Canon Officially Announces The PowerShot G1 X Mark III

[Jopa]

So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?

And who is this body aimed at market-wise? 2nd body for people who love their Rebels? 1st body for people who don't want to deal with the footprint of a Rebel? RX100 buyers? (Surely not X100 buyers, right?)

- A

You nailed it...I guess what I'd be even more interested in is an M6 +15-45 kit zoom.

Retractable zoom, but not as crappy as Sony's.

 

[Sporgon]

who the hell buys this anyway. we are living in an era where modern smart phones have beyond sufficient camera for things you are able to take photos of. sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway.

Were you an extra in K-Pax by any chance ?

 

[deleteme]

who the hell buys this anyway. we are living in an era where modern smart phones have beyond sufficient camera for things you are able to take photos of. sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway.

Gee, I don't know.
Fuji seemed to sell boatloads of X-100s with a fixed 35mm FOV lens.
This has a zoom and a decent EVF plus superior AF for the same money.
As for IQ I would presume that a Bayer filtered APS-C sensor will get better PP in LR and C1 than the Fuji.

While it is similar to the M5 with a fixed lens, this is aimed at that segment that does not want interchangeable lenses and wants compactness.
It will sell decently well.

 

[infared]

Seems like a very odd camera to make at this point in time, with the market and all things being what they are, phones, etc. It is not a camera that I would have any interest in.... for a lot of reasons.

 

[bholliman]

So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?

And who is this body aimed at market-wise? 2nd body for people who love their Rebels? 1st body for people who don't want to deal with the footprint of a Rebel? RX100 buyers? (Surely not X100 buyers, right?)
- A

You nailed it...I guess what I'd be even more interested in is a Powershot like an M6 +15-45 kit zoom.

This one has me scratching my head as well. At this price point, you can buy an M5 + 15-45 kit ($1,049) and EF-M 22 ($199 refurbished) and have a camera that will accept other lenses. Or, an M6 with a 3rd lens lens.

I suppose a buyer who would never consider changing lenses... Seems overpriced to me.

 

[scyrene]

Who writes these anouncements? Who reads them?

Marketing drones; journalists.

 

[scyrene]

but the images will be crap anyway.

That alone invalidates your whole post.

Well especially juxtaposed with 'phones are good enough for everyone'.

 

[scyrene]

I hope Canon made sure their wireless connectivity app works. More people own smartphones than all other devices combined.

Although I am not the target market for this camera I am happy Canon has come around to offering a point & shoot with an APS-C sensor.

Now do the right thing and slowly consolidate the 17 point & shoots into just 3 refreshed models. 1 for the SX Series and 1 for the ELPH series.

Same goes with all the brands as well.

I am still surprised that 4K @ 60fps isnt the norm for flagship point & shoots when the iPhone 8 can do it.

I said it on another thread but I'll repeat: how do you know fewer lines would mean more sales? Do you know anything about selling cameras?

And my eyes are in pain from rolling at your last comment. This is APS-C, not a tiny smartphone camera sensor.

 

[Talys]

That is actually a very cool video that does a good explanation of some things like DPAF without a lot of words. It also demonstrates how small the camera is -- with the lens -- very well.

I kind of want one now. If only it were cheaper or full frame. Am I greedy or what?

But seriously, I'd pay a few bucks for a full frame version of that.

 

[ahsanford]

That is actually a very cool video that does a good explanation of some things like DPAF without a lot of words. It also demonstrates how small the camera is -- with the lens -- very well.

I kind of want one now. If only it were cheaper or full frame. Am I greedy or what?

But seriously, I'd pay a few bucks for a full frame version of that.

Agree. But a Canon FF version of that (a) is up against some pricey competition going after wealthy folks who want a great camera and (b) surely wouldn't have a zoom for size reasons. It'd likely be a 35 f/2 or so and run something like $3-4k depending on what they put inside.

It's amazing design/aesthetic-wise where Canon went with this. The X100, RX1R, Leica Q invite being held in the hands and tinkered with, while this -- though I'm sure well-informed with Canon's 'ergonomic/control DNA' -- still looks like an engineery mess to the eye. It even looks more Knight Rider-like than the M5 it surely took its design cues from.

I generally roll my eyes at how cameras look as they are simply instruments to be used, but something about the G1x3 looks 80s and 'point & shooty'. I think the collapsible lens is putting me off for some reason.

(Sorry to design snob, it's almost never my bag.) Good call on a fixed lens FF. That still may happen.

- A

 

[dolina]

I said it on another thread but I'll repeat: how do you know fewer lines would mean more sales? Do you know anything about selling cameras?

And my eyes are in pain from rolling at your last comment. This is APS-C, not a tiny smartphone camera sensor.

I never said it will "mean more sales" but it will mean "better business". What I want Canon to do is to leverage economies of scale in the hopes that fewer SKUs at increased output will (a) reduce their cost, (b) keep the company profitable & (c) keep selling at prices relatively low.

This is especially true for the 17 point & shoots under the ELPH Series, G Series and SX Series cameras.

Dump the bottom 80% SKU that sold the least volume and focus on doing really well the top 20% SKU that generates the 80% profitability.

In a declining industry be more like Apple and less like Samsung.

Canon is doing this rather slowly already. These are the compact series and their last updated product that are not discontinued.

A Series in 2012
D Series in 2014
S Series in 2014

These are the compact series that continued and went up market to stay relevant in the era of smartphones.

G Series increased in image sensor size to APS-C within this week.
SX Series has WiFi and location information via smartphone last April 2017

The ELPH series has not updated since January 2016 and this product line renews on a 11-12 month cycle since 2012. This product line may not be updated anymore.

 

[Mikehit]

I said it on another thread but I'll repeat: how do you know fewer lines would mean more sales? Do you know anything about selling cameras?

And my eyes are in pain from rolling at your last comment. This is APS-C, not a tiny smartphone camera sensor.

I never said it will "mean more sales" but it will mean "better business". What I want Canon to do is to leverage economies of scale in the hopes that fewer SKUs at increased output will (a) reduce their cost, (b) keep the company profitable & (c) keep selling at prices relatively low.

This is especially true for the 17 point & shoots under the ELPH Series, G Series and SX Series cameras.

Dump the bottom 80% SKU that sold the least volume and focus on doing really well the top 20% SKU that generates the 80% profitability.

In a declining industry be more like Apple and less like Samsung.

Canon is doing this rather slowly already. These are the compact series and their last updated product that are not discontinued.

A Series in 2012
D Series in 2014
S Series in 2014

These are the compact series that continued and went up market to stay relevant in the era of smartphones.

G Series increased in image sensor size to APS-C within this week.
SX Series has WiFi and location information via smartphone last April 2017

The ELPH series has not updated since January 2016 and this product line renews on a 11-12 month cycle since 2012. This product line may not be updated anymore.

I agree with the thinking behind it, but unfortunately in marketing you are contending with human nature and things that do not fit onto a manufacturing balance sheet. Firstly, everyone wants to think there is a specific model for them (you only need to see the complaints and portents of doom that goes on whenever a new model is released). Secondly it has long been known that having more products creates an atmosphere of competition (albeit false) which actually increases sales. Thirdly, people often buy into a particular brand because they like the idea of stepwise progression to doing things like the professionals do - whether they ever take advantage of it is irrelevant but it is often a factor.
Do you really believe that Canon keep these models going for fun and 'aw, what the hell, we can afford it'? They make them because they serve a purpose in the market place.

 

[dolina]

Do you really believe that Canon keep these models going for fun and 'aw, what the hell, we can afford it'? They make them because they serve a purpose in the market place.

Canon is conservative enough to be more of a "follower" than a "pioneer" when it comes to product releases.

If a product does not sell they just quietly discontinue the product line like what happened A, D, S and soon the ELPH Series.

What I have issue is how slow they are to change & improve in light of the competition coming from smartphones, action cameras, 360 cameras, mirrorless and Sony image sensor technology.

I have a vested interest in Canon continuing to do business until the year 2100 as I want better full frame bodies every 3-5 years.

I am even open to Canon outsourcing their image sensors to Sony just to keep up as I doubt they have the R&D money to produce superior components.

 

[Mikehit]

Canon is conservative enough to be more of a "follower" than a "pioneer" when it comes to product releases.

If a product does not sell they just quietly discontinue the product line like what happened A, D, S and soon the ELPH Series.

What I have issue is how slow they are to change & improve in light of the competition coming from smartphones, action cameras, 360 cameras, mirrorless and Sony image sensor technology.

I have a vested interest in Canon continuing to do business until the year 2100 as I want better full frame bodies every 3-5 years.

I am even open to Canon outsourcing their image sensors to Sony just to keep up as I doubt they have the R&D money to produce superior components.

People keep on banging on about the sensors as the prime example of how Canon fail to innovate, but it is clear they have little understanding of how product development works. Canon choose to make their own sensors which is a solid business decision. In any competitive product development one company gets a jump on the technology through little more than good luck - the right people at the right time seeing something and taking it on. The company who 'misses' this opportunity then has a choice to carry on their own route or buy in the (what is at the time) superior technology and the question they have to answer is 'is this hurting us?' And despite 10 years of supposedly inferior sensors, Canon has increased market share so the answer is probably 'we would love a sensor with Sony's qualities but sensor performance is clearly not a defining factor for success'. No matter how many times I and others point this out, many (including you) seem to not want to listen to this simple self-evident truth.
As it is, Canon latest sensors have pretty much caught up on sensor technology as evidenced by the 5D4 and 1Dx2. The choices they made with the 6D2 have created such a furore that has drowned out that one simple fact. Canon. Have. Pretty. Much. Caught. Up. On. Sensor. Performance.
So now, Canon do not have any reason to outsource sensors to Sony especially as it seems even Sony have reached a technological limit. As for BSI, a recurring comment I have read is that the practical advantages seem to be far less than people were hoping for.

So not only have Canon been developing their sensors and now got technology to truly rival Sony, they retain the biggest market share so yes, they are doing good business. They are reportedly expanding their mirrorless. So they seem to be doing good business. Their market share remains the highest of any single company. So they are clearly doing good business.
Why you think 'action cameras' are a threat to them I don't know - I would be very surprised if Canon were not looking at them but they remain a niche product.
The biggest threat to Canon is not their technological development but their size. Not always because of their 'oil tanker' like ability to change track, but because bigger companies are more exposed when a market shrinks rapidly because they have production plants with assets that have a fixed cost. You can sack workers but the plants still need maintenance etc and even reducing the number of production plants have costs. Ask Nikon about the number of re-structurings they have undergone recently - nice technology but poor financials.

I want better full frame bodies every 3-5 years.

Have you ever seen a 'full frame' action camera? I haven't
But isn't a 'better FF camera' what you are getting every 5 years? And in 2100 I very much doubt you will even be able to pick one up, let alone use it!

So to me your comments about Canon doing 'good business' are based not on what 'good business' actually means, but on what you want to see and little knowledge of how marketing and product development actually work.

 

[AvTvM]

As it is, Canon latest sensors have pretty much caught up on sensor technology as evidenced by the 5D4 and 1Dx2. The choices they made with the 6D2 have created such a furore that has drowned out that one simple fact. Canon. Have. Pretty. Much. Caught. Up. On. Sensor. Performance.
So now, Canon do not have any reason to outsource sensors to Sony especially as it seems even Sony have reached a technological limit. As for BSI, a recurring comment I have read is that the practical advantages seem to be far less than people were hoping for.
...
So to me your comments about Canon doing 'good business' are based not on what 'good business' actually means, but on what you want to see and little knowledge of how marketing and product development actually work.

Well, to me your comments read like typical Canon fanboy apologist, rather than being based on actual knowledge of Canon and competitor products.

1. After about 7 years Canon of lagging dramatically behind [1 to 2 stops poorer performance] Canon has even now still not managed to fully catchup to Sony sensors, not even with their latest and most expensive models [5d4, 1dx2]. Not to mention, Canon being able to *innovatively leapfrog* Sony sensors ... as a matter of fact, Canon is only now being able to make ADC sensors ...

2. there is no indication that Sony sensors should have "reached a technological limit". There is no reason to believe Sony cannot further develop their sensors and maintain the lead ovr Canon sensors in a number of crucial parameters.

3. BSI has very visible practical performance advantages for both video and stills image capture. It is definitely not "underwhelming" in any way.

4. If anything then the much hyped canon DP-AF technology is way overrated and has limited advantages in practical use - and those only for video capture (AF), not for stills. As evidenced by the fact, that AF performance of even the latest and most expensive Canon mirrorless cams with DP-AF [M5, M6] is still well behind what Fujifilm, Sony and Olympus deliver in AF performance - specifically tracking AF, face/eye-AF etc. -
by using "regular hybrid" AF [on-sensor PD-AF plus CD-AF]. Sony A6300/6500, Fuji XT-2, X-20 draw circles around any Canon EOS M in terms of AF performance.

 

[Mikehit]

Well, to me your comments read like typical Canon fanboy apologist, rather than being based on actual knowledge of Canon and competitor products.

How did I know you would be the first to come back with little more than an insult? Does logic hurt you so much that you are unable to put a cogent argument together?
Tell me what knowledge of Canon products am I missing that you are privy to? Where in the above did I even attempt an explanation of competitor products? Answer - I didn't.

I occasionally participate in Nikon forums and have said pretty much the same thing in looking at decisions from a business point of view. So no, this is not about being a fanboy.

1. After about 7 years Canon of lagging dramatically behind [1 to 2 stops poorer performance] Canon has even now still not managed to fully catchup to Sony sensors, not even with their latest and most expensive models [5d4, 1dx2]. Not to mention, Canon being able to *innovatively leapfrog* Sony sensors ... as a matter of fact, Canon is only now being able to make ADC sensors ...

Read what I said. Canon have a choice - do they continue to plough their won furrow? Do they buy in other technology simply to impress the measurebators? Do they buy in new technology because their current choice is hurting them?
Does any sensor made in the last 5 years meet the needs of 99% of photograpehrs 99% of the time?. Yes.
Is their current Is having an inferior sensor hurting their sales? No. Period.
Therefore do they need to buy in other peoples' technology? No.
So explain to me why they have to. Explain it in terms of sales and profit. And explain to me what part of your so-called knowledge Canon does not know.

2. there is no indication that Sony sensors should have "reached a technological limit". There is no reason to believe Sony cannot further develop their sensors and maintain the lead ovr Canon sensors in a number of crucial parameters.

Where are the significant changes that Sony have made? Why else have Canon closed the gap on Sony's wonderful technology. I am not saying advances are not possible but those advances are getting less and less. Please educate me otherwise. That is strongly indicative of getting closer to limits. Why else have

3. BSI has very visible practical performance advantages for both video and stills image capture. It is definitely not "underwhelming" in any way.

I did not say it did not have visible advantages. I said it has not promised the level of improvement that many had predicted.

4. If anything then the much hyped canon DP-AF technology is way overrated and has limited advantages in practical use - and those only for video capture (AF), not for stills. As evidenced by the fact, that AF performance of even the latest and most expensive Canon mirrorless cams with DP-AF [M5, M6] is still well behind what Fujifilm, Sony and Olympus deliver in AF performance - specifically tracking AF, face/eye-AF etc. -
by using "regular hybrid" AF [on-sensor PD-AF plus CD-AF]. Sony A6300/6500, Fuji XT-2, X-20 draw circles around any Canon EOS M in terms of AF performance.

DPAF may be overrated to you, but then you have a strong track record in believing your view is what everyone else wants and believes.
I am not surprised that elements of the mirrorless techology lag behind Olympus and Sony. Canon (and Nikon) concentrate on their core market which are DSLR.

 

[dolina]

Canon has yet to reach the tipping point where in they will try to equal or exceed Sony sensors. Hopefully we wont need to wait until the year 2100 for that to happen.

People are locked into Canon because of the EF mount so stick to it. I just hope Canon isnt in the habit of abusing that loyalty.

 

[Mikehit]

Canon has yet to reach the tipping point where in they will try to equal or exceed Sony sensors. Hopefully we wont need to wait until the year 2100 for that to happen.

People are locked into Canon because of the EF mount so stick to it. I just hope Canon isnt in the habit of abusing that loyalty.

You are again making the mistake that sensor performance is central to any camera's success. Tell me how the 1Dx2 and 5D4 sensors will limit your photography as opposed to Sony.
The very fact you are staying with Canon shows how important the difference in sensor performance is to you - and it shows Canon they are giving a whole package that is competitive.

 

[dolina]

You are again making the mistake that sensor performance is central to any camera's success. Tell me how the 1Dx2 and 5D4 sensors will limit your photography as opposed to Sony.
The very fact you are staying with Canon shows how important the difference in sensor performance is to you - and it shows Canon they are giving a whole package that is competitive.

Image sensor performance and size does matter. It is a selling point whether it be a smartphone or dedicated still camera.

It is such a selling point that PowerShot G1 X Mark III prominently mentions that it has a APS-C image snsor.

I bought a Sony a7R II in 2016 and a Leica X Type 113 in 2014 because Canon did not have products like these until recently.

I am willing to go multi system when the technology is there. I am in the very small minority who does this and it is somewhat inconvenient.

The 1Dx2 and 5D4's advantage is its AF system. But Sony is making strides with the A9.

Which now leaves us with the lens system where only Nikon could compete in in ts completeness.

 

[Mikehit]

Image sensor performance and size does matter. It is a selling point whether it be a smartphone or dedicated still camera.

It is such a selling point that PowerShot G1 X Mark III prominently mentions that it has a APS-C image snsor.

I bought a Sony a7R II in 2016 and a Leica X Type 113 in 2014 because Canon did not have products like these until recently.

I am willing to go multi system when the technology is there. I am in the very small minority who does this and it is somewhat inconvenient.

I am not sure if it is me not explaining myself properly or your wilfully ignoring what I am saying.
Nowhere have I said that sensor performance does not matter. No-one I know who has bought a higher res camera has ever said 'Dang, I don't need those pixels. I wish they had kept it at 8MP of the 30D'. Likewise for dynamic range

What I am saying is that sensor performance is not a factor that in itself defines the success or failure of a camera. Because if it was, Sony would be #1.

The 1Dx2 and 5D4's advantage is its AF system. But Sony is making strides with the A9.

I would say Sony AF to Canon AF is about the same as Canon sensor performance to Sony sensor performance.

I bought a Sony a7R II in 2016 and a Leica X Type 113 in 2014 because Canon did not have products like these until recently.

Which sort of goes against your criticisms of Canon.
So what you really seem to be doing is comparing the A9 to the whole range of Canon cameras including the xxxxD models.
So tell me, as an 'ecosystem' it seems Canon still rocks it.