December 12, 2017, 07:09:48 PM

Author Topic: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III  (Read 19932 times)

photomachine

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2017, 09:41:02 AM »
Very interesting, the microphone cutouts are much bigger.

One question remains, does it have a microphone jack? Yes or no?

G5X 23,76-99,36 4,86-7,56
G1X3 24-72 4,48-8,96

So the G1X3 will have a 1/3 stop advantage over the G5X at 24mm
BUT it will have a 1/2 stop disadvantage at the long end, which doesn't even compare since it is at 70mm for the G1X3 while the G5X stays brighter at 100mm.

Then again the G5X gets dust into the lens and only shoots 1fps RAW.

Conclusion: wait for G5X2

Also I'm curious if it supports touch/drag focus like the M5

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2017, 09:41:02 AM »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3250
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2017, 09:41:38 AM »
Is it significantly smaller than a 200D with the kit lens? I seriously doubt that! So for me the 200D kit is the better solution.

oh god..

yes, it's smaller than an M5 without a lens attached, so I'm sure it would be smaller than a 200D and kit lens.
 ::)
I was wondering whether it is significantly smaller not smaller since the 200d ith kit is small enough!

yes it is. the M5 body is significantly smaller than the SL2 + kit lens. so what do you think?

see picture. good grief.


As I said above:

To my defence I have never seen in real life these compact cameras. But I am positively impressed with the 200D size  :)

And the work's firewall stopped the previous picture from being displayed! So I have to look elsewhere. But thanks anyway.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 09:44:48 AM by tron »

Cory

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 478
    • Cory Steiner Photography
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2017, 09:44:09 AM »
Did someone mention "bad battery life"?  If so then bad battery life is bad (for travel).
6D, 16-35 4.0 IS, 40, 135 2.0
430EXII, Induro AT113/Sirui K-20x, Sirui T-025x
https://www.twenty20.com/corsteiner/photos

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2034
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #18 on: October 13, 2017, 09:44:30 AM »
Is it significantly smaller than a 200D with the kit lens? I seriously doubt that! So for me the 200D kit is the better solution.

oh god..

yes, it's smaller than an M5 without a lens attached, so I'm sure it would be smaller than a 200D and kit lens.
 ::)
I was wondering whether it is significantly smaller not smaller since the 200d ith kit is small enough!

yes it is. the M5 body is significantly smaller than the SL2 + kit lens. so what do you think?

see picture. good grief.


As I said above:

To my defence I have never seen in real life these compact cameras. But I am positively impressed with the 200D size  :)

while the 200D is small for a DSLR, it's not that small for a mirrorless or compact.  and the G1X III is pretty tiny, smaller in fact than the M5 without even a lens attached.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#715.640,637,ha,t


rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2034
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2017, 09:46:03 AM »
Very interesting, the microphone cutouts are much bigger.

One question remains, does it have a microphone jack? Yes or no?

G5X 23,76-99,36 4,86-7,56
G1X3 24-72 4,48-8,96

G5X 1" sensor.
G1X Mark III, APS-C sensor.

conclusion: know what you are comparing.

AvTvM

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2940
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2017, 09:46:56 AM »
No 4K...fail
Horrible battery life...fail
Ugly as heck...fail
Slow, short zoom lens...fail
Insane price...fail

They put a dial right in the way of where you grip it!

You blew it Canon.

+1  exactly

Canon manages time after time to completely underwhelm ...   :o ::)

Only positive I can see is an LCD that appears to be fully articulated ["vari-angle"] rather than those stupid flip-flap ones that are totally useless in portrait orientation.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 09:49:42 AM by AvTvM »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3250
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2017, 10:01:45 AM »
...
while the 200D is small for a DSLR, it's not that small for a mirrorless or compact.  and the G1X III is pretty tiny, smaller in fact than the M5 without even a lens attached.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#715.640,637,ha,t
Thanks for the link. I didn't know that site.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2017, 10:01:45 AM »

FreshPicsUK

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 8
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2017, 10:06:40 AM »
Seriously?! I realise that physics dictates the size of the lens on this camera, so the unbelievably poor lens choice can be forgiven, but the rest of the spec is so bad that Canon should hang their heads. It's not 2006 any more. There's more choice than ever with regards to cameras, and the rumoured price is getting on for Fuji X-T20 and kit lens money, or maybe the X-E3 with the same 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4. or the Sony A6500 with 16-50mm kit lens. Which will all be roughly the same size and offer a much faster/better lens choice (as far as the Fuji's go anyway) and won't cost a lot more. I'm amazed that Canon think they can get away with these specs in the current market.  :o

ashmadux

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 339
  • Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
    • Edward Ofori Photography
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2017, 10:31:24 AM »
Oh man, this is even uglier than the M5 :-)

OH PLEASE.

If the M5 is "ugly", then god help your pictures, because you obviously can't see straight.


Good luck with that.
Be the best you, screw everything else.

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2034
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2017, 10:37:52 AM »
Seriously?! I realise that physics dictates the size of the lens on this camera, so the unbelievably poor lens choice can be forgiven, but the rest of the spec is so bad that Canon should hang their heads

Fuji X100F sells for $1299.  it's the only competitor. how does the specs compare to that?

none of those cameras you mention are as small.  do you understand the term, compact camera?

and PS .. the 16-50 kit lens on the Sony is a joke.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 10:44:09 AM by rrcphoto »

slclick

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2112
  • You might have more or less gear
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2017, 10:42:46 AM »
Seriously?! I realise that physics dictates the size of the lens on this camera, so the unbelievably poor lens choice can be forgiven, but the rest of the spec is so bad that Canon should hang their heads

Fuji X100F sells for $1299.  it's the only competitor. how does the specs compare to that?

Well in certain ways certainly not the lens. The fuji is a fixed focal length. That in itself makes most similarities a non starter.

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2034
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2017, 10:44:40 AM »
Seriously?! I realise that physics dictates the size of the lens on this camera, so the unbelievably poor lens choice can be forgiven, but the rest of the spec is so bad that Canon should hang their heads

Fuji X100F sells for $1299.  it's the only competitor. how does the specs compare to that?

Well in certain ways certainly not the lens. The fuji is a fixed focal length. That in itself makes most similarities a non starter.

sure if you ignore the fact that it's the only current production APS-C sensor based compact camera.

the only real differences are rangefinder OVF and fixed lens versus zoom.

the rest of the camera is remarkably similar.

Canoneer

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2017, 10:47:22 AM »
I don't really see this being good enough to justify an upgrade from my Oly E-PL7 with the 14-42 EZ Pancake lens. My Oly is smaller (can actually fit in my pocket), and the ED 40-150 lens is also small enough to fit in another pocket.

I do like the resolution and DPAF of the G1 X III, but it needed to have a little more reach for me to consider upgrading. Maybe a 24-120mm?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2017, 10:47:22 AM »

FreshPicsUK

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 8
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2017, 11:01:28 AM »
Seriously?! I realise that physics dictates the size of the lens on this camera, so the unbelievably poor lens choice can be forgiven, but the rest of the spec is so bad that Canon should hang their heads

Fuji X100F sells for $1299.  it's the only competitor. how does the specs compare to that?

none of those cameras you mention are as small.  do you understand the term, compact camera?

and PS .. the 16-50 kit lens on the Sony is a joke.

Yeah, I reckon I've got a grasp on what a compact camera is, thanks for asking. But have you ever held an X-E1/2/3? I own one and can tell you now, just by looking at it, that this isn't that much smaller. Oh, and at no point did I compare it to the X100F. And if you want to go really small there's the Sony RX100IV. I'm just pointing out that the specs on this are terrible in comparison to the competition.

unfocused

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3819
    • Mark Gordon Communications
Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2017, 11:29:46 AM »
...I'm continually amazed at how many think they know the camera industry to know if canon made a good / bad / indifferent camera.

+1.

I'm also amazed at how many are so quick to declare a camera that they never intended to buy in the first place a failure, simply because it doesn't meet their own personal preferences.

This isn't the camera for me. So what? There are plenty of other options out there and I presume that Canon is not in the business of making cameras that it can't sell.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images & Specifications For the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2017, 11:29:46 AM »