Canon PowerShot G1X Mark II real-world gallery

But how does the IQ compare to 4x5 Fuji Provia shot with a Linhof Master Technika?

If you pop over to imaging-resource and look at the G1X Mk I and MkII files, the MkII is actually noisier than the MkI.

Hi Jeff,
Thank you so much for processing the image of the statue and IMG_0130 into IMG_0130.acr. you did a great job on them, and this show some of what this sensor and lens combination can do.
Can you put IMG_0130 back up so we can see the comparison between them?This is a good example of what can be achieved beyond the JPEG and is rarely shown so clearly.

Canon seem to have done a good job matching such a small lens to the sensor, but it does not seem to be a new sensor, is it the same as the old GX1?
Thanks for all your hard work - you clearly seem to be enjoying this camera - think I will be buying it - look forward to the full review.

I was lucky enough to have the canon rep for my store lend me one overnight.
I didn't have to long to play with it but found it very enjoyable to shoot with (aside form a couple of ergonomic gripes-that mobile button is in a horrible position.)
For those expecting SLR quality should probably buy, I dunno, an SLR, but this little guy is an admirable performer for what it is. Reality is if you want a smaller camera you have to give something up be it zoom, IQ, etc.
For half of what I paid for my 550D + 17-40L it offers 80% of the quality/functionality.
Not a bad equation in my opinion.

Lens - No Color depth. Low Color resolution or color purity. Low contrast. Low sharpness. More Fuji or Samsung color than canon. Greenish pink rendition due to lens coating.
Sensor - Highlights always washed out or blown. any bright object indoor or outdoor quickly become white blob. Retains Shadow details Though. Highlights gone. DR performance not balanced.

If canon can make this lens to L standards as they did with Pro-1. It should overcome some of the sensor size and DR limitation and give an overall excellent package at a price point. Mediocre glass and sensor..Mediocre JAC pic quality.

Hi everyone, now that ACR 8.4 is out, I reconverted the 'torture tunnel' shot and also tried my hand at the ISO 8000 indoor statue photo. Wide-open macro shot still to come.

Great pictures! Can you up the contrast automatically?

Its very nice to see the usual suspects from Jeff, i miss them over dcresource (no longer exists), i think its good to see how diferrent cameras shoot the same scenes..

A little disappointed. Was looking forward to better DR, detail. Seems to me the overall IQ is just a tad behind the first G1X.

I like Jeff's samples too, because 1) there's a point to them (purple fringing tunnel, detail in ChinaTown, etc.), and 2) they're (mostly) shot on sunny days, which is what I (and I suspect most of us) do too.

These samples look good. I don't see a lot of D.R. advantage to the larger sensor, to be honest. Areas that I would expect to be blown out on a smaller sensor camera are blown out on this camera. The ISO 3200 portrait is a nice result. C.A. is corrected in all images, but you can see a few halos here and there, no biggie. Also, the corners are slightly degraded on wide angle, but don't look too bad.

This is a nice camera, but IMHO it's J.A.C. (just another camera). Not that there's anything wrong with that. Most of my cameras fit that description. But it's not a distinctive product. It seems like it could almost be sold without a Canon badge, just a black and white bar code.

Compact cam IQ
Next cam please....

For me, DR is just too much compact-like (i.e., bad/low...too often "just white)" instead of APSC-like. And why? Because they do not WANT to! It would be no problem to take their best APSC and downgrade it to 1.5", but THAT would cut/destroy their low- and midrange DSLR Business. It´s ALL about marketings!! :(

Jeff, had a look at two samples, large scenes, and the images looks soft with some double edges here and there...is it the 'default' jpeg processing? Because if it is its not really helpful...perhaps fewer images, shot and processed properly will have more value...as it is now the quality looks pretty soft viewed at 100% and its difficult to determine if its the camera or the operator...

Let me just say that I think Jeff should do all the samples in the future. It's been years since I last saw such useful samples on this stie. Kudos, Jeff!

Looks very promising, certainly great travel or universal camera!

Correct me if i'm wrong, the largest aperture used in this set is F3.2?

It's not that bad at all, considering the compromises made with the lens spec (i.e. more ambitious than the original G1X and not as crisp across the frame in some shots). The sensor seems the same quality, which is excellent. Without a built-in viewfinder, I still won't be buying it but, for those who can get by, it looks like a decent package. Roll on that review!

When I saw the series photo of stanford U, I think these must be jeff's work, and it seems I guessed correctly.

No school guards hush you out of their property this time?

First of all I think image quality from this camera is excellent. I have analyzed and scrutinized the sample photos 6 ways from Sunday and I find very little to criticize. While not worlds apart, they are a bit better than the Sony RX100 II at closer inspection. Especially the ISO3200 shot.

However, one thing I have noticed from the pictures from this camera vs. the RX100 II...the RX100 II's photos seem to "pop" a little more than the Canon's. The color and contrast are a little more dramatic from the Sony. That might be in part due to the Zeiss lens. The Canon still has nice (and very accurate) colors and I can see how a lot of people would find that more appealing over the Sony. But, me personally, I can't help but like the look of the RX100 II's photos a little better. Maybe I might change my mind once I see more of what the G1X Mark II can do.

I'm looking forward to seeing more landscapes when the sun is low, and more portraits in dramatic light.

Thank you and keep 'em coming.

Muuussshhh

Hi Jeff . . . this is Dark Cobra from your old site. I was glad to see you return to Stanford and San Francisco for many of these shots and we are very used to many of these scenes from your old site. In general the images are at best "alright". I don't see anything that WoW's me at all to be honest. The bridge night scene is good as is the Stanford "tunnel of doom" shot which renders excellent shadow and light detail balance. The sharpness of most of these images could be better. I was thinking about getting this camera but I'm SO glad I resisted and picked up the incredible Fuji X100S. Take care of yourself Jeff!

Seems a pretty decent camera. But I think that 100% crop images are very soft and grainy (reminded my old S100), not much detail as I hoped for a camera with this sensor. RX100 is smaller, cheaper and has better 100% crop details, and more mega pixels to crop the image.
Even with the crappy image from the studio scene from dpreview, I bought a RX100. Not one of my shots are like the studio scenes, real life pictures are much much better. I was thinking of buying a GXmkII, but now I`ve changed my mind.

Image processing is good, but the lens does not excite.
Leica's lens in X-Vario, or Ricoh's lens in the GR, are both miles ahead of this camera.
But, I believe, if Canon wanted to implement a really good lens, the package would cost twice as much. It would be worthwhile, though. It would be good Canon comes out with a kick-@ss enthusiast camera, not another budget 'zoom': they have plenty of budget cameras already.

Syncing @ 1/2000th - off camera flash in bright but underexposed ambient - the pics. Pretty please . . .

I can't tell from just these samples but I curious if image quality will be that much better than the original G1X? Slightly worse?

I have the original and was always pleased with it as a simple carry around travel camera with some zoom. It will be fun to learn what Canon has changed.

Amazing results. If I am not mistaken, equivalent FF with pixel size should be around 42mp. I want an FF 40 mp with this kind of low light performance.

I would have killed for this camera when I was buying Powershots 10 years ago.

Thanks but would like to see more shots in dark situations, with ISO pumped up, or portrait shots with wide aperture, to evaluate the bokeh.
Thank you!

there is nothing new with this camera, same old sensor tech, inferior color resolution and dynamic range compared to modern sensors from Sony,Toshiba,Panasonic, Aptina etc

Given the size and weight, the quality looks very good. I wonder how the G1X2 compares with the Ricoh and the Coolpix. I'll bet the difference isn't all that much and here's a camera where you don't have to bring or buy anything else to avoid being stuck with a 28mm or 35mm lens.

what the camera can do?

IMG_0130.dpp
blown high lights, no color resolution in the shadows , inferior DR
Crappy dynamic range