Canon G5X II user review and why I'm returning it

Now I am replying to 5 month old posts. Lost track of it. Put the thread on ignore I think.:-(

RLight wrote:

riveredger wrote:

You sound like a person who would find fault with any camera.

I wouldn't assume that.

My spider senses tell me from my computer thousands of miles away, this gentleman/woman probably is correct: Contrast focus which relies not no DPAF is simply not going to deliver the same low light performance as Canon's DPAF equipped sensors.

.

Now that said, I think the OP is being a bit harsh as to frame it correctly: You'll need a Sony RX100 V or newer, to get better low light AF, which costs more, and delivers less depending which model you're comparing. And, the new RX100 VI and VII have worse low light due to a slower lens attached so they're going to be in the same boat. Really, that means the only point and shoots that will do better (in low light AF) are the G1X III and RX100 VA (the Fuji X100F is a known class trailer in AF, even though on paper it should be able to hang with hybrid AF and a fast lens + APS-C, it doesn't).

.

The reality is when comparing say a G5X II against experiences you have with a DSLR, small APS-C MILC, or, a G1X III or RX100 VA, the G5X II and G7X III aren't in the same league for low light AF. It shouldn't be bad, but, well, there's reasons the G1X III still exists as does the Sony RX100 VA still sell alongside the RX100 VI and VII. I don't think the OP is wrong, even though the OP may be a bit, irate, and rightly so as one would think it'd be better...

Hardly rightly so.

It is well over the top. The firmware rant is out of date anyway because they have issued the update which forms a chunk of the outburst aside from shirt collar stiffness in pocketability issues etc. etc. etc..

Side note, might I suggest the OP consider the EOS M200, which is due later this year,

There is no sign that the OP is anywhere near this site yet people are still talking to him.

which should be less expensive, about the same footprint, and, has DPAF, DIGIC8, and you can slap an EF-M 22mm f/2 STM on it?

The whole point of these compacts is not having to slap a lens on them after taking off the other one when conditions change or different focal lengths are needed or having to put a prime on for compactness. m43 has pancake zooms so that would be a better alternative rather than the clumsy 15-45 EOS M choice. Also people must not forget the stops of stabilisation being lost with the 22mm prime over the G5X or any compact.

The EOS M platform is an APS-C powershot with interchangeable lenses of sorts. But, DPAF and fast optics like the 22/2 or 32/1.4, make quick work of this sort of thing for around the same price point, but a bit bigger.

The M100, although cheap enough, and should be decent paired with an EF-M 22mm, I'd wait for the DIGIC8 equipped M200, which will have double (or more) low light sensitivity.

The ultra crude stripped back controls on the M100/200 more reminiscent of my Canon SX620 HS do rather make it an eccentric alternative to posit as an alternative to G5X range. Myself I would recommend a look at all the other makes available and am never sure what to make of these attempts, considering there are no lens compatibility problems, to steer people in to a solely Canon solution in a format in which Canon themselves show little interest just because this is the Canon compact forum.