Canon G1X

[Gordon Buck]

I've had a G1X for a couple of weeks now.  Although Michael's review is somewhat lukewarm, I agree with it and his conclusions.  I assume that Michael will not be getting a G1X but I intend to keep mine.  In my opinion and for my needs, the great redeeming factor is the image quality of the G1X.

In getting to the G1X, I've passed through the G3, G9 and G12.  (And now, I'm going to do yet another thing that I said I would not do:  plagiarize the bumper sticker "My other car is a Mercedes")  My other camera is a 7D.  My practice is to routinely carry the G series and use the 7D when a "real" camera is needed.  But I've also made a sort of hobby of maximizing use and performance of the G series and documenting the experience in my blog, http://lightdescription.blogspot.com/ .  I'll continue to do this with the G1X.

Although the G1X did not fulfill my wish list, it's a pretty good camera and I think I'll prefer using the G1X to the G12 (with the possible exception of macro).  It does seem to me (although I'm not a camera engineer) that it would not have been that difficult to have made significant improvements in the operational features, especially speed, of the G1X.  I'm particularly aggrevated that flash controls are not more like the Canon DSLRs. 

Not exciting, but pretty good ...

[mbkinsman]

Thanks Michael, for stating what many of us Canon users have felt for some time, regarding what I can only describe as intentionally leaving out features that the competition has offered for some time. As a long time Canon user (starting with the first EOS film body), it has been frustrating to see Canon ignore features in todays camera designs. With the 1Dx, G1 x and 5DmkIII, I had hoped this signaled a change in that approach. As a 5DmkII users, I was happy to finally see features long desired in the MkIII, but not with the new price point. As good as the MkIII sounds, it will be sometime before I upgrade, if at all.
With the G1x I had hoped for Canon to deliver a camera I would be willing to carry everyday. However, with all the great new micro four thirds gear from Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic, etc, I am planning on going to another brand, and with the options available , along with great image quality, it will be a system, not just a camera for everyday. I find lugging around 30+lbs of Canon gear getting to be a bit much and now see opportunities for photographers to get great image quality, with small cameras! that are offering features that rival the DSLRs.
Unfortunatly, not from Canon. I sincerely hope they are reading these comments and wake up. Maybe the regime change at the top will finally shake them up!

[DaveCurtis]

I remember my first Canon, the A1, then the T90, then EO3. All great Cameras in my opinion. The digital age for me was the 1DII then the 1DSIII. However in the last few years Canon (yawn) have appeared to go to sleep.

I just regret having so many $$ tied up in Canon glass.

Toyota, I agree 100%. I dont think you are being controversial Michael, you are just stating the obvious.

The question is will I purchase the 5DIII Corolla or the Nikon D800E in Ferrari red 

[Paulo Bizarro]

Michael, I think you have summed up the camera nicely. For many years, the G series was almost the only option for those photographers wanting a "high quality pocket camera". However, the mirrorless market caused quite a stir, and the likes of the G9, G10, G11, and G12, while still good cameras, could no longer compete with the other ones. They were and still are, good cameras, but in the end, they were let down by the sensor size.

Enter the G1X, and Canon did the obvious; they increased the sensor size, to close the gap with the competition. The G1X has the G series DNA, but it also has its defects: middle of the road AF, and a laughable VF.

As you rightly say, Nikon, as of late, has been doing some very interesting stuff, including in the mirrorless market. I ended up getting a Nikon 1 J1 as a pocket camera; the sensor is good enough for me, and the whole thing is much more fun and responsive to use, compared to the G1X.

[dreed]

I wonder if the target market for this camera doesn't include those that want to swap lenses?

The person that's has been using a compact/phone camera for a few years and wants to get something a bit better without having to care about which lens to buy. This type of person is after better image quality than they've had but they're not keen on extra complications.

[marcmccalmont]

I remember 20 years ago Road and Track described Honda as "boring like a bar of soap" and what character Toyota's have
Life is a circle. The G1X fits my needs but the 5DIII doesn't, its a G1X in my flight bag and a D800E in my backpack!
Marc

(wish the G1X had a Sony sensor and better macro capability though)

[BJL]

I wonder if the target market for this camera doesn't include those that want to swap lenses?

The person that's has been using a compact/phone camera for a few years and wants to get something a bit better without having to care about which lens to buy.

Once again, the argument that eliminating choice and being locked into a decision that one might regret later is somehow a good thing.

People who do not wish to worry about which lens to buy with a "CSC" (compact system camera) can just buy a kit with a standard zoom, the way many people did with inexpensive film SLRs. That covers the option of wanting more later, and for example being able to add a telephoto zoom or a lens covering wider than the 28mm FOV equivalent of the G1X.

The G1X might win over those alternatives with its wider than 3x zoom range, but it loses me with the jumpy push-button zoom and useless peep-hole OVF. Been there, done that in my pre-DSLR digital days; don't want to go back.


P. S. That other recent argument that "less [choice, flexibility,mobility to change one's mind later] is more" comes from the essay on slide film. I agree that for occasional training purposes, forcing oneself to get it right in the camera is good, but some of us are perfectly capable of doing that while still having the option of fixing things in the minority of occasions when we mess up, or the subject brightness range is too great to handle with special post-processing.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

The question is will I purchase the 5DIII Corolla or the Nikon D800E in Ferrari red 

I'm perfectly happy with my 5DII Camry (and my S100 Yaris). (And my car is a 2000 Canon Camry; my wife's is a '99.)

[jbgeach]

I think we are being a little hard on Canon regarding the 5D mark 3. It does have a pro level AF now, it has adequate resolution and is now basically a mini 1DX. Doesn't sound like a toyota, more like a Nissan GTR

[mbkinsman]

I would say the MkIII is priced like a more expensive car than the Camry. What really bugs me is seeing  great AF and some of the other new "features" of the MkIII, in the Nikon line at least as far back as th D300, and now that it finally has the features it's going to cost $1000.00 more than my mkII. I'm sure it will be a great camera and I'm sure the Gx1 is a nice P&S, but there are so many alternative choices this year, that Canon may have offered too little too late for some of us the buy in to at this time. For those that do enjoy, they will be great cameras, just not the only great camera to own.

[hmk]

(Edited from an email sent earlier)
Michael,

Thanks for the review on the G1X. It seemed the right time - considering others' offerings - for Canon to do a compact with interchangeable lenses, given the good job Fuji seems to have done with their GX1, for instance. But if the market is there and the sales are there for the G1X, perhaps the excitement will not matter

But little has seemed exciting from Canon for some time unless one does video - the closest being the very nice 70-300L compact lens - but then the extenders won't even work on that lens*. I dream a 1D that shoots 15fps without video and without a flipping (literally and figuratively) LCD.

I wonder if the 5DIII had been named the '1DMkV' and the G1X had been named  'G14', I would be more optimistic about either one. As someone mentioned, the 5DIII is great, but it could have been greater for $500 less.

With four Canon SLRs, a dozen lenses, etc., I have too much invested to switch brands now. But I still think about it.

Here's hoping someone at Canon is paying attention to your Sidebar thoughts - the comments are surely worth a column of their own.

hmk
*Canon says no, others say yes.

[dreed]

Once again, the argument that eliminating choice and being locked into a decision that one might regret later is somehow a good thing.

People who do not wish to worry about which lens to buy with a "CSC" (compact system camera) can just buy a kit with a standard zoom, the way many people did with inexpensive film SLRs. That covers the option of wanting more later, and for example being able to add a telephoto zoom or a lens covering wider than the 28mm FOV equivalent of the G1X.

The G1X might win over those alternatives with its wider than 3x zoom range, but it loses me with the jumpy push-button zoom and useless peep-hole OVF. Been there, done that in my pre-DSLR digital days; don't want to go back.

I'm curious as to what size pockets are required to fit all of those cameras with interchangeable lenses for a similar zoom range and sensor size.

[John Camp]

I'm curious as to what size pockets are required to fit all of those cameras with interchangeable lenses for a similar zoom range and sensor size.

The G1X  is actually a pretty hefty camera -- quite a bit bigger than the Panasonic GX1 body. You *might* be able to squeeze it into a jacket pocket, if you have big pockets. If you put a 14-45 zoom on a GX1, it'd be somewhat larger than than the G1x, but not much -- and you could take it apart and put the body and lens in separate pockets. They are both quite compact, and would easily fit in most jacket pockets, or even the buttoned pockets in a pair of cargo shorts. You could also fold up the external viewfinder and put it in a pocket with either the body or the lens..and then you'd have an interchangeable lens camera, with a really excellent zoom, and a much better viewfinder.

 

[Robert Roaldi]

Camera pocketability comes up so often in discussions that there must be a photo essay somewhere of people with cameras in their pockets.

[BJL]

I'm curious as to what size pockets are required to fit all of those cameras with interchangeable lenses for a similar zoom range and sensor size.

The Panasonic GX1 with the collapsable 14-42X lens is about the same size as the G1X and somewhat lighter , but has only 3x zoom range vs 4x for the G1X. (Also, there is no OVF in the GX1 vs what is for me the almost useless peep-hole OVF of the G1X.) Both fit my "coat-pocketable" category, and another pocket could carry the accessory EVF for the GX1, but that combo gets expensive.

[John Camp]

Camera pocketability comes up so often in discussions that there must be a photo essay somewhere of people with cameras in their pockets.

These are theoretical pockets, rather than actual pockets. If theory holds, we may have to consider Levi's jeans with pleated front pockets; we're awaiting final word from CERN.

[meyerweb]

I was a bit surprised at MR's comments on the articulated vs. tiltable screen. While I realize that he largely shoots landscapes, I think he would at least acknowledge that a tilt-only screen provides no benefit at all for portrait orientation shots. So while there are certainly advantages (as he noted) to a tilt screen, there are disadvantages, too. Life is full of trade-offs. I shoot a lot of verticals, so I prefer the trade-offs of an articulated screen.

As for the G1X, and the arguments about this vs. a CSC, I think the folks who frequent this forum really aren't the target market. There is a potential market for people who simply want a "better" P&S camera, and whether we think they'd be better off with an m43 with a 3X kit lens doesn't matter. They won't want to be bothered with changing lenses, they'll see the longer zoom range as a plus to the Canon, and they don't know enough to understand the compromises involved.

The fact that we don't think it's a smart set of tradeoffs will have little impact in the target marketplace. The size and price may have a larger impact, though.

[John Angulo]

Clarification on the zoom: the article says it's "fly-by-wire... making precise focal length selection impossible."  Generally true, but you can snap to 28, 35, 50, 85, 100 and 112mm by assigning this function to the rear control dial.

More importantly, as to mixed feelings about the camera, Michael's certainly not the only one to feel a bit disappointed that higher-spec AF and viewfinder, and perhaps more versatile lens, did not accompany the larger sensor.  As he said, it ultimately depends on your particular needs and perspective.  Compelling replacement for SLR system or CSC for mainstream uses?  Probably not - too limiting, and maybe the market will agree.  But as a substitute, capable of sharp 16x20 landscape prints, and when size constraints might otherwise limit you to a P&S (e.g. grade V mountaineering), it seems a very decent choice at the moment.

John