G1X MII or RX100II?

Started Feb 13, 2014 | Discussions
technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

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.

I'm not bitching at all, I'm just pointing out that many comments here about these decisions are plain WRONG. Apparently that hurts ...

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

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

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.

I'm not bitching at all, I'm just pointing out that many comments here about these decisions are plain WRONG. Apparently that hurts ...

No they are not necessarily wrong. They are just not comments that you happen to personally agree with.

(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,853
G1 X Mark II. I still would hate life with a Sony in my hand.

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 --

They are just so unpleasant to use.  Plus I want a serious camera, and that means that fitting in my pocket is not anywhere on my list of priorities.  The G1 X Mark II lens alone will most likely sell the camera.

Dames01 Forum Member • Posts: 79
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

phazelag wrote:

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.

I am sorry but it seems to me that you are comparing apples and pears. The Ricoh GR is undoubtedly a great camera, but it has a fixed focal length of 28mm whereas the G1X mk II has a 24 to 120mm zoom lens. So you will not need to crop, unless of course you forget to zoom

And as concerns the Sony RX100, the sensor size is less than half the area size of that of the G1X mk II. If you compare the image quality between the original G1X and the RX100, you will see more noise starting at ISO 800!

 Dames01's gear list:Dames01's gear list
Canon G1 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS M
Mark B. Forum Pro • Posts: 22,059
wrong comparison

A6000 is an interchangeable lens camera with a much larger sensor.  Different class of camera, and not a competitor to the G1X II.

phazelag
OP phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,083
Re: 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.

I hear you and agree. The camera is intriguing me more and more.
--
www.scottzinda.com
http://instagram.com/phazelag
http://motivationmachine.net/

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm XQ2 Olympus Tough TG-4 +6 more
Mark B. Forum Pro • Posts: 22,059
Re: Compare size & weight against lens size and brightness

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

Don't think so; this is a feature reserved for the DSLRs.

Ed B
Ed B Veteran Member • Posts: 8,409
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

howardroark wrote:

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.

Have to agree with much of what you're saying but have to add that when people pay this kind of money, for a compact camera, they shouldn't have to worry about much of anything.

The camera has a nice size sensor and the lens looks like it will be great. I only hope Canon has been able to improve the auto focus speed so the price of the camera is really justified.

I've always liked Canon and, except for the lack of a viewfinder, I think this is one of the nicest compacts I've seen. Hope it turns out to be as good as it looks.

PaulRivers Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
1

phazelag wrote:

...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... 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.

I don't think you understand how megapixels work. If there was a way to do it, I'd bet you $100 that the G1X M2 will consistently the same or better real, actual details and resolution than the Sony.

On the other reasons, like size, weight, etc - well those are good reasons. But 12.8 megapixels on a larger sensor vs 20mp on a smaller sensor? The 12.8 is going to have more details.

Even on full frame cameras with quality glass, improving the megapixel count above 12 or so has only improved real detail in the picture by a very, very tiny amount. But that's with huge sensors.

The reason your Ricoh has more croppability is because it uses a dslr-sized sensor and good glad. The megapixel count is not why. Increasing megapixels is a game of diminishing returns when it comes to real detail increase, and those returns have been small since 6mp and very tiny since 12mp.

phazelag
OP phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,083
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

PaulRivers wrote:

phazelag wrote:

...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... 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.

I don't think you understand how megapixels work. If there was a way to do it, I'd bet you $100 that the G1X M2 will consistently the same or better real, actual details and resolution than the Sony.

On the other reasons, like size, weight, etc - well those are good reasons. But 12.8 megapixels on a larger sensor vs 20mp on a smaller sensor? The 12.8 is going to have more details.

Even on full frame cameras with quality glass, improving the megapixel count above 12 or so has only improved real detail in the picture by a very, very tiny amount. But that's with huge sensors.

The reason your Ricoh has more croppability is because it uses a dslr-sized sensor and good glad. The megapixel count is not why. Increasing megapixels is a game of diminishing returns when it comes to real detail increase, and those returns have been small since 6mp and very tiny since 12mp.

That makes sense.  The more I think about this camera the more it appeals to me.

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm XQ2 Olympus Tough TG-4 +6 more
Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,249
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
2

I actually just got rid of my RX100II, lots of small issues that started to affect my usage of the camera. I'll list them and maybe they can help you with your decision. I also have a Canon S90 that I used side by side with the RX100M2.

-Image stabilization on the wide end (28mm) of the RX100M2 is very poor, and the camera defaults to 1/30 or slower when there is low lighting, which resulted in many many many blurry pictures. You can use shutter mode, but that's incredibly limiting for such a pricey camera. I end up with less blurry photos from my S90.

-Screen tits, but not 180 degrees like the G1X Mark II.

-Operation is fast, but because the shutter works so fast, it actually activates faster than the camera can auto focus, which means more blurry photos. So I developed the habit of pressing the shutter 2x, which is kind of silly really.

-F1.8 is only avail on the wide end.

-Lens is very soft when using F1.8 on the wide end, so soft that I think there may have been a malfunction with my copy. Going to F2.8 solves the problem, but its another hassle you need to deal with.

-Lots of rough edges all over the camera, so it's not as easy to slip in a pocket like the S90

-Camera without the grip is awkward to hold

-LCD is rigid and difficult to move around

-Apps are laggy

-Close up macro performance is mediocre despite the 5 cm MFD. It's easier on my canon

-Colors are "sony cold" vs "canon saturated"

-No touch screen

-No auto ISO in M

-shutter button feedback stinks

Once the G1X Mark II was announced, I knew it was the camera for me.

Heck, it saved me from blowing $1,099 on a zeiss lens for my NEX (and I sold the NEX also).

It will provide similar results as my NEX for less than 1/2 of the price.

Now i'm just waiting to see it in person, because the G1X's weight may be a problem (same weight as my Sony A57 without a lens on.....)

phazelag
OP phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,083
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?

technic wrote:

Catalin Stavaru wrote:

If Canon will ever release a small APS-C camera with a fixed 28mm F2 lens (like the Nikon Coolpix A) I am sure that even without zoom it will take a lot of sales from the RX100.

Why would such a camera from Canon be much more attractive than Ricoh GR and Coolpix A? Maybe Canon can provide slightly smaller size (assuming f/2.8 28mm, not f/2), better out-of-camera jpeg and noisier sensor Ultimately the choice is between a high quality prime and a compromised zoom, and for some maybe about good ergonomics or lots of features.

People who don't like the RX100 concept already have two compact APS-C WA prime cameras to chose from.

I love my Ricoh GR.  If I could only one camera that would be it, but I really liked my Olympus XZ1 for macros and even portraits.  The Canon is similar with a larger sensor and more useful lens range, but still compact and having a camera like that is like owning a swiss army knife for someone who will use the features and I would for sure.

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm XQ2 Olympus Tough TG-4 +6 more
phazelag
OP phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,083
Re: G1X MII or RX100II?
1

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

I actually just got rid of my RX100II, lots of small issues that started to affect my usage of the camera. I'll list them and maybe they can help you with your decision. I also have a Canon S90 that I used side by side with the RX100M2.

-Image stabilization on the wide end (28mm) of the RX100M2 is very poor, and the camera defaults to 1/30 or slower when there is low lighting, which resulted in many many many blurry pictures. You can use shutter mode, but that's incredibly limiting for such a pricey camera. I end up with less blurry photos from my S90.

-Screen tits, but not 180 degrees like the G1X Mark II.

-Operation is fast, but because the shutter works so fast, it actually activates faster than the camera can auto focus, which means more blurry photos. So I developed the habit of pressing the shutter 2x, which is kind of silly really.

-F1.8 is only avail on the wide end.

-Lens is very soft when using F1.8 on the wide end, so soft that I think there may have been a malfunction with my copy. Going to F2.8 solves the problem, but its another hassle you need to deal with.

-Lots of rough edges all over the camera, so it's not as easy to slip in a pocket like the S90

-Camera without the grip is awkward to hold

-LCD is rigid and difficult to move around

-Apps are laggy

-Close up macro performance is mediocre despite the 5 cm MFD. It's easier on my canon

-Colors are "sony cold" vs "canon saturated"

-No touch screen

-No auto ISO in M

-shutter button feedback stinks

Once the G1X Mark II was announced, I knew it was the camera for me.

Heck, it saved me from blowing $1,099 on a zeiss lens for my NEX (and I sold the NEX also).

It will provide similar results as my NEX for less than 1/2 of the price.

Now i'm just waiting to see it in person, because the G1X's weight may be a problem (same weight as my Sony A57 without a lens on.....)

That all good info.

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm XQ2 Olympus Tough TG-4 +6 more
RedFox88 Forum Pro • Posts: 26,830
photos on phones..

Well, since most photos are viewed and shared on small phone screens I hardly see how 13 MP is "low resolution" since phone screens are maybe 1 to 2 MP.  So 13 is more than enough!  Step back and contemplate why you need 20 instead of 13 and and "to crop" is not an intelligent answer here.

ohcello Senior Member • Posts: 1,630
If you use your cam as your full time videocam like I do, >> RX100 II...

I have a 5d, but use the RX100 II as my vacation cam and my full time video cam... it takes amazing video with little to no moire.... All the larger chip DSlRs and mirrorless I tried, even the ones with 60p, had moire issues when panning....

The reason I was told is that NEX and DSLR cameras don't scale down a full size image to generate a frame of video, but instead they skip lines. So an NEX-6 with its 16MP sensor is probably only reading every 3rd line to generate 1080p video, and this results in the aliasing of the lines that are close to horizontal in the image, which in turn causes the moire pattern.

In other words, The APS-C sized sensor cannot be read fast enough to read all lines @ 60p. So they cheat by line skipping. FF is even worse.

Here is an example - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3525116

++++++

Now, I'm not sure how the G1X II will fare with moire, but it's 30p and with my fast moving kids, that's a deal breaker as the G1x II would have to be my full time video cam. From everything I have seen and tried, 30p with fast motion is pretty noticable compared to 60p.

It's a shame as I was really looking forward to switching... I'd *much* rather have 24mm on the long end, and having 120mm with f/3.9 on 1.9x crop!...

But the RX100 video is excellent indoors at f/1.8 @28mm.. with very little noise... and it does Ok outdoors as well at 100mm f/4.9.

+++++++

If I was getting a camera and didn't care about video, I'd switch to the G1X II in a heartbeat.

 ohcello's gear list:ohcello's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +2 more
Mk7 Senior Member • Posts: 1,284
Re: Compare size, weight and options...

rrccad wrote:
if canon can't match the distortion / optics of that 16-50 .. then someone shoot the engineers that worked on the Mark II.

is there a lens in production that has more distortion in that lens that isn't a fisheye?
i doubt you get more than 12Mp out of that lens even on a 24Mp sensor.

Most buyers don't know or care about distortion. Salespeople aren't gonna tell them, either. Customers will just see the 24MP, DSLR sensor and built-in EVF, in a similar-sized package, and buy the Sony.
Or, they'll see that cute, tiny Sony RX100 II with a lusty Carl Zeiss lens and "large 20MP DSLR sensor" (so the salesperson tells them, anyway ),and buy that one, since it easily slips into their pocket or purse (along with the money they save).
Mark II may continue the slow sales despite significant improvements.

Mk7 Senior Member • Posts: 1,284
Re: Compare size & weight against lens size and brightness

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).

Doug

Those were true of the original G1 X but the advantages did not translate into sales. Now Canon has upped the ante. The new product specs are really great, but bulk and price will hurt.

Mk7 Senior Member • Posts: 1,284
fair comparison

Mark B. wrote:

A6000 is an interchangeable lens camera with a much larger sensor. Different class of camera, and not a competitor to the G1X II.

What, are we to compare it only to cameras with 1.5" sensors?
In their review, DPReview compared the G1 X to an APS-C DSLR, an ILC and a "small" sensor compact. Customers did too.

Mark B. Forum Pro • Posts: 22,059
Re: fair comparison

Mk7 wrote:

Mark B. wrote:

A6000 is an interchangeable lens camera with a much larger sensor. Different class of camera, and not a competitor to the G1X II.

What, are we to compare it only to cameras with 1.5" sensors?

No, but at least compare it to other large-sensor compacts.  The RX100 II makes sense.

In their review, DPReview compared the G1 X to an APS-C DSLR, an ILC and a "small" sensor compact. Customers did too.

Just as a frame of reference.  Someone that truly wants interchangeable lenses isn't going to be happy stuck with one zoom range; someone that wants something portable probably won't be happy with a DSLR body and the lenses that go with it.

Mk7 Senior Member • Posts: 1,284
Re: fair comparison

Mark B. wrote:

Mk7 wrote:

Mark B. wrote:

A6000 is an interchangeable lens camera with a much larger sensor. Different class of camera, and not a competitor to the G1X II.

What, are we to compare it only to cameras with 1.5" sensors?

No, but at least compare it to other large-sensor compacts. The RX100 II makes sense.

The A6000 makes as much sense. It has a large sensor (and EVF) and is darn near as compact as the G1X II.

In their review, DPReview compared the G1 X to an APS-C DSLR, an ILC and a "small" sensor compact. Customers did too.

Just as a frame of reference. Someone that truly wants interchangeable lenses isn't going to be happy stuck with one zoom range;

True, that's why DPR compared it to an ILC and entry-level DSLR. Most people who buy those don't truly want interchangeable lenses.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads