G1X MKII - Why the lack of buzz?

rgleich wrote:

After some careful consideration of performance vs. price vs. flexibility - I finally scrounged the cash and picked-up a secondhand Fujifilm X-T1. (And, knowingly spent considerably more than I would have for a brand-new G1Xii. However, I believe that it will give me more room to grow.)

I STILL believe that if somebody wants a nice, SOLID, camera, cares about image quality, but does not want to screw-around with Interchangeable Lenses - the G1Xii could still be a good fit.

I picture it like a considerably-improved, somewhat larger version of the G-9 that I liked very much.

Now - On to the Fuji X-Series forums!

Thanks for the valid thoughts on this subject though.

Good choice.

I bought a Canon G1X-II after having had two G1X models which I really liked. I was more than deeply disappointed in the Mark II.

At the time I had it, I compared it to a G1X-I, an Olympus E-P5 (with kit lens to be fair), a Nikon Coolpix A, an Olympus XZ-2 an Olympus E-PL1 and Sony RX100. All those cameras beat the G1X in sharpness. The E-P5 and Coolpix A trounced it in all image quality parameters.

The G1X-II produced nice rich Canon colors and pleasant images at normal viewing, most of the time.
I did not like the twin control ring setup on the lens at all. The viewfinder was excellent. The movie record button is in the worst place possible and can't be turned off. The constant accidental movie shots were extremely annoying. I observed luminance noise at ISO's as low as 400 (unbelievable for a sensor this size). The dynamic range is lower than an RX100 at base ISO. It's resolution is fine by cave dweller standards. It tended to clip highlights all the time, I thought I was shooting with my S110 again. I had to carry a bag full of batteries to go on one walk-about photo shoot.

Here are two shots of many that I took to illustrate the lack of sharpness from the G1X-II:

Both images are SOOC JPEG, no PP, default settings.

I have many, many more like this and in most cases the G1X-II is not sharper and sometimes, alarmingly so.

It does have it's sweet spots and can do well if you stay in the mid-range focal lengths while stopped down a bit but, this limitation hobbles the camera in my opinion. What's the point in having a camera, with a fixed zoom lens where you can't use 25% or more of the range?

Canon G1X-II

It is a nice looking camera and "feels" great. Too bad it's got such a soft lens.

Here's a much, much better alternative, if you don't mind changing lenses every once in a while:

Olympus E-P5

If you must have Canon, get this one. It's much cheaper and has a better lens:

Canon G1-X

I wouldn't hesitate to get another G1X Mark I or E-P5 (will be getting another one soon) but the G1X-II, neh. I don't see any compelling reason at all to buy a camera with so many "cons".

I did purchase a new G7X and expect it to do much better than the G1X-II as it has the amazingly good Sony 1" sensor.