DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

Started Jan 29, 2018 | User reviews
Twitchly
Twitchly Senior Member • Posts: 1,280
The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl
22

I've had the camera for about a month now and feel ready to review it.

First, and perhaps most important, this is a review of how well this camera meets my photographic goals. That's the only meaningful basis on which to compare cameras, in my experience. I don't personally care if camera X is the perfect vlogging tool, for example, or is great for shooting sports. I do neither of these things.

Also, a bit of background: I own a Nikon DSLR and am reasonably happy with it. It's a mid-range amateur DSLR, and I'm a mid-range amateur. I shoot for my own enjoyment, and I rarely print what I shoot.

My reason for buying a new camera was not to replace my DSLR. I intend to continue to use it. But I have grown tired of lugging around a large camera when traveling. I find it takes too much focus away from experiencing the rest of life. I'm going to Europe this spring and wanted something lighter and smaller. Also, sometimes when I'm out and about, something catches my eye and I want to shoot it. The only camera usually with me was my iPhone, and I've grown quite frustrated with its limitations, particularly its dynamic range (or lack thereof). It also doesn't zoom, and crops from its photos look crappy.

So I wanted something:

1. SMALL and light

2. Able to take shots with excellent image quality and dynamic range so I could manipulate them in post-processing (which I love)

3. Able to take shots that could be cropped down afterward, since I'm a major cropper

4. Highly configurable and fun to use.

Basically, I wanted a mini-DSLR without the interchangeable lenses. The cameras I narrowed it down to were the Sony RX100 V, the Fujifilm X100F, and the Canon G1X III. The Sony had the size I wanted but not the ergonomics. The Fuji had the ergonomics and the image quality, and it was a strong contender. But the fixed-length lens and weird post-processing artifacts were detractors, and it felt a little too big.

So I went with the Canon. And after a month with it (yes, finally I'm getting to the review itself), here's my take, based on the above-mentioned goals. It's worth noting that I shoot RAW and do PP in Photoshop.

Small and Light

It's small enough, somewhere between the Sony RX100 V and the Fuji X100F. I carry it in my coat pocket or in my purse. I've taken it with me everywhere since I got it, and it hasn't been a burden. I've gotten shots I otherwise wouldn't have been able to get as a result, and that's huge. Would I like it to be smaller still? Yes, probably, though only if ergonomics remained good. Some day they'll make a fully capable camera the size of my iPhone. Until then, I'm happy with this.

Image Quality

The IQ from this camera is as good as my DSLR, for the most part, which is all I'd hoped for. Images are sharp. Shadows in high-contrast shots are easy enough to pull up in PP, and highlights can be turned down as needed. I take a lot of outdoor shots where this comes in particularly handy. The G1X does a great job of capturing the subtleties of clouds, of skies at dusk, of skin. That's really why I wanted the larger sensor.

I also take indoor shots and night shots with this camera, without a flash, and it performs very well. These are largely stills or portraits or people hanging out, so I can go down to some very slow shutter speeds. The image stabilization in this camera is excellent, the best I've yet seen, which makes those lower shutter speeds possible without a tripod.

I'll shoot at up to 6400, rarely going above that, and find the noise very manageable in PP. In order to stay at 6400 and below, if I'm in a very dark place I find it best to avoid zooming all the way in. I'm also not averse to a little noise, and this camera retains detail very well even at higher ISOs.

What I don't shoot is action scenes in low light or activity on a distant indoor stage. This camera would probably not be ideal for either of those things, though I haven't yet tried the flash.

I'm quite happy with the separation this camera produces, and the bokeh looks pleasing, not ragged. If I want tons of bokeh, I'll use my DSLR and F1.6 prime lens.

Cropping and zoom

I'm a major zoomer with my DSLR. I knew I'd have to give some of that up for a small camera with a big sensor. I like the 18-72 range of this lens well enough for most situations and find that it provides a decent degree of flexibility. With the 24-megapixel sensor, I've cropped shots way down to less than 25% of their original size, and the clarity remains sharp. I find this goes a long way to alleviate the limited zoom.

Configurability, ergonomics, and fun factor

I'm seriously impressed with this camera on all three of the above counts. I have average-sized hands for a woman, and the grip and controls on this camera feel terrific. There are lots of configurable physical dials so I can keep out of the menus for the most part, which is a huge plus. (I hate noodling in menus when I'm shooting.) I'm still customizing it for my needs, which is very easy to do. The "Quick" menu gives me access to most of what I need when I do have to move beyond the physical controls, and the touch screen makes it very easy to get around.

I also love the touchscreen focus. I look through the viewfinder most of the time (also excellent) and use my thumb to shift the focus. You can set part of the touch screen to be non-active when focusing, which alleviates problems with your nose touching the screen.

And the focus is zippy and dead-on accurate, even in low light. It beats my DSLR hands down on that score.

Love the silent shutter. This camera makes very little noise.

Canon has obviously given a ton of thought to how best to make shooting fun, and it shows in this camera. I've also gotten more comments on this camera than any other I've had. People want to hold it and try it. I find it much more attractive in person than in pictures for some reason.

Summary: Neither fish nor fowl

To sum up, the Canon G1X III is pretty much exactly what I was looking for. And that's interesting, because it doesn't seem to fit neatly into any category. It looks and shoots like a DSLR but doesn't have interchangeable lenses. It zooms but isn't a super-zoom. It has a large, capable sensor but to take full advantage of it in low light you need to avoid zooming. It's a compact but costs as much as some DSLRs. It's definitely a niche camera. I just happen to fit perfectly into that niche.

I'll keep my Nikon DSLR for long-distance shots, especially of wildlife; for closeups when I want heavy bokeh; and for the rare low-light action shot. But as a companion camera, the G1X III hits the sweet spot of an all-around, take-with-me-everywhere compact with DSLR quality.

Street lights at night. Approx. 20 percent crop. No noise reduction or sharpening.

Fog lights. No crop, no sharpening. Highlights lifted.

Lights at dusk. Focus on the blue light in the front.  Slight crop.

-- hide signature --

Instagram: @twitchly

 Twitchly's gear list:Twitchly's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW120 Canon G1 X III Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +3 more
Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
24 megapixels • 3 screen • 24 – 72 mm (3×)
Announced: Oct 16, 2017
Twitchly's score
4.5
Average community score
4.4
bad for good for
Kids / pets
unrated
Action / sports
unrated
Landscapes / scenery
excellent
Portraits
excellent
Low light (without flash)
great
Flash photography (social)
unrated
Studio / still life
excellent
= community average
Canon G1 X III Fujifilm X100F Sony RX100 V
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
CMCM Veteran Member • Posts: 5,995
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

Thank you so MUCH for a fabulous review!  Your first few paragraphs could have been written by me about my current camera search (except I wasn't considering the Fuji....I already have a Fuji X30).  Your review touched on all the questions I'd had as I evaluate this camera (I've got a borrowed one at the moment, got it yesterday).  I started off looking for either a new DSLR to replace my 2004 Nikon D70s, but I soon realized what I really wanted was a really good pocket/purse camera because when traveling around, that's what I use.  I never want to lug around a camera bag full of lenses.  Been there, done that.  Then I pondered the zoom range....I do want some reasonable level of zoom rather than a fixed lens (thus I wasn't interested in the Fuji X100F, good as it may be).  I tested out a Sony RX10iv and absolutely loved it, BUT....it's bigger and heavier and would also be kind of a pain to travel around with all the time.  Plus it had a certain overlap and almost identical size to the Nikon P900 I got recently purely for its 2000mm zoom.  So I actually DO have an 18-2000 zoom when I want it.  I didn't like the smaller Sony RX100v for ergonomic reasons, I just couldn't get past how tiny it is, how small and slippery to hold it is, etc.  Then I came across the G1X iii almost by accident and it made it on my testing list because I've had a string of good Canon P&S the cameras through the years, and the stats on this new one were extremely compelling....especially the APSC sensor and the dual pixel focus, and I quite like it so far.  Your comments have helped a lot, sothanks for posting such a realistic and thoughtful review!

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon D500 Canon G7 X II Nikon Coolpix P950 Nikon D700 +17 more
CMCM Veteran Member • Posts: 5,995
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

What I like so far is the beautiful, sold, big DSLR-like build, I wasn't sure I'd like a touch screen but I really do.  The Sony RX10iv has a strangely limited touchscreen...focus only, but this fuller one on the G1Xiii is great, I've found that it's something I like on a camera now.  The focus seems really outstanding.  Expensive camera, but it's got some great features that I personally really like to have.  I guess you've got to pay for that, right?  

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon D500 Canon G7 X II Nikon Coolpix P950 Nikon D700 +17 more
marksee Contributing Member • Posts: 969
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl
1

Great review, but I have one question. If you don't print why not get a 1" or smaller sensor camera. Smaller, lighter, smaller files, larger aperture and much less expensive. Canon G5X etc. I don't print and use my Canon SX50 IS. Small, fantastic zoom range, viewfinder, articulated screen etc. Ready for almost anything and great fun to use.

bullet1 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,339
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

Thank you for the delightful review of the G1X III.

The G1X III would meet my needs for WA indoor low light use and all around outdoor travel use with the exception of closeups. Currently I use the G5X for such task and would love to upgrade to the G1X III once it shows up on Canon refurbished list. I am also exploring options with APS-C mirrorless bodies such as the Canon M3 and Sony a6000 that I already own.

Twitchly wrote:

...

I'm quite happy with the separation this camera produces, and the bokeh looks pleasing, not ragged. If I want tons of bokeh, I'll use my DSLR and F1.6 prime lens.

Which Nikon DSLR do you use?

....

I'll keep my Nikon DSLR for long-distance shots, especially of wildlife; for closeups when I want heavy bokeh; and for the rare low-light action shot. But as a companion camera, the G1X III hits the sweet spot of an all-around, take-with-me-everywhere compact with DSLR quality.

A DSLR with tele-zoom would be quite heavy. I leave my FF tele-zoom at home for oversea trips and use the 1" based FZ1000 for now.

Is your DSLR full frame? I find it hard to locate a lighter alternative to replicate my Canon full frame performance at the 17-105mm range with an APS-C body, mirrorless or not. Beyond that it was not an option to even bring the heavy FF tele-zoom onto transatlantic flights.

-- hide signature --

Nelson Chen
http://NelsonChenPhotography.com/
100% RAW shooter with Capture One Pro V11

 bullet1's gear list:bullet1's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Canon PowerShot G5 X Sony a7 III Canon EOS R Canon EOS R7 +20 more
nolten Contributing Member • Posts: 850
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

Thank you for the excellent review!  I'm glad that you like the IQ with post processing and compared to your larger DSLR.  This is good news.

 nolten's gear list:nolten's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS 90D Canon EOS M6 II
CMCM Veteran Member • Posts: 5,995
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

marksee wrote:

Great review, but I have one question. If you don't print why not get a 1" or smaller sensor camera. Smaller, lighter, smaller files, larger aperture and much less expensive. Canon G5X etc. I don't print and use my Canon SX50 IS. Small, fantastic zoom range, viewfinder, articulated screen etc. Ready for almost anything and great fun to use.

I'm still trying to understand all these sensor sizes and what they are capable of.  Doesn't the very much larger APS-C sensors do a lot to affect photo quality and do more just enable you to printer large photos?

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon D500 Canon G7 X II Nikon Coolpix P950 Nikon D700 +17 more
Twitchly
OP Twitchly Senior Member • Posts: 1,280
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

CMCM wrote:

marksee wrote:

Great review, but I have one question. If you don't print why not get a 1" or smaller sensor camera. Smaller, lighter, smaller files, larger aperture and much less expensive. Canon G5X etc. I don't print and use my Canon SX50 IS. Small, fantastic zoom range, viewfinder, articulated screen etc. Ready for almost anything and great fun to use.

I'm still trying to understand all these sensor sizes and what they are capable of. Doesn't the very much larger APS-C sensors do a lot to affect photo quality and do more just enable you to printer large photos?

Yes. For my interests, I wanted the larger sensor to get the most dynamic range -- lights to darks. Smaller sensors will clip highlights and create muddy shadows that can't be lifted afterward. Since I do a lot of outdoor shooting with its wide contrasts of light, this was a critical feature for me.

Larger sensors also do a better job than smaller ones in low light and in creating separation between subject and background (also known as bokeh). But aperture plays a big role here, too; you have to weigh more than just sensor when you compare cameras. Check out the CameraLabs review comparing the G1X III with the Sony RX100 V for more about that.

-- hide signature --

Instagram: @twitchly

 Twitchly's gear list:Twitchly's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW120 Canon G1 X III Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +3 more
Twitchly
OP Twitchly Senior Member • Posts: 1,280
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

bullet1 wrote:

Thank you for the delightful review of the G1X III.

The G1X III would meet my needs for WA indoor low light use and all around outdoor travel use with the exception of closeups. Currently I use the G5X for such task and would love to upgrade to the G1X III once it shows up on Canon refurbished list. I am also exploring options with APS-C mirrorless bodies such as the Canon M3 and Sony a6000 that I already own.

Twitchly wrote:

...

I'm quite happy with the separation this camera produces, and the bokeh looks pleasing, not ragged. If I want tons of bokeh, I'll use my DSLR and F1.6 prime lens.

Which Nikon DSLR do you use?

The D5300. It's your basic middle-of-the-road DSLR. I have just 2 lenses for it, a 50mm 1.6 prime and an 18-200 zoom. The latter is not at all a fast lens (3.6-5.6, I think), which is something I've just learned to work around. That might be another reason why the Canon G1X's lens doesn't really bother me.

....

I'll keep my Nikon DSLR for long-distance shots, especially of wildlife; for closeups when I want heavy bokeh; and for the rare low-light action shot. But as a companion camera, the G1X III hits the sweet spot of an all-around, take-with-me-everywhere compact with DSLR quality.

A DSLR with tele-zoom would be quite heavy. I leave my FF tele-zoom at home for oversea trips and use the 1" based FZ1000 for now.

Is your DSLR full frame? I find it hard to locate a lighter alternative to replicate my Canon full frame performance at the 17-105mm range with an APS-C body, mirrorless or not. Beyond that it was not an option to even bring the heavy FF tele-zoom onto transatlantic flights.

Not full frame. Have you ever looked at the Sony RX1 Mark II, their full-frame compact? I'm not fond of its ergonomics, but the image quality from that camera is just fantastic. It's hideously expensive, though ... the only thing that kept me from buying it. I would've put up with the crappy usability just for that image quality. Wow.

If I had a full-frame camera, I think I would have a tough time going backwards.

-- hide signature --

Instagram: @twitchly

 Twitchly's gear list:Twitchly's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW120 Canon G1 X III Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +3 more
bullet1 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,339
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

Twitchly wrote:

bullet1 wrote:

Thank you for the delightful review of the G1X III.

The G1X III would meet my needs for WA indoor low light use and all around outdoor travel use with the exception of closeups. Currently I use the G5X for such task and would love to upgrade to the G1X III once it shows up on Canon refurbished list. I am also exploring options with APS-C mirrorless bodies such as the Canon M3 and Sony a6000 that I already own.

Twitchly wrote:

...

I'm quite happy with the separation this camera produces, and the bokeh looks pleasing, not ragged. If I want tons of bokeh, I'll use my DSLR and F1.6 prime lens.

Which Nikon DSLR do you use?

The D5300. It's your basic middle-of-the-road DSLR. I have just 2 lenses for it, a 50mm 1.6 prime and an 18-200 zoom. The latter is not at all a fast lens (3.6-5.6, I think), which is something I've just learned to work around. That might be another reason why the Canon G1X's lens doesn't really bother me.

The D5300 is pretty good on IQ, DR and low light. Its low light ability is the same or slightly better than the canon 7D Mark II and 80D according to DPReview's comparison tool. Its DXOMark is 83, quite respectable for a crop sensor body.

One of my friends has a Nikon APS-C body similar to yours and paired it with the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR lens as his "light" travel kit. That DX lens is unique to Nikon and no one else (Canon or Sony) has anything like that.

....

I'll keep my Nikon DSLR for long-distance shots, especially of wildlife; for closeups when I want heavy bokeh; and for the rare low-light action shot. But as a companion camera, the G1X III hits the sweet spot of an all-around, take-with-me-everywhere compact with DSLR quality.

A DSLR with tele-zoom would be quite heavy. I leave my FF tele-zoom at home for oversea trips and use the 1" based FZ1000 for now.

Is your DSLR full frame? I find it hard to locate a lighter alternative to replicate my Canon full frame performance at the 17-105mm range with an APS-C body, mirrorless or not. Beyond that it was not an option to even bring the heavy FF tele-zoom onto transatlantic flights.

Not full frame. Have you ever looked at the Sony RX1 Mark II, their full-frame compact? I'm not fond of its ergonomics, but the image quality from that camera is just fantastic. It's hideously expensive, though ... the only thing that kept me from buying it. I would've put up with the crappy usability just for that image quality. Wow.

If I had a full-frame camera, I think I would have a tough time going backwards.

The Sony RX1R II is an interesting camera, very capable, limited in focal range and way over priced. It is a Leica want to be design.

For me it would be better to pick up a lower cost Sony full frame mirrorless, such as the A7S and paired with a light 35mm prime.

RX1R II: 4.45 x 2.56 x 2.83″, 1.12lbs

A7S : 5.00 x 3.70 x 1.89″, 1.08lbs + a light 35mm prime

It is hard to justify this kind of purchase when I already own two Canon full frame bodies, an APS-C mirrorless (gift) and a set of Canon lenses, plus a Sony APS-C body (gift) and a couple of lenses.

-- hide signature --

Nelson Chen
http://NelsonChenPhotography.com/
100% RAW shooter with Capture One Pro V11

 bullet1's gear list:bullet1's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Canon PowerShot G5 X Sony a7 III Canon EOS R Canon EOS R7 +20 more
nolten Contributing Member • Posts: 850
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

What Twitchy said.  For an example see my 2nd post in the Full Circle thread.  Different Canon camera but with the same sensor as the G1X3.  Generally, a larger sensor accumulates more light in a given amount of time so each pixel's measurement is more accurate.  You can adjust the shadows and highlights without losing detail.

 nolten's gear list:nolten's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS 90D Canon EOS M6 II
marksee Contributing Member • Posts: 969
Re: The Canon G1X Mark III: Neither fish nor fowl

I hear you. I also have an APS sensor Canon for the few times I want the better dynamic range etc, but I rarely use it.  As for my purposes of sharing online my friends won't notice the difference.

GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,604
Re: It’s sad
5

... when it makes more sense to rely on user reviews than on the official reviewers on a site. I guess that's why no one should rely on any one review site.

Good review. Let's hope Canon listens to appreciative users and people who have actually had the camera in their hands and not just sites that consistently downplay some of their more interesting developments.

-- hide signature --

"Most of the greatest photos ever taken were taken with equipment worse than yours."
Some favourite pics:
http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +16 more
chrisno Contributing Member • Posts: 925
Re: It’s sad
3

GaryJP wrote:

... when it makes more sense to rely on user reviews than on the official reviewers on a site. I guess that's why no one should rely on any one review site.

Good review. Let's hope Canon listens to appreciative users and people who have actually had the camera in their hands and not just sites that consistently downplay some of their more interesting developments.

I found DPR reviews are generally a lot more reliable than most users reviews

Ownership makes people biased, giving very positive reviews

Those who return the items, are also biased and gave very negative reviews

CMCM Veteran Member • Posts: 5,995
Re: It’s sad
2

I read every review I can, but don't take any of them as 100% the final arbiter of what I decide to buy, mainly because my wants and needs may greatly differ from those of another person.  We all want and look for different things in a camera.  It also takes (me) a certain amount of time to read about all the features a particular camera may offer and definite exactly what works for me.  So individual user reviews are often more helpful when they comes from people who have been trying out and using a camera longer term than a reviewer  who is undoubtedly knowledgeable but who also has to test and review a lot of cameras and who doesn't get the luxury of a longer term test run.  I like the expert perspective but I equally value the user experiences, which are often varied as well.  It all adds up to an overall impression about a camera.

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon D500 Canon G7 X II Nikon Coolpix P950 Nikon D700 +17 more
GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,604
Re: It’s sad
3

Certainly one of the funniest things must be those people who get more and more irate the more good images appear from a given camera.  

-- hide signature --

"Most of the greatest photos ever taken were taken with equipment worse than yours."
Some favourite pics:
http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +16 more
CMCM Veteran Member • Posts: 5,995
Re: It’s sad
1

Isn't that the truth!

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon D500 Canon G7 X II Nikon Coolpix P950 Nikon D700 +17 more
chrisno Contributing Member • Posts: 925
Re: It’s sad
1

CMCM wrote:

I read every review I can, but don't take any of them as 100% the final arbiter of what I decide to buy, mainly because my wants and needs may greatly differ from those of another person. We all want and look for different things in a camera. It also takes (me) a certain amount of time to read about all the features a particular camera may offer and definite exactly what works for me. So individual user reviews are often more helpful when they comes from people who have been trying out and using a camera longer term than a reviewer who is undoubtedly knowledgeable but who also has to test and review a lot of cameras and who doesn't get the luxury of a longer term test run. I like the expert perspective but I equally value the user experiences, which are often varied as well. It all adds up to an overall impression about a camera.

attention to details is key here

and DPR definitely nailed many good points

for example Carey mentioned unforgivable battery life

which is more often overlooked by most users

you would expect a decent battery life in a premium price? but no you got 25% less here.

This just shows another laziness in body developments (using the same old G5x body design)

That being said, it's definitely a decent camera all around for $899 now, not $1299.

GaryJP
GaryJP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,604
Re: It’s sad
4

chrisno wrote:

GaryJP wrote:

... when it makes more sense to rely on user reviews than on the official reviewers on a site. I guess that's why no one should rely on any one review site.

Good review. Let's hope Canon listens to appreciative users and people who have actually had the camera in their hands and not just sites that consistently downplay some of their more interesting developments.

I found DPR reviews are generally a lot more reliable than most users reviews

Ownership makes people biased, giving very positive reviews

Lack of ownership makes them ignorant of what it's like to use the camera.

It should be obvious.

I've never had a problem saying a camera I owned is garbage when that is the case. If you do, it says more about you than anyone else.

I didn't like the Fuji X10, the Canon XL2 video camera, the Sony A7R MkII, or even much the RX100, all of which I owned. Don't assume everyone else responds the way you do. They don't.

-- hide signature --

"Most of the greatest photos ever taken were taken with equipment worse than yours."
Some favourite pics:
http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 GaryJP's gear list:GaryJP's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony RX100 II Canon G1 X II Canon PowerShot G5 X Canon G7 X II +16 more
CMCM Veteran Member • Posts: 5,995
Re: It’s sad
2

chrisno wrote:

CMCM wrote:

I read every review I can, but don't take any of them as 100% the final arbiter of what I decide to buy, mainly because my wants and needs may greatly differ from those of another person. We all want and look for different things in a camera. It also takes (me) a certain amount of time to read about all the features a particular camera may offer and definite exactly what works for me. So individual user reviews are often more helpful when they comes from people who have been trying out and using a camera longer term than a reviewer who is undoubtedly knowledgeable but who also has to test and review a lot of cameras and who doesn't get the luxury of a longer term test run. I like the expert perspective but I equally value the user experiences, which are often varied as well. It all adds up to an overall impression about a camera.

attention to details is key here

and DPR definitely nailed many good points

for example Carey mentioned unforgivable battery life

which is more often overlooked by most users

you would expect a decent battery life in a premium price? but no you got 25% less here.

This just shows another laziness in body developments (using the same old G5x body design)

That being said, it's definitely a decent camera all around for $899 now, not $1299.

Good points.  The battery is truly pathetic, and it's hard to understand how it could run down so quickly.  It was running down just from my messing around with all the settings.  What is in this camera that is so power hungry, is it the larger processor?  Yet it seems like they could have made room for a larger, more robust battery and they knew when they released this camera that the battery wasn't good.  Hard to understand at this price point, that is for sure.  It's almost as if all the camera manufacturers make improvements but intentionally leave things wanting so we'll be more inclined to upgrade next time around.  What drives me nuts is how great features will sometimes get dropped as a camera moves on to its next version, instead of building on what was good, fixing what wasn't so great, perhaps adding new things.  It seems like they ALL do this.

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon D500 Canon G7 X II Nikon Coolpix P950 Nikon D700 +17 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads