MAC wrote:
RLight wrote:
Ladies and gents,
.
I'm returning to the G5X II world.
rinse and repeat...
missing out on the goodness of m6II +32 + 11-22 + PL5
No, I should’ve never left; Lightroom having true color match support changes things in all fairness. I couldn’t get the colors I wanted from the G5x II before, now I can, without an M. I do have to pony up for LR annually though, I’m fine with that caveat. You get what you pay for often in life; it’s a fair trade for convenience and results at a cost.
I tried LR last night on my old M6II RAWs from Sigmas, that unfortunately isn’t such a happy ending; LRs M6II match is the same as the one I adapted from the M50; not a true match. Metering / exposure from Sigmas is a mess still in LR even though I’m getting more true to Canon colors, it’s a hassle to have to play with exposure significantly to get desired results.
I am giving the M thought as a utility camera, think meets my non-standard shooting like macro work, landscape, telephoto shooting which the G5x II doesn’t do as good of a job at, but, the R fills this gap too. Haven’t decided yet. No rush either. G5x II arrives later this week and I plan to take it one step at a time.
Adobe LR's latest implementation for the CR3 files has sold me. I'm getting the results I want from RAW files taken the last time I owned the G5X Mark II via recent conversions. I've got a G5X II coming to me, may be a few days / week as I bought mine from CameraCanada (again); state side the G5X II is sold out and on backorder, which is a VERY bad sign for the G5X Mark II as they make these in batches, and with the existing state of things, it's hard to say how long the back order will take as the components in the G5X II may be OOS. Right now the backorder on all US dealers has no ETA which is telling.
As much as I enjoy the M system, it's too complicated for my on-the-go needs and I love the 18-150, but that last dud lens was the third strike on EF-M lenses in the last 6 months... Like my R, where the RF 28-70 f/2L stays glued 90% of the time, I need something with a lens that stays glued 90% of the time, for times I don't want to drag the R with me. The G5X II is a step down in sheer image quality, but, it's a step up in portability and simplicity. I get IS 24/7; I don't loose it when I mount a 22mm, which matters for indoor/low light video. That fast lens is also something not available in the M mount, or frankly most mounts at all, especially in the size. At the end of the day it's all about glass. The G system via the G5X II gives me the lens I want in a portable solution and the R system via the RF 28-70 f/2L gives me the lens I want for power. The age old saying of it's about the glass, is true.
Canon makes many options for many needs/desires. My desire is simplicity, with pocket power.
Now, if only Canon would do an updated PowerShot G with APS-C that has 4K. Again, with the state of things, the only new cameras we may see for some time are the R series.
I'm not posting this in the M forum as those folks will throw rocks at me for leaving them, again. It's nothing agains the M, it's more there is no perfect tool, you just have to pick what makes the most sense for you.
Edit:
I guess it’s not all about glass; post processing matters too. This is an example where it can be the “tipping point”. For me, RAWs processed with the latest color match in LR give the G5x II a more Canon look than it’s own DPP4 or SOOC jpeg. The G1X III is the same way. LR is arguably the best tool to get the most out of the files.