G1X MII or RX100II?

Started Feb 13, 2014 | Discussions
BarnET Veteran Member • Posts: 3,498
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

tkbslc wrote:

technic wrote:

howardroark wrote:

Catalin Stavaru wrote:

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II. Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket. I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios. If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

The 12.8 megapixels does not lower its potential at all, but instead keeps the pixels big and the APS-C image quality from the smaller than APS-C sensor.

The problem with the G1X II is the size. It's just too big. And the size does not come from the lens only, they just made the body unnecessarily big (maybe indeed to balance out the lens).

You think they made the body larger than it needed to be to balance out the lens? I'm going to bet on a categorical no to that idea. The body has a large sensor, pretty stunningly fast electronics on-board, contains the AF mechanism which must be considerable if reports of AF speed are correct, and it also has a pretty large battery inside. The camera isn't too big, you are too unimpressed with what you get for that size....which is a shame.

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

Look how big Samsung's F2 zoom is:

The Samsung is f2.8 at the long end and covers an 1.5 times crop apsc sensor. Which is larger as the 1.6 crop canon or 1.94 crop of the mk2.

Look at the XF 18-55mm f2.8-4 and difference already shrinks a lot. And that's also a larger sensor. All in all canon really out did themselves with the lens. The sensor is dissapointing. Since I was hoping for an cut to size dual pixel af sensor. That would have had more Mp and class leading autofocus.

 BarnET's gear list:BarnET's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

tkbslc wrote:

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

I know the bright lens is a big part of the weight / volume. But there is a lot of camera body outside the 'lens area' and the II is not much smaller than the I version, despite removing the optical viewfinder. Maybe a top quality internal EVF would be asking to much given the volume, but I really think this is a business decision to enable 'upselling'.

yatesd
yatesd Regular Member • Posts: 298
Re: Compare size & weight against lens size and brightness
1

It is important to compare size & weight against other total packages with similar lens range, brightness, and sensor size.

I see other cameras with similar zoom ranges which are smaller, but not with similar sensor size and brightness.

I see other ILS options with lighter bodies, but not with a combined lens package that is more compact (or cheaper).

I am very tempted by this product. Can the Canon G1X MII command off camera flash with the pop up?

-- hide signature --

Doug

jonrobertp Forum Pro • Posts: 12,856
RX100-3 will be better. June.

yatesd wrote:

It is important to compare size & weight against other total packages with similar lens range, brightness, and sensor size.

I see other cameras with similar zoom ranges which are smaller, but not with similar sensor size and brightness.

I see other ILS options with lighter bodies, but not with a combined lens package that is more compact (or cheaper).

I am very tempted by this product. Can the Canon G1X MII command off camera flash with the pop up?

-- hide signature --

Doug

June ... Expecting a new lens for the RX.  Yay !

 jonrobertp's gear list:jonrobertp's gear list
Canon PowerShot G7 X Canon G3 X Panasonic ZS100 Canon EOS 70D
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 5,590
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

technic wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

I know the bright lens is a big part of the weight / volume. But there is a lot of camera body outside the 'lens area' and the II is not much smaller than the I version, despite removing the optical viewfinder. Maybe a top quality internal EVF would be asking to much given the volume, but I really think this is a business decision to enable 'upselling'.

Upselling to what?

tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 11,736
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

technic wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

I know the bright lens is a big part of the weight / volume. But there is a lot of camera body outside the 'lens area' and the II is not much smaller than the I version, despite removing the optical viewfinder. Maybe a top quality internal EVF would be asking to much given the volume, but I really think this is a business decision to enable 'upselling'.

Another way to look at it may be that it is a way to keep the price of the camera down and the relative few that really want to have the VF can pay extra for it.   I really doubt they could add a good viewfinder and still hit the same price target.

 tkbslc's gear list:tkbslc's gear list
Canon G7 X II Fujifilm X100F OnePlus 3
technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

meland wrote:

technic wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

I know the bright lens is a big part of the weight / volume. But there is a lot of camera body outside the 'lens area' and the II is not much smaller than the I version, despite removing the optical viewfinder. Maybe a top quality internal EVF would be asking to much given the volume, but I really think this is a business decision to enable 'upselling'.

Upselling to what?

selling G1X II owners a very expensive external EVF.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

tkbslc wrote:

technic wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

I know the bright lens is a big part of the weight / volume. But there is a lot of camera body outside the 'lens area' and the II is not much smaller than the I version, despite removing the optical viewfinder. Maybe a top quality internal EVF would be asking to much given the volume, but I really think this is a business decision to enable 'upselling'.

Another way to look at it may be that it is a way to keep the price of the camera down and the relative few that really want to have the VF can pay extra for it. I really doubt they could add a good viewfinder and still hit the same price target.

agree that could be a factor; although it is difficult to see what a 'realistic' sales price is for such a target, most cameras are sold at several times the real production cost. You can pay for development with high margins or with high sales numbers (because of a more compelling product).

Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,258
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
1

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 5,590
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

technic wrote:

meland wrote:

technic wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Difficult to judge if it could be smaller with these specs. But I'm surprised (comparing with some other cameras) there wasn't even room for an EVF ... I guess that's not so much because there wasn't any space left, but more likely because it allows Canon to extract some extra money from the customers ;-(

Other cameras you are comparing to don't have an F2 zoom designed for a 1.9x crop sensor!

I know the bright lens is a big part of the weight / volume. But there is a lot of camera body outside the 'lens area' and the II is not much smaller than the I version, despite removing the optical viewfinder. Maybe a top quality internal EVF would be asking to much given the volume, but I really think this is a business decision to enable 'upselling'.

Upselling to what?

selling G1X II owners a very expensive external EVF.

Oh, right.  But that would only work as a business model if the sales of the basic G1X II were sufficient to get a percentage to purchase the additional EVF.  If having to purchase additional EVF, rather than one built in actually deters purchasers from buying the camera at all then as a decision the upselling strategy would fail miserably.

No I think Canon simply listened to all of you who said "the OVF is crap, get rid of it."  And so they did.

(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 5,590
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

Of course.  You might like them to be a charity but unfortunately they wouldn't remain in business very long if they were.  And even if they made the very best products technically possible there is absolutely no guarantee that those products, at the price they would probably have to be sold for, would sell.  All manufacturing for the consumer is a compromise even if some here think that makes manufacturers dirty, money grabbing bastards.

(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
You actually think Canon held back? They've spoiled you.

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent.  I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom.  This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II.  Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket.  I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios.  If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.).  Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens.  As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself.  The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

Prepare to be stunned by all the ways Canon decidedly did not hold back.

Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,258
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
1

meland wrote:

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

Of course. You might like them to be a charity but unfortunately they wouldn't remain in business very long if they were. And even if they made the very best products technically possible there is absolutely no guarantee that those products, at the price they would probably have to be sold for, would sell. All manufacturing for the consumer is a compromise even if some here think that makes manufacturers dirty, money grabbing bastards.

Yes, I'm not making any moral judgments on Canon. I'm just stating this because some people are suggesting that some features are technically impossible or something ... I don't doubt that Canon could make a much better camera, but ultimately it is marketing (and not engineering) these days that decides which consumer products will make it to market.

(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 5,590
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

howardroark wrote:

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II. Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket. I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios. If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.). Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens. As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself. The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

I do hope you are right, that is your comment that it will shut up the naysayers.  But I fear that there will still be too many who simply don't understand the point of the product, or rather don't want to see the point even if it's not for them, and they will continue to snipe away at it until something else comes along they they don't understand either, or they just get bored.

Prepare to be stunned by all the ways Canon decidedly did not hold back.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not assuming anything, but I worked in this business (both product development and sales) for many years and I have a pretty good idea about how the decisions are made and what actual production costs are.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: You actually think Canon held back? They've spoiled you.

howardroark wrote:

phazelag wrote:

I have been moving toward smaller cameras for a while now and I really do like the concept of the G1X M2, but the fact that its only 12.8 mega pixels in my opinion really lowers its potential.

I know the megapixel police will be cursing me, but I think 14-16 would have been excellent. I have my Ricoh GR at 16 and it is nice to be able to crop to zoom. This where I think many buyers looking for high quality in their pocket will be more likely to choose the Sony RX100 or RX100II. Yes I am guessing the G1X will have nicer high ISO photos, but really how much better and how often will that be necessary compared to wanting the details in the 20MP Sony.

Plus the Sony truly does fit in your pocket. I think Canon has done something nice, but they have limited the potential buyers by holding back newer sensor pixel ratios. If this used the 70D sensor technology it could be 15MP and that would be more to work with.

I will wait to see the photos and reviews, but I do feel like canon held back on us.

-- hide signature --

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.). Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens. As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself.

Agree that the lens is worth the price of the camera if it really delivers (= at least as sharp as the one on G1X, especially when it comes to corner quality), but I first want to see how it performs.

The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

Let's hope the macro quality is better than what they provide on their somewhat similar 15-85IS lens for APS-C. That one is so bad for closeups (very unsharp outside the center; way worse than the cheap 18-55IS) that I never use it.

Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,258
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Yes well, canon is still a business. They're in it to make money as well.

yes, so many product feature/quality decisions are based on making money, not so much on what is technically possible.

You do not know the costs or the decisions the company needs to go through. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not assuming anything, but I worked in this business (both product development and sales) for many years and I have a pretty good idea about how the decisions are made and what actual production costs are.

If you've worked in this industry, then you should know exactly why decisions like this are being made. No point bitching about it on the forums.

(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
1

meland wrote:

I think we got a similar sensor to one that was first introduced 2 years ago, but very likely with manufacturing improvements that will increase image quality (DR, noise, etc.). Even if those improvements are marginal, what Canon did not hold back on was a killer (I mean really groundbreaking) new lens. As long as it produces the same type of detail, color, etc. as the G1 X lens the new G1 X II lens will be enough to justify the price of the camera all by itself. The greatly improved macro ability will also shut up the naysayers, or at least a great many of them.

I do hope you are right, that is your comment that it will shut up the naysayers.  But I fear that there will still be too many who simply don't understand the point of the product, or rather don't want to see the point even if it's not for them, and they will continue to snipe away at it until something else comes along they they don't understand either, or they just get bored.

At the very least we won't have to endure reviews where some dude picks up the camera, tries to focus on something a foot away, and when it doesn't work he goes "what a worthless camera....this sucks."  Now it will behave much more normally in close-up situations and have a much closer min focus distance when put in macro mode.  And perhaps the AF will be fast enough that we won't have to keep reminding people that, with the proper technique, you can actually greatly improve the AF speed of the G1 X.  Like a DSLR, a lot of things can be improved on the G1 X with good technique.  When people pick up a P&S/compact camera they don't expect to have to use good technique:  if sloppy technique in full auto mode doesn't work then they are disappointed instantly.

Prepare to be stunned by all the ways Canon decidedly did not hold back.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads