G7X Mark 3 turn on grid and level?

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,170
226
Davidson, NC
As a travel camera I think the 24-200mm equivalent lens is a better option than a 24-70mm. For a vlog'ing camera it's probably not.
And that is a matter of priorities. The longer zoom is a much slower lens. For my travel pictures, having an f/1.8-2.8 lens is more important than having a longer zoom. Now perhaps having f/2.8 at 200mm equivalent would be the best of both worlds, but then it would be harder to make it fit in my pocket. I don't do vlogging, and can't imagine that I'd ever want to.

On the other side, I wouldn't want to be limited to 70mm, either. The 100mm equivalent of the G7X II or III works fine for me. I'm much more likely to wish I had something wider than 24mm than to wish for something longer than 100mm when I'm traveling. For wider, I make shots to stitch together once I get home. For a little more telephoto, I can crop, up to a point, of course. The G7X II replaced an S120 as my travel camera. It would zoom to 120mm equivalent. I have not missed the difference. There is enough more resolution with the 1" sensor so that I can crop the pictures tighter than the 120mm would give me, and can still have more pixels than with the S120 shot's whole frame when zoomed in. Other folks will want different zoom ranges, and that's fine.

Anyway, I don't need to rush into this purchase (or nonpurchase). If by October when I'm traveling again I'm that the III (or the 5 II) will be advantageous for me, then I might make a purchase. I'll still watch these threads and look at reviews over the next month or two. Otherwise, I'll be happy to tromp around Italy and sail to some Greek islands using the G7X II to document the trip but not get in my way. I might have to restrain my residual amount of GAS, however.

Thanks to you and to the others who are helping provide ideas and links to consider.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,170
226
Davidson, NC
It seems to do fine some of the time, and get fooled some of the time. It is hard to tell much when the light is bright and the ND filter is off, since the lens is topped down somewhat and the difference between in and out of focus is not so great. Without comparison videos of the II or of the Sony from three years ago I don't learn much.

What he is doing for the test is so far from something that is likely to happen in a video of mine, I'm not sure that even the bad results say anything about what I might experience in real life. I'd try making my own version of the test if I had someone to play Bruno and four pretty stewardesses.

I also don't know what this might mean for autofocus in still photography.
 

Stereodude

EOS 80D
Jul 8, 2019
149
130
In contrast, I learned a lot from his several videos and those posted by others. I learned it has very substandard AF performance in video for a camera in 2019 compared to class leaders. Considering that and other things like overheating and the usual rash of typical Canon feature crippling there's no way it's worth the price Canon wants for it. Whether the sensor is responsible or Canon's processing of the data is irrelevant to me. The camera is the sum of its parts and programming, and this one adds up to a big fat 0 if you want to use it for video and are expecting competitive performance.

I had such high hopes for the G7X III, but Canon... You dashed them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: javisan23