Filter use G1x Mark lll

One of the first things I did when I bought the camera was to buy a UV filter - A Hoya HMC thin filter.

So I just simply screwed one on as the inner part of the front of the lens does not move at all as far as I can tell and I've looked at it thoroughly.

The filter just screws on easily no force required as it's a proper 37 mm thread.

Then I read a few posts in other parts of the web about adaptors and lens hoods required.

A thorough search on Google seemed not to come up with anything conclusive, especially not on any Canon website as far as I could see.

You'd think if it was a feature Canon would have made a big deal of it, considering it was always an (expensive) issue with previous iterations of the G-series.

I was starting to get worried.

To ensure that nothing was touching anything I tore a tiny sliver of white paper say 3x3mm which I inserted above the lens and then screwed on the filter.

I then moved the camera around and the piece of paper moved around totally freely between the filter and the top of the lens, all over the lens. No contact whatsoever.

I repeated this with the camera on, at various focal lengths focussing at different points. The inner part of the lens does appear to move at all, the paper flows freely - so I guess that the focus is all internal. I haven't tried macro mode, but I just don't think anything external moves - part of the weather sealing I would suspect.

In addition, the specs of the hood don't say this is absolutely needed for filter use.

As the filter is much lighter than any lens hoods, etc, I can see absolutely no reason not to use the filter. It's not like the thread resisted in any way - it was as smooth as any DSLR lens.

Do you think I have reason to worry? Anyone with any ideas? Anyone done the same.

Im using UV filter 37mm, no problem so far.

Thanks for your comments they are appreciated.

I'm just surprised that the filter advantage - which it is - is not mentioned anywhere. You'd think it would be a highlight.

I feel more comfortable now

First thing I did was attach that UV filter!

Hi Ken

No, I'm using the straight HMC filter. I did some checking on the internet and these came up as being first class in most tests. In fact, it beats the BW's and is just a fraction behind the Zeiss at a fraction of the price.

While it says low profile on the box I think that's just marketing speak. But it works great, cleans easily and makes no difference to light transmission that I can see - or no reflections that I can find.

Now I've finally been able to get rid of that lens cap, which I might say, has to take the prize for the most irritating lens cap ever made.

I understand others like Lightgreen use the shade, but I didn't want to increase the dimensions of the camera in any way. This does the job just fine.

Peter Bendheim wrote:

Do you think I have reason to worry? Anyone with any ideas? Anyone done the same.

No, you're right... there's VERY little information available online. 
.
Canon replied to my inquiries on this subject on November 23, 2017. A week earlier, they had advised me by phone that there was no means of attaching a filter to the G1X III. I also drew their attention to several review sites that also noted there was no filter option for this camera, including THIS site which does not list a filter thread diameter on the specs page.  I spoke with Canon several times by phone and later they contacted me via email to update me when they felt they had more information.  It surprised me that Canon staff were unfamiliar with their own products.  But I maintained communication with Canon on the subject since this camera really should have had a filter option.  This also included Canon customer support and their overseas offices.  But to their credit they later contacted me with a positive reply to my questions.
.
Whilst there appears to be threading on the outermost portion of the barrel... that fits a filter of around 37mm... this is not the purpose of those threads.  I believe that this was most likely a standard size barrel threading assembly they used to access the interior of the lens during manufacture.
.
After almost a week of silence, Canon contacted me personally a third time to inform me of the following: "I would like to inform you that the PowerShot G1 X Mark III allows mounting of external filter by using a filter adapter. Please open attach file." (see image below)
.

.
So whilst Canon do not advertise filters to be used on the G1X III, and they do not supply this information to dealers or to websites, there's indeed a method to attach a filter to the camera using the device pictured above.  They call it a a "Lens Hood and Filter Adapter Kit for PowerShot G1 X MARK III" ... which suggests that it has more than one part.  Canon do NOT recommend threading a filter directly onto the end of the lens and the threads there were not designed for this purpose, which is WHY it is not listed on any website.
.
Talking with several authorized repairers, they warned me that placing a filter directly onto the outermost element of the G1X III was a concern if the camera is knocked or dropped. Due to the minuscule gap between any inappropriately fitted filter would likely shatter the outermost element through kinetic reaction. The outermost element on most Canon cameras contains the majority of nano coatings and spectral transmission coatings thatreduce internal reflections and improve contrast.  As a result of rising labor costs, it is now quite expensive to replace with repairs in the hundreds of dollars these days. They used to be much cheaper. The same also applies to Canon DSLR lenses as well and the service costs and lens element replacement costs have skyrocketed in recent years compared to what they used to be.
.
Different brands of filter will have different amounts of tolerance between the inner surface of the filter and the outer surface of your lens. I think there have been plenty of PowerShot users who have noted how their camera lenses were repeatedly scratched by the closing lens covers that used to be incorporated into the cameras over the years.  Even recently.  I think Canon avoided using this method with the G1X III because the last thing they wanted was to be responsible for scratching their own lenses.... again.  Although it's hard to say why they can't just add more safe distance.  The Canon technicians I spoke with told me that the use of the Adapter would also reduce vignetting with some filters... which might occur if the filters were placed directly on the end of the lens.
.
Another reason there may not be an automatic protective lens cover is so that people can add filters to their lens much like with the G1X Mk 1.  The Filter attachment was a bayonet-style filter mount that allowed the instant removal of any filter without undue pressure on the lens mechanism when removing or adding a filter.  This may also be the reason why Canon do not want you mounting a filter directly to the outer lens element of the camera... because a stuck filter on a geared modern lens barrel is a sure-fire recipe for disaster with some customers.

Hi Marco

Thanks for your comprehensive reply.

Yes, there is very little info other than it being on the specs of a few review sites such as imaging resource.

As I indicated in my original post, I checked the tolerances and it seemed fine.

Part of me really believes that Canon does this just to sell extra accessories for inflated prices.

Part of me is also amazed at about how little Canon employees know about their own products.

It is, however, a normal filter thread and I'm not convinced the gap is much less than some DSLR lenses, if at all. Using the moving piece of paper trick.

I really don't want an ugly lens hood adding dimension to the camera.

I don't really believe Canon about stuck filters because I think if a filter can get stuck so can a lens hood.

I think they are being manipulative. Like they are with 3rd party batteries.

Now that I have found out conclusively that the front element does not move in an out, it's no longer an internal dust risk.

So this is what I have decided based on your informative post.

1. I won't buy the lens hood. It's ugly and defeats the purpose of a slimline retractable lens.

2. I will only use the filter if I am at the beach and don't want sea spray on the lens which I hate. I think for occasional use that's OK. Otherwise, I will keep it virgin, so to speak.

3. I will resort to using what must be the worst lens cap ever made in the history of cameras

I'm sure the odd use based on environmental circumstances will be ok. Personally, I think it will all be ok unless one is super careless. Personally I think it's probably OK in general but I will err on the side of caution.

Sometimes Canon sucks and this is one of those times. Intensely stupid and irritating.

KeepCalm wrote:

The big question is why they did not just put this bit of plastic in the box in the first place and up the whole package with the cost price which is probably a minute fraction of what it will cost separately.

Canon have slowly been forcing their customers their "optional yet necessary" accessories for some time now.  I remember that the PowerShot Pro1 came with the filter adapter.  But from memory the G1X did not, even though it was almost an identical product.  It's as annoying as introducing a new model of battery for an identical size of camera that offers no difference in output.
.
I noticed recently that when I bought a wife angle 11-22mm lens for my EOSM cameras that the tiny, thin lens hood did not come with the lens.  This would have to be one of the smallest lens hoods in the world... and it sells for between $3 for a knock-off to $15 locally (US$11) so it's very likely Canon has them made for less than $1.  I had to buy it separably and no camera store bothered to order them so it was deemed a 'special order' and I had to wait a couple of weeks for one to arrive.
.
I can understand Canon trying to make their cameras smaller and lighter so they can brag about it like they do their lenses (by removing the metal fittings and replacing them with plastic just so they can fold a record for a couple of months).  I know Canon are hard up for cash these days with so much competition and so few people buying cameras over smart phones... but this has to stop.
.
They really should include all the goodies in the box as a sign of good faith.  Especially with a FLAGSHIP series camera and especially with a Pro or Serious Photographer type model.

Thanks again, and I've commented in great detail below, hopefully, you'll have something to add to that.

As far as the original G1X is concerned you had to buy a lousy plastic adaptor.

Seeing your comment about the M series, I use a UV filter on the 22mm lens and I have since day one without issue. The G1x lens part seems pretty similar to me conceptually?

There are no little tongues, for want of a better word, on the Mark lll lens barrel for an attachment like there was for the G1X original.

The lens hood is a screw-in exactly like a filter and its apparently aluminium.  So I cannot see why there is any less chance of this getting stuck on the end of a lens than a normal filter. And if some people screw a filter into the adaptor without taking it off the lens, I'd think there is every chance they could apply too much torque in doing so, thus overtightening the lens hood and placing too much stress on that lens. And we all remember Error 99, don't we?

Peter Bendheim wrote:

Thanks again, and I've commented in great detail below, hopefully, you'll have something to add to that.

As far as the original G1X is concerned you had to buy a lousy plastic adaptor.

Seeing your comment about the M series, I use a UV filter on the 22mm lens and I have since day one without issue. The G1x lens part seems pretty similar to me conceptually?

I am an absolute fan of high quality Hoya Pro1 HD (99.35% light transmission) & Multi Coated (97%+ light transmission) UV filters - which were recently designed especially for digital cameras with CMOS sensors on ALL of my lenses. There is but ONE exception and that's the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens. I don't bother putting a filter on that lens to protect it.  The optics on that lens are so tiny that they are protected from knocks and scratches entirely by the front portion of the lens barrel. In the event where I might be shooting in an environment where salt air is a problem, I might consider a filter on the day but I'd be more likely to use a Circular Polarizer than a UV filter near ocean views.  The lens is also cheap enough that I would rather buy a new one that have it repaired.
.
I found it necessary to clean my 22mm lens just once and it was a very easy chore. Just be sure to dampen the cloth with the isopropyl alcohol (or whatever you use) and don't dab the bottle directly against the lens... or you'll get liquid inside the lens assembly. I still carry it with the lens cap on because an indirect stray ray of sunlight can cook the sensor on a mirrorless camera even if the camera is turned off. I had to do that with the original G1X as well. And I always used a UV filter with the G1X. The higher end UV filters allow virtually all the light through whilst adding a layer of protection to the camera's not-so-easy-to-fix lens.
.
One thing I've noticed is that whenever I've had a problem with a lens on a PowerShot, it took about 4 to 6 weeks to get the camera back from Canon and it ALWAYS had optical problems afterwards. Always. Soft corners, distortions, soft center at certain focal lengths. It's almost always just GREAT straight out of the box but as soon as you send something to Canon for repair, there's issues afterwards.  I can't confidently say that I've been happy with anything they've sent back and if you return it to them they don't always fix the problem you send it in for.
.
Canon no longer do their own Repairs here in Australia. They have "Authorized Service Centers" now and those are run by local bidders. It's always worth protecting your lenses just so you're not without a camera while it's being serviced or repaired.
.
The plastic Filter Mount ring on the original G1X was made of a composite material - which made it very hard and not at all brittle. The only tricky thing was using both palms of your hands to loosen the mount from any filter that got stuck... without touching the filter surfaces.