Canon g1 x mark 2 review

Started Mar 14, 2014 | Discussions
Lucien Contributing Member • Posts: 847
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

jimr wrote:

kinglau711 wrote:

I have the G1X Mark II and I confirm that 24mm at F2 is soft/blurry.

24mm is good at F4.

That would negate much of the advantage of a high speed lens at that focal length..

Not completely. At very high ISO and low-light conditions you lose lot of that detail and resolution at entire image. So if you'd shoot at ISO 3200 f2.0 instead of ISO 6400 f2.8 it should still be better. Especially if you have no choice and you want to capture fast movement without blurring.

Again not unique to G1X Mark II. Any 24mm zoom lens I've seen exhibit this. The bigger question is if it's more than other comparable camera's in this class. Couldn't answer that until we see full test (e.g. Imaging resource as nice test at different apertures and focal lengths).

The previous G1 Mark lens should be better in theory given less ambitious zoom range but then you don't have same flexible zoom range. So it's trade-off. If you never shoot at 24mm or full 120mm you're not getting much from the new lens but both increased upper ranges can be really useful at times.

Ramesh Regular Member • Posts: 218
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

Lucien wrote:

jimr wrote:

kinglau711 wrote:

I have the G1X Mark II and I confirm that 24mm at F2 is soft/blurry.

24mm is good at F4.

That would negate much of the advantage of a high speed lens at that focal length..

Not completely. At very high ISO and low-light conditions you lose lot of that detail and resolution at entire image. So if you'd shoot at ISO 3200 f2.0 instead of ISO 6400 f2.8 it should still be better. Especially if you have no choice and you want to capture fast movement without blurring.

Again not unique to G1X Mark II. Any 24mm zoom lens I've seen exhibit this. The bigger question is if it's more than other comparable camera's in this class. Couldn't answer that until we see full test (e.g. Imaging resource as nice test at different apertures and focal lengths).

The previous G1 Mark lens should be better in theory given less ambitious zoom range but then you don't have same flexible zoom range. So it's trade-off. If you never shoot at 24mm or full 120mm you're not getting much from the new lens but both increased upper ranges can be really useful at times.

Take a look at these night shots. many of them shot at F 2.0:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/minami/sets/72157642734832515/

-- hide signature --

rr

 Ramesh's gear list:Ramesh's gear list
Canon EOS 550D Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,327
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp
2

Lucien wrote:

jimr wrote:

kinglau711 wrote:

I have the G1X Mark II and I confirm that 24mm at F2 is soft/blurry.

24mm is good at F4.

That would negate much of the advantage of a high speed lens at that focal length..

Not completely. At very high ISO and low-light conditions you lose lot of that detail and resolution at entire image. So if you'd shoot at ISO 3200 f2.0 instead of ISO 6400 f2.8 it should still be better. Especially if you have no choice and you want to capture fast movement without blurring.

Again not unique to G1X Mark II. Any 24mm zoom lens I've seen exhibit this. The bigger question is if it's more than other comparable camera's in this class. Couldn't answer that until we see full test (e.g. Imaging resource as nice test at different apertures and focal lengths).

The previous G1 Mark lens should be better in theory given less ambitious zoom range but then you don't have same flexible zoom range. So it's trade-off. If you never shoot at 24mm or full 120mm you're not getting much from the new lens but both increased upper ranges can be really useful at times.

That's exactly what I'm thinking as well, and i'm not sure why no one seems to understand this.

In such low light, detail will be lost no matter what. F2.0 allows more flexibility, you can still shoot at F2.8 or F4 or whatever you want, but you can also shoot @ F2.0. Not sure why everyone is having such big issues with this.

Before even having the camera, I have an easy fix for this, try not using F2.0, or use the step zoom to keep it at 28mm. Problem solved.

Before you say "but i ONLY shoot at F2.0 and 24mm" well, if you actually did, then you'd know of this issue anyways. Also the canon S120 I just handled had this same issue, but it would only go to F1.8 in very low light, where you'd be forced to use higher ISO or wider apertures anyway. I'm also quite certain many other cameras that are able to shoot at so bright and wide will have this issue. No worries unless you're unable to adjust settings on your own.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp
1

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

That's exactly what I'm thinking as well, and i'm not sure why no one seems to understand this.

why? simple, because some people have other priorities and shooting habits than you.

In such low light, detail will be lost no matter what. F2.0 allows more flexibility, you can still shoot at F2.8 or F4 or whatever you want, but you can also shoot @ F2.0. Not sure why everyone is having such big issues with this.

If you want to use the f/2 or f/2.8 in GOOD light and the lens doesn't deliver, you are paying for and carrying dead weight. F/2 is not only for 'low light performance'.

Before even having the camera, I have an easy fix for this, try not using F2.0, or use the step zoom to keep it at 28mm. Problem solved.

It seems the lens is soft (with blurred corners) wide open throughout the zoom range, so just sticking to 28mm doesn't solve everything; but I will reserve judgment until we have more reliable test images.

Before you say "but i ONLY shoot at F2.0 and 24mm" well, if you actually did, then you'd know of this issue anyways. Also the canon S120 I just handled had this same issue, but it would only go to F1.8 in very low light, where you'd be forced to use higher ISO or wider apertures anyway. I'm also quite certain many other cameras that are able to shoot at so bright and wide will have this issue. No worries unless you're unable to adjust settings on your own.

As mentioned before, I found the very similar S110 lens quite usable wide open at 24mm equiv. (yes, it is a bit 'soft' full open, but acceptable - not like the few 24mm equiv. images I have seen from the G1X II) and optimal by f/2.8. One could argue that f/2 on the S110 is equivalent to about f/4 on the G1X II for DOF control and light gathering, but if you can use that extra f/2-f/4 aperture range only for low light shooting (when the corners don't matter), I doubt it is worth the huge extra cost and weight (not for me ...).

Tonkotsu Ramen
Tonkotsu Ramen Senior Member • Posts: 2,327
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

That's exactly what I'm thinking as well, and i'm not sure why no one seems to understand this.

why? simple, because some people have other priorities and shooting habits than you.

In such low light, detail will be lost no matter what. F2.0 allows more flexibility, you can still shoot at F2.8 or F4 or whatever you want, but you can also shoot @ F2.0. Not sure why everyone is having such big issues with this.

If you want to use the f/2 or f/2.8 in GOOD light and the lens doesn't deliver, you are paying for and carrying dead weight. F/2 is not only for 'low light performance'.

Before even having the camera, I have an easy fix for this, try not using F2.0, or use the step zoom to keep it at 28mm. Problem solved.

It seems the lens is soft (with blurred corners) wide open throughout the zoom range, so just sticking to 28mm doesn't solve everything; but I will reserve judgment until we have more reliable test images.

Before you say "but i ONLY shoot at F2.0 and 24mm" well, if you actually did, then you'd know of this issue anyways. Also the canon S120 I just handled had this same issue, but it would only go to F1.8 in very low light, where you'd be forced to use higher ISO or wider apertures anyway. I'm also quite certain many other cameras that are able to shoot at so bright and wide will have this issue. No worries unless you're unable to adjust settings on your own.

As mentioned before, I found the very similar S110 lens quite usable wide open at 24mm equiv. (yes, it is a bit 'soft' full open, but acceptable - not like the few 24mm equiv. images I have seen from the G1X II) and optimal by f/2.8. One could argue that f/2 on the S110 is equivalent to about f/4 on the G1X II for DOF control and light gathering, but if you can use that extra f/2-f/4 aperture range only for low light shooting (when the corners don't matter), I doubt it is worth the huge extra cost and weight (not for me ...).

The samples posted in the flickr look sharp enough for me

https://www.flickr.com/photos/minami/13328842015/in/set-72157642734832515

You stated before:

technic wrote:

Some people want to use f/2 in medium to good light levels, where the sharpness loss will be painfully obvious (judging from the first results). For landscape / architecture style images I try to keep ISO as low as possible for better sharpness and DR, and for this type of images sharpness loss in the corners is often undesirable (soft corners will be far more obvious that e.g. in people or low light shots). I can accept softness full open if it is really sharp by f/4 in the WA range, but even that is questionable.

So are you shooting landscape and architecture at f/2? What other conditions do you use that require sharp corners at f/2 (which usually isn't the case for most lenses while shooting that bright anyways)

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

So are you shooting landscape and architecture at f/2? What other conditions do you use that require sharp corners at f/2 (which usually isn't the case for most lenses while shooting that bright anyways)

No, I'm not shooting at f/2 as I currently use a DSLR. If I used a 1/1.7" compact I sure would shoot at f/2 of f/1.4 if the lens quality allowed that (i.e. with sufficiently sharp corners). For most of my shooting the DOF would be sufficient at that aperture, which is equivalent to about f/5.6 on my APS-C camera. On my DSLR with 15-85IS lens I often use about f/4 in less than ideal lighting, but I would definitely use f/2.8 for some shots if possible.

A bright lens that is sharp into the corners full open is also very nice for astrophotography.

BarnET Veteran Member • Posts: 3,529
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

So are you shooting landscape and architecture at f/2? What other conditions do you use that require sharp corners at f/2 (which usually isn't the case for most lenses while shooting that bright anyways)

No, I'm not shooting at f/2 as I currently use a DSLR. If I used a 1/1.7" compact I sure would shoot at f/2 of f/1.4 if the lens quality allowed that (i.e. with sufficiently sharp corners). For most of my shooting the DOF would be sufficient at that aperture, which is equivalent to about f/5.6 on my APS-C camera. On my DSLR with 15-85IS lens I often use about f/4 in less than ideal lighting, but I would definitely use f/2.8 for some shots if possible.

A bright lens that is sharp into the corners full open is also very nice for astrophotography.

Astro requires not a razor sharp lens but a wide lens that has good coma performance. Which is very rare wide-open. F2 sharp corners is more likely to be used for interior shooting. With dull lighting and wide-angle needs.

 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: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

BarnET wrote:

A bright lens that is sharp into the corners full open is also very nice for astrophotography.

Astro requires not a razor sharp lens but a wide lens that has good coma performance. Which is very rare wide-open.

agree that coma is more important, but it is already clear to me from the first images that the Canon G1X mkII is not a good astro lens.

F2 sharp corners is more likely to be used for interior shooting. With dull lighting and wide-angle needs.

for interior shooting?? Seems to me you need very good DOF for that most of the times - unlike outside architecture, and in that case I'm not talking about Realtor pictures but architecture in its surroundings which often doesn't need much DOF because of the distance.

sdh Regular Member • Posts: 205
Re: 4 pages detailed review at monox.jp

Lucien wrote:

technic wrote:

Tonkotsu Ramen wrote:

Same issue my Sony RX100M2 had.. except it was at 28mm F1.8 and only became useable at F2.8

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3593706

When you make a lens that covers such a wide range, there will be compromises.

Not unusual really.

yes, it seems like this is what you get when making a bright lens for larger sensor too compact. I'm really starting to doubt the value of that bright lens, which IMHO is the main selling point of the G1X II. I think I would prefer a slower lens (e.g. f/3.5-5.6) with the same focal length range that is sharp wide open (and smaller / lighter and possibly cheaper).

I suspect the same could be said of the G15.

I hope the Nikon P8000 gives better results near wide open; the smaller sensor and experience with some previous Coolpix and Nikon 1 lenses should help.

I shot a Nikon P7700 for about 6 months before switching to the G15.  While I found the Nikon interface maddening (operational speed), that it produced very detailed images, which I suspect is due to the lens. (raw vs raw, G15 images look soft vs the P7700...)

Same was said about S100 few years ago when going from 28 to 24mm and apparently also with Sony (and tons of other camera's). This is typical especially with f2.0 and wide 24mm (unless you are buying a $1000+ lens). Checkout some of the top lens reviews on dpreview just for reference.

Note however don't expect it in daylight conditions to choose f2. It would only choose that with low light conditions and in that case you'll lose some detail anyway (certainly if alternative is higher ISO). Also remember you can add more sharpening but not all pictures will look like a resolution chart...

Note sure I agree, based on my experience with the G15. I see my G15 choosing max (brightest) aperture at any focal length, at any light levels, pretty much until it needs to stop down due to reaching max shutter speed.

I certainly hope Canon programs the G1X II more wisely.

Until we see dpreview studio comparison still bit hard to do a good comparison between previous model and other cameras. Don't expect huge difference at lowest ISO compared to camera's with smaller sensors. Biggest difference would be in low light in theory given much larger sensor.

 sdh's gear list:sdh's gear list
Canon PowerShot G15 NEX5R Canon EOS 700D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +5 more
mthalen Regular Member • Posts: 114
Some more reviews and pics (including Engadget Japan)
1

Hadn't seen these before:

http://monopod.exblog.jp/tags/G1X%20mk2/

Another one:

http://mark6502.at.webry.info/201403/article_3.html

And engadget Japan, article:

http://japanese.engadget.com/promo/canon_powershotg1xmarkii/

and gallery:

http://japanese.engadget.com/gallery/pr-canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii/

Do a google translate on the Japanese Engadget review:

"The PowerShot G1 X Mark II is going to be indispensable travel partner in the future"

He than asks a bunch of bloggers' opnions:

The unanimous first impression was that the "image quality is beautiful".

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads