Jump to content

Another mirrorless: Canon G1x


Recommended Posts

<p>When will these makers realize 24 or 21 at the wide end and f/2.0 wide open?<br>

With the Panasonic LX5 I have a 24 and the wide aperture in a carry around body that fits in a shirt pocket. The OLD G3 Canon I have has an f/2.0 lens.<br>

If they would add those features in something like this I would gladly buy one. As it is, the LX5 is perfect for a carry around and light newspaper work as it is non-threatening to many folks who definately notice the bigger SLR bodies.<br>

Really, I would love to see a digital equivalent to the Contax G2. I liked it much better than the M6 Leica.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<blockquote>

<p>Yes, Bob, never said it was a MILC</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed, but calling it a mirrorless camera suggests it's something other than a good old high end P&S/compact digicam. After all, Canon announced two other mirrorless cameras at the same time - the 520HS and the 110HS, and a day or so ago Fuji announced more than a dozen new mirrorless cameras. Sony announced three new mirrorless cameras and Olympus announced four. Panasonic, Samsung and Casio all announced handfulls of mirrorless cameras in the last few days too. None of them had interchangeable lenses though. Hell, even good old semi-bankrupt Kodak makes mirrorless cameras and I have a shoebox full of older digital mirrorless cameras.</p>

<p>So I just don't think "mirrorless" is a good adjective to use when describing the G1 X, even though technically, it's correct.</p>

<p>BTW the new MILC from Fuji (the X-Pro 1) looks pretty interesting...and it's mirrorless too.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>No excitation from me. It's not a particularly pretty camera, is it? This could have been a game changer but they choose conservative instead. Heck, my 14.6MP, APS-C Samsung NX100 with 20-50mm lens was under $300 and can take every manual focus lens around! Sorry Canon, my S95 handles shirt-pocket P&S duties admirably. The new Fuji/Sony NEX is looking better everyday.<br>

I'm really not an early adopter type so I'll wait till the dust settles but clearly in the jacket-pocket sized, larger sensor camera arena, it appears Canon will not win my dollars this year. I suppose if you had no camera in this range and didn't want the ability to use fast, manual focus lenses, this might be a OK choice if a 4x zoom range and $800 price tag satisfied you. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>BIG APPLAUSE</p>

<p>WOW! This is a real mirror less and $800 is a great price. Should I wait a little for the price to drop a little? and please let me know where to buy</p>

<p>I totally agree with the fixed lens design and also the zoom lens design. Only doing that you can "solve" the size and carrying problems</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>This is a good update to the G series, by increasing the sensor size to "a little bigger than 4/3". Canon marketing is working quite well, inasmuch as it seems to be convincing people that the sensor is "almost APS-C size", which is far from thruth of course.<br>

Finally Canon have seen that the "big sensor small camera format" was a market they were being left out; as always, the Canon follows Nikon follows Canon seems to "force" decisions on these two companies. In the meantime, companies like Fuji are really innovating, with a bunch of cameras that are really interesting.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My wife just informed me of our retirement vacation - a three week river cruise in Europe. I, of course, immediately started to think of which camera to take. My current inventory is a D300 with a couple of big Nikon 2.8 zooms, an EPL1 with a 20 1.7, and a Samsung TL500. I'm going to need good IQ on the trip, since sales potential will be there.</p>

<p>I immediately ruled out the D300 because I'm going to need to travel light, and no way would I take just a small sensor P/S to Europe as my only camera, so the logical decision would seem to be the EPL1. As much as I like it with the 20mm 1.7, I don't want to get into more micro 4/3 lenses, and the 20 would just be too limiting by itself. So, what to do?</p>

<p>Buy a new camera! But which.....the new Canon G1 X, or the new Fuji pro? I've used both brands before and would buy either one. Right now I lean to the Canon, because it's more of what I'd want - a (sort of) small body, large sensor, non-interchangeable zoom lens camera with an articulating LCD. I don't generally buy new gear right away (rather wait until the initial hype/prices subside), but I may just pre order the Canon right now.</p>

<p>What a great time to be in the market for a new camera! </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The sensor in the G1x is twice the size of the X10 (there is also less difference in size between the G1x and FF sensor than there is between the G1x and the X10) so the DOF at the same FOVs will be the same. The other thing that most folks don't seem to grasp is that once sensor size goes smaller than m4/3 lens resolution is a limiting factor.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>All considerations of image quality, sensor size and lens capability aside, for me the only dissapointing thing about the G1X is that it has lost the ISO dial from previous G models. As my pocketable alternative to my 1Ds, my S95 doesn't have an ISO dial either, but I have always eyed the G12 ISO dedicated ISO dial but have never been willing to give up the pocketability of the S95 for that reason alone, so I have stuck with the S95. I guess there is now just 1 less compelling reason to switch to the G series if I ever decide the S95 needs to be replaced.</p>

<p>When it comes to any of these mirrorless compacts or high-end point and shoots for that matter, they all take great pictures when used properly. For me the ease with which the critical shooting parameters can be controlled are more important considerations than technical specs (but only because I know that Canon has those issues nailed down and I don't need to worry so much about those things). But for me the ideal compact camera would have a large sensor, very fast high quality optics, a fixed focal length of 50mm, robust build and 3 dials (shutter, aperture and ISO). Somehow I don't think I will ever see that camera.... </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>This camera looks like an urban guerilla, but I can't see myself buying one in place of a m4/3 camera. And what I am *really* interested in seeing is how well this does AF. Canon has NOT done a good job of CDAF on any large sensor camera, so this will be the first real test of how much they've learned about CDAF. Also, the performance of the lens will be critical, since you're stuck with it. Hopefully the lens will live up to their standards (can't see why it won't, but it's got to cover a big sensor) and the AF will keep up.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Rob, I understand the LX5 has a small sensor. Also that the camera is pocketable and I have licensed more than 30 images from it for newspaper and magazine articles. Half were wide angle shots of older buildings and business interiors.<br>

The little camera is not perfect but it works and, as I mentioned, it not intimidating to many when I have it on site and a photo opportunity presents itself.<br>

In a perfect world I would have a Contax G2 digital...</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>People are complaining about the lens a lot:</p>

<blockquote>

<p> however the lens is 2 stops slower at the long end... a fixed 35mm (equivalent) f1.8 lens instead of the slow zoom....If it had a really exciting lens... a decent camera but the zoom range is limited....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure, the lens is not perfect (though, it is the most commonly used range for non-pro photographers or for a pro in non-pro situations). But no lens is! and the answer must be an interchangable lens system</p>

<blockquote>

<p>something ... with an EF (and EF-S) compatible lens mount adapter</p>

</blockquote>

<p>and your lenses stock is huge anyway which totally defeat the "smaller" design</p>

<blockquote>

<p>250 shots?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>that's not many, but that's fine for me, roughly about 7 Kodak rolls. Besides, I would carry some more batteries. Well, maybe there should be a power grip?</p>

<blockquote>

<p> looks ergo instead of retro classic elegancy.... not a particularly pretty camera</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree that none of the Canon G looks pretty, but as I keep telling someone close to me "A camera is for taking pictures, not for taking pictures of it". What is more important to me is how to handle and operate it. And in this respect, the Gs are pretty good, especially I appreciate they replace the ISO dial by the EC dial. I can't imagine myself changing ISO very often (and manually). In Auto mode, I'd have to adjust EC almost every shot, and in manual, the main and sub dials are all I need (and shutter release button too, of course)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A real TTL EVF or OVF is essential</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What is really a "real OVF"? isn't it a SLR (or DSLR) system? And a real TTL EVF? Almost every digital camera has it and most have it mainly or only on back LCD and the reason is the main profit in using EVF instead of OVF is that we can easily put it on big LCD. And tilted, swiveled CD back would solve most viewing problems. And in worst situations, the G1X OVF would be good enough for framing and autofocusing, it also has advantage over slow refreshing and slow resolution EVF. As for manual focusing, nothing really works except good SLR (and DSLR)</p>

<blockquote>

<p> calling it a mirrorless camera suggests it's something other than a good old high end P&S/compact digicam... don't think "mirrorless" is a good adjective to use when describing the G1 X, even though technically, it's correct.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>the terms "mirror less", "P&S", and "compact" are very confusing and misleading, especially "mirror less", I believe the people who created this term really wanted some confusion in using it. And "mirror less" should be used to characterize (all) the cameras without a sophisticated mirror system. But in the end, it doesn't matter how you call them</p>

<blockquote>

<p>trying to protect their DSLR markets</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't see how releasing a product for one market could be a trying effort to protect another market. I only see the G1X as a nice answer of what a good "mirror less" camera should be. Of course interchangable lens is important, big sensor is important, all pro features are important,... but go for that and forget about being compact</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, regarding the "tunnel" OVF, unfortunately, by looking at the images of the camera, it looks very much like the one from previous G cameras... It is very good that Canon have updated the G series with a larger sensor, but why not "borrowing" the good OVF concept from the Fuji X10? Even though it is not perfect, the OVF from the Fuji X10 is actually quite nice in use, with good clarity.<br>

The current OVF in the G series is good for nothing, and just adds to the bulk of the camera.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>OVF of X10 has nothing special, too bad none of us know how good OVF of G1X is but the only problem with those OVF is they are useless for manual focusing. EVF of X10 has only half the pixels. The lens is faster only because it is less than half size compared to G1X's. It is much easier to make a fast lens for small sensor. Does any of us want a smaller sensor? or a bigger size?</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

<blockquote>

<p ><a name="00Zqqy"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=657840">Scott Ferris</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jan 10, 2012; 06:16 p.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>And you know the viewfinder is like that how?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Because it is being commented on by people who have held and viewed the camera. Anything else you'd like to know....just ask.</p>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only one I have seen who has actually looked through it says it is "adequate", that is a large step up

from the current G viewfinder.

 

 

I just wanted to confirm that you haven't actually looked through one, and you obviously haven't, so there

would be no point in asking you anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...