Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III sample gallery

@Goodmeme: If you cant distinguisch 4k from 1080p you either have a setup problem or a problem with eyesight, simple as that. sorry, but not sorry.

Also, People should stop telling others what THEY DONT NEED !!!!! 4k Video/6K Photo/8k Photo are very usefull, but i wont tell you for what.. lol

If you can't see a difference between a 4K Sony video downsized to 1080p and a native 1080p Canon video, even at 2.5 metres, then it probably doesn't matter to you, yes.
But there might be other medical problems involved. lol

This gets boring after a while. If video is your thing then this camera obviously may not be for you - buy a Sony. But for everyone else who just want to use their camera for taking photos, this looks like a great little camera. Move on.

@wasTF. No it's not as simple as that. I use an Epson TW9300 and it has amazing black levels. The colours are accurate and it is bright. Those things are what matter with video and to a great extent, even stills. Resolution is not the same as picture detail from good lighting, and all the articles I've ever seen on the subject of what our eyes can typically discern from normal viewing distances corroborate this. 4k is arguably a marketing device for anyone without an enormous projector screen, and I mean imax viewing angles here. Some -perhaps many - of the experts in the AV community couldn't care less so long as they have access to HDR, wide gamut and 3d sound formats. The resolution itself is not a big deal in my opinion. Yes I can tell the difference on a 30" monitor from a foot away, but who watches content like that?

I mean in addition to the camera only having 1080p as max resolution. The 1080p material from Canon just looks awful. Otherwise it's a really tempting camera for me for travelling, just like the M5 and M6. I just can't get head my head around why Canon doesn't start to improve on the video quality. They have the best video autofocus on the market, but the worst video quality.

It's definitely something that merits a mention in our full review, which is under way. I'll see if we can't work in some real-world samples as well, to illustrate its usefulness.

Yes, you're right, despite the barrel distortion of 2.3% at the wide angle, it's a damn sharp lens, the sharpest zoom lens ever mounted on a compact one, it happens as with the kit lenses that come with the fuji mirrorlens, are big compared to their peers, but sharp, the size in photography does matter, whatever they say.

Since we beat Leica (I did not mention it because it's out of my pocket ...) it would be fair to talk about the Leica Q, an excellent 28mm Full Frame compatact, for those who can afford it.

By the way, the X various can be obtained by 2,000 (new) 1,000 (used), the truth is that I would pay more gladly than the 1,300 of this Canon, not only because of the HUGE difference in sharpness, we do not deny it, although we of rage, although we think that they cost more than they are worth, that their latest designs do not convince us, that some of their technologies are getting outdated ... All, and I say ALL, those of us who love photography, we would like to have some one

We need to compare cameras of the same type to have any results with meaning, (with zoom to zoom, not with zoom to fixed).
Sharpness in overrated in a practical sense(low res online and prints)'
Distortion is much less important in landscapes and can be dealt with by cropping. Most people will never notice distortion less than about 2%.

I was saying that there is no sharp zoom camera, at least at the wide end, so I mentioned that for landscapes a compact with a fixed lens was preferable.

Then the partner reminded me of the Leica X Vario, a compact lens with Zoom, spectacularly sharp, that's comparing apples to apples, right?

About distortion, I do not know, I even notice 0.1%, with 0.4% the trees at the corners come out completely lying down, for me that is important, I'm not interested in crop, I compose at the moment of take the picture, not after, sitting in front of the computer, I'm interested that what I see in the viewer of the camera comes out as I see it, I'm interested in 100% of the frame, and I need it to be sharp from corner to corner to be possible.

Especially if I'm paying 1300 for it.

@Kobakokh Absolutely agree, my LX100 sees more action than my Sony A7R2. It's just so infuriatingly good:)

Weather sealed, robust, leaf shutter, built in ND filter, DPAF, APS-C sensor ... yes right really absolutely nothing special - except for everything that is pretty special.

Why post pictures of important people in your life in a public for profit web site? Did you get a model release form signed?

People just get in the way of landscape shots. :)

Sezano is right. These are the first pictures of buildings I've ever seen!

previous G1X models weren't APS-C

They were very close to APS-C

The previous G1X's are pretty much m43 in practice with a 1.95 crop but with 4:3 and 2:3 it does utilise much of it image circle it can from the oversized 1.5" sensor. The same trick Panasonic do with their aspect ratio when they cannot cover the full sensor as with the 2.2 crop with the m43 sensor in the LX100.
The only thing Canon have reused from the previous camera is the name.

Leica X Vario

@2eyesee .. not everything is shot wide open.

The Leica X Vario is larger and came out in 2013. A fixed lens APS-C with a great lens. Talk about sharp.

give me a break. the rest of aps-c's have a 1.54 to a 1.55 crop nowadays, are they not aps-c either?

canons has always been a 1.6 crop for APS-C.

No, they have 1.52-1.54 crop, and Canon's crop is not exactly 1.6.