G1X Is this the best Canon can do?

In this forum those comments from any random user would be met with "RTFM." Pointing out a limitation is fine, but for a reviewer to seem surprised by something that is in blinking pink neon letters in the manual and any review or spec sheet posted anywhere else....that's where credibility of a reviewer comes into play.

It is certainly possible that the G1x is not up to your expectations.

However, i do not believe that your statement that the E-P1 is beating the G1x on IQ is holding up. I would at least qualify:

I think it is fair to say that unless you look at the edges of the picture the G1x easily beats the E-P1 on image quality. That becomes more apparent the higher you go with ISO.

If you look at the edges (e.g. the watch bottom right or the batteries bottom left the E-P1 wins. However this is for one focal length and at close range, in other words it could be an extreme condition for the lens.

Generally i would say that the G1x beats the E-P1 (and even the E-P3) on IQ at least iso800 upwards. Now is it enough to buy a new camera if you own an E-P1? That i don't know. That is your decision.

bigpigbig said:

I was super excited to replace my "Old" E-PL1 with the Canon G1X. I thought with the latest (Digic 5) processor and well substantiated line of 12 G series cameras, Canon would hit it out of the park.

Well...I went here: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canong1x/page6.asp

I put in Fuji X100, Nikon V1, and E-PL1 against the G1X.

The E-PL1 blows them all away in every ISO both JPG and RAW. OK, just so I don't get bashed, maybe it doesn't blow them away, but it is as good as or better at every ISO.

My big question is: have we gotten NOWHERE with IQ in this mid-size camera in TWO YEARS? I was so excited until I saw this.

Click to expand...

pede59 said:

However, i do not believe that your statement that the E-P1 is beating the G1x on IQ is holding up. I would at least qualify: ...

bigpigbig said:

...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Also, one should also take the DPR studio test shots as one test with some sampling error. I used the 5D2 as one of my comparison cameras and all of the 5D2 shots looked soft by comparison. I don't think the G1X or any of the alternative cameras mentioned here are going to best the 5D so something else is going on in its test. (They say they used the 85 f1.4 lens which I've never heard of.) DPR's caveat about the g1X's corner sharpness caused me to inspect the available sample images carefully and I don't see an alarming issue. One test is good but more tests are better.

tinpusher wrote:

but image quality and colour are worth praising.... as is my 2 year old Leica X1!

tinpusher said:

Waste of money they cried as I bought my X1 but I'm still saying "wow" at the results.

Click to expand...

I agree, I like the output of my X1 and love the simple controls. As far as a smaller interchangeable lens camera, I'm looking to see what Leica brings this fall. Rightly or wrongly, I have more confidence in Leica 1.0 than Fuji 1.0 based on the X100 and X10. I will look at the OMD too. The powerzoom lenses don't interest me in the slightest, they don't even seem to be up to 1.0 level.

Reviewers almost assuredly did not expect such a limited close focusing limitation with this camera....

Yes they should have noted the warning, but they probably did not notice it because they would not expect it at that long a distance.

Then the reviewers are grossly incompetent and have no business passing themselves off as any sort of camera experts. Period.

Large sensor cameras are different from tiny sensor compacts. Inability to achieve close focus is routine with many excellent DSLR lenses.

For many of the compact oriented participants in this forum to not understand such things is... just the nature of things. For someone who is being paid to review cameras to not understand it is inexcusable.

jimr said:

Reviewers almost assuredly did not expect such a limited close focusing limitation with this camera....

Yes they should have noted the warning, but they probably did not notice it because they would not expect it at that long a distance.

Click to expand...

I would extend that to people who insist on pointing out one aspect or another of this camera as a weakness while ignoring the fact that such compromises come with the advantage of an exceptional strength.

This camera is a DSLR in P&S clothing, so confusion initially is understandable. To either continue insisting it should be priced like a P&S or keep the price but have a great viewfinder and interchangeable lenses is to miss the entire point around which the camera is based.

And to get true macro on an interchangeable lens system usually costs somewhere between $500 and a $1,000. The Canon 100mm IS is just under a grand and it's worth every penny.

Wow, I didn't mean to start a thread like this. I am personally disappointed with what Canon is offering. I love Canon products as you can see in my OP, I only own Canon in the other two segments I defined. I want a serious mid-size camera. I don't love the E-PL1, but it was close to as-good-as-it-gets at the time. I was SO READY to pull the trigger in the G1X (might still) but...

This is pulling me:
F2.0-2.8, 28-112mm

TWO STOPS FASTER at the long end and ONE STOP FASTER at the wide and.

That means shots taken at the long end will be ISO 400 when the G1X needs to be ISO 1600.

Canon: WHY?! 2.8-5.6

So the 20mm f1.7 Panny allows me to shoot at 3200 while the G1X needs to shoot at 12,800.

It's the best built on lens camera out thee. any camera that has interchangeable lens with good prims are going to look better they just chose not to build one yet I was hoping for one. I got a G1x today and I am fairly pleased so far but I only took a few photo's. If you don't like it just don't buy it no one is forcing you to It's good for what it is.
--

My gear: 5DmkII,7D,300mm2.8Lis,70-2002.8Lis,17-40f4L,851.8,501.4,1002.8 macro,2 580ex flashes,twin macro flash,oly E-P1

The Sony X10 has a f2.0-2.8. That is what I would expect from Canon.

PHelton said:

It's the best built on lens camera out there.

Click to expand...

Man --- i guess you mean Fuji? And you also know that it has a tiny sensor that is unable to produce pictures without throwing in a white disk here and there? Maybe not a problem with the lens but who knows?

And you claim you own top Canon gear. Between that and owning a E-P1 you should pretty much know what you can expect from a 4x zoom lens for a sensor that is between 4/3 and APS-C.

I do not know of any zoom lens in Canon's EF lineup that has more than 2.8 as largest aperture. And the few zooms with a constant 2.8 max aperture are very large, heavy and expensive.

I have to doubt that you are serious.

bigpigbig said:

PHelton said:

It's the best built on lens camera out there.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yes. I am serious. Just in a hurry.

Yes, I meant Fuji X10.

Yes, I am a Newbie. Not to photography. But to these small "gadgets". I guess what you are saying is that it is the physics that prevents a 112mm 2.8 lens from producing an image circle large enough to fill the G1X sensor AND fit on the body (size and weight).

If so, I get it. And agree. Thanks.

Why people have to be so personal on this form is beyond me. BE NICE! It will come back to you tenfold.

I have been shooting with an SLR for 30 years. My lens line up looks like this:
8-15 f4 fisheye
14mm f2.8 MKII
35mm f1.4
24-105mm f4
85mm f1.2
70-200mm f2.8 IS
300mm f2.8 IS
TC 1.4 and 2.0 MKIII

My expectations are high.

pede59 said:

Man --- i guess you mean Fuji? And you also know that it has a tiny sensor that is unable to produce pictures without throwing in a white disk here and there? Maybe not a problem with the lens but who knows?

And you claim you own top Canon gear. Between that and owning a E-P1 you should pretty much know what you can expect from a 4x zoom lens for a sensor that is between 4/3 and APS-C.

I do not know of any zoom lens in Canon's EF lineup that has more than 2.8 as largest aperture. And the few zooms with a constant 2.8 max aperture are very large, heavy and expensive.

I have to doubt that you are serious.

bigpigbig said:

PHelton said:

It's the best built on lens camera out there.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

bigpigbig said:

Wow, I didn't mean to start a thread like this.

Click to expand...

Don't be. Most of the people that reply to threads here are either genuinely curious or they're looking for something to disagree over. Hopefully others looking at the G1X will read threads like this one and at least take the time to look into the camera most closely and explore the possibilities that it might offer to them. If they don't want it, they can pass. Even Canon's first public statement about the G1X (before they had even named the camera) concluded that they expected the new model to be the subject of debate and discussion.

bigpigbig said:

I am personally disappointed with what Canon is offering. I love Canon products as you can see in my OP, I only own Canon in the other two segments I defined. I want a serious mid-size camera. I don't love the E-PL1, but it was close to as-good-as-it-gets at the time. I was SO READY to pull the trigger in the G1X (might still) but...

Click to expand...

Sounds like you purchased it for just the right reasons. The E-PL1 produces stunning images with considerable clarity.

Personally, I was DEEPLY disappointed to find out that the G1X has a 20cm minimum Macro distance because I shoot a lot of Macro shots from day to day. Macro is one of the functions I use regularly. But when I took the time to read about WHY the G1X had to sacrifice the extreme closeup distance due to the larger sensor and larger optics, it made a lot more sense to me. The camera is not incapable of macro shots, just extreme macro shots. Is it worth giving up the super-tight macro shots for a camera that should ultimately produce DSLR-type image quality? I think so. Yes.

I'll show you why just as soon as I can get my hands on a G1X (hopefully in another day or so). I've already composed a list of unusual subjects, conditions, locations and lighting variations that I wish to photograph just to show my friends what I believe this camera can do. I think I might have some surprises in store for those watching the G1X threads in relation to what I think I can get out of this camera.

bigpigbig said:

This is pulling me:
F2.0-2.8, 28-112mm

TWO STOPS FASTER at the long end and ONE STOP FASTER at the wide and.

Click to expand...

Higher grade optics on the G1X with low dispersion means you'll probably appreciate the lack of optical aberrations at the long end of the zoom on this camera.

bigpigbig said:

That means shots taken at the long end will be ISO 400 when the G1X needs to be ISO 1600.

Click to expand...

And yet the G1X can still take that higher ISO shot and it will be smooth enough with so little noise that you probably won't even see a difference.

bigpigbig said:

Canon: WHY?! 2.8-5.6

Click to expand...

Because this is the price you must pay for a larger lens to compliment a larger sensor. The ability to run the G1X at much higher ISO with less noise ratio is why you won't miss f/2.0 - You'll get the same shots. Just look at the numerous nighttime examples taken by other members here with their own G1Xs. They didn't need f2.0 ... another thing to note is that when you drop or raise the f/stop beyond certain numbers, there's a loss of image quality as the clarity of the picture degrades with other factors like ISO and noise reduction/inclusion.

bigpigbig said:

So the 20mm f1.7 Panny allows me to shoot at 3200 while the G1X needs to shoot at 12,800.

Click to expand...

No. The G1X can produce a picture at 12,800 in RAW and JPEG that the Panny can't even produce at a much lower ISO like 3200. I don't doubt that MOST cameras produce similar shots with very low ISO counts. But what we need today is the ability to take lowlight shots with great clarity and detail with a high Dynamic Range. Few cameras can do this with pleasing results. The G1X, which is not even a DSLR, apparently can.

This careful scrutiny of certain images and comparisons between cameras is great fun on places like this one. But it does not offer a real-world expectation as to what kind of an experience you will have with a particular camera. The G1X was not built as a successor to the G12. Canon have made this clear in their statements as have DPreview. It's a new type of camera that was built from the ground up as a kind of "labor of love" by the Canon designers and technicians. It was not released as a response to a competitor. It was not produced to kill off any rivals. It was made simply because they had a good understanding of the technology (lenses & sensors) and because they wanted to produce something special. If you can't appreciate that, then I might suggest that you do NOT buy this camera. And why would you want to if your own camera makes you happy with the results?

--
Regards,

Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design/powershot_pro1

Awesome. Thank you. Well said.

I believe rumor was 13th of March so 2 more weeks. I believe Sony made a mistake by dropping F and R line as they those would be great with all developments along today. I believe rumor was NEX based camera with fixed glass would be released to play against G1X, but it remains to be seen. I believe by the end of the year or early next one all major players will have one and Canon will be able to take it to the next level with G2X. With that said, I plan to purchase ultrazoom for now as that seems to be the only "stable" thing at the moment. Small P&S, while cheap, will be eaten by smartphone segment so plan to invest there neither.
--
Cheers,
Hrvoje
F7one7; http://hcrvelin.fotki.com

LOL, I have had them all are you kidding?

LOL, Really are you kidding? Please please re-test this time put your glasses on...I don't want to be rude but come on.

it is kind of pointless to debate such an opinion rendered on I don't know what, instead of mult-sourcing expert tests and reviews to test out your thoughts. By the way, you are wrong.

bigpigbig said:

The way I see it, there are three sets of cameras I want to own.

1) DSLR. (I have a 1D MKIV and a 5D MKII) - Big, heavy, top of the line IQ and lens choices. Fast. Looking forward to see the new 1DX and 5D(whatever).

2) Compact. - Not small enough to go in a pocket, but light and easy to take along in a small bag. Decent IQ. Up to 8x10 they rival DSLR. Some have changeable lenses. (I have an Olympus E-PL1)

3) Slim Compact - Fit in a pocket. Small enough that you could easily take it anywhere. IQ not up for printing large, slow, not many creative options) (I have a Canon SD980 IS)

Sorry for the long lead in:

I was super excited to replace my "Old" E-PL1 with the Canon G1X. I thought with the latest (Digic 5) processor and well substantiated line of 12 G series cameras, Canon would hit it out of the park.

Well... have they?

Price is $799.

I realize that many new "features" have been introduced, but I care mostly about IQ. I shoot mostly in Manual mode.

For the same price, my Olympus came with a 14-42 f3.5-5.6 (28-84mm eqiv.) and I bought a Panny 20mm f1.7. $800 all in.

Two years later and Canon offers us this. The IQ should blow me away.

Well...I went here: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canong1x/page6.asp

I put in Fuji X100, Nikon V1, and E-PL1 against the G1X.

The E-PL1 blows them all away in every ISO both JPG and RAW. OK, just so I don't get bashed, maybe it doesn't blow them away, but it is as good as or better at every ISO.

My big question is: have we gotten NOWHERE with IQ in this mid-size camera in TWO YEARS? I was so excited until I saw this.

Click to expand...

--
Joe
Central Florida