OGEYD
Member
Does anybody know the maximum magnification of that camera. I just read the minimum distance for macro photos (20 cm) but not the corresponding magnification.
Th. for help.
--
OGEYD
Th. for help.
--
OGEYD
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Canon G1X - Macro features
- Thread starter OGEYD
- Start date
Steve40
Forum Enthusiast
The camera has a close focusing distance of 8 inches, there is no! what would be called macro. At present from what I read, there are no plans for any Macro, Wide Angle, or Telephoto converters.
Due to the way the lens is designed, they would also have to hang on the front lens tube. Does "Lens Error-18" sound familar.
--
Steve40.
http://steveslandscapes.50webs.com
Cameras: Canon G12, and SX150 is.
Due to the way the lens is designed, they would also have to hang on the front lens tube. Does "Lens Error-18" sound familar.
--
Steve40.
http://steveslandscapes.50webs.com
Cameras: Canon G12, and SX150 is.
Zuzullo
Active member
Most Powershot cameras have a pretty decent macro mode.
Mine has 0,6x magnification and a Super-macro mode, (at half res.), of 1,4x.
If this is a proud Powershot, it will continue the SAGA!
I have just send the question to canon support.
Mine has 0,6x magnification and a Super-macro mode, (at half res.), of 1,4x.
If this is a proud Powershot, it will continue the SAGA!
I have just send the question to canon support.
OGEYD
Member
Thanks Zuzullo. If you have any answer from Canon, please post it.
By the way, is the mgnification of your PowerShot rated in 35 mm camera equivalent?
--
OGEYD
By the way, is the mgnification of your PowerShot rated in 35 mm camera equivalent?
--
OGEYD
Zuzullo
Active member
Yes, those values are for 35mm equivalent.
Around 25mm is the FOV that I get.
Around 25mm is the FOV that I get.
iso rivolta
Senior Member
No large sensor fixed lens camera has good close focus abilities, offering only low maximum magnifications.
Sony R1, Sigma DP1/2, Leica X1, Fuji X100 and now Canon G1X
That's because at the same relative (to sensor's size) magnification the DOF is much thinner in a large sensor camera compared to a small sensored compact.
The contrast detection focus would be then very slow (compounded anyway by the larger mass of the necessary larger objective lens). And the people that these cameras are intended to do not want to fiddle with manual focus.
Chuck Westfall said that the new G1X is focusing generally faster than G12, except for "extreme macro situations". I don't know how G1X can enter an extreme macro situation (maybe with accessory lenses).
And don't forget that older Powershots were not good at "macro", for example all G cameras up to and including G6.
Sony R1, Sigma DP1/2, Leica X1, Fuji X100 and now Canon G1X
That's because at the same relative (to sensor's size) magnification the DOF is much thinner in a large sensor camera compared to a small sensored compact.
The contrast detection focus would be then very slow (compounded anyway by the larger mass of the necessary larger objective lens). And the people that these cameras are intended to do not want to fiddle with manual focus.
Chuck Westfall said that the new G1X is focusing generally faster than G12, except for "extreme macro situations". I don't know how G1X can enter an extreme macro situation (maybe with accessory lenses).
And don't forget that older Powershots were not good at "macro", for example all G cameras up to and including G6.
Most Powershot cameras have a pretty decent macro mode.
Mine has 0,6x magnification and a Super-macro mode, (at half res.), of 1,4x.
If this is a proud Powershot, it will continue the SAGA!
I have just send the question to canon support.
Hi,
Small sensor compacts (including the G series) are only able to offer macro and very close focusing distances because they have small sensors. These sensors only require very short focal length lenses which in turn allow 'macro' photography with very short lens extension from the sensor. In reality, the magnification is not very high. If your sensor is (only) say 5mm across, a full frame image of an object 20mm high is only a 1:4 magnification. This isn't what photographers traditionally refer to as a "macro" magnification, even if a 20mm object is quite small. If you shot the same 20mm object with a FF camera with a sensor 24mm X 36mm, and filled the frame to get the same composition, the image magnification would be greater than 1:1 - much higher. And you would have needed a specialized and expensive macro lens to do it.
The G1 X has a bigger sensor than most compacts and a 15mm - 60mm lens. It isn't FF or even APSC, but the extension necessary to get to 1:4 at 60mm would be considerably longer than (say) the G12's lens, and far longer again than a camera with an even smaller sensor. It's lens would need a longer focusing helix, a bigger motor and more battery power to achieve what you're used to from a camera with a small sensor.
Canon would have considered the closest focusing distance very carefully in designing the G1X lens. I'm pretty sure that they would have been forced to conclude that "macro" was too difficult with the longer focal lengths involved, and especially given that one of their key goals was a retracting design.
Sorry, but in macro there's no free lunch.
Cheers, Rod
Small sensor compacts (including the G series) are only able to offer macro and very close focusing distances because they have small sensors. These sensors only require very short focal length lenses which in turn allow 'macro' photography with very short lens extension from the sensor. In reality, the magnification is not very high. If your sensor is (only) say 5mm across, a full frame image of an object 20mm high is only a 1:4 magnification. This isn't what photographers traditionally refer to as a "macro" magnification, even if a 20mm object is quite small. If you shot the same 20mm object with a FF camera with a sensor 24mm X 36mm, and filled the frame to get the same composition, the image magnification would be greater than 1:1 - much higher. And you would have needed a specialized and expensive macro lens to do it.
The G1 X has a bigger sensor than most compacts and a 15mm - 60mm lens. It isn't FF or even APSC, but the extension necessary to get to 1:4 at 60mm would be considerably longer than (say) the G12's lens, and far longer again than a camera with an even smaller sensor. It's lens would need a longer focusing helix, a bigger motor and more battery power to achieve what you're used to from a camera with a small sensor.
Canon would have considered the closest focusing distance very carefully in designing the G1X lens. I'm pretty sure that they would have been forced to conclude that "macro" was too difficult with the longer focal lengths involved, and especially given that one of their key goals was a retracting design.
Sorry, but in macro there's no free lunch.
Cheers, Rod
iso rivolta
Senior Member
Hi Rod,
Well, you don't need the same magnification with a small sensor camera as you need with a largel sensor camera. If the pixel pitch is small enough on the small sensor camera (and it usually is), you have almost the same megapixel count on the two sensors. G10 has even more than G1 X.
What counts for macro here is the number of pixels/milimeters of subject image. You can use a much lower magnification with a small sensor compact (while retaining larger DOF) and still have the same number of pixels/mm or more than a large sensor compact. Considering that generally small and large sensors have at a moment in time the same number of megapixels (call it fashion), it is practical to consider the optical magnification relative to the sensor's size.
The 20cm distance to the subject that presumably G1 X can focus at, will offer (if that is at the wide angle focal length of 15.1mm) a very low magnification and number of pixels/mm.
Well, you don't need the same magnification with a small sensor camera as you need with a largel sensor camera. If the pixel pitch is small enough on the small sensor camera (and it usually is), you have almost the same megapixel count on the two sensors. G10 has even more than G1 X.
What counts for macro here is the number of pixels/milimeters of subject image. You can use a much lower magnification with a small sensor compact (while retaining larger DOF) and still have the same number of pixels/mm or more than a large sensor compact. Considering that generally small and large sensors have at a moment in time the same number of megapixels (call it fashion), it is practical to consider the optical magnification relative to the sensor's size.
The 20cm distance to the subject that presumably G1 X can focus at, will offer (if that is at the wide angle focal length of 15.1mm) a very low magnification and number of pixels/mm.
VadymA
Senior Member
I think it's the front lens. Otherwise how to explain macro focusing distance of 1cm on many compact and bridge cameras. Even with the smallest camera the distance from the subject to the sensor is much more than 1cm.
VadymA
Senior Member
Interesting. Looks like better DOF and low light performance are on the opposite side of the scale against better macro and telephoto capabilities relative to the size of the sensor. Maybe the solution is to have two sensors inside - big one for DOF and low light and small one for macro/telephoto. Am I crazy or genious?
Shorthand
Senior Member
20" MFD would probably be at the widest focal length. Therefore I don't think we're going to see very good maximum magnification from the G1 X without assistance. Honestly, its too much to ask of a lens for a sensor of this size anyway.
From the supplies and accessories page for the G1 X:
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_g1_x#SuppliesAndAccessories
As for mounting adapters - there is good news here:
There is a 58mm filter adapter that mounts to the bayonet on the end of the lens. It is called the " Filter Adapter FA-DC58C "
I'm pretty sure it can handle a macro diopter.
There is also a lens hood for the bayonet mount (The "*
Lens Hood LH-DC70*"):
There is also a macro flash adapter with the familiar smooth ring from the 100mm and 60mm Macro lenses. It is called the " Light Adapter MLA-DC1 " This uses the more traditional g-series remove-the-ring and then mount to the body type of mount.
Therefore, I think that it is safe to say the the G1X will have decent macro capabilities and has some features designed for the dental/medical market.
This also means that 3rd parties should be able to easily make collars that can accept wide angle and telephoto adapters. Of course nobody yet knows how well that will work.
I will add that the whole point of the G1 X is to give good compact performance at non-telephoto focal lengths. If you need telephoto, canon figures you will go for a DSLR, which is really quite correct. I never use my tele adapter on my G9, its pretty nearly useless.
From the supplies and accessories page for the G1 X:
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_g1_x#SuppliesAndAccessories
As for mounting adapters - there is good news here:
There is a 58mm filter adapter that mounts to the bayonet on the end of the lens. It is called the " Filter Adapter FA-DC58C "
I'm pretty sure it can handle a macro diopter.
There is also a lens hood for the bayonet mount (The "*
Lens Hood LH-DC70*"):
There is also a macro flash adapter with the familiar smooth ring from the 100mm and 60mm Macro lenses. It is called the " Light Adapter MLA-DC1 " This uses the more traditional g-series remove-the-ring and then mount to the body type of mount.
Therefore, I think that it is safe to say the the G1X will have decent macro capabilities and has some features designed for the dental/medical market.
This also means that 3rd parties should be able to easily make collars that can accept wide angle and telephoto adapters. Of course nobody yet knows how well that will work.
I will add that the whole point of the G1 X is to give good compact performance at non-telephoto focal lengths. If you need telephoto, canon figures you will go for a DSLR, which is really quite correct. I never use my tele adapter on my G9, its pretty nearly useless.
Shorthand
Senior Member
Crazy - you need very different lens designs for different sensors.
Shorthand
Senior Member
MFD is indeed measured from subject to sensor. Working distance is from the front of the lens.
MFD/(true) focal length will give you a first-order approximation of the maximum magnification of a lens. The issue is we don't know the maximum focal length at the MFD for the G1 X.
MFD/(true) focal length will give you a first-order approximation of the maximum magnification of a lens. The issue is we don't know the maximum focal length at the MFD for the G1 X.
Actually at the Imaging-Resource chat with Chuck at Canon he stated that the filter adaptor and Canon 250D worked really well. As the 250D doesn't cost any light and reduces infinity focus to inches it makes serious macro work easy.
It's a hard to find part new (try eBay) but I've got mine on my desk waiting for my camera.
It's a hard to find part new (try eBay) but I've got mine on my desk waiting for my camera.
Shorthand
Senior Member
Raynox also makes some very fine achromatic diopters, which can be easier to find.
Lensmate will always have something high quality available in a 58mm mount.
Lensmate will always have something high quality available in a 58mm mount.
Nudibranco
Well-known member
not so crazy... !
m43 and 43 sensors take on easily the lenses designed for bigger sensors like aps-c and FF.
In Underwater Photography the medium range shooting used over the water becomes much less useful Underwater. You have to deal all the times with subjects that either require Wide Angle or UWA and MACRO or Super MAcro.
So some people that strive for quality may actually bring 2 cameras for their shooting.
For Macro shooting a high quality smaller sensor may actually be the best way to go. However even at Macro distances the larger sensor do show some better resolutions and less noise than the best compacts at the lowest ISOs. So if the G1X were to have some additional diopter lens that will allow at least 10cm focusing it will be a very versatile tool.
I wished I knew what shortest Focus distance is available at its telephoto ranges from 90 to 110mm. It could help extrapolate what magnification diopters are needed for short range focus...
m43 and 43 sensors take on easily the lenses designed for bigger sensors like aps-c and FF.
In Underwater Photography the medium range shooting used over the water becomes much less useful Underwater. You have to deal all the times with subjects that either require Wide Angle or UWA and MACRO or Super MAcro.
So some people that strive for quality may actually bring 2 cameras for their shooting.
For Macro shooting a high quality smaller sensor may actually be the best way to go. However even at Macro distances the larger sensor do show some better resolutions and less noise than the best compacts at the lowest ISOs. So if the G1X were to have some additional diopter lens that will allow at least 10cm focusing it will be a very versatile tool.
I wished I knew what shortest Focus distance is available at its telephoto ranges from 90 to 110mm. It could help extrapolate what magnification diopters are needed for short range focus...
This totally makes sense to me.
Canon website seems to indicate 20cm MFD at the wide end, and 85cm MFD at the long end (112mm film equivalent). This may not be 1:1 true macro magnification but some sort of 'proxi' thing instead. Let's wait and see.
Canon website seems to indicate 20cm MFD at the wide end, and 85cm MFD at the long end (112mm film equivalent). This may not be 1:1 true macro magnification but some sort of 'proxi' thing instead. Let's wait and see.
Hi Iso,
Yes, you're right about the pixels/mm and the greater DOF. My main point was that I doubted that Canon had been able to build in the ability to take macro photos of subjects as small as those feasible with small sensored cameras. I argued that this would have been difficult with the longer FL lens in the G1X, and the need for its mechanical design to be small to retract.
I agree with you that the G1X should be able to competently take small scenes at its stated minimum focusing distance of 20cm (at the wide end). How big/small would the subject actually be? To get a rough indication I checked out my 15mm prime lens on my K5. It focuses to a marked minimum of 18cm and is also marked at 20cm. With the lens set at the 20cm mark, the subject size is a little tighter than an A4 page on the K5's APSC sensor. This would suggest that the smallest subject size of the G1X - when zoomed to 15.5mm and focused to 20cm - would be proportionally smaller because of its sub-APSC sized sensor - a subject size somewhere between A5 and A4.
This isn't really macro, but I suspect that it would still meet the close focus requirements of most photographers most of the time (including me). Remember too, that if the G1X zoom also focuses down to 20cm at the long setting, the magnification would be higher again. However, it may not do that. The specs don't say, and this data is rather conspicuous by omission.
If anyone needs greater magnification than the G1X provides, they could add diopter lenses to the filter ring (at some sacrifice to working distance). Alternatively they could resort to either a smaller sensored camera with tighter macro, or to a DSLR and a macro lens.
Can't wait to see one........ Rod
Yes, you're right about the pixels/mm and the greater DOF. My main point was that I doubted that Canon had been able to build in the ability to take macro photos of subjects as small as those feasible with small sensored cameras. I argued that this would have been difficult with the longer FL lens in the G1X, and the need for its mechanical design to be small to retract.
I agree with you that the G1X should be able to competently take small scenes at its stated minimum focusing distance of 20cm (at the wide end). How big/small would the subject actually be? To get a rough indication I checked out my 15mm prime lens on my K5. It focuses to a marked minimum of 18cm and is also marked at 20cm. With the lens set at the 20cm mark, the subject size is a little tighter than an A4 page on the K5's APSC sensor. This would suggest that the smallest subject size of the G1X - when zoomed to 15.5mm and focused to 20cm - would be proportionally smaller because of its sub-APSC sized sensor - a subject size somewhere between A5 and A4.
This isn't really macro, but I suspect that it would still meet the close focus requirements of most photographers most of the time (including me). Remember too, that if the G1X zoom also focuses down to 20cm at the long setting, the magnification would be higher again. However, it may not do that. The specs don't say, and this data is rather conspicuous by omission.
If anyone needs greater magnification than the G1X provides, they could add diopter lenses to the filter ring (at some sacrifice to working distance). Alternatively they could resort to either a smaller sensored camera with tighter macro, or to a DSLR and a macro lens.
Can't wait to see one........ Rod
iso rivolta
Senior Member
In cameras with interchangeable lenses you have a marking on the camera for the image focal plane and the (minimum) focus distance of a lens is indeed measured between the subject and the sensor and that is important because you need the same reference when using different lenses.
As you can see G1 X has no such mark on the camera top, as neither do most of fixed lens cameras (Fuji X100 is an exception here), so there is no way of measuring the focus distance. In this case the manufacturers are giving the working distance (the minimum distance between the lens front element and the subject) calling it "macro distance", "imaging range" "focusing range" and all sorts of names except working distance. Even X100 with that focal plane mark present (for "retro" considerations only probably) has in the specification sheet something called "focus distance (from lens surface)".
As you can see G1 X has no such mark on the camera top, as neither do most of fixed lens cameras (Fuji X100 is an exception here), so there is no way of measuring the focus distance. In this case the manufacturers are giving the working distance (the minimum distance between the lens front element and the subject) calling it "macro distance", "imaging range" "focusing range" and all sorts of names except working distance. Even X100 with that focal plane mark present (for "retro" considerations only probably) has in the specification sheet something called "focus distance (from lens surface)".
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum