Pros would not gamble with it until things become more settled. Perhaps, one day.

0 upvotes
Dr_Jon

Actually Sony isn't ahead on Raw image quality for two reasons.
Firstly they use lossy compression on the Raw files which means on some scenes it all goes downhill a bit. They can be better at low-ISO due to extra DR but the may get bitten by the missing data.
Secondly at high ISO, where the lower DR can become critical for getting good images, the Canon 6D beats the Sony 99 for DR at all ISOs over 1000.
Not that there aren't scenes where the Sony's low-ISO DR makes it a big win, but it's not black and white...

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (7 months ago)

If you check DxO tests (which is what so many live by) Sony overestimates ISO for most of the range. At ISO100 it's really about 100, at stated ISO 200 it's really 136, and at 400 it's really 270. So you basically get ISO100 and 200 (really 100 and 136) with a DR advantage. After that the ISO you choose will underexpose your image and have worse DR.

0 upvotes
Tripeiro

With a good EVF and a modern sensor it would be worth 700/750€. As it is it is worth 550/600€ at most. But they are asking for 850€!!!! LOL

1 upvote
Dr_Jon

Because there are people who will pay that for it and limited supply. When the quantities for cameras in the supply chain builds up the price will come down to shift them. That's why Canon makes money selling Cameras, it's a business...

0 upvotes
Total comments: 689
1234