The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

GaryJP wrote:

KeepCalm wrote:

GaryJP wrote:

Certainly one of the funniest things must be those people who get more and more irate the more good images appear from a given camera.

If the camera is that much better it may drive smaller sensor users off the forum reluctant to post images which tends to happen.

I suppose in the sad competitive world of photography that is a victory of sorts. : (

I tend to think that it's usually much more of a matter of horses for courses. Some cameras do some things better than others and are easier/more pleasurable to use in some situations than others. Camera engineering is always a matter of compromise with laws of physics and the compromises Canon made here suit me. DPR sometimes seems to have one use scenario and - I guess - can only surmise Canon is so popular because its users are stupid or undemanding.
I am not knocking the G7X MkII because I still have mine, have taken pictures I like with it, and its's fine. I have pictures I've taken with much worse and older cameras that some people still like a lot so of course people needn't stop posting smaller sensor images. (It hadn't occurred to me that that this might be a factor in some resentment.)

But I think the hostile commentary from SOME people on the G1X III is extremely bizarre. I can think of NO camera I haven't used that I have an overriding urge to go out and diss to people who actually use it. I didn't get on with the A7RII but I DID actually use it, and I still talk about it in the context of the cameras i do like rather than head to the Sony forum and show my ignorance.

And I do think the DPR review of this camera is one of the least accurate I have seen here ever since I joined (which I think was some fourteen years ago).

The one thing I DO agree with all critics on is that its price in the US is too high. It is selling in Hong Kong for about US$1,000 and I think Canon would have to better word of mouth for this one if they'd matched that in other markets. I am not sure I would have bought if for the US price, although I suspect that if I used if for a bit I probably would have not been able to resist.

I am sure the GX III is an excellent camera of its type but is just so different to the Mk I and II. My viewpoint as a Mk II owner is the camera is so different and people are rather sad that the only fixed lens camera giving such image separation and lens flexibility has gone. It makes it doubly difficult that this new camera is supposedly an evolution of the old camera.

If the new camera had been given a new name it would have been entirely different I think. You need to forgive the reviewers being confused a bit and not knowing where to begin and how to react when a Mk III shows no matching points of comparison with a Mk II.

The camera will sell a lot as I am sure the great pool of EOS-M users will get one of these as a backup and they are all wandering about the forum chatting about their rebels and Ms. Interesting how many Mk II users will change to it but I am not interested in it. Just sad that they have scrapped every concept of the G1 series bar the name. They probably had to do it to get a new market and use their only modern sensor but it is a sad day. My resolution is to not buy any kit this year and the prices are going out of reach. I hope they have assessed the need for over £1,000 kit better than Apple and their X phone.

I suppose in a way you have the clash of people rejoicing at the new King but mourning at the loss of the old one and unsure with their having very different personalities.