Has anyone abandoned the X10 for the G1X?

Started Feb 26, 2012 | Discussions
Photofreak7 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,707
Has anyone abandoned the X10 for the G1X?

... I love the larger sensor but the slower lens is hard to swallow. Just curious how many are willing to give up the faster lens (and orbs) of the X10 to get the G1X which appears to have usable results even at ISO6400 (and poss. 12800)?

 Photofreak7's gear list:Photofreak7's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0
Fujifilm X10
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
OP Photofreak7 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,707
G1X advantages/disadvantages ...

Looking at both it appears the G1X advantages are:

  • much higher resolution vari-angle LCD

  • larger sensor

  • better IQ and at -full- resolution - especially at high ISO

  • built-in ND filter

  • presumably better video

  • motorized zoom mechanism (may be an advantage to some)

  • no more orbs - could be a disadvantage for some

disadvantages compared to X10:

  • slower lens

  • non-manual focus ring

  • slower focus (?)

 Photofreak7's gear list:Photofreak7's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0
a l b e r t Senior Member • Posts: 1,663
Re: X10 is the better camera

I played with G1x over the weekend. X10 is the far better camera.

I was shooting G1x at ISO 640 and it has got more shadow noise than X10 @ ISO 400.

The lens is not sharp enough to resolve all 14MP. X10's lens is able to resolve more detail and is more contrasty.

The larger sensor does not bode well at 112mm. At the tele end, it is 2-stop slower than X10's lens. So instead of shooting ISO 400, now you have to shoot at ISO 1600. And G1x at ISO 1600 is definitely more noisy than X10 at ISO 400.

Marco is poor, you can't shoot very close. You'll need another camera for marco.

X10 is lighter and more refine in everyway in actual use. The only problem is orbs in specular highlights and nite shots. Can work around it somewhat, and if it wasn't of the orbs problem, it'd have been the perfect P&S.

Photofreak7 wrote:

Looking at both it appears the G1X advantages are:

  • much higher resolution vari-angle LCD

  • larger sensor

  • better IQ and at -full- resolution - especially at high ISO

  • built-in ND filter

  • presumably better video

  • motorized zoom mechanism (may be an advantage to some)

  • no more orbs - could be a disadvantage for some

disadvantages compared to X10:

  • slower lens

  • non-manual focus ring

  • slower focus (?)

-- hide signature --

a l b e r t

 a l b e r t's gear list:a l b e r t's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm X-H1 Sony a7 III +14 more
OP Photofreak7 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,707
Re: X10 is the better camera

I agree on the macro and weight differences but pretty much all else you've stated I can't substantiate based on what I've seen. The G1X has more fine detail than the X10 - just compare them at Dpr or IR's comparometer.

a l b e r t wrote:
I played with G1x over the weekend. X10 is the far better camera.

I was shooting G1x at ISO 640 and it has got more shadow noise than X10 @ ISO 400.

The lens is not sharp enough to resolve all 14MP. X10's lens is able to resolve more detail and is more contrasty.

The larger sensor does not bode well at 112mm. At the tele end, it is 2-stop slower than X10's lens. So instead of shooting ISO 400, now you have to shoot at ISO 1600. And G1x at ISO 1600 is definitely more noisy than X10 at ISO 400.

Marco is poor, you can't shoot very close. You'll need another camera for marco.

X10 is lighter and more refine in everyway in actual use. The only problem is orbs in specular highlights and nite shots. Can work around it somewhat, and if it wasn't of the orbs problem, it'd have been the perfect P&S.

Photofreak7 wrote:

Looking at both it appears the G1X advantages are:

  • much higher resolution vari-angle LCD

  • larger sensor

  • better IQ and at -full- resolution - especially at high ISO

  • built-in ND filter

  • presumably better video

  • motorized zoom mechanism (may be an advantage to some)

  • no more orbs - could be a disadvantage for some

disadvantages compared to X10:

  • slower lens

  • non-manual focus ring

  • slower focus (?)

 Photofreak7's gear list:Photofreak7's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0
OP Photofreak7 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,707
Re: X10 is the better camera

You can of course shoot at a lower ISO with the X10 - that's why I mentioned the faster lens of the X10 under advantages. Those on the Canon forum even mention the slower lens of the G1X. But it's looking pretty good in nearly every other aspect.

a l b e r t wrote:
I played with G1x over the weekend. X10 is the far better camera.

I was shooting G1x at ISO 640 and it has got more shadow noise than X10 @ ISO 400.

The lens is not sharp enough to resolve all 14MP. X10's lens is able to resolve more detail and is more contrasty.

The larger sensor does not bode well at 112mm. At the tele end, it is 2-stop slower than X10's lens. So instead of shooting ISO 400, now you have to shoot at ISO 1600. And G1x at ISO 1600 is definitely more noisy than X10 at ISO 400.

Marco is poor, you can't shoot very close. You'll need another camera for marco.

X10 is lighter and more refine in everyway in actual use. The only problem is orbs in specular highlights and nite shots. Can work around it somewhat, and if it wasn't of the orbs problem, it'd have been the perfect P&S.

Photofreak7 wrote:

Looking at both it appears the G1X advantages are:

  • much higher resolution vari-angle LCD

  • larger sensor

  • better IQ and at -full- resolution - especially at high ISO

  • built-in ND filter

  • presumably better video

  • motorized zoom mechanism (may be an advantage to some)

  • no more orbs - could be a disadvantage for some

disadvantages compared to X10:

  • slower lens

  • non-manual focus ring

  • slower focus (?)

 Photofreak7's gear list:Photofreak7's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0
jimr Forum Pro • Posts: 11,405
For $300 More Shouldn't The Canon Have More Than Better IQ Going

for it? That goes for the comparison with the Canon G12 as well where the Canon X seems like a G 12 on steroids ....with a better sensor...but not that much else for the $400 increase in actual selling price over the G12...

After seeing many reports (dpreview etc.) from sources outside of the Canon forum (where some defend the G X at all cost)...the AF is THE most important functional performance area where more should be expected from a $800 camera p&s or not...

OP Photofreak7 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,707
Re: For $300 More Shouldn't The Canon Have More Than Better IQ Going

I agree the price is wacky - more than a used/refurb T3i. But the camera is still a decent effort on Canon's part. Ashame corporate greed pushes the price up.

jimr wrote:

for it? That goes for the comparison with the Canon G12 as well where the Canon X seems like a G 12 on steroids ....with a better sensor...but not that much else for the $400 increase in actual selling price over the G12...

After seeing many reports (dpreview etc.) from sources outside of the Canon forum (where some defend the G X at all cost)...the AF is THE most important functional performance area where more should be expected from a $800 camera p&s or not...

 Photofreak7's gear list:Photofreak7's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0
a l b e r t Senior Member • Posts: 1,663
Re: X10 is the better camera

1st image, X10 @ ISO 400

2nd image, G1x @ ISO 640

Tell me which one looks better.

Photofreak7 wrote:

I agree on the macro and weight differences but pretty much all else you've stated I can't substantiate based on what I've seen. The G1X has more fine detail than the X10 - just compare them at Dpr or IR's comparometer.

 a l b e r t's gear list:a l b e r t's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm X-H1 Sony a7 III +14 more
OP Photofreak7 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,707
Re: X10 is the better camera

OK fair enough but this contradicts other sites and shots I've seen. Hey the X10 is about as good as it gets in a 'smallish' sensor camera and the fact that it is even being compared to the G1X is admirable considering the price difference ... I am in no way talking the X10 down - I own it and it's a good effort by Fuji - that 'could have' been great if ya know what I mean.

a l b e r t wrote:
1st image, X10 @ ISO 400

2nd image, G1x @ ISO 640

Tell me which one looks better.

Photofreak7 wrote:

I agree on the macro and weight differences but pretty much all else you've stated I can't substantiate based on what I've seen. The G1X has more fine detail than the X10 - just compare them at Dpr or IR's comparometer.

 Photofreak7's gear list:Photofreak7's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0
a l b e r t Senior Member • Posts: 1,663
Re: X10 is the better camera

You probably just looking at G1x images without comparing it to another camera, which also took the same image at the same time I did! I tell you, the lens cannot resolve all the pixels of its 14MP sensor. G1x's major flaw is the lens.

The G1x is supposed to have much better high ISO performance due to the sensor size, but I don't find it to be any better than the X10, especially when X10 is shot using EXR mode.

I also found the skin tone much better on the X10. G1x's skin tone is on the 'flat' side and they tune the algorithm to pull out a lighter complexion on the skin tone. Not realistic and not what the subject looks like at the time of the shot.

Poor macro performance is also a deal breaker for me.

I think for pocketable cam, Fuji took the right approach. Use a smaller sensor, but optimize the lens with a larger aperture.

Photofreak7 wrote:

OK fair enough but this contradicts other sites and shots I've seen. Hey the X10 is about as good as it gets in a 'smallish' sensor camera and the fact that it is even being compared to the G1X is admirable considering the price difference ... I am in no way talking the X10 down - I own it and it's a good effort by Fuji - that 'could have' been great if ya know what I mean.

 a l b e r t's gear list:a l b e r t's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm X-H1 Sony a7 III +14 more
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 18,309
Re: For $300 More Shouldn't The Canon Have More Than Better IQ Going

Photofreak7 wrote:

I agree the price is wacky - more than a used/refurb T3i. But the camera is still a decent effort on Canon's part. A shame corporate greed pushes the price up.

There is no 'corporate greed pushing the price up'. Any new product is introduced at the highest price the mfr thinks it can be sold for. After the initial flurry of sales, as things slow down, the price is cut to get the sales going again. Another flurry of sales, another slowdown, and another price cut, repeating until the camera settles into a steady selling price. In this way a mfr sells their products for the highest average price overall that the customers are willing to pay, which helps them recoup their investment in R&D etc. faster. It's not greed, it's economics. If someone thinks a camera is too expensive they can wait for the price to come down, or buy something different.

Several months back there was someone posting on the Canon forum that Canon ought to be able to sell a DSLR full frame camera for six or seven hundred dollars. It made sense to him at least.

GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Pretty much

The IQ is much higher and the lens is hardly slow, particularly given the low noise.

Photofreak7 wrote:

... I love the larger sensor but the slower lens is hard to swallow. Just curious how many are willing to give up the faster lens (and orbs) of the X10 to get the G1X which appears to have usable results even at ISO6400 (and poss. 12800)?

-- hide signature --

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Rubbish

You should do more than play with it.
--

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Samples

http://www.pbase.com/garyp/g1_x

Blow them up as big as you like

Personally I have had enough of the crap of the X10 which is the worst of the current compacts I own.

Your mileage may vary

Photofreak7 wrote:

You can of course shoot at a lower ISO with the X10 - that's why I mentioned the faster lens of the X10 under advantages. Those on the Canon forum even mention the slower lens of the G1X. But it's looking pretty good in nearly every other aspect.

a l b e r t wrote:
I played with G1x over the weekend. X10 is the far better camera.

I was shooting G1x at ISO 640 and it has got more shadow noise than X10 @ ISO 400.

The lens is not sharp enough to resolve all 14MP. X10's lens is able to resolve more detail and is more contrasty.

The larger sensor does not bode well at 112mm. At the tele end, it is 2-stop slower than X10's lens. So instead of shooting ISO 400, now you have to shoot at ISO 1600. And G1x at ISO 1600 is definitely more noisy than X10 at ISO 400.

Marco is poor, you can't shoot very close. You'll need another camera for marco.

X10 is lighter and more refine in everyway in actual use. The only problem is orbs in specular highlights and nite shots. Can work around it somewhat, and if it wasn't of the orbs problem, it'd have been the perfect P&S.

Photofreak7 wrote:

Looking at both it appears the G1X advantages are:

  • much higher resolution vari-angle LCD

  • larger sensor

  • better IQ and at -full- resolution - especially at high ISO

  • built-in ND filter

  • presumably better video

  • motorized zoom mechanism (may be an advantage to some)

  • no more orbs - could be a disadvantage for some

disadvantages compared to X10:

  • slower lens

  • non-manual focus ring

  • slower focus (?)

-- hide signature --

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Re: X10 is the better camera

NOBODY but Albert believes this. Read almost every review out there.
--

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
jimr Forum Pro • Posts: 11,405
The AF Disappointment Has Been Found In A Number Of Sites (Canon G X1)

and has been 'excused' by others repeatedly. It's a p&s. What more can you expect. You don't understand the engineering. The lens elements are larger so moving them is the inherent problem. Not enough room inside of the small lens...

All wonderful excuses about why Canon has produced what dpreview calls a 'average p&s AF performance. Average p&s performance says many other p&s cameras have better AF performance and clearly cost alot less No excuse for average p&s AF performance on one of the most expensive p&s cameras out there. If you cannot engineer better AF performance don't charge for it. $800 for a very good sensor but little else over the G12 is a rip off.

O.K. So the price will come down. Let's say $700 when a G12 costs $400. Where is the $300 in increased cos/value over the G12?

GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Re: The AF Disappointment Has Been Found In A Number Of Sites (Canon G X1)

Not many have compared the AF to X10. I have. There's little to choose.

And you don't see dozens of disappointed users of the G1X like you do the X10.

I would not have needed to buy the G1X if my X10 worked properly. If Fuji thinks they can hold onto consumers with this nonsense, they can think again.

jimr wrote:

and has been 'excused' by others repeatedly. It's a p&s. What more can you expect. You don't understand the engineering. The lens elements are larger so moving them is the inherent problem. Not enough room inside of the small lens...

All wonderful excuses about why Canon has produced what dpreview calls a 'average p&s AF performance. Average p&s performance says many other p&s cameras have better AF performance and clearly cost alot less No excuse for average p&s AF performance on one of the most expensive p&s cameras out there. If you cannot engineer better AF performance don't charge for it. $800 for a very good sensor but little else over the G12 is a rip off.

O.K. So the price will come down. Let's say $700 when a G12 costs $400. Where is the $300 in increased cos/value over the G12?

-- hide signature --

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
jimr Forum Pro • Posts: 11,405
Re: The AF Disappointment Has Been Found In A Number Of Sites (Canon G X1)

Exactly... That is the probllem...
There should be a notable difference in the G's favor..
$800....

.

GaryJP wrote:
Not many have compared ths AF to X10. I have. There's little to choose.

jimr wrote:

and has been 'excused' by others repeatedly. It's a p&s. What more can you expect. You don't understand the engineering. The lens elements are larger so moving them is the inherent problem. Not enough room inside of the small lens...

All wonderful excuses about why Canon has produced what dpreview calls a 'average p&s AF performance. Average p&s performance says many other p&s cameras have better AF performance and clearly cost alot less No excuse for average p&s AF performance on one of the most expensive p&s cameras out there. If you cannot engineer better AF performance don't charge for it. $800 for a very good sensor but little else over the G12 is a rip off.

O.K. So the price will come down. Let's say $700 when a G12 costs $400. Where is the $300 in increased cos/value over the G12?

GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Re: For $300 More Shouldn't The Canon Have More Than Better IQ Going

To me, better IQ trumps all.

Maybe not to you.

jimr wrote:

for it? That goes for the comparison with the Canon G12 as well where the Canon X seems like a G 12 on steroids ....with a better sensor...but not that much else for the $400 increase in actual selling price over the G12...

After seeing many reports (dpreview etc.) from sources outside of the Canon forum (where some defend the G X at all cost)...the AF is THE most important functional performance area where more should be expected from a $800 camera p&s or not...

-- hide signature --

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,594
Re: The AF Disappointment Has Been Found In A Number Of Sites (Canon G X1)

Orbs. And IQ.

jimr wrote:
Exactly... That is the probllem...
There should be a notable difference in the G's favor..
$800....

.

GaryJP wrote:
Not many have compared ths AF to X10. I have. There's little to choose.

jimr wrote:

and has been 'excused' by others repeatedly. It's a p&s. What more can you expect. You don't understand the engineering. The lens elements are larger so moving them is the inherent problem. Not enough room inside of the small lens...

All wonderful excuses about why Canon has produced what dpreview calls a 'average p&s AF performance. Average p&s performance says many other p&s cameras have better AF performance and clearly cost alot less No excuse for average p&s AF performance on one of the most expensive p&s cameras out there. If you cannot engineer better AF performance don't charge for it. $800 for a very good sensor but little else over the G12 is a rip off.

O.K. So the price will come down. Let's say $700 when a G12 costs $400. Where is the $300 in increased cos/value over the G12?

-- hide signature --

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +14 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads