Of the G1X IV, G3X II and the state of things...

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 1,455
Re: Of the G1X IV, G3X II and the state of things...

RLight wrote:

I was considering where we are, how we got here with point and shoots, Canon technology and whatnot... Couple thoughts:

The G7X III and G5X II addresses the larger market need for pocketable power with Canon flare, and do it with Sony's 1" sensor. This is "the" sensor for point and shoots. Leverages Sony's R&D to accomplish high MP counts, high ISO performance and fast readout, in a compact category. Canon doesn't have a sensor in this range to address this market. Canon can, adopt the RX100 V/VA sensor on next update to add PDAF. Interestingly enough, by Canon choosing to use the RX100 IV sensor, they don't have to re-write their AF software for PDAF (for the G7X III / G5X II), but get the benefits of 4K and faster readout on contrast detection.

Canon, is addressing "peak" image quality and build with the G1X Mark III via their own APS-C sensor. The G7X III and G5X II lack PDAF/DPAF. The G1X III lacks DIGIC8 and has a slower lens, albeit higher quality.

I gather, the G5X II's newly designed lens will get re-used next round, probably on a newer Sony RX100 sensor down the line in say 1-2 years that has PDAF. It'll probably also get DIGICX at the time so ever smarter processor for say HEIF support, etc with PDAF is a decent upgrade.

The G7X III may likewise get PDAF around the same time. We're probably a year or so away from both (G5X II getting updated sensor/DIGIC).

Will Canon really want to develop processing on sensor PDAF purely for the compact range when it is not paralleled in its ILC range?

Can the dual pixel software and hardware setup just be be switched to reading on sensor specialised PDAF that easily? Presumably they will need at least to work up to avoid banding issues that have not come too easily to current practitioners of the art.

However, Canon still has the long zoom / bridge camera to address, the G3X series. Frankly, I'm surprised the G3X did not get an update around the same time the G7X III and G5X II did, or even after the G7X II got the DIGIC7 but the G3X never did. I do know the G3X lens (24-600) took some doing, and, they make these things in batches. It may be due to the market position of the G3X (not the most popular) and the difficulty with lens manufacturing that specific one, that we may never see a G3X Mark II. That's unfortunate. That's a camera that needs DIGIC8 (or even DIGIC7), something, so it's more than a frame a second RAW performance.

The G1X Mark IV is more promising. In the same vein, newly designed lens, and a good one at that, it may be that Canon does a 32MP APS-C drop in with DIGIC8 or DIGICX in a few months. Once again, I think they're looking heavily at the performance of the G5X II here (powerful + EVF) from a sales perspective before proceeding. Likewise, the M platform starts to encroach here too as it's a shrinking market and perhaps the G5X and M6 II / Upcoming M5 II squeeze it out? Dunno.

Real shame about the G3X. Perhaps they feel between the SX70 and competiting platforms ala RX10 and FZ1000, it's not worth it. They might be right.

Anyhow, I've become less of a rant / guessing person, but some food for thought for the day. I think, we'll see an upgraded G1X by end of year / next year (unless the M5 Mark II is Canon's answer, which maybe), but I'm really doubtful of the G3X due to lack of noises this far out (5 years now without update of any kind). Either way, we should have our answer on both by Q4 this year on the G1X at least.

I think, with the given contracting market, it's really anyone's guess what's going to happen here. The safe bet is Canon will do an APS-C / FF prime offering of some kind as it simply brings something to the table that isn't already there (say an X100 or RX1 competitor say with a 35mm fast prime), or simply update the G1X III to G1X IV at least.

It costs $$ to re-engineer AF-software for PDAF vs DPAF, it costs money to do a more aggressive lens for the G1X, is it worth the return on investment to make more G3X lenses for the number of units they expect to sell? Is it worth it to make a X100 competitor when the M + 22mm can already do that?

All to say, I'm not quite sure what'll happen. No-one can. But looking at risk to reward, it's obvious as I started this article, the G7X III and G5X II were in fact well-thought out even though they use the older RX100 IV sensors, it allows Canon to bring to the table a cost-effective solution for the masses without having to re-do much and bring something different to the table that the M system isn't already doing. Where I could see some room? G1X IV that either re-uses the existing G1X III lens, but an updated sensor and processor where they either leave everything else alone, which makes this a more powerful landscape shooter with 4K support, or they change the formula a bit and make it more M6 / G1X II like where the EVF is optional (to make it more pocketable without the EVF), and/or, perhaps they take on the X100 series with a APS-C sensor married with a 22mm f/2 or, possibly even faster say 22mm f/1.4 lens making it essentially a RX1 competitor but with an APS-C chip thus tackling both the X100V and RXR1 in a single blow at presumably a lower price point. If, you combine an IBIS-based 32MP APS-C with a 22mm f/1.4 lens, this could be a serious competitor, especially if you marry in a pop-up EVF to the equation. That'd be unique.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
0lf
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow