I don't see why the G1X II would be any less than $799 at launch. The RX100 II is still $699, and the G1X II is offers a heck of a lot more than that camera.
I paid full price for the original G1X, and I'll do the same here. To me the G1X was my dream camera, minus the 1cm macro form the G series. The Mark II offers 5cm macro, a full stop faster, wifi, 24mm, and almost same size as EOS M. Al-in-all it IS my dream camera, and in fact its MORE than I even dreamed of getting!!! I'm not one those folks that dreams outside the laws of physics, lol. BRAVO Canon. Proved to EVERYBODY (Not literally) that they are the best of the best. Sony looked good for a little while anyway. lol
Bring on the Mark II, WITHOUT the EFV, which I think is pretty dorky looking in practice. hahaha
You can get a Sony a6000 for $800 with faster AF, better DR, better lowlight, more AF points, 90% AF coverage, AND EVF.
I know eactly who the G1X mark II is marketed for.... ME!
I think what people don't get is that people like me just don't want a camera with separate lenses! but still want decent image quality. If I could buy a good m43 camera with a lens that did macro, zoom, wide appature etc, then maybe I'd think about it, but what would be the point? as I would never take off that lens!
Ok so the price is a bit steep, but it would be the only thing I'd ever need in my kit bag!
Yes you can buy the new sony with a lens for about the same price, but then you'd need extra lens for the other shooting conditions.
I have pre-ordered the new G1x and I can't wait to get out there with it!