OP
AdamT
•
Forum Pro
•
Posts: 62,282
Re: So I got a G5X Mk2 - My thoughts
1
Now, it just so happens that unwanted RX100 IV silicon has the best 1" sensor image quality, not by alot, but a touch. Presumably because there are no PDAF "stripes". So there is a side benefit here too.
Its the same in the RX10 Mk3 . that camera does ISO64 with APS_C level clean skies and largely noisefree shadow pulling - you can with the G5X Mk2 also but you need to overexpose by 2/3 of a stop (and keep an eye on that to make sure its maintained and use the EV comp accordingly) then pull back with neg comp in RAW ..
It`d have been way easier if Canon had put Extended low ISOs in to make it automatic (even Capture one automatically compensates so the RAW develop by default looks normal) but they couldn`t bothered to do that either - shame for JPG users because there`s no way of doing that and you end up with horribly speckly blue skies and shadows (same with the EOS-M6-II to a large degree too) .. none of these companies are perfect . canon have a superb JPG engine available (the M50 even has it) but it stinks in the Compacts despite the same settings
Pixel Peep this SOOC JPG from the EOS-M50 Mk1 . not even a current camera or latest DIGIC - the JPG is set to finest detail . compare to the mush from the compacts JPGs (Including the G1X Mk3)

A link to one of yours from the G1X Mk3 - Mush city like the G5X-II JPG engine - why are the Compacts getting worse JPGs from Digic-8 than the M50 got from Digic-7 ? , the M50-II even has the same sensor and even as a kit costs half as much ....... I don`t get it
https://www.flickr.com/photos/130836605@N07/51094056647/sizes/6k/
You can get the 32Mp M6-II body + the superb 11-22 lens for LESS than a G1X Mk3 - Pricing is nonsensical
I guess we have to ignore all this and buy new or used what fits best .. for me that`s the G5X-II and avoid the JPG engine like the plague
-- hide signature --
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **