Canon PowerShot G1 X Announced

[iTasneem]

You can now preorder the new Canon PowerShot G1 X from Amazon.com.

 

[bvukich]

I'm not talking about a superzoom; for example the G9 zoomed to the equivalent of 210 mm and it wasn't a superzoom.

5x and greater is what I've always seen considered a superzoom. The G9 is 6x, so a superzoom. Granted, not nearly as silly as the PowerShot SX30 (35x?), but still a superzoom.

 

[Rocky]

Let us be fair to Canon. A lot of people complained about the GX1 lens is not fast enough, not long enough, the body is too big, no full manual control in video etc. Lets us face it, Canon has quadral the size of the sensor from G12 and just bump up the size here and there by a faction of an inch for the body, keep the lens to be f 2.8 at wide end with a 4X zoom range. That is quite an accomplishment in my book. My only corncern (may be complain) is the pricing. $800 is a little bit steep. May be it may drop to $600 street price, after the dust is settled. Just hope the AF is fast enough to beat the LX5 with a better face detection.

 

[moreorless]

The lens needs to be "slow" because of the big sensor. The maximum aperture is around 10mm -- that is about the same as the 18-55mm rebel kit lens, or the 20mm f/1.7 pancake prime that is popular on micro 4/3. So for those who are used to fast lenses on an SLR, nothing to write home about, but Canon are probably trying to pick off the crowd who would otherwise buy a big sensor camera with the kit lens and never change lenses.

My guess is that this is actually the silent majority of mirrorless users given that lens sales lag well behind camera sales on places like Amazon. When you make that comparison the lens on this camera has a longer zoom range and a superior appature at the wide end.

Compaired to the X10 its going to offer superior DOF control and you would think superior ISO petformance aswell.

 

[noncho]

Surprisingly large sensor, but not enough for 800$ camera. Lens like 24-120 F2.8-4 would make it much more interesting. Actually I would prefer slightly smaller sensor like 15mm X 10mm(between 4/3 and Nikon's 2.7 crop) for lens like this.

 

[briansquibb]

Street price is NEVER the same as recommended.$600 sounds about right.

Who believes that you will have to pay $10,000 for a large white? $7000 tops

I think people are setting their sights too high - it is like they want 1DX IQ with a 24-70 f/2.8 quality lens for $600. They haven't smelt the coffee yet then!

 

[marinien]

I think this camera will fail, the fuji X10 lens is a full stop faster at the wide end and 2 full stops faster at the long end! not to mention its smaller, and the fuji looks retro

I will try to use the explanations of Neuro on the comparison between the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 and the EF 24-105mm f/4:

The EF-S lens that has had some full frame users jealous for a while.

Not the educated ones, who would know that the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS on a crop body is out-spec'd by the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS used on FF, since the FF-equivalent of 17-55mm f/2.8 is 27-88mm f/4.5 (becuase the crop factor affects aperture in terms of DoF for equivalent framing), and the 1-stop effect on shutter speed is more than compensated for bu the 1.33-stop improvement in ISO noise with the additional light gathering ability of a FF sensor). So, the 24-105 on FF is wider, longer, and faster than the 17-55mm on crop, still has IS, and is weather-sealed with L-quality build to match.

The sensor sizes of the G1 X and the Fuji X10 are respectively 1.5" and 2/3", so the sensor of the G1 X is 2.25*2.25 larger than the X10's. The two cameras have the same FF-equivalent focal range. However, the maximum aperture range of the X10 is f/2.0-2.8. If we apply the crop factor of 2.25 to convert this to the equivalent aperture range of the 1.5" sensor, we obtain f/4.5-6.3. So the G1 X's lens on its 1.5" sensor is better than the X10's lens on its 2/3" sensor.

 

[marinien]

I will not buy the G1 X. However, I am really interested in the mirrorless or rangefinder system. Wide-angles lenses on these systems are usually smaller and have less distortion than their SRL counterpart. The ideal set for me would be a rangefinder with wide-angles lenses and a DSLR for the rest. However, I do not know any real alternative to the Leica and I do not have the budget for that :-\

 

[pwp]

Street price is NEVER the same as recommended.$600 sounds about right.

A quick look back at the launch price of previous G's and most new Canons for that matter, has always been high. Once the initial demand starts to soften, prices will ease off pretty rapidly.

G12's have been around $400 for a while now, though I doubt the G1X will hit this for some time.

Paul Wright

 

[briansquibb]

I remember the wails of anguish when the 70-300L was announced. Doomed to failure it was - has proved to be a good product and popular. I think it will be the same with the G1X

 

[stu_cj]

£699 in the uk pre-order. By my calculations that's around $1080. - Think I'll stick with my trusty G9 for a while yet.

 

[takeapic]

A very interesting comparison from digitaltrends.com

 

[kubelik]

HOW MUCH !!!!!!!!

Yet again Canon replace a model with something costing nearly twice as much! This seems to be a deliberate marketing policy what next a 5D MkIII costing £3000 / $5000?

let's not overexaggerate things here. 60% more is not "twice as much". and it's not a direct replacement, it's got nearly an APS-C sized sensor crammed into. versus a 1/1.6" compact-sized sensor. you're telling me you don't think that change in sensor size justifies an additional $300? I don't think canon's priced it too high based on the technology inside. whether or not it's too rich for the individual ... I agree that $800 is a lot of money.

 

[kubelik]

£699 in the uk pre-order. By my calculations that's around $1080. - Think I'll stick with my trusty G9 for a while yet.

equipment prices don't translate based on exchange rates, because the more critical part of the price are tariffs and distribution costs. canon has announced that the price of the G1X will be about $800 US.

 

[briansquibb]

UK RRP for the G12 is £540 = so they are looking for a £160 premium - this translate to about £100 more in street prices.

I got my G12 before Christmas for £350 as I knew the upgrade was coming - we only wanted a good P&S for my wife.

 

[NotABunny]

1.5-inch (18.7 x 14mm) sensor

That's a 23.4 mm diagonal, so it's not even 1 inch. It's basically in the middle of what the leak said and what's been speculated.

Okay, I see that Wikipedia says that x" have nothing to do with real inches. In fact, with a real size of 1", the marketing departments actually call this 1.5".

Bottom line, Canon did not fit a 38.1 mm (1.5 real inches) sensor in a G-sized body.

 

[elflord]

1.5-inch (18.7 x 14mm) sensor

That's a 23.4 mm diagonal, so it's not even 1 inch. It's basically in the middle of what the leak said and what's been speculated.

Okay, I see that Wikipedia says that x" have nothing to do with real inches. In fact, with a real size of 1", the marketing departments actually call this 1.5".

Bottom line, Canon did not fit a 38.1 mm (1.5 real inches) sensor in a G-sized body.

There's a lot of confusion in this thread about sensor terminology. 1.5" is NOT 1.5 inches in the standard unit length (25mm) that we're familiar with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Compact_digital_camera_formats

The whole thing is quite confusing, it would be nice if everyone would use crop factor or just publish the sensor dimensions instead.

 

[jhpeterson]

The whole thing is quite confusing, it would be nice if everyone would use crop factor or just publish the sensor dimensions instead.

I wholeheartedly agree. The present designation is much too confusing to the serious photographer who wishes to make a comparison, let alone the average consumer. It's high time for camera maunfacturers to state in clear, unambiguous language the size of their sensor, whether it's in dimensions, both width AND height (in mm) or, better yet , expressed as area [i.e., mm2 (squared)].

 

[kapanak]

The whole thing is quite confusing, it would be nice if everyone would use crop factor or just publish the sensor dimensions instead.

I wholeheartedly agree. The present designation is much too confusing to the serious photographer who wishes to make a comparison, let alone the average consumer. It's high time for camera maunfacturers to state in clear, unambiguous language the size of their sensor, whether it's in dimensions, both width AND height (in mm) or, better yet , expressed as area [i.e., mm2 (squared)].

Who says they do not? All manufacturers of cameras specifically state their sensor size dimensions in millimeters.

 

[jhpeterson]

Who says they do not? All manufacturers of cameras specifically state their sensor size dimensions in millimeters.

If so, where?
Yes, the DSLRs, whether full-frame, APS-C or some other size, nearly always state it in their specs, but I've looked pretty hard to find this for point-and-shoots, and have come up empty. I think I'm not the only one who can't find it, as I seem to recall a column by the NYTimes' David Pogue on this very subject.
Say manufacturers, isn't it time for full disclosure?