Canon g1 x mark 2 review

Started Mar 14, 2014 | Discussions thread
Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,380
Re: 4 pages detailed review at

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

That's exactly what I'm thinking as well, and i'm not sure why no one seems to understand this.

why? simple, because some people have other priorities and shooting habits than you.

In such low light, detail will be lost no matter what. F2.0 allows more flexibility, you can still shoot at F2.8 or F4 or whatever you want, but you can also shoot @ F2.0. Not sure why everyone is having such big issues with this.

If you want to use the f/2 or f/2.8 in GOOD light and the lens doesn't deliver, you are paying for and carrying dead weight. F/2 is not only for 'low light performance'.

Before even having the camera, I have an easy fix for this, try not using F2.0, or use the step zoom to keep it at 28mm. Problem solved.

It seems the lens is soft (with blurred corners) wide open throughout the zoom range, so just sticking to 28mm doesn't solve everything; but I will reserve judgment until we have more reliable test images.

Before you say "but i ONLY shoot at F2.0 and 24mm" well, if you actually did, then you'd know of this issue anyways. Also the canon S120 I just handled had this same issue, but it would only go to F1.8 in very low light, where you'd be forced to use higher ISO or wider apertures anyway. I'm also quite certain many other cameras that are able to shoot at so bright and wide will have this issue. No worries unless you're unable to adjust settings on your own.

As mentioned before, I found the very similar S110 lens quite usable wide open at 24mm equiv. (yes, it is a bit 'soft' full open, but acceptable - not like the few 24mm equiv. images I have seen from the G1X II) and optimal by f/2.8. One could argue that f/2 on the S110 is equivalent to about f/4 on the G1X II for DOF control and light gathering, but if you can use that extra f/2-f/4 aperture range only for low light shooting (when the corners don't matter), I doubt it is worth the huge extra cost and weight (not for me ...).

The samples posted in the flickr look sharp enough for me

You stated before:

technic wrote:

Some people want to use f/2 in medium to good light levels, where the sharpness loss will be painfully obvious (judging from the first results). For landscape / architecture style images I try to keep ISO as low as possible for better sharpness and DR, and for this type of images sharpness loss in the corners is often undesirable (soft corners will be far more obvious that e.g. in people or low light shots). I can accept softness full open if it is really sharp by f/4 in the WA range, but even that is questionable.

So are you shooting landscape and architecture at f/2? What other conditions do you use that require sharp corners at f/2 (which usually isn't the case for most lenses while shooting that bright anyways)

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow