Canon PowerShot G9 X II sample gallery

The compact camera is dead, so people should bring themselves to buy a compact camera?

That makes no sense.

If you are going to insult people, you should think through what you are going to say first.

And maybe run it by your mom.

I have an RX100m4 (and have previously had the 1, 2, 3, and 3 of the Canon S series compacts).

I frequently think about selling off the Sony for this Canon because I really miss the RX's gradually eroded pocketability, and I barely use most of the features that set it apart (HFR, viewfinder, etc...)
.
The only thing that's stopped me is that I really like the wider wide end, and the faster tele. I do find the tilting screen very useful too, but I could live without it.

If Canon were to go with a 25-80mm lens, and could speed up their tele end, I think I'd switch for sure come the G9X III.

Yeah. I bought it and sold it. Just bought another one a year later. The size is the real kicker. It's not the fastest, sharpest or most feature rich, but it's small ...real small. For the size and for a compact camera in general it's outstanding.

Is RX100 III as pocketable as G9X? Pocketable aspect is as important as the absolute image quality at this segment. What's the point of having a camera you don't want to/can't take with you. APSC cameras superior in IQ department but not pocketable or as convenient to carry around. Let's not lose perspective on things.

I'm curious where you are buying a RX100 M3 for $600?

The M3 $200 more than the 9X II ($500 verus $700 with todays amazon prices).

Also the M3 is 30% thicker so it's kind of an apples and oranges thing anyway.

What's the point of carrying a camera instead of your phone if the lens on the camera is slower and not any sharper? I'd rather carry a little larger camera with a decent lens. Canon makes great lenses why'd they put this crap lens with this sensor? Why won't Canon make a 1" sensor camera with a good lens and autofocus equivalent to the newer rx100's? I know they are capable.

@pkcpga : "What's the point of carrying a camera instead of your phone if the lens on the camera is slower and not any sharper?"
Are you saying the G9x has no better low light ability, no DoF management capability and no more resolution than a phone ? Ridiculous.

It´s because of the Sony sensor...

I find Canon colours one of the best, however not with this camera it seems....

Never loved my RX100 output but shines against these samples. @Contra is right, mediocre at best.

G9X's whole point is that it fits in smaller pockets than any RX100 would. Let's see how well that RX100 performs when you aren't carrying it with you at the right moment, hmmm?

For those with pockets big enough to carry RX100s, Canon has G7X and G5X. The general verdict on IQ is that the lenses on these cameras are still not quite as good as RX100, but since G7X/G5X have longer zoom range it's a tradeoff.

Never been a Sony fan but the rx100 series definitely shines against these canon examples, anything 800 and over looks terrible. The colors have even more of a blue cast than Sony, what happened to the usual nice canon colors.

Like if the size difference was so great. The Sony is pocketable enough to carry it everywhere.

The downside of the pocketable Sony is that it is a slippery body. I do not understand what people find positive in the rx100. I got rid of mine after using it in London for a few days. It has been a poor experience : weak battery, slow autofocus, inaccurate autofocus when low light, battery door prone to open accidentally, slow in operation, very slippery body which makes it désagréable to hold (if you can achieve this) ....

Yeah ...good luck with that in your pocket.

unfortunately, you've only had experience with dcams/dslrs/mirrorless with rudimentary AutoGain (Auto-EV=0) LiveView (nikons) ... or non-Manual capable LV (basic low-end auto-exp powershot canon)

Nikon 1 (LV mirrorless), Nikon LV coolpix dcams, and all Nikon APSC DX LV dSLRs, lack the more sophisticated Exposure Simulation LV in Manual capable prosumer LV dcams (Canon Powershots: like entire G-series from inception)

you don't know what you miss for LV until you've seen the LV in ES-LV capable systems (instead of your LV limited to basic AutoGain LV, like kodak's LV) ...

unfortunately, dpr comparison database makes no distinction between LV types to help buyers sort out options. so, you've are still in kodak-LV-land ...

Funny enough-- a Panasonic GM1 with the 14-140mk2 lens is even smaller than that J4 setup with the 10X zoom. And it has a bigger sensor, and a faster aperture on the short end.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#549.42,491.34,ha,t

CameraSize only has the mk1 version of that lens, the mk2 version is even smaller, and f/3.5 instead of f/4.

This combo is exactly what I keep in my car as my "glovebox camera."

This is the best I can do comparing Panasonic 14-140mm to Nikon 1 10-100mm non-PD version. Dimension-wise, the 10-100mm non-PD version clearly is a lot smaller and lighter. It's the law of physics. Larger sensor requires larger lens for the same optical range.

https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_1_10-100&products=nikon_1_10-100_vr_pd&products=panasonic_14-140_4-5p8

You are all right : there are many better options than this canon. Hoping Nikon will eventually rebirth its one series, I must say those are really really reliaBle in speed, colors, accuracy. The sensor could be better but with the UWA zoom, you can achieve extraordinary results. Using the old venerable V1, I NEVER missed a single shot and pictures have always been correctly exposed.

I'd much rather have the money to buy an RX100IV to keep in my pocket than being happy to see you.

It's called Canon vapors.

Canon always had warmer more saturated colors. Many people like that. On the other hand, though Sony jpegs often suck, there is no difficulty to get warm Canon-like colors from raw if you like them. Postprocessing Canon raws ain't fun, DR sucks, and noise abound.

So Canon's DR and noise performance suck even when they use a Sony sensor? The very same sensor that Sony has used without anyone complaining about poor DR?

"Postprocessing Canon raws ain't fun, DR sucks, and noise abound."

AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH

Please don't teach

Canon has used Sony sensors in many compact cameras. For example, my old G12 has a Sony CCD, and all of their 1" compacts use Sony sensors.

Canon has stated that their compact camera production was affected by the sensor shortage after the earthquake, whereas the ILC production was unaffected since they use their own sensors for those.

DxO allows you to do that (along with profiles for various cameras and films) very easily. Probably not the only software to offer the option. Personally I've never liked Canon's color profiles (but hey, whatever floats your boat). Of course that's not a real issue anymore as soon as you get camera that produces RAW files.

ive always liked fuji and oly sause poured over my shots.... but to each their own

Contramundum, the cellphones are no cameras, they are phones. This has nothing to do in a comparison. Compare cellphones with cellphones, cameras with cameras but not cameras with cellphones !

The Panasonic CM1 smartphone had a 1" sensor.