Canon PowerShot G1 X II Thoughts from CP+

[weixing]

Note the G1 X II lens is 24-120mm 35mm film (FF) equivalent . With the 1.92 crop factor, the lenses aperture is FF equivalent to f/3.8-7.5, not exactly fast! You can use a f/1.2 or 1.4 primes on the EOS-M and for FF equivalent apertures of f/2 to f/2.2, something the G1XII can't get close to.

The f-ratio of the lens didn't change... the field of view is equivalent to 24-120mm 35mm FF.

Have a nice day.

 

[Roark]

I may sound silly but I am thinking about buying this camera. Because it´s form factor is even smaller than my travel mft setup (I use three mft lenses) and a 24-120mm is all I really need for casual stuff. The big question is how it´s iq compares to the Olympus OMD lineup. It should be better in low light and maybe even better in the DR department.

 

[bholliman]

Note the G1 X II lens is 24-120mm 35mm film (FF) equivalent . With the 1.92 crop factor, the lenses aperture is FF equivalent to f/3.8-7.5, not exactly fast! You can use a f/1.2 or 1.4 primes on the EOS-M and for FF equivalent apertures of f/2 to f/2.2, something the G1XII can't get close to.

The f-ratio of the lens didn't change... the field of view is equivalent to 24-120mm 35mm FF.

Have a nice day.

I didn't say the f-ratio changed, that is the ratio of the focal length divided by the diameter of the entrance pupil of the lens. However, the equivalent f/stop is different when comparing cameras with different sensor sizes.

The attached article explains it much better than I can. Note the "Depth of Field Equivalents" calculator and explanation half way down the page.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

Canon apparently created a new sensor size for the G1XII (according to this description from their website: "Focal Length - 12.5mm (W) - 62.5mm (T) (35mm film equivalent: 24-120mm)". So, this would be a 1.92x crop factor, which is very close to the micro 4/3 sensor on the chart (2x crop factor).

This is a quote from the Cambridgeincolour article:

As sensor size increases, the depth of field will decrease for a given aperture (when filling the frame with a subject of the same size and distance). This is because larger sensors require one to get closer to their subject, or to use a longer focal length in order to fill the frame with that subject. This means that one has to use progressively smaller aperture sizes in order to maintain the same depth of field on larger sensors. The following calculator predicts the required aperture and focal length in order to achieve the same depth of field (while maintaining perspective).

Have a good day!

 

[Roark]

Who cares about dof with a camera like the G1 X II? The exposure is exactly the same as you would get with a full frame or Crop sensor, only the dof roughly doubles because of the crop factor. Anyone who really needs thin dof should buy something else - different strokes for different folks.

(The Sony RX 100 and all the other super zoom compact cameras are much "worse" in regard to dof due to their even smaller sensors.)

 

[Loswr]

Who cares about dof with a camera like the G1 X II? The exposure is exactly the same as you would get with a full frame or Crop sensor, only the dof roughly doubles because of the crop factor. Anyone who really needs thin dof should buy something else - different strokes for different folks.

Canon states, "a circular, 9-blade aperture for stunning blurred background." Maybe they meant stunning, not-very-blurred backgrounds.

 

[infared]

The G1X-II looks to me to be a collossal waste of time and money for Canon development. If they had wanted to
hit a home run, they should have used M lenses, priced it at $499.00 and pushed it as a new mirrorless system.
Now they just have two turkeys on their hands and will have a hard time selling either.

+100
I find it especially interesting that Canon offers a $300 EVF for a fixed-lens P&S camera and offers no such option for an interchangeable-lens "system" camera like the M. They did not even get that right on the M2?

GOBBLE....GOBBLE!

 

[Roark]

I hope that they pull the plug on their M system. I don´t want to buy new lenses and I don´t want to lug them around. Make a good compact zoom cameras and concentrate on FF format.

 

[privatebydesign]

I hope that they pull the plug on their M system. I don´t want to buy new lenses and I don´t want to lug them around. Make a good compact zoom cameras and concentrate on FF format.

And why do you think producing the M series and good compact zoom cameras are mutually exclusive. You don't have to lug anything around because you don't have to buy it.

 

[bholliman]

With the 1.92 crop factor, the lenses aperture is FF equivalent to f/3.8-7.5, not exactly fast!

Who cares about dof with a camera like the G1 X II? The exposure is exactly the same as you would get with a full frame or Crop sensor, only the dof roughly doubles because of the crop factor. Anyone who really needs thin dof should buy something else - different strokes for different folks.

Canon states, "a circular, 9-blade aperture for stunning blurred background." Maybe they meant stunning, not-very-blurred backgrounds.

I was thinking about this misleading marketing statement when I made my point about the lens not really being all that fast. Sure, you will get a small amount background blurring, something most P&S and phone cameras are nearly incapable of, but certainly not "stunning blurred background(s)". Very misleading.

 

[distant.star]

.
The more I think about this camera, I can't help but wonder...

Is it really just a toy for the dilettantes?

Who pays $800 + (the EVF toy, lens hood, etc. don't forget) for a point & shoot camera in a vanishing market segment?

It's small enough to be "not a DSLR," yet it's not really small enough to put in a pocket (like my venerable S95).

I don't see anyone buying this as a sole camera. It has to be a second camera, and it really only makes sense as a second to the FF DSLR models. Everything in the APS-C realm (Canon's anyway) will perform rings around it.

Since it doesn't really fit into any Canon "system," it has to compete directly with similar products being produced by Sony, etc. The EOS-M at least had a system connection and relation. I don't see it doing well against similar, perhaps more innovative products.

As usual, I have more questions than answers. Perhaps over the next few months reliable reviews will start being published and the true pedigree of this camera will emerge.

 

[ajndesign]

.
The more I think about this camera, I can't help but wonder...

Is it really just a toy for the dilettantes?

Who pays $800 + (the EVF toy, lens hood, etc. don't forget) for a point & shoot camera in a vanishing market segment?

It's small enough to be "not a DSLR," yet it's not really small enough to put in a pocket (like my venerable S95).

I don't see anyone buying this as a sole camera. It has to be a second camera, and it really only makes sense as a second to the FF DSLR models. Everything in the APS-C realm (Canon's anyway) will perform rings around it.

Since it doesn't really fit into any Canon "system," it has to compete directly with similar products being produced by Sony, etc. The EOS-M at least had a system connection and relation. I don't see it doing well against similar, perhaps more innovative products.

As usual, I have more questions than answers. Perhaps over the next few months reliable reviews will start being published and the true pedigree of this camera will emerge.

I've ordered one, and it will be my only camera.