So I got a G5X Mk2 - My thoughts

Juggernaut122 wrote:

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

Juggernaut122 wrote:

Pitman100 wrote:

I think this comparison here is better:

Which has the best lens? Sony RX100 VII vs Canon G5 X II vs Canon G7 X III: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Interesting that if you step down the Canon G5xii at the same focal length and aperture the images look basically as sharp to me.
And in the two weeks I had the RX100VI, it will tell you it was not too easy to get a shot without handshake when zoomed in & I have pretty steady hands.

You must have a defective RX100 because mine is VERY easy to shoot at 200mm without any handshake issues (I have the VII but its pretty much the same for this matter).
When Canon announced the G5X 2 I was intrigued because I wanted more than 70mm range but with EVF but I was very disappointed with it. Not only the AF pales in comparison to the RX100 VII but also the lens was all across less sharp and of course the Sony has extra advantages like better 4k video and the mic which now I use often.

One thing I would say in favor of the Canon is that if your primary goal is taking static pose portraits with blurry backdrops with a small camera, the Canon may be a better choice as it will create smoother bokeh with its faster lens. Other than that, the vii is the superior camera.
And before I am called a Sony fanb0y, I moved from Sony to Canon R5 for my professional work as I found the R5 to be amazing..my favorite all time camera. But when it comes to the RX100 VII there is simply no comparison (same for the rx10 iv).
We need more competition to get better prices.

Don't know if mine was defective or not, but the image stabilization was definitely not impressive at all with the Sony.
Depends on what you use the camera for. You are also forgetting that the G5xii will be much better than the RX100 VI in low light situations. Frankly I tested my G5xii with my D7200 Nikon DSLR with my worse lense 18-300 zoom and with the RX100 vi and the G5xii took better indoor low light pictures than my DSLR using that slow lens - and the RX100 vi.
I tested them both for about 2 weeks, and except in bright light where I wanted more zoom the G5xii was better for my uses in every way. I don't usually use the continuous autofocus, so that was not an issue for me.
I really have difficulty understanding how someone could ignore the low light advantage of the G5xii but I guess if you don't use it that way then it doesn't matter. I don't really notice the difference in bright light and the low-light was no comparison.
But that is just my experience.

Thanks

I am not forgetting anything. The difference in noise levels are easily fixed with a little cleaning as it is not that dramatic. And if posting on IG, even less of an issue.
Now the differences between 120mm and 200mm and the differences in overall sharpness of the Sony lens vs the Canon lens, now that is a different story.
You cant even crop the Canon 120mm to "200mm" since its already softer so that is another no no.
Now if your main goal is using it for indoors in low light then sure, get the faster Canon or an RX100 V or even a small APS-C with a prime for much better higher iso.
Also the faster lens is good but the so so Autofocus and so so lens sharpness..well the extra fstop advantage wont help much if your lens is already soft and you dont get accurate focus to begin with.

Like wise I really have difficulty understanding how someone could ignore the terrible Autofocus (specially for video, just awful), soft lens and soft 4k video quality and ignore the benefits of the extra range of a 200mm. As a travel camera, I can get closeup details of architecture and wide shots knowing that both will have plenty of detail where the G5X will have only 120mm of a softer lens and lets not even discuss the even worse 24mm performance.
But indeed, if you dont use it that way, it may not be a problem for you.
Regards