Canon G2X

Started Jan 14, 2013 | Discussions
(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

I answered my own question about quantum efficiency.  By your own uber-metric, Canon is doing quite well.

Jostian
Jostian Veteran Member • Posts: 3,225
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

tron555 wrote:

Nope… the sensors are basically the same size and quality. The reason the P7700 out resolves the G15 and looks so much sharper is because the P7700 lens is much better (higher quality) lens than the G15. No amount of sharpening, post processing, going to a higher ISO range is going to make the G15 images look as sharp as the P7700 images. Also, having the 200mm vs only a 140mm reach is a real advantage!

But the P7700 doesn't out resolve the G15... on DPreview and DC resources and DCI they are pretty even up to 800 iso then the P7700 falls behind in terms of noise and desaturation... check the comparisons! select 800 or 1600 iso and see for yourself... go to the bottom of this page (G15vs P7700 vs LX7 at 1600 and 3200 iso G15 is ahead by miles, same on DPReview High iso comparisons and other sites) and at lower iso's its about even so again I really battle to understand your standpoint. http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_g15-review/page-0,2

-- hide signature --

Jostian

 Jostian's gear list:Jostian's gear list
Nikon D500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 +4 more
Grobb
Grobb Senior Member • Posts: 1,229
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

All images with a sensor the size of 1/1.7” look like pure crap at 800 ISO and above because of the small photo sites and low QE of the sensors IMO. At base to 400 ISO and below, the P7700 wins at fine detail because of its sharper lens. These small sensor cameras should only be shot at 800 ISO and above in extreme circumstances and the images will always look blurry and smeared. All I have been trying to get across to you and Howey is that Canon needs to put more emphasis on creating more efficient sensors for a change. If you do not agree with that, that is your opinion. If you think a 46% for the G15 and 60% is good enough for the G1X DxO rating is good enough, well, what can I say. Keep saying that good enough is good enough and better more efficient sensors are not needed in the next versions of cameras to get better IQ :/

(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

Dude, the DxO score isn't even a percentage. Don't you read and understand scores before you try to judge how they reflect on the product? The score isn't a percentage and you don't understand what it means. You don't even understand that Canon makes sensors that have similar quantum efficiencies to other sensors. Quit talking about quantum efficiency. In a real camera drawing a straight line between QE and image quality is impossible because there are way too many other variables involved. Let it go. It isn't as important as you're acting like it is. Yes, it's great to have the most amazing sensors on the planet, but guess what, Canon is right up there with the rest of them.  And QE is usually higher in smaller sensors, by the way.  Go look it up.  There are other reasons small sensors are noise, mainly because they saturate much more quickly due to their small photo sites and minimum noise, therefore, is a greater proportion of the signal.

You can dream about the P7700 having better optics than the G15 all you want, but in real, actual test shots that simply isn't the case.

As for the G1 X or G15 or P7700 score on DxO I never said anything was good enough. What I said was that score is like any other score: only meaningful in context and if you understand how the score is reached. You obviously don't, so why you keep coming back to it I don't quite get. I personally don't care one way or the other about a DxO score. When I look at their site I go to see what their tests revealed and how it suits my purposes. I bought the G1 X before the tests and reviews, but I did see test shots. The more recent tests only confirm what I already knew. I wanted to wait for sensor and lens tests, but the test shots and what I know of Canon sensors was more than enough information. My educated guess was proven correct, and experience with the camera for almost a year has not disappointed.

Jostian
Jostian Veteran Member • Posts: 3,225
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

tron555 wrote:

All images with a sensor the size of 1/1.7” look like pure crap at 800 ISO and above because of the small photo sites and low QE of the sensors IMO. At base to 400 ISO and below, the P7700 wins at fine detail because of its sharper lens. These small sensor cameras should only be shot at 800 ISO and above in extreme circumstances and the images will always look blurry and smeared. All I have been trying to get across to you and Howey is that Canon needs to put more emphasis on creating more efficient sensors for a change. If you do not agree with that, that is your opinion. If you think a 46% for the G15 and 60% is good enough for the G1X DxO rating is good enough, well, what can I say. Keep saying that good enough is good enough and better more efficient sensors are not needed in the next versions of cameras to get better IQ :/

Dunno what you are smokin' hopefully something substantial though, cos you whinge and whine about the poor DxO score of the canon G15's sensor and the crappy quality of canon's sensors and how they need to improve blah blah... BUT the G15's score is the HIGHEST in that sensor class across all brands!!!

Oh so 800 and above = smeary etc. in 1/1.7" well I took the liberty of taking a shot in my office with my lowly G15 with its poor sensor at 800 iso to show you how WRONG you are.

and here's a 100% crop to show you how 'smeared and blurry' it is at 800 iso.. mmm not!

looks absolutely decent to me...

-- hide signature --

Jostian

 Jostian's gear list:Jostian's gear list
Nikon D500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 +4 more
(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

The trouble with assigning a score to something is there will invariably be people who won't know how to interpret it correctly.  If you don't know what a score means then the score does more harm than good.  Period.

Dimitri Khoz Contributing Member • Posts: 943
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

tron555 wrote:

let me try to simplify it

If the GX1 had a better DxO score rating rather than only 60,  their images would look even better.

Having better DxO score does not directly translate into better looking images.

Here are RAW samples from

Sony A77 with DxO score of 78

Nikon 3200 with DxO score of 81

Pentax K-x with DxO score of 72





Looks like Canon G1X trumped them all in terms of noise, color, retained details while having DxO score of mere 60 pts.

This is why high DxO score does not always corresponds into better looking images.

Canon is lagging way behind in sensor efficiency and innovation and NEEDS to improve their sensor quality and efficiency to keep up with other companies.

Really?

Please have a look at my ISO6400 full size 14Mp image



ISO6400 Canon G1X Full Size 14Mp

Here is 100% crop

ISO6400 Canon G1X 100% Crop

Canon G1X delivers stunning results thanks to the efficient sensor and innovative technology

that can easily rival any APS-C sensored camera on the market while having smaller 1.4' sensor size.

Canon G2X, if it will be ever produced, will follow the footsteps of its mighty predcessor.

papybenenuts
OP papybenenuts Regular Member • Posts: 406
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

G1x superb test from dxo

i hope it will have a succesor soon

 papybenenuts's gear list:papybenenuts's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS M50 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +1 more
Jostian
Jostian Veteran Member • Posts: 3,225
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

Dimitri Khoz wrote:

tron555 wrote:

let me try to simplify it

If the GX1 had a better DxO score rating rather than only 60, their images would look even better.

Having better DxO score does not directly translate into better looking images.

Here are RAW samples from

Sony A77 with DxO score of 78

Nikon 3200 with DxO score of 81

Pentax K-x with DxO score of 72





Looks like Canon G1X trumped them all in terms of noise, color, retained details while having DxO score of mere 60 pts.

This is why high DxO score does not always corresponds into better looking images.

Canon is lagging way behind in sensor efficiency and innovation and NEEDS to improve their sensor quality and efficiency to keep up with other companies.

Really?

Please have a look at my ISO6400 full size 14Mp image



ISO6400 Canon G1X Full Size 14Mp

Here is 100% crop

ISO6400 Canon G1X 100% Crop

Canon G1X delivers stunning results thanks to the efficient sensor and innovative technology

that can easily rival any APS-C sensored camera on the market while having smaller 1.4' sensor size.

Canon G2X, if it will be ever produced, will follow the footsteps of its mighty predcessor.

+1! well said on all the above!

-- hide signature --

Jostian

 Jostian's gear list:Jostian's gear list
Nikon D500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 +4 more
Grobb
Grobb Senior Member • Posts: 1,229
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

OK, so your point is that Canon should not try to imporve their sensors through inovation and R&D because they are already good enough as they are right now. Is that your point? All I have been saying the whole time is that it seems like Canon has not increased the QE in thier sensors in MANY years. It seems like that would/should be their next logical step in the process of inproving IQ even more than it currently is, which is by the way very good. Hopefully you can agree on that, and if you do, I have finally gotten my original point accross to you.

(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times
1

The implicating that they've made no advances in many years is where all the disagreement lies. You realize that they've changed to back-illuminated sensors, right? They pioneered CMOS sensors in DSLR's and then moved those sensors into point and shoot cameras when noone else was. They've improved their microlens technology. I'm sorry, but it is patently obvious that improvement is desired always, but your implicating that they aren't improving is at issue.

http://www.sensorgen.info/ If that isn't improvement, what is?

It is also your understanding of what quantum efficiency means when applied to an image's quality that is a problem. The fact that Canon is keeping pace with others and that all sensor makers are improving seems to elude you. And you're missing so many other issues. Optical efficiency of the sensor itself, for example. http://vistalab.stanford.edu/~brian/papers/pdc/opticalefficiency.pdf Larger pixels with less real estate used for circuitry, better pixel technology, better pixel optics, etc. are all factors that you're completely ignoring and you instead concentrate on one factor. We all agree improvement in technology is desired, but most of us know that it is happening. Just because a sensor is rated at 18MP doesn't mean its always the same sensor. Here is the test that DxO does not do. http://www-isl.stanford.edu/~abbas/group/papers_and_pub/qe_spie_98.pdf

Another interesting read http://www.cs.washington.edu/education/courses/cse467/08au/pdfs/lectures/07-cmos-ccd-imagers.pdf

Jostian
Jostian Veteran Member • Posts: 3,225
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times
1

tron555 wrote:

OK, so your point is that Canon should not try to imporve their sensors through inovation and R&D because they are already good enough as they are right now. Is that your point? All I have been saying the whole time is that it seems like Canon has not increased the QE in thier sensors in MANY years. It seems like that would/should be their next logical step in the process of inproving IQ even more than it currently is, which is by the way very good. Hopefully you can agree on that, and if you do, I have finally gotten my original point accross to you.

Ah so now you change, after saying they are behind the other brands yada yada... now its that they should look to innovate etc.... obviously they should and do, R&D is important. BUT you were saying how inferior their sensors were, REMEMBER!!! Come on tron, stop changing your arguments to suite the replies...

-- hide signature --

Jostian

 Jostian's gear list:Jostian's gear list
Nikon D500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 +4 more
Grobb
Grobb Senior Member • Posts: 1,229
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

Jostian wrote: “obviously they should and do, R&D is important” That isexactly what I have been saying all along, thanks for finally agreeing with me, I will consider that an apology.

And to further drive home my point, check here for more proof of that fact:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings

In the top 56 camera ratings, Canon has 7 cameras and they are all FF, which is not a high percentage. Do you think that bodes well for Canon sensor quality and QE? I think not.

Jostian also wrote: “BUT you were saying how inferior their sensors were” I have never said in any one of my posts that Canon sensors were inferior. I only said Canon is lagging behind in Dx0 QE ratings, and that is an undisputableFACT!!! I have never changed any of my views or opinions in any way and I stand 100% behind everything I have said so far.

As far a Howey baby goes (your buddy), I refuse to reply to any of the spins he makes on factual statements since he is obviously misinformed and spews complete non sense most of the time. I only read his replies for amusement purposes.

krugman Contributing Member • Posts: 957
Re: What I look forward to in the Canon G2X:

tinpusher wrote:

mcshan wrote:

The G1X is good but a faster lens would be awesome. Faster response time would be okay too.

When Panasonic tried to answer requests for more zoom range in their LX series they could never quite acheive the brilliance of the lens in the LX3.

Canon have a quite remarkable optic in the G1X and I'd hate to see it spoilt by trying to give us something faster or wider. For me the current lens matches my Leica glass and beats the Zeiss 16-80 on my Sony DSLR .

Long live the current lens!

Funny you should say the G1X lens matches the Leica glass. Here is a direct comparison:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/03/22/a-really-quick-comparison-of-the-canon-g1x-and-leica-m9-what-by-george-sutton/

There are surely instances where Leica glass is better, but you can't tell that from these comparison photos. Remarkable.

Thinking of the G1X primarily in terms of its outstanding image quality seems a lot more fruitful than comparing its features  to  cameras  that can't compete with it in image quality.

Krugman

Jostian
Jostian Veteran Member • Posts: 3,225
Re: Getting it right by innovation and keeping up with the times

tron555 wrote:

Jostian wrote: “obviously they should and do, R&D is important” That isexactly what I have been saying all along, thanks for finally agreeing with me, I will consider that an apology.

And to further drive home my point, check here for more proof of that fact:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings

In the top 56 camera ratings, Canon has 7 cameras and they are all FF, which is not a high percentage. Do you think that bodes well for Canon sensor quality and QE? I think not.

Jostian also wrote: “BUT you were saying how inferior their sensors were” I have never said in any one of my posts that Canon sensors were inferior. I only said Canon is lagging behind in Dx0 QE ratings, and that is an undisputableFACT!!! I have never changed any of my views or opinions in any way and I stand 100% behind everything I have said so far.

As far a Howey baby goes (your buddy), I refuse to reply to any of the spins he makes on factual statements since he is obviously misinformed and spews complete non sense most of the time. I only read his replies for amusement purposes.

Think maybe you SHOULD smoke something at least then you'd have an excuse, in the 1/1.7" sensor size (which you raised as a specific size related to your QE argument) the top 2 spots are Canon (S100 and G15)....!!!!!!!!!! hope you get that, you say "lagging behind" to many that equates to inferior in some way, hope you get that too. As for spewing nonsense, its strange that NO ONE that replies or comments does so in support of you... as for an apology, if my previous reply equates to one for you I'm both insurmountably happy for you but so very sad too!

-- hide signature --

Jostian

 Jostian's gear list:Jostian's gear list
Nikon D500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 +4 more
gear1box Senior Member • Posts: 1,526
Re: What I look forward to in the Canon G2X:

Let me add my modest voice to the chorus on this lens.  First, let me say that i am picky about lenses, as most of my use of this lens is scenics and architecture where fuzzy corners are noticeable.  Oh, and i commonly enlarge to 20x30 from raw files.

Gawd wrote the laws of optics in ways that makes compromises unavoidable.  As photogs, we would all love this lens to be faster and not be so hobbled in the "macro" mode.  (I place it in quotes, since macro for this lens is well in envelope of most other lenses we use.)

Yet most of us are happy with the lens' optical performance (as noted, it gives a Leica a run and puts to shame virtually any kit lens), size, and, implicitly for the G1x, the image circle it produces.  So presumably we would wish to KEEP those attributes.

Well, yah can't have it all.  Either speed (particularly at the tele end) or macro improvements (much less increases in focal range, or a shorter min focal length) would involve compromises in the attributes that the lens is strong in already.  In particular, any of those changes would almost certainly increase size, which is at the outside form factor of what works in a body like this.

For my use of this camera, i am happy with the compromises they made and constantly marvel at the quality of images.  But, your mileage may vary.

-- hide signature --

gary ray

Semi-professional in early 1970s; just a putzer since then. interests: historical sites, virginia, motorcycle racing. A nikon user more by habit than choice; still, nikon seems to work well for me.

 gear1box's gear list:gear1box's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon D810 Olympus E-PL7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 +9 more
frameman Contributing Member • Posts: 925
Re: What I look forward to in the Canon G2X:
1

Well I have read all the above, and have to agree with some and not others. Now I have looked and tested the G1X a lot(downloads and actual usage), it's IQ is sgreat, it's shape is about right, I can live with the lens quite easily (faster would be nice but optical engineering has limits and retain the size) and it's ISO performance is exemplary. The optical viewfinder is very off putting and the focusing speed is not good but useable. Canon missed a great chance here with both the G1X and the EOS M. Other makers have mastered the mirrorless focusing to a much higher degree and also put in splendid EVFs, so I am guessing there are some patents to be avoided or design ethics to be considered. I use a Canon 600D and various lens and would like a lighter set up and have seriously considered the G1X, but I am hanging back to see just what Canon intend to do for a G2X, that is if they do.

For my needs I would like the G2X to have much much faster focusing, a decent EVF, manual zooming using the front ring and a few more frames per second. If it were possible a faster lens but no worries, it has good high ISO. So come on Canon, you have the ability, the know how and the customers ready and waiting, what's your problem.

MOD Dale Buhanan Veteran Member • Posts: 4,277
Re: What I look forward to in the Canon G2X:

frameman wrote:

Well I have read all the above, and have to agree with some and not others. Now I have looked and tested the G1X a lot(downloads and actual usage), it's IQ is sgreat, it's shape is about right, I can live with the lens quite easily (faster would be nice but optical engineering has limits and retain the size) and it's ISO performance is exemplary. The optical viewfinder is very off putting and the focusing speed is not good but useable. Canon missed a great chance here with both the G1X and the EOS M. Other makers have mastered the mirrorless focusing to a much higher degree and also put in splendid EVFs, so I am guessing there are some patents to be avoided or design ethics to be considered. I use a Canon 600D and various lens and would like a lighter set up and have seriously considered the G1X, but I am hanging back to see just what Canon intend to do for a G2X, that is if they do.

For my needs I would like the G2X to have much much faster focusing, a decent EVF, manual zooming using the front ring and a few more frames per second. If it were possible a faster lens but no worries, it has good high ISO. So come on Canon, you have the ability, the know how and the customers ready and waiting, what's your problem.

I second what you have written here with one exception.  I don't see how Canon could have a manual zoom and still have a lens that would retract into the body at shutdown, like they do now.  I think having the lens retract into the body is a must, and that likely precludes having a manual zoom.  Manual zooms work best on fixed lenses.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon G1 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 +35 more
gear1box Senior Member • Posts: 1,526
Re: What I look forward to in the Canon G2X:
1

frameman --

i obviously have the camera and use it, and i would certainly agree with all your complaints, and even add one that you do not dwell on:  generally slow responses particularly  the shutter release irrespective of focus mode.  woof woof.  I guess i am a bigot in this regard, having spent decades with manual cameras . . . still, i think that virtually any dSLR refugee seeking a smaller form factor would find this terribly frustrating. (i often find myself thinking "i've pushed the dad-gum button; when the heck is this thing going to take the darn picture?")

Of course this complaint -- and your point about both the EVF and the terrible OVF -- all stems from the original sin of the G1x:  the design brief must have stated "graft the current APSC technology sensor onto the existing Gx architecture . . ."  This certainly helped speed-to-market, if not ultimate photographer's utility.

How serious is Canon about this market?  Compared to m4/3s vendors, not very; even Nikon -- whatever one may think of the V1's sensor -- stepped up to the bat and designed a tool that was smooth to use.  Sad to say, the EOSM, aside from having an interchangeable lens, appears to be about as hobbled as the G1x as a serious tool.

I understand the camera's limitations and, for a substantial subset of my use, it makes sense to accept them and use it.  But i don't think that we should consider it to be a serious attempt by Canon to compete in the mirrorless market.

-- hide signature --

gary ray

Semi-professional in early 1970s; just a putzer since then. interests: historical sites, virginia, motorcycle racing. A nikon user more by habit than choice; still, nikon seems to work well for me.

 gear1box's gear list:gear1box's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon D810 Olympus E-PL7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 +9 more
frameman Contributing Member • Posts: 925
Re: What I look forward to in the Canon G2X:

The Fuji X10 does, and switches on at the same time and considering the G1X will never be a true pocket camera, any extra depth would be a fair trade off. Thinking more, and from what I read, if a lens hood is in use the filters cannot be used. This might be rectified in design too. I really like the G1X, but it's just not quite there. Maybe Canon should think about just how many customers have given up waiting and bought , maybe, a Panasonic GX1 and a few bits, never to return to Canon. I know that Canon want people to buy a DSLR, and with that is the profit from further lens aquisitions etc', but not everybody wants the bulk and weight. Canon haven't got long before I bite the bullet and move on to makes new.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads