Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon Rumors-PowerShot? I Say It Is A G2X

Go to last post
4

4thnebula

Senior Member
Messages
2,421
Reaction score
440
Location
US
It does make sense to me. Maybe Canon will test out the their next gen APS-C PD/CD sensor on it to see how fast af is to people. This was the start of the EOS-M and T4i roll out
last year. Personally, I hope it is the 70D, but a G2X could be interesting even if I wouldn't buy one.
 
While I think a G2X would be cool, I want an entirely different model without the OVF and the flip-out screen.

Basically, I want something with the G1X's image quality, faster AF, and most importantly, as compact as possible.
 
Hi 4thnebula,

I saw your post and so I've just read the front page and index of the Canon Rumors site. I'm not sure what you're referring to that might point to a G2X. There's nothing G1X/G2X specific, (unless I missed it completely, in which case I apologise in advance).


And to Patrick...... I think if you read the many threads on what a G2X looks like, debate in relation to the VF has been largely about what kind of VF, not a preference for not having one at all. If Canon ever develop a replacement and keep its G series heritage, they'll probably retain a VF and flip screen. They've both been popular over the years with G series users.

There's a view that Canon aren't developing a successor. We'll have to wait and see. Personally, I've argued for an EVF over a tunnel OVF with reduced FOV, because it would free Canon up to increase the diameter of the lens (read increase lens speed).

Patience.... I think we can expect some new and interesting mirror-less cameras through 2013.

Cheers, Rod
 
Rod McD said:
Rod McD wrote:
And to Patrick...... I think if you read the many threads on what a G2X looks like, debate in relation to the VF has been largely about what kind of VF, not a preference for not having one at all.
Click to expand...



Oh, I definitely understand that.

I just *really* want Canon to make an S-series type Camera with the G1X sensor, kind of a competitor to the RX100 and recently announced Nikon Coolpix A.
 
First: The pen being sent out produces a PowerShot image, the G2X seems the one 1st in line;

2: As I stated, in the past year the G1X came first, then the EOS M;

3: A new APS-C sensor is coming-it makes sense to beta test it and the af system first;

Its all speculation and fun for me. Not sure why Canon would spend the money on a PowerShot image with no PowerShot coming out.
 
Must be one awesome PowerShot.



Or the 70D is coming.
 
On the other hand, if (unknown) the rumored $800 Canon mini-DSLR is released, then there may never be a G2 X. Between the mini-DSLR and the EOS-M, Canon would have the large-sensor small-camera sector pretty well covered.

Just wild speculation on my part. :-)
 
It's going to be a Powershot Pro2. It'll be a 14MP 1" CMOS sensor, 28-200mm (equiv) f/2-f/4.5 zoom w/ IS, 1.44million-dot EVF, 2.5" 920,000dot tilting LCD and a red ring around the lens to make people feel special.




Canon reads these forums and is releasing this in the hopes that it will finally shut marco nero up. It will be like Christmas for everyone! :)
 
AngryCorgi said:
AngryCorgi wrote:

It's going to be a Powershot Pro2. It'll be a 14MP 1" CMOS sensor, 28-200mm (equiv) f/2-f/4.5 zoom w/ IS, 1.44million-dot EVF, 2.5" 920,000dot tilting LCD and a red ring around the lens to make people feel special.

Canon reads these forums and is releasing this in the hopes that it will finally shut marco nero up. It will be like Christmas for everyone! :)
Click to expand...
Sorry to disappoint you but Canon DON'T read these public forums although they have staff who surf this site in their own time and report leaked material directly to Canon Japan. So keep on dreaming.

Anyone reading Canon Rumors and treating the information there as even "likely" is an absolute idiot.

Anyone reposting stories about what they think they read on the Canon Rumors sites is likewise considered foolish here by his peers. You know this because we keep reminding you.


There's no Pro2 (well, there's already a Pro2 although we sometimes affectionately call it a "G1X") and I think you'll find there's no G2X on the way either. I was using my own G1X yesterday and it's far more than adequate, considering why it was manufactured in the first place. But you kids can keep shadow-boxing and try to impress one another with features that your "dream camera" might have whilst the rest of us actually go about buying cameras every year or two rather than complain bitterly that the price "was just $100 more than [you] were willing to spend" so you'd rather wait a while for the price to "come down" .... and, when it finally does, you'll repeatedly post here about how there must be a newer, better update "just around the corner" so you'll wait and see what happens. Then the process can repeat itself all over again. Just as it does here every single year.

Meanwhile, those of us who actually done a little research based on the announcements (and release of Camera specs) have gone out and actually purchased a particular camera to take photographs with.... and we browse the posts on this forum by those who make the same mistakes year in and year out... whilst we chuckle to ourselves in that "I told you so" kind of way.

/Annoying, isn't it?
 
Perhaps we should think about the G1 X a bit more in terms of what it is able to do. It has good high ISO characteristics, excellent image quality and a serious sensor. We all know that it needs better focusing speed and inreased frames per second(fps) and a better OVF /EVF. The lens is said to be sharp if slow but the slowness is an optical engineering reality. A faster lens' for the sensor size would increase the lens size significantly and therefore defeat one of the objects of its perception.

Now one of the things I cannot understand with Canon thinking is focusing speed and fps. They have the technology, or should have, others have such as Olympus and Panasonic. The EOS M suffers the same so say. Fuji with the X Pro 1 and X100 had similar problems, improved on the XE1. The afore mentioned are not without problems or are they perfect in reality. Maybe Canon is working on it or should be, and I would bet that sooner or later they will introduce a system that works at least adequately.

Would it not be logical that Canon rectifies the problem, to some extent, on the M and on it's DSLR range for live view focusing which will then be transfered to the G1X thus making a G2X. OK there maybe some other improvements to compliment said G2X. It would be reasonable to suggest that their money earners will get the improvements first, so have patience perhaps.

The fact that the G1X doesn't focus at high fps and that it relies on the depth of field to keep the image sharp is nothing new, any lens that is manual focusing will be the same, it always was/is and is still a requirement of rangefinders to use zone focusing at various times.

I guess we all expect perfection in this digital age, even instantly I might add, but life is rarely like that. Photography is still all about light and what ever cameras we use still has to be told what to do and when to do it. Enough ramblings, but when I get brave enough I will divest myself of the DSLR trappings and get a G1X / 2.
 
frameman said:
Now one of the things I cannot understand with Canon thinking is focusing speed and fps. They have the technology, or should have, others have such as Olympus and Panasonic. The EOS M suffers the same so say. Fuji with the X Pro 1 and X100 had similar problems, improved on the XE1. The afore mentioned are not without problems or are they perfect in reality. Maybe Canon is working on it or should be, and I would bet that sooner or later they will introduce a system that works at least adequately.
Click to expand...
My guess is cost and market. They came out with a point and shoot that costs as much as their low end DSLR and I'd imagine they were very uncertain if that market existed and, if so, would they butcher their DSLR market that is much more lucrative than another point and shoot segment since lenses and accessories are very profitable. Also, they developed a new sensor for this camera (maybe not new from the ground up, but at least a new take on established tech) that costs a lot of money not to mention designing an entirely unique lens. I can speak for myself when I say that the G1 X works more than adequately and I'm sure EOS M owners would say the same.
frameman said:
Would it not be logical that Canon rectifies the problem, to some extent, on the M and on it's DSLR range for live view focusing which will then be transfered to the G1X thus making a G2X. OK there maybe some other improvements to compliment said G2X. It would be reasonable to suggest that their money earners will get the improvements first, so have patience perhaps.
Click to expand...
Yes, if they are confident in the market then now doubt their costs for the next model will have dropped somewhat allowing for money to be put in other areas. If the past is any indication we shouldn't hold our breath for a G2 X really soon. I'm betting there will be one in the not too distant future.
frameman said:
The fact that the G1X doesn't focus at high fps and that it relies on the depth of field to keep the image sharp is nothing new, any lens that is manual focusing will be the same, it always was/is and is still a requirement of rangefinders to use zone focusing at various times.
Click to expand...
Relies on DoF to keep the image sharp? Zone focusing? I'm not sure what you mean here. The G1 X has a very narrow depth of field, unlike every other P&S, which means it doesn't have the AF advantage of huge depths of field. Are you saying zone focusing is the only way one can deal with "slow" focus?
frameman said:
I guess we all expect perfection in this digital age, even instantly I might add, but life is rarely like that. Photography is still all about light and what ever cameras we use still has to be told what to do and when to do it. Enough ramblings, but when I get brave enough I will divest myself of the DSLR trappings and get a G1X / 2.
Click to expand...
Why would you get rid of your DSLR for a G1 X? Must it be all or nothing? Only one tool at a time for many, many different jobs? I think Canon hit the nail on the head when they said the G1 X was designed for people who demanded excellent image quality, were already invested in their DSLR, and wanted a small, self-contained P&S that could match the image quality of the large sensors they're used to. It would take a very impressive G2 X to convince me to sell my body, lenses, flash, accessories, and carry around something that only had one lens.
 
I have just spent 15 mins replying to have it wiped out by a an internet error, blast it. I'll not try again.

Short replies :- I want lighter and smaller kit and utilise some of the Canon accessories I already have, the G1X in a faster focusing guise would surfice adequately as it has the image quality.

Zone focusing is not an answer to slow focusing but an option if you know when and where you intend to capture the image, especially when it will be across the scene. The smaller the sensor the greater the depth of field at any focal length. The G1X has a very useable sensor size in that regard. Zone focusing works by the fact of knowing the distance etc and understanding the hyperfocal length. It is possible to fit the target within the depth of field and get sharp focus, Leica M users seem to get adept at it.

If the EOS M gets faster focusing then I guess that it will be transfered to the G1X and DSLRs that use live view, and cosequentially create a G2X. The list of reviews that absolutely love the EOS M and G1X but find the focusing frustrating are endless. I can't see the point of the M but I can the G1X. From my testing the slower focusing is a bug bear to me and one of the reasons I haven't yet bought into one. I have Leica D-Lux 4 that is faster and that is 3-4 years older.

I hope I have answered some of the things that I refered to in my previous post, the destroyed post that didn't happen was much more detailed , but there ya go it happens.
 
frameman said:
frameman wrote:

I have just spent 15 mins replying to have it wiped out by a an internet error, blast it. I'll not try again.
Click to expand...
Argh!!! I hate that. If I've got my thinking cap on I try to paste everything into Word for a quick spelling/grammar check which is also handy for preventing losses. I still lose stuff when I get in a hurry, so I feel your pain.
frameman said:
Short replies :- I want lighter and smaller kit and utilise some of the Canon accessories I already have, the G1X in a faster focusing guise would surfice adequately as it has the image quality.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if Canon's position is good or bad: they have very fast AF on their low end DSRL's and even faster the higher up you go, which means they have a lot of profits to protect by carefully controlling their other market segments. If something costs too little and works too well, they steal from a segment that is already doing very well with few complaints. If something doesn't perform on par with technology they already have they're accused of holding back. If they create a new market segment like the G1 X they have to keep the cost within the realms of what they reasonably expect people to spend. So, the G1 X is both a victim and benefactor of Canon's innovation and extension into other, previously untread, paths.
frameman said:
Zone focusing is not an answer to slow focusing but an option if you know when and where you intend to capture the image, especially when it will be across the scene. The smaller the sensor the greater the depth of field at any focal length. The G1X has a very useable sensor size in that regard. Zone focusing works by the fact of knowing the distance etc and understanding the hyperfocal length. It is possible to fit the target within the depth of field and get sharp focus, Leica M users seem to get adept at it.
Click to expand...
The G1 X has the same depth of field issues as any other APS-C sensor since it is only slightly smaller than those found in all the 1.6X crop bodies. Zone focusing does help when possible. My expectations when using the G1 X are formed before I even take it with me since I know that I'm not going into a fast-action scenario but still need excellent low light performance. If things are completely unknown or will surely require the fastest AF I can get, out comes the 7D.
frameman said:
If the EOS M gets faster focusing then I guess that it will be transfered to the G1X and DSLRs that use live view, and cosequentially create a G2X. The list of reviews that absolutely love the EOS M and G1X but find the focusing frustrating are endless. I can't see the point of the M but I can the G1X. From my testing the slower focusing is a bug bear to me and one of the reasons I haven't yet bought into one. I have Leica D-Lux 4 that is faster and that is 3-4 years older.
Click to expand...
I do think Canon is right now rethinking how much money to spend on fast CD AF and what cameras to put it on. They might even be considering how to expand their on-sensor PD AF, perhaps putting an advanced version in the next round of DSLR bodies as well as the G2 X and EOS M2. Costs are coming down and they're running out of new or advanced features to sell, so fast AF tech is going to have to enter into the selling points for cheaper, high performing cameras.

Have you ever held and M? Used one? Having a tiny, tiny body that uses the same sensor as the T4i (or close to the same) and yields similar results to it and the 7D and 60D is a big deal. Fast AF isn't always required, and I do think that the speed of the AF is probably partially related to the power output of the battery (at least with regards to power conservation if not actual potential). Or maybe the technology just isn't there yet.
frameman said:
I hope I have answered some of the things that I refered to in my previous post, the destroyed post that didn't happen was much more detailed , but there ya go it happens.
Click to expand...
Canon can be conservative at times and revolutionary at others. They have a lot to protect and they are a big organization to move. Smaller companies do tend to move faster and come out with exciting new things, but those amazing new things aren't necessarily important and enduring.

There are some smaller changes that I wish Canon would make. I'd like to customize my bracketed exposures (let me take 7 shots 1/3 of a stop apart using only shutter speed variations.....that would be a fun menu option)....built in intervalometer would be nice, but I already have the TC-80N3 remote and I just received the adapter cable from Canon Parts to use it on the G1 X (originally made for the 60Da and way too expensive for what it does, but worth it to me).
 
Last edited:
Canon like Nikon have a legacy system to protect as you say, and if say the G2X is tooooo good they loose sales of lens'. Fuji doesn't and M4/3 is inter-changeable across the brands and more with adaptors. I see that Canon are rumoured to be putting out a much smaller DSLR this week, mmmmmm Oly did that before M 4/3.

For what I do in photography the G1X is almost there, almost. I can live with the slow lens (if it is) I would prefer an uninterupted viewfinder but quite frequently I need almost instant focusing. Even the focal length is sufficient, and I guess that third parties will eventually make add ons to accomodated other minor failings. The trouble is I really like the G1X, in the hand and images on the computer. It's not quite there but almost.

The M , well I've held it and taken images for testing, but, well no viewfinder. Image quality is so good for it's size, looks rediculous on larger lens' and how I wish Canon had put a bit more effort into it, it could have been a Fuji X chaser easily. Then again the sensor size needs a large image circle projected on to it and so it ends up like a Sony NEX, then again they put a viewfinder on their effort so why can't Canon. So close to being a show stopper.Kudos for sensor size goes to Canon for that.

Unless Canon sorts the G1X out or maybe the M then my 600D will surfice, I have moved on all my big heavy lens' and so minimise the weight factor and retained 80-90% of the image quality. The law of deminishing returns is so applicable, because a lens is several hundred pounds more expensive doesn't make the image quality several hundred pounds better. Mmmmmm, then again a lot depends on the image purpose and who's looking at it. It's good to discuss things.
 
frameman said:
frameman wrote:

I have just spent 15 mins replying to have it wiped out by a an internet error, blast it. I'll not try again.
Click to expand...
Just a tip: If your reply to a previous post is going to be lenghthy? Write it out in your Word Processor first. (I use Microsoft Word) Copy it and Paste into your dpreview reply. Works like a champ!

I got so frustrated with my replies or threads disappearing on this site, that's when I started using Word to compose them first.

I usually keep my replies/threads short....if I can. However, when you're dealing with Howard's thread/replies? They naturally lend themselves to long answers. (I mean that in a positive way)
frameman said:
Short replies :- I want lighter and smaller kit and utilise some of the Canon accessories I already have, the G1X in a faster focusing guise would surfice adequately as it has the image quality.

Zone focusing is not an answer to slow focusing but an option if you know when and where you intend to capture the image, especially when it will be across the scene. The smaller the sensor the greater the depth of field at any focal length. The G1X has a very useable sensor size in that regard. Zone focusing works by the fact of knowing the distance etc and understanding the hyperfocal length. It is possible to fit the target within the depth of field and get sharp focus, Leica M users seem to get adept at it.

If the EOS M gets faster focusing then I guess that it will be transfered to the G1X and DSLRs that use live view, and cosequentially create a G2X. The list of reviews that absolutely love the EOS M and G1X but find the focusing frustrating are endless. I can't see the point of the M but I can the G1X. From my testing the slower focusing is a bug bear to me and one of the reasons I haven't yet bought into one. I have Leica D-Lux 4 that is faster and that is 3-4 years older.

I hope I have answered some of the things that I refered to in my previous post, the destroyed post that didn't happen was much more detailed , but there ya go it happens.
Click to expand...
 
panamforeman said:
panamforeman wrote:
panamforeman said:
frameman wrote:

I have just spent 15 mins replying to have it wiped out by a an internet error, blast it. I'll not try again.
Click to expand...
Just a tip: If your reply to a previous post is going to be lenghthy? Write it out in your Word Processor first. (I use Microsoft Word) Copy it and Paste into your dpreview reply. Works like a champ!

I got so frustrated with my replies or threads disappearing on this site, that's when I started using Word to compose them first.

I usually keep my replies/threads short....if I can. However, when you're dealing with Howard's thread/replies? They naturally lend themselves to long answers. (I mean that in a positive way)
Click to expand...
OOPS! I see that Howard already recommended the same thing. I knew he was a smart guy!




panamforeman said:
panamforeman said:
Short replies :- I want lighter and smaller kit and utilise some of the Canon accessories I already have, the G1X in a faster focusing guise would surfice adequately as it has the image quality.

Zone focusing is not an answer to slow focusing but an option if you know when and where you intend to capture the image, especially when it will be across the scene. The smaller the sensor the greater the depth of field at any focal length. The G1X has a very useable sensor size in that regard. Zone focusing works by the fact of knowing the distance etc and understanding the hyperfocal length. It is possible to fit the target within the depth of field and get sharp focus, Leica M users seem to get adept at it.

If the EOS M gets faster focusing then I guess that it will be transfered to the G1X and DSLRs that use live view, and cosequentially create a G2X. The list of reviews that absolutely love the EOS M and G1X but find the focusing frustrating are endless. I can't see the point of the M but I can the G1X. From my testing the slower focusing is a bug bear to me and one of the reasons I haven't yet bought into one. I have Leica D-Lux 4 that is faster and that is 3-4 years older.

I hope I have answered some of the things that I refered to in my previous post, the destroyed post that didn't happen was much more detailed , but there ya go it happens.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top