Canon PowerShot G1 X ISO Sample Images

[Canon Rumors]

Share

ISO Tests Focus Numerique has posted ISO samples from the Canon G1 X. A full range of shots from ISO 100 through to ISO 12,800 have been posted. They also compared it against the Panasonic GX1, Sigma DP2x, Fuji X100, Canon G12 & Sony NEX-5N

See the comparison here

Judging from these samples, it’s clear the performance is going to be near or at the top of large sensor compact camera segment.

Preorder the PowerShot G1 X at B&H for $799

thanks Ben

cr

[kubelik]

I'd say the Fuji sensor retains a bit more detail than the G1X, and the Sony sensor is nearly a tie.  the benefits over a m4/3 or 1/1.6" sensor are massive ... but then again, we expected that.  given what Chuck Westfall has said, I really want to see it compared to the current Canon APS-C sensor, especially in untouched RAW format

[Musicjohn]

To be honest, I'm not really overly impressed. Up to ISO 3200 thing would appear quite useable. Above that, it all  starts to look a bit smudgy.

I know it would not be completely fair to compare it to the Fuji X100 but that is still my favourite compact for this moment as far as image quality is concerned at all ISO settings.

It will be interesting to see how the G1-X holds up in 'real life' situations. 

[JR]

I actually find the result very interesting.  The G1X seem like a great improvement on the old G12 in any case.  I was not expecting the ISO to be that good on that little camera!

[Olly]

Test images are shot with noise reduction set to standard. Way to much NR for my taste. ISO 1600 are smudgy.

I downloaded some of the images and looked at them in DPP.

ISO 100:
Luminance noise reduction: 8
Chrominance noise reduction: 7

ISO 1600:
Luminance noise reduction: 15
Chrominance noise reduction: 15

ISO 3200:
Luminance noise reduction: 17
Chrominance noise reduction: 17

Wonder what RAW files will look like?

[CamaJan]

I don't know WHAT they did to that sensor but all ISOs up to 1600 look exactly the same, meaning pretty damn good at 1600 but HORRIBLE noise on lower ISOs. Look at those 100% crops and black background.

1600 on G1x and Pana GX1 look about the same, but compare the ISO 160,200 etc!! DAMN...
What shite has canon put in this camera and how far did they need to stretch the software to produce good high ISO. Look at he cost! ISO100 looking like ISO800/1600!
And that was good light, ISO ladder.
WTF?

[kubelik]

I don't know WHAT they did to that sensor but all ISOs up to 1600 look exactly the same, meaning pretty damn good at 1600 but HORRIBLE noise on lower ISOs. Look at those 100% crops and black background.

1600 on G1x and Pana GX1 look about the same, but compare the ISO 160,200 etc!! DAMN...
What S___e has canon put in this camera and how far did they need to stretch the software to produce good high ISO. Look at he cost! ISO100 looking like ISO800/1600!
And that was good light, ISO ladder.
WTF?

all the other sensors exhibit the same patterning on the black material at ISO 100.  so either it's not a sensor thing (maybe its the material) or it is a sensor thing but all sensors on the market exhibit the same behavior.  don't think its worth getting that worked up over.

[traveller]

I don't think you can read too much into sensor performance from these crops.  In terms of jpeg output, it may be of some use, but it says as much about how good each manufacturer's noise reduction algorithms are (and Sony's are notorious for smudging detail) as how good the sensor itself is.  I see that you can download the raw files, but to be honest I can't be bothered!

[dilbert]

Ah, what's going on with these images?

Look at the far right edge of the map and compare ISO 100 with ISO 800.

The detail has almost vanished by the time you get to the edge of the image!

If detail was important to me, I can't see myself using anything over ISO 200 for JPEG shooting. Well, maybe even ISO 100 would be the limit. Detail is just being blurred away above ISO 200.

We need to see what the raw files produce.

[gmrza]

Ah, what's going on with these images?

Look at the far right edge of the map and compare ISO 100 with ISO 800.

The detail has almost vanished by the time you get to the edge of the image!

If detail was important to me, I can't see myself using anything over ISO 200 for JPEG shooting. Well, maybe even ISO 100 would be the limit. Detail is just being blurred away above ISO 200.

We need to see what the raw files produce.

Aside from that, I would also have preferred it if the testers had kept the shutter speed as well as the aperture constant across the tests.  For instance, the ISO100 image is take at 1/8s, f/5.6, while the ISO1600 image is taken at 1/60s, f/5.6.

To really get a true reflection of relative noise, I would like to see all of the images taken at the same shutter speed and aperture and ND filters used to reduce light if necessary.  I think at 1/8s, an ISO 1600 image will show more noise, which we will only really see properly in the RAW files.

[liv_img]

The high ISO noise is really much better than the G12 and some of the other cameras compared, and solves the problem of the G series for street and indoors photography. Well done!

But I am really worried by the very bad optical quality of the Canon G1X lens at the edges. Download and compare the full image edges (the city map, for example) with the Panasonic GX1 or other cameras. The centre is perfect, crystal clear but the edges are blurry, clearly the worst.

[goodmane]

I wonder what the shutter button feels like? The shutter button on my G9 feels like a toy compared to any SLR, and - I imagine - the likes of the Fuji X100.

I'm really disappointed Canon are pansying around in this market, rather than committing with a useable, small body system with rangefinder styling as per Fuji et al.

I would maybe / probably bought a Canon small interchangeable body to try out for my wife; she could use an adapter with my EOS primes (only 35mm at moment), and we'd gain the onboard flash not present on my 5D for travel / walkaround. We'd be able to take my speedlites along for evenings too. I could live with inferior handling pleasure vs Fuji if the price were right. And I'd save money with existing lenses.

I can't be bothered with another toy camera where if something breaks the whole thing is out of action. Also, with a popular system, batteries and accessories will be around for decades. Not so sure about this odd point and shoot specimen. Obviously its not meant for me. I suppose I'd recommend it to non-photographers who want better pictures but don't want hassle of lenses as per sony nex.

 

[CatfishSoupFTW]

i am impressed and not impressed. The noise, yes it does go to 12800 but its horrible. What i also noticed, is that the outside edges of the images are really out of focus and lose most if not all sharpness. I dunno, with 800 dollars, should you rather buy a low end DSLR i.e. rebel? I dont think i would even buy either or. I currently use a 40D hopefully upgrading to a 7DmarkII when it comes out.

Maybe to the untrained eye the G1X will impress, but atm, i wasnt in much amazement.

[gkreis]

Let's wait to see more images from other sources.  This is from a pre-production camera, right?  Also, let's see what multiple reviews show us....

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have the G1X on pre-order, but when I compared the images of the map just to the right of the motherboard on the linked photos.   There were three cameras that seemed competitive, the Fujii X100 with lens ($1129 on Amazon), the Sony Nex 5n with 18-55mm ($859), and the Canon G1x with built-in zoom ($799 pre-order price).

I thought the Sony looked a bit better at high ISO, but don't know which lens was used.  The X100 had better detail as well, but not as good as the Sony.  Thats pretty subjective, and different viewers will see it differently.

I'm looking at a camera for my wife to replace her G11, she only uses jpeg, but has a good eye and gets some excellent images.  She would never consider changing a lens, and would like a supertelephoto if I were not telling her that its not the best choice.

That kinda still leaves the Canon as the best for her use, even though its a bit inferior to the other two.  I might just hold off until the price drops to $600 in a year or so.