Interesting offering from Canon : G3X

Mister Roboto said:

Geno123 said:

This from another site

All Details Below are Based on Speculation and Rumours only as to what the G3 X may well feature

• 20.2MP 1" High-Sensitivity CMOS Sensor
• DIGIC 6 Image Processor
• 25x Optical Zoom f/1.8-2.8 IS Lens
• 24-600mm (35mm Equivalent)
• 3.0" 1,040k-Dot Tilting Touchscreen LCD
• High-Speed AF with 31 Focus Points
• Full HD Video Recording at 60p
• ISO 12,800 & 6.5 fps Continuous Shooting
• Control Ring, Dials & Built-In ND Filter
• Built-In Wi-Fi Connectivity with NFC

Now This, if true, is really interesting!! Note the 1.8-2.8 IS lens

Click to expand...

Given the sensor size, I'd be happy to have a constant f/4.0 600mm lens. That aperture range is next to impossible.

Click to expand...

VisionLight said:

I really don't think the pop-up flash has a lot of practical use on a camera with a 600 mm (equiv) lens. An EVF would be much more useful for stability at that range, and therefore used by most experienced photographers more often than a pop-up flash. Yes, I know you younger folks say you are just fine with using the LCD for telephoto images, though my experience with students' images tells me otherwise.

So this is what would garner my interest in this camera, going from this:



to this:



Then the hot shoe can be used for what it was originally intended: the few times a flash needs to be attached. I know that a pop-up EVF would take more space than a tiny flash, but an external EVF adds even more. An EVF would also be more expensive, but not as expensive as an add-on.

This camera appears to be giving some degree of "best" (read that: acceptable compromise) of everything in a single package. No internal EVF unfortunately is not an acceptable compromise to most of the photographers I know, possibly unless every other feature is so good that we would have to swallow hard and live with the external EVF. So I will not write it off, at least not yet.

Ed

Click to expand...

damian5000 said:

damian5000 said:

I really don't think the pop-up flash has a lot of practical use on a camera with a 600 mm (equiv) lens. An EVF would be much more useful for stability at that range, and therefore used by most experienced photographers more often than a pop-up flash. Yes, I know you younger folks say you are just fine with using the LCD for telephoto images, though my experience with students' images tells me otherwise.

So this is what would garner my interest in this camera, going from this:



to this:



Then the hot shoe can be used for what it was originally intended: the few times a flash needs to be attached. I know that a pop-up EVF would take more space than a tiny flash, but an external EVF adds even more. An EVF would also be more expensive, but not as expensive as an add-on.

This camera appears to be giving some degree of "best" (read that: acceptable compromise) of everything in a single package. No internal EVF unfortunately is not an acceptable compromise to most of the photographers I know, possibly unless every other feature is so good that we would have to swallow hard and live with the external EVF. So I will not write it off, at least not yet.

Ed

Click to expand...

This is just a matter of taste.

Click to expand...

damian5000 said:

I would never use the EVF except in extreme and rare circumstances, and prefer to keep the cost down and have an onboard flash if I needed it. Far more people would be psd if they included the pricier EVF and nixed the flash.

Click to expand...

technic said:

sbansban said:

technic said:

technic said:

It would be very attractive if it could fit in a jacket pocket. That said, I'd be shocked if Canon managed to build a 600mm lens for a 1 inch sensor with those dimensions that's not ridiculously slow. I'm guessing the lens is going to be something like 24-600/f4-7?. I hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

24-600mm f/2.8-f/5.6 for 1 inch sensor is possible with current optics technology, assuming a size similar to FZ1000. If they want a much smaller size, it is probably going to be slower indeed, and have a more compromised lens with 'software magic' like on the G7X, which isn't good at least for those who want decent image quality throughout the frame. Or they would have to use DO technology but that is probably too expensive for a camera in this price range.

Also, it's not reassuring that the presentation has been postponed several times, maybe they have trouble realizing the combination of image quality and small size that they were aiming at? Just from the specs this should be an FZ1000-killer, and that will be difficult if it doesn't have an EVF and at least the same image quality.

Click to expand...

What is DO technology?

Click to expand...

DO = Diffractive Optics: this enables much shorter, lighter lenses and works especially well for long tele lenses (example: the new Canon 4/400 DO II, Nikon 4/300 VR PF). But I don't think the technology is suitable for this type of consumer cameras yet, probably still too expensive.

Click to expand...

kodakrome said:

technic said:

CoHiker said:

jonrobertp said:

dv312 said:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9634942175/canon-announces-plans-to-produce-g3-x-with-25x-zoom

Will this be the RX / FZ killer camera?

Cheers,

Click to expand...

looks like it will go into my jacket pocket. Yay !

Click to expand...

It would be very attractive if it could fit in a jacket pocket. That said, I'd be shocked if Canon managed to build a 600mm lens for a 1 inch sensor with those dimensions that's not ridiculously slow. I'm guessing the lens is going to be something like 24-600/f4-7?. I hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

24-600mm f/2.8-f/5.6 for 1 inch sensor is possible with current optics technology, assuming a size similar to FZ1000. If they want a much smaller size, it is probably going to be slower indeed, and have a more compromised lens with 'software magic' like on the G7X, which isn't good at least for those who want decent image quality throughout the frame. Or they would have to use DO technology but that is probably too expensive for a camera in this price range.

Also, it's not reassuring that the presentation has been postponed several times, maybe they have trouble realizing the combination of image quality and small size that they were aiming at? Just from the specs this should be an FZ1000-killer, and that will be difficult if it doesn't have an EVF and at least the same image quality.

Click to expand...

I don't see why people keep repeating comments about the G7X having a "compromised lens". I own a G7X and I get excellent images with it. I have no problem with the lens quality at all. The biggest weakness of the camera is that it doesn't have a viewfinder. It's got a fast lens and very good IS. The appeal of the G7X is in its very small size - 4 inches and 10 ounces. That's also its biggest limitation - you can't make a tiny camera without making compromises. The Sony RX100iii has a compromised lens - a very small zoom range. $800 for a compact that only goes to 70mm on the long end - that's a huge compromise. Think of how limiting that is. No small camera will do what a big camera can do. That's the limitation that comes with a camera that fits in your pocket.

Click to expand...

freediverx said:

kodakrome said:

technic said:

CoHiker said:

jonrobertp said:

dv312 said:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9634942175/canon-announces-plans-to-produce-g3-x-with-25x-zoom

Will this be the RX / FZ killer camera?

Cheers,

Click to expand...

looks like it will go into my jacket pocket. Yay !

Click to expand...

It would be very attractive if it could fit in a jacket pocket. That said, I'd be shocked if Canon managed to build a 600mm lens for a 1 inch sensor with those dimensions that's not ridiculously slow. I'm guessing the lens is going to be something like 24-600/f4-7?. I hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

24-600mm f/2.8-f/5.6 for 1 inch sensor is possible with current optics technology, assuming a size similar to FZ1000. If they want a much smaller size, it is probably going to be slower indeed, and have a more compromised lens with 'software magic' like on the G7X, which isn't good at least for those who want decent image quality throughout the frame. Or they would have to use DO technology but that is probably too expensive for a camera in this price range.

Also, it's not reassuring that the presentation has been postponed several times, maybe they have trouble realizing the combination of image quality and small size that they were aiming at? Just from the specs this should be an FZ1000-killer, and that will be difficult if it doesn't have an EVF and at least the same image quality.

Click to expand...

I don't see why people keep repeating comments about the G7X having a "compromised lens". I own a G7X and I get excellent images with it. I have no problem with the lens quality at all. The biggest weakness of the camera is that it doesn't have a viewfinder. It's got a fast lens and very good IS. The appeal of the G7X is in its very small size - 4 inches and 10 ounces. That's also its biggest limitation - you can't make a tiny camera without making compromises. The Sony RX100iii has a compromised lens - a very small zoom range. $800 for a compact that only goes to 70mm on the long end - that's a huge compromise. Think of how limiting that is. No small camera will do what a big camera can do. That's the limitation that comes with a camera that fits in your pocket.

Click to expand...

I tried out the G7X but ended up returning it. The build quality was superb, image quality was great, very fast lens, and the touch screen interface was simply fantastic, especially for controlling focus while shooting video. But the ergonomics were just terrible. It's simply too heavy and too small to maintain a confident grip, eespecially for one handed shooting. Also the lack of an EVF made for frustrating shooting in bright sunlight.

The fact that they seem to be taking the same design and adding a grip plus a crazy zoom lens is very enticing. As others have pointed out, the huge questions are how fast will the lens be and how quickly and reliably will it autofocus, especially at the far end of the zoom range.

Click to expand...

Helmut Eder said:

The fact that it says "Ultrasonic" might hint towards a newer (better) AF system...

Click to expand...

CoHiker said:

It would be very attractive if it could fit in a jacket pocket. That said, I'd be shocked if Canon managed to build a 600mm lens for a 1 inch sensor with those dimensions that's not ridiculously slow. I'm guessing the lens is going to be something like 24-600/f4-7?. I hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

Henry Falkner said:

CoHiker said:

It would be very attractive if it could fit in a jacket pocket. That said, I'd be shocked if Canon managed to build a 600mm lens for a 1 inch sensor with those dimensions that's not ridiculously slow. I'm guessing the lens is going to be something like 24-600/f4-7?. I hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

I have been using three 16 MB pocket travel zooms with 25-600mm lenses since the 24th September 2011 (Olympus SZ-30MR, SH-50, SH-1). What makes them all work with the slow lenses is the BSI-CMOS sensor.

The larger sensor in the G3X is of the BSI-CMOS type, so the lens speed will be less of an issue still.

Click to expand...

Helmut Eder said:

freediverx said:

kodakrome said:

technic said:

CoHiker said:

jonrobertp said:

dv312 said:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9634942175/canon-announces-plans-to-produce-g3-x-with-25x-zoom

Will this be the RX / FZ killer camera?

Cheers,

Click to expand...

looks like it will go into my jacket pocket. Yay !

Click to expand...

It would be very attractive if it could fit in a jacket pocket. That said, I'd be shocked if Canon managed to build a 600mm lens for a 1 inch sensor with those dimensions that's not ridiculously slow. I'm guessing the lens is going to be something like 24-600/f4-7?. I hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

24-600mm f/2.8-f/5.6 for 1 inch sensor is possible with current optics technology, assuming a size similar to FZ1000. If they want a much smaller size, it is probably going to be slower indeed, and have a more compromised lens with 'software magic' like on the G7X, which isn't good at least for those who want decent image quality throughout the frame. Or they would have to use DO technology but that is probably too expensive for a camera in this price range.

Also, it's not reassuring that the presentation has been postponed several times, maybe they have trouble realizing the combination of image quality and small size that they were aiming at? Just from the specs this should be an FZ1000-killer, and that will be difficult if it doesn't have an EVF and at least the same image quality.

Click to expand...

I don't see why people keep repeating comments about the G7X having a "compromised lens". I own a G7X and I get excellent images with it. I have no problem with the lens quality at all. The biggest weakness of the camera is that it doesn't have a viewfinder. It's got a fast lens and very good IS. The appeal of the G7X is in its very small size - 4 inches and 10 ounces. That's also its biggest limitation - you can't make a tiny camera without making compromises. The Sony RX100iii has a compromised lens - a very small zoom range. $800 for a compact that only goes to 70mm on the long end - that's a huge compromise. Think of how limiting that is. No small camera will do what a big camera can do. That's the limitation that comes with a camera that fits in your pocket.

Click to expand...

I tried out the G7X but ended up returning it. The build quality was superb, image quality was great, very fast lens, and the touch screen interface was simply fantastic, especially for controlling focus while shooting video. But the ergonomics were just terrible. It's simply too heavy and too small to maintain a confident grip, eespecially for one handed shooting. Also the lack of an EVF made for frustrating shooting in bright sunlight.

The fact that they seem to be taking the same design and adding a grip plus a crazy zoom lens is very enticing. As others have pointed out, the huge questions are how fast will the lens be and how quickly and reliably will it autofocus, especially at the far end of the zoom range.

Click to expand...

The fact that it says "Ultrasonic" might hint towards a newer (better) AF system...

Click to expand...

Henry Falkner said:

I am however concerned about reliability issues. The reports about the battery life in the G7X are ambiguous.

Click to expand...

Jim said:

requa said:

Jim said:

Helmut Eder said:

Looks to me like it has a similar fold out screen to the G1XM2

Click to expand...

I hope not. People who have been G series users really like the fully articulated tilt/swivel LCD. Why Canon dropped this is puzzling given its popularity.

To be honest, I really love Canon products and am willing to wait until the full spec is released shortly on the G3X. But the FZ1000 has a beautiful tilt/swivel LCD, a first-rate EVF and its image quality is excellent. It's size and price are also not off-putting to me.

As many others have stated, different cameras are targeted at different audiences and we buy the ones that fit our requirements the best. I'm just hoping that the G3x would be an exciting product like the FZ1000...something that the G7x wasn't.

We'll see soon enough.

Jim

Click to expand...

I had the original G1X with the tilt/swivel LCD, and certainly enjoyed that feature. I now have the G1X-II with the fold-out screen, and actually like this design better. For my uses, the fold-out design is much simpler and faster to deploy when needed. "My uses" would be, generally, any time I wish to shoot from a high or low angle. I realized when I began using the fold-out LCD that the vast majority of the times I extended the LCD on the G1X, I actually pulled it all the way out to the side and tilted it up or down -- I rarely had need for any other angle. Obviously, others have different needs, as several have mentioned the advantage of the tilt-swivel for shooting in portrait orientation from waist level, but I think you have over-generalized people who have been G series users based on your preference.

Dan

Click to expand...

Could be, but there is nothing that the tilt-only LCD can do that a fully tilt/swivel LCD can not do. The reverse is not true. I think it's a pretty safe bet that if you ask people if they would prefer a fully tilt/swivel LCD or one that's tilt-only, the fully tilt/swivel LCD would win hands down. If tilt-only were that great, the latest Rebels and XXD models, G1X Mark 1, and the SX40/50/60 series would all have tilt-only...and they don't. Only the G1X Mark II was downgraded from having one. In my view, that's both unfortunate and somewhat strange.

...just my take.

Jim

Click to expand...

Dale Buhanan said:

Jim said:

requa said:

Jim said:

Helmut Eder said:

Looks to me like it has a similar fold out screen to the G1XM2

Click to expand...

I hope not. People who have been G series users really like the fully articulated tilt/swivel LCD. Why Canon dropped this is puzzling given its popularity.

To be honest, I really love Canon products and am willing to wait until the full spec is released shortly on the G3X. But the FZ1000 has a beautiful tilt/swivel LCD, a first-rate EVF and its image quality is excellent. It's size and price are also not off-putting to me.

As many others have stated, different cameras are targeted at different audiences and we buy the ones that fit our requirements the best. I'm just hoping that the G3x would be an exciting product like the FZ1000...something that the G7x wasn't.

We'll see soon enough.

Jim

Click to expand...

I had the original G1X with the tilt/swivel LCD, and certainly enjoyed that feature. I now have the G1X-II with the fold-out screen, and actually like this design better. For my uses, the fold-out design is much simpler and faster to deploy when needed. "My uses" would be, generally, any time I wish to shoot from a high or low angle. I realized when I began using the fold-out LCD that the vast majority of the times I extended the LCD on the G1X, I actually pulled it all the way out to the side and tilted it up or down -- I rarely had need for any other angle. Obviously, others have different needs, as several have mentioned the advantage of the tilt-swivel for shooting in portrait orientation from waist level, but I think you have over-generalized people who have been G series users based on your preference.

Dan

Click to expand...

Could be, but there is nothing that the tilt-only LCD can do that a fully tilt/swivel LCD can not do. The reverse is not true. I think it's a pretty safe bet that if you ask people if they would prefer a fully tilt/swivel LCD or one that's tilt-only, the fully tilt/swivel LCD would win hands down. If tilt-only were that great, the latest Rebels and XXD models, G1X Mark 1, and the SX40/50/60 series would all have tilt-only...and they don't. Only the G1X Mark II was downgraded from having one. In my view, that's both unfortunate and somewhat strange.

...just my take.

Jim

Click to expand...

As I have explained to you before, that was not the reason Canon went to the tilt LCD on the G1X-II. It was because a fully swivel type LCD, when it stuck out to the side, interfered with the left hand running the very close lens control rings. I even copied and pasted what the original design engineer said as the reason.

There was no need for that on the latest Rebels or the G1X-I or the SX40/50/60 series. Canon explained that in one of their writeups when the camera was released. Why are you unable to grasp that? I own the camera and it seems totally obvious to me.

Click to expand...

damian5000 said:

Crap. What happened to several powershots being introduced on the 6th.... Now it's the 12th. And only one...

Anyways... It looks good. Any idea on apertures?

Click to expand...

jonrobertp said:

Canon on has more knowledge of the market that you and other nay-Sayers do. They know what sells better than you do. This design is for a reason ( not yours)

Smaller size and lower cost take precident. They sell a ton of cams ... And for a good reason.

Click to expand...

freediverx said:

jonrobertp said:

Canon on has more knowledge of the market that you and other nay-Sayers do. They know what sells better than you do. This design is for a reason ( not yours)

Smaller size and lower cost take precident. They sell a ton of cams ... And for a good reason.

Click to expand...

You really think so?

"Canon Inc. (CAJ) has posted mixed earnings results for its third quarter ended September 30, 2014. The company reported a fall in both net income and revenues, since traditional cameras are falling out of favor, while strong competition in other areas kept earnings growth at bay... The Image System unit, which makes digital cameras and other photography products, had revenues that fell a hefty 9.4% to $2.8 billion. Operating profits declined 24% to $398 million... The global market for interchangeable-lens digital cameras is in a secular slump as consumers prefer smartphone cameras, which are getting more and more advanced."

So as digital camera sales continue to fall due to the growth of smartphones with ever-improving camera features, Canon's strategy is two-fold:

1) Keep making compact cameras smaller, despite the fact that they are nowhere near as small as a smartphone,

2) Strip compact cameras of ergonomics and advanced features, further blurring the distinction in what they can do compared to smartphone cameras.

I don't see how this paves the way for success, unless Canon thinks they can make a camera as small as a smartphone with gimmicky features that rival the versatility of a pocket computer with always-on internet connectivity and telephony.

I may not be qualified to tell Canon how to run their business, but to my untrained eye this seems like a strategy doomed to failure.

In my view, a better strategy would be to focus on making cameras that are just "small enough" to be easy to carry and pack, while delivering superior ergonomics, controls, and features that put smartphone cameras to shame. Anyone already spending $600-800 every year or two on a new iPhone is not going to make a camera purchase decision based on a low price. The only thing that will make them even consider a camera purchase is if said camera can let them do things they want to do but can't using their iPhone.

Click to expand...

jonrobertp said:

freediverx said:

jonrobertp said:

Canon on has more knowledge of the market that you and other nay-Sayers do. They know what sells better than you do. This design is for a reason ( not yours)

Smaller size and lower cost take precident. They sell a ton of cams ... And for a good reason.

Click to expand...

You really think so?

"Canon Inc. (CAJ) has posted mixed earnings results for its third quarter ended September 30, 2014. The company reported a fall in both net income and revenues, since traditional cameras are falling out of favor, while strong competition in other areas kept earnings growth at bay... The Image System unit, which makes digital cameras and other photography products, had revenues that fell a hefty 9.4% to $2.8 billion. Operating profits declined 24% to $398 million... The global market for interchangeable-lens digital cameras is in a secular slump as consumers prefer smartphone cameras, which are getting more and more advanced."

So as digital camera sales continue to fall due to the growth of smartphones with ever-improving camera features, Canon's strategy is two-fold:

1) Keep making compact cameras smaller, despite the fact that they are nowhere near as small as a smartphone,

2) Strip compact cameras of ergonomics and advanced features, further blurring the distinction in what they can do compared to smartphone cameras.

I don't see how this paves the way for success, unless Canon thinks they can make a camera as small as a smartphone with gimmicky features that rival the versatility of a pocket computer with always-on internet connectivity and telephony.

I may not be qualified to tell Canon how to run their business, but to my untrained eye this seems like a strategy doomed to failure.

In my view, a better strategy would be to focus on making cameras that are just "small enough" to be easy to carry and pack, while delivering superior ergonomics, controls, and features that put smartphone cameras to shame. Anyone already spending $600-800 every year or two on a new iPhone is not going to make a camera purchase decision based on a low price. The only thing that will make them even consider a camera purchase is if said camera can let them do things they want to do but can't using their iPhone.

Click to expand...

I'd still like to know if someone has determined the size & Wt. of this new cam vs what's out there now ?

it has to be somewhat smaller and lighter or no deal from me.

Click to expand...

freediverx said:

Size-wise, I just need something small enough to fit in comfortably in a backpack or messenger bag without adding any noticeable weight.

Click to expand...