Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications

[EverydayGetaway]

for me, the eos-m destroys this camera. especially for the price. I don't see how this can be priced at the 750ish price point when the M is 300 bucks with the 22mm f2 lens. maybe that's just me.
it seems to me like if you really want an all in one, non ILC then the Sony RX100 II is way better than this... if someone disagrees please explain why.

The M only costs that low because it's on clearance, the stock won't last long. This camera looks extremely interesting.

Why is it better than the RX100? A significantly larger sensor, wider zoom range with an overall faster aperture and better (imo) manual control dials... looks leaps and bounds better to my eyes.

 

[Lee Jay]

I'm always amazed that people care about how a camera looks. It doesn't take pictures of itself.

I could see an ugly man, robot, or senior citizen not caring about how his camera looks, but I'm sure any young, good looking, senstive man wants his camera to be as sexy as he is. lol

How good a product looks plays a big role in what most people buy. I'm no different and expect my camera and lenses to pretty sexy and modern looking. Not becuase I think other people will have any sort of appreciation for the contraption in my hand, but becuase I have an eye and appreciate beauty, so natually I buy stuff I am attracted too.

I am amazed there are people who either have no visual attraction to what they spend their money on, or spend their money on things they are not visually attracted to. lol

I think anyone that thinks a camera can be beautiful hasn't seen anything beautiful before.

 

[Woody]

Love the lens on this thing. The zoom range and speed hit a sweet spot for me. Very curious about sensor quality. I've lost all faith in Canon's sensor tech. If its dynamic range ends up the same as it's been over the last five years that's probably a deal killer. I'd rather wait for Sony to add non-lossy RAW to the A7r and pair that with the upcoming Novoflex EOS adapter. It's a bigger, more expensive solution but the IQ is potentially far superior.

A7R/A7 are in a different league. Should compare to similarly classed Sony RX 100 with smaller sensor.

 

[deleteme]

Well maybe Canon is repositioning the G1X brand to compete with the RX100 II. The new design and control logic seems to be leaning towards that direction. I don't mind losing the top dial if the functionality is transferred to the second lens barrel ring - this would make it faster especially if you're looking thru the EVF or the screen. But 12 or 13 megapixels is too small for me as I like to isolate and crop details. This should have been 18 megs at least. Better DR would be welcome. Better implementation of HDR and pano would also be welcome. NFC is definitely for sharing pics. Wi-Fi is cool too. That optional grip does not look cool. Lensmate has an opportunity here. Can't wait to see sample pics to compare. The G1X.2 might seem like a step back, but then maybe Canon has something else brewing that's meant to duke it with the retro-mods (X100S, OM-DE-M-what?, Nikon Df, etc.). More waiting...

I would think the lower res would help for high ISO and DR compared to the Sony and its very dense 20MP 1 inch sensor. I had a classic 5D with 13MP and it was brilliant at tight crops.
IMO the combination of largish sensor and fast moderate zoom makes this an ideal camera for when I need stealthy quality. My only question is its responsiveness. All the features in the world mean nothing to me if it is a slug at focusing and shot to shot times.

 

[Solar Eagle]

This IS a good looking camera after all!!!!

 

[Solar Eagle]

I think anyone that thinks a camera can be beautiful hasn't seen anything beautiful before.

I hear you.

Sorry for taking a stab at you. My bad. :-[

 

[Woody]

IMO the combination of largish sensor and fast moderate zoom makes this an ideal camera for when I need stealthy quality. My only question is its responsiveness. All the features in the world mean nothing to me if it is a slug at focusing and shot to shot times.

+1. The most sensible response from a real and serious user.

The 70D live view focusing is very fast. But its shot to shot time is ridiculously long compared to many mirrorless cameras out there. Hopefully the G1X II is sensible in this department.

If the G1X II performs well, it's like packaging the 6D + 24-105 lens into a much smaller and lighter load. Ideal for traveling. Much better than RX100 (faster lens + bigger sensor = better high ISO and DOF control). Like what another poster said, I will wait for price to drop... just a matter of time

 

[CanoSony]

G1X mk2 killer:

FIRST LOOK: Sony α6000 with World's Fastest Autofocus System

watch from 1:20...

11fps WITH tracking.

 

[RGomezPhotos]

The Mk2 is more consequent in its features.
I didnt like the optical viewfinder because it was too small. A halfway solution, and made it bulky.
No increasing number of pixels, another good point.
How does it look?
Absolutely dont care.
I own a Sony RX100; I like its small size and superb IQ.
The 1GX offers more, so it is bigger.

@ flash: hm. When I use all this extra gear it makes no difference if I carry my 1 or 5D.

Price: $ 600 in a few months will be the fair price for it.

Thanks for reading!

At $600 it would definitely be a better deal. But the sensor size just kills me. When I can get a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 for $300 or Canon G16 for $450... Don't know if it's worthwhile.

 

[CarlTN]

Makes me wonder how low prices will go on the original G1X?

 

[Woody]

G1X mk2 killer
watch from 1:20...
11fps WITH tracking.

Size? Lens speed for the same price? Also, not everyone needs tracking. Otherwise, A6000 looks cool.

 

[aseek]

2 completely unflattering releases, hopefully this means Canon was too busy preparing "the year of the lenses" to get their ship together on mainstream stuff

 

[CanoSony]

G1X mk2 killer
watch from 1:20...
11fps WITH tracking.

Size? Lens speed for the same price? Also, not everyone needs tracking. Otherwise, A6000 looks cool.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#375.360,257,ha,t

size of previous gen (nex 6 and g1x)

pricing is $800 with 16-50 3.5-5.6 lens

still packs apsc and faster af + faster burst.

 

[ajndesign]

The Mk2 is more consequent in its features.
I didnt like the optical viewfinder because it was too small. A halfway solution, and made it bulky.
No increasing number of pixels, another good point.
How does it look?
Absolutely dont care.
I own a Sony RX100; I like its small size and superb IQ.
The 1GX offers more, so it is bigger.

@ flash: hm. When I use all this extra gear it makes no difference if I carry my 1 or 5D.

Price: $ 600 in a few months will be the fair price for it.

Thanks for reading!

At $600 it would definitely be a better deal. But the sensor size just kills me. When I can get a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 for $300 or Canon G16 for $450... Don't know if it's worthwhile.

The sensors in the LX7 and G16 are tiny compared to the G1x!

 

[ecka]

 

[Woody]

http://camerasize.com/compact/#375.360,257,ha,t
size of previous gen (nex 6 and g1x)
pricing is $800 with 16-50 3.5-5.6 lens
still packs apsc and faster af + faster burst.

OK. I agree with you. A6000 looks FAR more enticing for the same price, especially with in-built EVF and longer battery life.

 

[LDS]

Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen?

Explain how a touch screen is a step back??

Because a touch screen is far slower to use compared to a dial, and requires you to move your fingers to the screen from the position you use to take a photo.
You need to look at it while using it, has no "physical" feedback, and requires more time to get at the setting you need - with a dial you just need to "feel" it and turn it - no distractions. Sure, it's cheaper than a dial, because now electronics is dead cheap compared to mechanical items, and looks more "techie", but it is not.
It looks the two rings around the lens are used instead of dials - can't understand why in the past thirty years Canon worked hard to move settings from lens rings to camera dials which you could easily (and it was the pioneer, timidly with the A-1 then full steam with the T90 and EOS cameras) and now it brings them back to the lens rings just because of fashion? But not the zoom command which looks still to be the uncomfortable less precise one around the shutter button (one of the things I like less about my sister's G11).
It looks the rise of phones as compact cameras alternatives left Canon designers clueless how to design the next generations of cameras - but making them more "phone like" doesn't help - it just help people switching fully to phones. Maybe the Nokia 1520 is already better than this G1X MII, at least it can make phone calls also... and play Angry Birds, on the touch screen... I wonder what kind of customer this camera is aimed to. It doesn't look like a lighter smaller alternative to the DSLR user needing something to carry around everywhere everytime.

 

[LDS]

Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen? C'mon!

Never used a touched screen or what? EOS M has no dials at all and it's quite slick to use. This appears to have TWO control rings in ADDITION. I do like the knobs and dials on the original G1X, but I'm sure this one will be PLENTY useable.

LOL! I do use touch screens every day - even code software for them, and I know all their deficiencies when it comes to usability for tasks that don't require to look at the screen - or when on-screen controls makes the screen display far less usable because of the clutter.
They are versatile, true, they are cheap, but in many situations they are far less usable because the lack of "physical feedback" they offer, and the need of looking at them while using controls simply drawn on them. They are good display devices, far less control devices. And that's one of the reason I didn't buy an EOS M even if I would like to buy a smaller camera to complement my EOS 5.
About the rings, in the past thirty years cameras moved controls from lens rings to on-camera dials. Why? Because of ergonomy - one finger on the shutter button, another controlling the front dial, thumb controlling the rear dial, left hand controlling zoom/focus. Now they're moving settings again to lens rings - but not the zoom!-, where they are less ergonomic to use? That happens when your design choices are made by designers who just follow fashion and not good, ergonomic design principles.

 

[ajndesign]

Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen? C'mon!

Never used a touched screen or what? EOS M has no dials at all and it's quite slick to use. This appears to have TWO control rings in ADDITION. I do like the knobs and dials on the original G1X, but I'm sure this one will be PLENTY useable.

LOL! I do use touch screens every day - even code software for them, and I know all their deficiencies when it comes to usability for tasks that don't require to look at the screen - or when on-screen controls makes the screen display far less usable because of the clutter.
They are versatile, true, they are cheap, but in many situations they are far less usable because the lack of "physical feedback" they offer, and the need of looking at them while using controls simply drawn on them. They are good display devices, far less control devices. And that's one of the reason I didn't buy an EOS M even if I would like to buy a smaller camera to complement my EOS 5.
About the rings, in the past thirty years cameras moved controls from lens rings to on-camera dials. Why? Because of ergonomy - one finger on the shutter button, another controlling the front dial, thumb controlling the rear dial, left hand controlling zoom/focus. Now they're moving settings again to lens rings - but not the zoom!-, where they are less ergonomic to use? That happens when your design choices are made by designers who just follow fashion and not good, ergonomic design principles.

Looking at the full specs, it states that the control ring on the lens can be used for step zoom.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

http://camerasize.com/compact/#375.360,257,ha,t
size of previous gen (nex 6 and g1x)
pricing is $800 with 16-50 3.5-5.6 lens
still packs apsc and faster af + faster burst.

OK. I agree with you. A6000 looks FAR more enticing for the same price, especially with in-built EVF and longer battery life.

Although I prefer Canon over any other camera manufacturer and having used the G1 X for a few months, I'd pick the A6000 over the the G1 X II any day.