The First PowerShot G7 X Mark III Specification List We've Seen [CR1]

[Maximilian]

Looks like this could become my next p&s.
If it only had an (e)vf. :-\

I think they have other models in the same series that have viewfinders. Of course that makes them bigger, so not what I want for my travel camera.
...

Of course you are right that there is a G5 X for example, but that is too big for my needs of p&s.
AND there is also a Sony RX 100 (whatever iteration), that is a direct competitor in size and function, WITH EFV.
My only problem here is that I never want to deal with Sony again, because of bad experiences.

 

[juan]

As both an iPhone and compact camera (RX100 / G7X type) user, I see a place for both. I frequently shoot RAW HDR on my iPhone with Lightroom mobile and the results are great and generally beat the jpeg I could get out of my camera. The RAW from the camera would beat the iPhone RAW hands down if you could easily and quickly get it from the camera to the phone while out and about.

But it also depends a great deal on the camera makers understanding the niche these cameras serve and focusing on it instead of trying to please everyone. For example, the RX100 series seems to be evolving to have features many of us don’t care about in a camera that small (viewfinder?!), ramping up the cost and seemingly at the expense of features we do want (zoom, better interoperability with smartphones).

I hope this version of the G7X finally comes with software on both the camera and iOS/Android that can wirelessly transmit RAW photos. The RX100 series have had a way to do this for a few models now. Lightroom mobile has RAW shooting functionality for iPhones and Android phones that are a couple years old. Fooling around with cables and, worse, the phone interfaces to copy these pictures from a camera is just too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I quickly want to get a RAW image to my phone for processing in LightRoom mobile. Too often, if I really want a RAW image while out and about, I just shoot it with my iPhone.

I’d happily pay for G7X mark II specs with wireless RAW right now. If the mark III comes out without wireless RAW, I don’t see the point of the camera.

 

[stevelee]

As both an iPhone and compact camera (RX100 / G7X type) user, I see a place for both. I frequently shoot RAW HDR on my iPhone with Lightroom mobile and the results are great and generally beat the jpeg I could get out of my camera. The RAW from the camera would beat the iPhone RAW hands down if you could easily and quickly get it from the camera to the phone while out and about.

But it also depends a great deal on the camera makers understanding the niche these cameras serve and focusing on it instead of trying to please everyone. For example, the RX100 series seems to be evolving to have features many of us don’t care about in a camera that small (viewfinder?!), ramping up the cost and seemingly at the expense of features we do want (zoom, better interoperability with smartphones).

I hope this version of the G7X finally comes with software on both the camera and iOS/Android that can wirelessly transmit RAW photos. The RX100 series have had a way to do this for a few models now. Lightroom mobile has RAW shooting functionality for iPhones and Android phones that are a couple years old. Fooling around with cables and, worse, the phone interfaces to copy these pictures from a camera is just too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I quickly want to get a RAW image to my phone for processing in LightRoom mobile. Too often, if I really want a RAW image while out and about, I just shoot it with my iPhone.

I’d happily pay for G7X mark II specs with wireless RAW right now. If the mark III comes out without wireless RAW, I don’t see the point of the camera.

In September after I got my G7X II I took an extended trip through the Rockies. I don’t recall ever shooting JPEGs at all with that camera. Sometimes in the evening I would use Canon Camera Connect to review pictures from the day on my iPad. As I recall I transferred a few to the iPad, and maybe with a bit of editing I emailed some on to friends. From what you say, I shouldn’t have been able to do that. I wonder what I really did.

 

[gmrza]

It is a great little camera. I bought one shortly after it came out and have made about five thousands pictures with it and some video. I leave my Rebel and now my 6D2 at home when I travel. It fits in my pants and jacket pockets. The lens retracts and is covered by a metal shutter when turned off. It is not quite as small as the S120 I used before it, but has a somewhat larger sensor to make up for that.

I have to concur. In February my wife and I each bought one for a trip to SE Asia as we had become fed up with the inconvenience of travelling with DSLRs. After close to 5000 frames shot over 3 weeks, I am very happy.
This little camera provides a very good compromise. The 24-100mm equivalent zoom provides what you need in over 90% of travel scenarios. It's low light capabilities are good enough in most circumstances, and for a compact camera the images are very sharp. The f/1.8 to f/2.8 maximum aperture is a must-have feature for travel.
Battery life leaves a little bit to be desired, but that is easy to fix by carrying multiple batteries and/or recharging from a USB power bank between locations. The fact that you have the option to recharge via USB also makes it possible to concurrently charge two batteries at night. - On a busy day in the ruins around Siem Reap I was chewing through at least 2 batteries.
The ability to copy photos onto a phone for emailing is also a neat feature.
I think with the G7X (mk II) Canon has hit the mark precisely for a travel camera.

 

[robotfist]

I really wish they’d give us a little more focal length on the wide end than on the zoom. No P&S camera in the market goes wider than 24mm. One of the primary uses for a P&S camera is hiking/travelling/backpacking where 90% of the images that are shot are landscapes. Not sure why these camera companies can’t seem to grasp this. 24mm is just an average focal length for landscapes but it’s not ideal. 18mm or 20mm would be leaps and bounds better and really differentiate these P&S cameras from smart phones. Nikon almost released a P&S (DL 18-50) with the wide end going to 18mm but cancelled it. The market is wide open for this. Just go to any avid backpacker/hiking forum and ask who would buy a P&S with a wide angle lens and see what kind of response you get.

 

[stevelee]

On the S120, the zoom goes out to 5.2mm to give a 24mm equivalent view. On the G7X II it is 8.8mm, I think, for the larger sensor. To get the high quality of pictures at those small focal lengths on cameras you can fit your pocket, they already use a massive amount of corrections in software (in camera for JPEGs or in ACR et. al. to correct RAW files).

I think it is already miraculous that they are able to do that well at the 24mm equivalent lens side. I'm not surprised they don't go much wider on P&S.

 

[Mikehit]

I really wish they’d give us a little more focal length on the wide end than on the zoom. No P&S camera in the market goes wider than 24mm. One of the primary uses for a P&S camera is hiking/travelling/backpacking where 90% of the images that are shot are landscapes. Not sure why these camera companies can’t seem to grasp this. 24mm is just an average focal length for landscapes but it’s not ideal. 18mm or 20mm would be leaps and bounds better and really differentiate these P&S cameras from smart phones. Nikon almost released a P&S (DL 18-50) with the wide end going to 18mm but cancelled it. The market is wide open for this. Just go to any avid backpacker/hiking forum and ask who would buy a P&S with a wide angle lens and see what kind of response you get.

I think 24mm is perfectly fine for landscapes - why is is not 'ideal'? Yes, some would like it wider but wider than 24mm and crafting a shot needs great care to avoid boring same-same images.
I travelled for 2 years fro the Himalayas to Australasia with a 28mm as my widest prime and not once do I look a the images and think 'I wish I had had a wider lens'. In fact. taking shots of the Himalayas, even 28mm makes the mountains look small and short telephoto is better IMO.

I am sure there are people who would love a lens to go wider but I guess the companies have done their research and decided the pros do not outweigh the cons. I guess 18-50 is standard zoom on APS-C and 24-70/24-105 is standard mid range zoom for a reason.

 

[juan]

...
I hope this version of the G7X finally comes with software on both the camera and iOS/Android that can wirelessly transmit RAW photos. The RX100 series have had a way to do this for a few models now. Lightroom mobile has RAW shooting functionality for iPhones and Android phones that are a couple years old. Fooling around with cables and, worse, the phone interfaces to copy these pictures from a camera is just too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I quickly want to get a RAW image to my phone for processing in LightRoom mobile. Too often, if I really want a RAW image while out and about, I just shoot it with my iPhone.

I’d happily pay for G7X mark II specs with wireless RAW right now. If the mark III comes out without wireless RAW, I don’t see the point of the camera.

In September after I got my G7X II I took an extended trip through the Rockies. I don’t recall ever shooting JPEGs at all with that camera. Sometimes in the evening I would use Canon Camera Connect to review pictures from the day on my iPad. As I recall I transferred a few to the iPad, and maybe with a bit of editing I emailed some on to friends. From what you say, I shouldn’t have been able to do that. I wonder what I really did.

What I said was fooling around with cables and the phone interfaces to copy RAW images from a camera while out and about is too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I want to quickly get a RAW image to my phone.

The case you are describing is completely different - you are doing this in evening after you have returned to where you are staying and doing this with an iPad with a larger screen than a phone in a more convenient setting for that. I'm talking about doing the transfer to a phone while out and about. It's technically possible to hook up the cables and navigate the interfaces, but a pain - especially if trying to do while standing or walking. Using the wireless app for Jpegs, it's easy. I want this functionality for RAW images.

I already have a great pocket camera for shooting RAWs that I can pull images off at home if that's what I want. Sony has already had options to pull RAW off their RX100 series via wireless for a few years now. If Canon will not include it this time, I don't see the point of the camera.

 

[stevelee]

...
I hope this version of the G7X finally comes with software on both the camera and iOS/Android that can wirelessly transmit RAW photos. The RX100 series have had a way to do this for a few models now. Lightroom mobile has RAW shooting functionality for iPhones and Android phones that are a couple years old. Fooling around with cables and, worse, the phone interfaces to copy these pictures from a camera is just too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I quickly want to get a RAW image to my phone for processing in LightRoom mobile. Too often, if I really want a RAW image while out and about, I just shoot it with my iPhone.

I’d happily pay for G7X mark II specs with wireless RAW right now. If the mark III comes out without wireless RAW, I don’t see the point of the camera.

In September after I got my G7X II I took an extended trip through the Rockies. I don’t recall ever shooting JPEGs at all with that camera. Sometimes in the evening I would use Canon Camera Connect to review pictures from the day on my iPad. As I recall I transferred a few to the iPad, and maybe with a bit of editing I emailed some on to friends. From what you say, I shouldn’t have been able to do that. I wonder what I really did.

What I said was fooling around with cables and the phone interfaces to copy RAW images from a camera while out and about is too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I want to quickly get a RAW image to my phone.

The case you are describing is completely different - you are doing this in evening after you have returned to where you are staying and doing this with an iPad with a larger screen than a phone in a more convenient setting for that. I'm talking about doing the transfer to a phone while out and about. It's technically possible to hook up the cables and navigate the interfaces, but a pain - especially if trying to do while standing or walking. Using the wireless app for Jpegs, it's easy. I want this functionality for RAW images.

I already have a great pocket camera for shooting RAWs that I can pull images off at home if that's what I want. Sony has already had options to pull RAW off their RX100 series via wireless for a few years now. If Canon will not include it this time, I don't see the point of the camera.

As I recall the Canon software works the same on the phone as it does on the iPad. If you are away from a Wi-Fi signal, the camera will make its own network for the phone to connect to. I’ve never had a cable that would connect the phone to the camera, so I don’t know what you were doing with one, just that I didn’t need it. Bluetooth probably works also, but I haven’t tried. As I said, I don’t shoot JPEGs with that camera, so something must work with the RAW files. I just don’t remember what I did. As you say, the iPad has a bigger screen, so I use it to sort through pictures when I’m back at the hotel.

The main reason I use the Canon software on the phone to connect to the camera’s Wi-Fi is for the camera to get the GPS info from the phone to add to pictures’ metadata. I don’t do that on a long day of touring in order to save battery on both devices.

 

[juan]

...
I hope this version of the G7X finally comes with software on both the camera and iOS/Android that can wirelessly transmit RAW photos. The RX100 series have had a way to do this for a few models now. Lightroom mobile has RAW shooting functionality for iPhones and Android phones that are a couple years old. Fooling around with cables and, worse, the phone interfaces to copy these pictures from a camera is just too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I quickly want to get a RAW image to my phone for processing in LightRoom mobile. Too often, if I really want a RAW image while out and about, I just shoot it with my iPhone.

I’d happily pay for G7X mark II specs with wireless RAW right now. If the mark III comes out without wireless RAW, I don’t see the point of the camera.

In September after I got my G7X II I took an extended trip through the Rockies. I don’t recall ever shooting JPEGs at all with that camera. Sometimes in the evening I would use Canon Camera Connect to review pictures from the day on my iPad. As I recall I transferred a few to the iPad, and maybe with a bit of editing I emailed some on to friends. From what you say, I shouldn’t have been able to do that. I wonder what I really did.

What I said was fooling around with cables and the phone interfaces to copy RAW images from a camera while out and about is too much time and trouble for 99% of the cases where I want to quickly get a RAW image to my phone.

The case you are describing is completely different - you are doing this in evening after you have returned to where you are staying and doing this with an iPad with a larger screen than a phone in a more convenient setting for that. I'm talking about doing the transfer to a phone while out and about. It's technically possible to hook up the cables and navigate the interfaces, but a pain - especially if trying to do while standing or walking. Using the wireless app for Jpegs, it's easy. I want this functionality for RAW images.

I already have a great pocket camera for shooting RAWs that I can pull images off at home if that's what I want. Sony has already had options to pull RAW off their RX100 series via wireless for a few years now. If Canon will not include it this time, I don't see the point of the camera.

As I recall the Canon software works the same on the phone as it does on the iPad. If you are away from a Wi-Fi signal, the camera will make its own network for the phone to connect to. I’ve never had a cable that would connect the phone to the camera, so I don’t know what you were doing with one, just that I didn’t need it. Bluetooth probably works also, but I haven’t tried. As I said, I don’t shoot JPEGs with that camera, so something must work with the RAW files. I just don’t remember what I did. As you say, the iPad has a bigger screen, so I use it to sort through pictures when I’m back at the hotel.

The main reason I use the Canon software on the phone to connect to the camera’s Wi-Fi is for the camera to get the GPS info from the phone to add to pictures’ metadata. I don’t do that on a long day of touring in order to save battery on both devices.

The Canon software does work the same on the iPad as on the iPhone and when you try to transfer a RAW photo (even if you only shoot RAW rather than RAW+jpeg) it converts the RAW image to jpeg (or it extracts the smaller jpeg image that is stored within the RAW format). It does not transfer a RAW file. You can check that by checking the file format and size of image copied to the iPad. Different software tools like Adobe Mobile Lightroom will also tell you what format an image is when you import them.

 

[stevelee]

The Canon software does work the same on the iPad as on the iPhone and when you try to transfer a RAW photo (even if you only shoot RAW rather than RAW+jpeg) it converts the RAW image to jpeg (or it extracts the smaller jpeg image that is stored within the RAW format). It does not transfer a RAW file. You can check that by checking the file format and size of image copied to the iPad. Different software tools like Adobe Mobile Lightroom will also tell you what format an image is when you import them.

The only reason I would ever want to transfer a picture from the camera to the phone is to email it to friends or post. So it wouldn't have occurred to me to want the RAW file itself on the phone. All I knew was that I could shoot a RAW photo, send it to the phone, and then email it to people. I hadn't really thought about what point the conversion to JPEG took place in the process. Obviously I am wanting to send them something they can see rather than a file they will need some software to edit so they can create their own version of my picture. That is why I thought you were telling me that I couldn't do something that I clearly remembered doing.

 

[juan]

The Canon software does work the same on the iPad as on the iPhone and when you try to transfer a RAW photo (even if you only shoot RAW rather than RAW+jpeg) it converts the RAW image to jpeg (or it extracts the smaller jpeg image that is stored within the RAW format). It does not transfer a RAW file. You can check that by checking the file format and size of image copied to the iPad. Different software tools like Adobe Mobile Lightroom will also tell you what format an image is when you import them.

The only reason I would ever want to transfer a picture from the camera to the phone is to email it to friends or post. So it wouldn't have occurred to me to want the RAW file itself on the phone. All I knew was that I could shoot a RAW photo, send it to the phone, and then email it to people. I hadn't really thought about what point the conversion to JPEG took place in the process. Obviously I am wanting to send them something they can see rather than a file they will need some software to edit so they can create their own version of my picture. That is why I thought you were telling me that I couldn't do something that I clearly remembered doing.

I too can't imagine wanting to send a RAW photo to someone. But there are plenty of us who want to *edit* RAW photos on their phones. LightRoom Mobile is great for this. Shooting with the camera for a while, you get a feel for scenes (especially high contrast and low light) where the sensor/lens and a few quick tweaks in LRM will make the photo pop or simply be usable but would not if the same photo was in JPEG or a RAW from a phone.

I'll give you an example. Recently, I was at a roof top bar with some visiting business partners. It was a dark night and there was a great skyline. We wanted to get a nice group shot with the skyline behind us. Photos taken with phone cameras using flash either made us too bright or made the skyline too dark, without the flash, we were too dark. With my camera, I was able to get a shot in RAW without using a flash that would be perfect with a few seconds of quick edits but I had no quick and convenient way to get a RAW to my phone. The JPEG didn't have enough depth to work with. When I got home, I was right, the RAW shot turned out great. But it was kind of a moot point. Folks had shared their shots hours ago when we were there.

Assuming you are editing on a desktop/laptop too. If the editing is just using the JPEGs on an iPad, shooting RAW may be overkill. With that said, if you have a high contrast or other scenes that require a lot of dynamic range, try editing the RAW file - there is so much more detail to pull out of the over and underexposed areas. Have gotten so many amazing shots tweaking RAW photos that wouldn't have been possible working with the JPEG.

 

[stevelee]

OK. I finally get what you were trying to do and why. For me the situation has just never come up. I have on occasion cropped JPEGs or made slight color corrections in either Photos or Mobile Lightroom before emailing pictures, but nothing needing the range of adjustments RAW files afford. If it doesn't already look good in the camera or on the iPad, I don't think about sending it out.

I don't have a laptop, other than an ancient iBook that I now use only in the rare instance that I need to send an actual fax. I stay too busy doing things to spend time on my travels editing photos. I went for almost 10 years when I wouldn't even take a camera with me when I traveled, since I was serious enough about photography in those days that I would spend more time taking pictures than seeing or doing those things that I went to see and do. When I started traveling with a camera again, I promised myself that I would quit if I got back like that again. Prague was the only real exception. The city is so photogenic, I let myself out of the promise temporarily. I still might take hundreds of pictures on some trips, and will even take part of a day and devote it to picture taking. But I make sure that photography doesn't so much get in the way of what I came for. And there is nothing wrong with a photo excursion. I hope to do one soon with my new 100-400mm II once I figure out where I want to go and find a day that is not too outrageously hot or raining. And after that I hope to rent a TS lens (maybe the 24mm) for a week's "staycation" of using that lens around this area.

 

[Kit.]

I'll give you an example. Recently, I was at a roof top bar with some visiting business partners. It was a dark night and there was a great skyline. We wanted to get a nice group shot with the skyline behind us. Photos taken with phone cameras using flash either made us too bright or made the skyline too dark, without the flash, we were too dark. With my camera, I was able to get a shot in RAW without using a flash that would be perfect with a few seconds of quick edits but I had no quick and convenient way to get a RAW to my phone. The JPEG didn't have enough depth to work with. When I got home, I was right, the RAW shot turned out great. But it was kind of a moot point. Folks had shared their shots hours ago when we were there.

G7 X has both slow sync mode and flash exposure compensation. Wasn't it enough to get the desired image straight from the sensor?