Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Sample Images

[SecureGSM]

Only some? Holly Batman... These pics were taken with a $1300 camera. right!

Some of those are really terrible photographs =X

And if it's the built-in flash, I guess it's a pretty good way to sell flashes that go on the shoe

 

[deleteme]

There are three salient features here for me.

APS-C sensor -Big enough to deliver excellent IQ at higher ISO as compared to a 1 inch sensor.

Short zoom- 24-70 is all I am looking for in this camera because it has.....

A LEAF SHUTTER!.

I use flash fill ALL the time on paying jobs.
On images I know are web-use I use my Panasonic FZ-1000. It is a sterling performer with a very sharp lens, IS, 15fps (not with flash), nearly silent with mechanical shutter, perfectly so with e-shutter.
But it allows brilliant fill in bright sun with a manual flash set to 1/4 power and throwing fill as much as 25 feet.

I just returned from a shoot for a magazine cover (lifestyle) where the subjects were facing away from bright sun. I had to shoot at f11 at 1/200 with ISO at 100. Flash shooting in a large umbrella to cover 4 people needs to be very powerful.( was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units) With the G1 X mk3 I could have used f7.1 at 1/500 thus using far less powerful flash and still maintaining decent DOF.

I have looked at other LS cameras but they all fall short. The Fuji X-100 is a fixed 23mm lens, great camera but little flexibility in framing.
The Sony Rx-1 has the same issue of a fixed (but superb) FL.
The Leica Vario X has a superb lens but slower than this one, no EVF and slow AF.

So for all the carping, this one really has potential for me. The price is very fair as it really has no competition in the LS space except smaller sensor cameras.

Sure you can any number cameras that shoot 4K but as I shoot no video it is a non-issue for me.
Everything it does have makes me happy.

 

[SecureGSM]

your example shooting at 1/200s: you do not need to use HSS mode when shooting at 1/200s unless you are a Canon 6D user. Thus you do NOT loose any flash power. If F11 was too narrow for you, then you may have consider using decent ND2 (1 stop) filter to slow down the aperture by a 1 stop and shoot at F8 instead. Yes, this will result in a somewhat higher flash output, but you loose very substantial 2.5+ stops of flash power as soon as you crossed out of the X-Sync territory. Hence ND2 is a lesser of two evils. slight colour cast is very easy to compensate for in post.

I just returned from a shoot for a magazine cover (lifestyle) where the subjects were facing away from bright sun. I had to shoot at f11 at 1/200 with ISO at 100. Flash shooting in a large umbrella to cover 4 people needs to be very powerful. ( was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units) With the G1 X mk3 I could have used f7.1 at 1/500 thus using far less powerful flash and still maintaining decent DOF.

 

[privatebydesign]

your example shooting at 1/200s: you do not need to use HSS mode when shooting at 1/200s unless you are a Canon 6D user. Thus you do NOT loose any flash power. If F11 was too narrow for you, then you may have consider using decent ND2 (1 stop) filter to slow down the aperture by a 1 stop and shoot at F8 instead. Yes, this will result in a somewhat higher flash output, but you loose very substantial 2.5+ stops of flash power as soon as you crossed out of the X-Sync territory. Hence ND2 is a lesser of two evils. slight colour cast is very easy to compensate for in post.

I just returned from a shoot for a magazine cover (lifestyle) where the subjects were facing away from bright sun. I had to shoot at f11 at 1/200 with ISO at 100. Flash shooting in a large umbrella to cover 4 people needs to be very powerful. ( was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units) With the G1 X mk3 I could have used f7.1 at 1/500 thus using far less powerful flash and still maintaining decent DOF.

He didn't say he went into HSS so your comparison of ND2 1 stop loss vs HSS 2.5 stop loss is irrelevant. At 1/200 he didn't go into HSS so he lost none of his 1200Ws flash power. The point is the ambient required f11 at 1/200 at 100 iso, he couldn't give the ambient less because to do so would either push the camera into HSS or affect the flash exposure. The flash exposure required 1200Ws at f11 at 100 iso. The only way to beat the equations and lower the flash power while maintaining ambient exposure level is to raise the shutter speed and have a faster sync speed.

Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway. People who thing a leaf shutter or global shutter will give them full power flash at high shutter speeds really are missing the concept of flash duration.

 

[CanonGuy]

my iphone 6 plus probably takes better/similar pics compared to these in such low light.

well done hitting on your foot canon

 

[neuroanatomist]

Given a choice, I'd at least prefer trolls with some intelligence. Alas.

 

[SecureGSM]

PBD,


OP said that he had to shoot at 1/200 and F11 and he HAD to use a much more powerful strobes to compensate for power loss:

... was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units..

.
please note OP logic: had to shoot with higher power strobes than usual.

Now, I said exactly what you said: I pointed out that he did not go into HSS and therefore he lost NO power. hence no need using more powerful 600 Ws strobes instead of usual 360 Ws Op used.

In the second part of my comment I pointed out that if OP would rather shoot at F8 rather than F11 aperture he used to avoid HSS territory, there is a simple solution to open up aperture by 1 stop and loose relatively small amount of flash power.

OP had to use F11 at 1/200s, ISO 100 instead of F7.3 at 1/500s, ISO - these are identical exposures.

repeat:

no loss of flash power at 1/200s
if F8 was required instead of F11, then ND2 application will allow to open aperture up to F8 at 1/200s but strobes will have to be cranked up by 1 stop

.. Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway..

Correct, GODOX AD360 II flash duration at full power is 1/300s. GODOX AD600B flash duration at full power is even longer: 1/220s.

your example shooting at 1/200s: you do not need to use HSS mode when shooting at 1/200s unless you are a Canon 6D user. Thus you do NOT loose any flash power. If F11 was too narrow for you, then you may have consider using decent ND2 (1 stop) filter to slow down the aperture by a 1 stop and shoot at F8 instead. Yes, this will result in a somewhat higher flash output, but you loose very substantial 2.5+ stops of flash power as soon as you crossed out of the X-Sync territory. Hence ND2 is a lesser of two evils. slight colour cast is very easy to compensate for in post.

I just returned from a shoot for a magazine cover (lifestyle) where the subjects were facing away from bright sun. I had to shoot at f11 at 1/200 with ISO at 100. Flash shooting in a large umbrella to cover 4 people needs to be very powerful. ( was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units) With the G1 X mk3 I could have used f7.1 at 1/500 thus using far less powerful flash and still maintaining decent DOF.

He didn't say he went into HSS so your comparison of ND2 1 stop loss vs HSS 2.5 stop loss is irrelevant. At 1/200 he didn't go into HSS so he lost none of his 1200Ws flash power. The point is the ambient required f11 at 1/200 at 100 iso, he couldn't give the ambient less because to do so would either push the camera into HSS or affect the flash exposure. The flash exposure required 1200Ws at f11 at 100 iso. The only way to beat the equations and lower the flash power while maintaining ambient exposure level is to raise the shutter speed and have a faster sync speed.

Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway. People who thing a leaf shutter or global shutter will give them full power flash at high shutter speeds really are missing the concept of flash duration.

 

[deleteme]

PBD,


OP said that he had to shoot at 1/200 and F11 and he HAD to use a much more powerful strobes to compensate for power loss:

... was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units..

.
please note OP logic: had to shoot with higher power strobes than usual.

Now, I said exactly what you said: I pointed out that he did not go into HSS and therefore he lost NO power. hence no need using more powerful 600 Ws strobes instead of usual 360 Ws Op used.

In the second part of my comment I pointed out that if OP would rather shoot at F8 rather than F11 aperture he used to avoid HSS territory, there is a simple solution to open up aperture by 1 stop and loose relatively small amount of flash power.

OP had to use F11 at 1/200s, ISO 100 instead of F7.3 at 1/500s, ISO - these are identical exposures.

repeat:

no loss of flash power at 1/200s
if F8 was required instead of F11, then ND2 application will allow to open aperture up to F8 at 1/200s but strobes will have to be cranked up by 1 stop

.. Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway..

Correct, GODOX AD360 II flash duration at full power is 1/300s. GODOX AD600B flash duration at full power is even longer: 1/220s.

your example shooting at 1/200s: you do not need to use HSS mode when shooting at 1/200s unless you are a Canon 6D user. Thus you do NOT loose any flash power. If F11 was too narrow for you, then you may have consider using decent ND2 (1 stop) filter to slow down the aperture by a 1 stop and shoot at F8 instead. Yes, this will result in a somewhat higher flash output, but you loose very substantial 2.5+ stops of flash power as soon as you crossed out of the X-Sync territory. Hence ND2 is a lesser of two evils. slight colour cast is very easy to compensate for in post.

I just returned from a shoot for a magazine cover (lifestyle) where the subjects were facing away from bright sun. I had to shoot at f11 at 1/200 with ISO at 100. Flash shooting in a large umbrella to cover 4 people needs to be very powerful. ( was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units) With the G1 X mk3 I could have used f7.1 at 1/500 thus using far less powerful flash and still maintaining decent DOF.

He didn't say he went into HSS so your comparison of ND2 1 stop loss vs HSS 2.5 stop loss is irrelevant. At 1/200 he didn't go into HSS so he lost none of his 1200Ws flash power. The point is the ambient required f11 at 1/200 at 100 iso, he couldn't give the ambient less because to do so would either push the camera into HSS or affect the flash exposure. The flash exposure required 1200Ws at f11 at 100 iso. The only way to beat the equations and lower the flash power while maintaining ambient exposure level is to raise the shutter speed and have a faster sync speed.

Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway. People who thing a leaf shutter or global shutter will give them full power flash at high shutter speeds really are missing the concept of flash duration.

The entire point of a leaf shutter is to avoid having to use small apertures and concomitant large flashes. DOF has nothing to do with it.
An ND filter just pushes my SS lower with still the same power demand from the flash.

With my Panasonic I can shoot at f5 or 5.6 and use a manual speedlight and throw light 20+ feet in bright sun.
FP with HSS is a power sapping strategy also.

 

[SecureGSM]

Please see my comments in blue below.

The entire point of a leaf shutter is to avoid having to use small apertures and concomitant large flashes. DOF has nothing to do with it.
A.M.: As PBD pointed out, flash duration at close to full power is quite long. (1/300s to 1/200s) see the numbers above. therefore, if your shutter is faster than flash recycle time, then your flash would not have enough time to deliver full discharge while the shutter still open.

secondly: your comment regarding avoiding usage of small apertures. If that has nothing to do with DOF, what it has to do with then? is that about DLA (Diffraction Limited Aperture)? if so, then in your example stopping down from F7.3 to F11 won't change much in terms of sharpness in practical terms.
If that is an issue though, I demonstrated how, based on your example, open up aperture to F8 instead of F11 and still avoid HSS.

An ND filter just pushes my SS lower with still the same power demand from the flash.
A.M.: in my example you keep the SS the same (1/200s), open up aperture by one stop and _increase_ flash output by 1 stop.
the point is: to avoid using HSS as that will cost you 2.5+ stop flash power rather than just 1 stop. The lesser of the two evils.
Please note: shooting at 1/500s is likely exceeds your flash recycle time. please see my comment above.

With my Panasonic I can shoot at f5 or 5.6 and use a manual speedlight and throw light 20+ feet in bright sun.
FP with HSS is a power sapping strategy also.

A.M.: you seems to overlooking that in my example I explained how to avoid HSS for the same reason: being a power sapping strategy, 2.5+ stops of flash power loss.

 

[merefield]

Will add my 2 cents here........

First, while I use a SLR for paying jobs I rent these days. For all personal shooting I've given up hauling big cameras, lenses, flashes etc. For two years now it's been a Canon G7X and now Mark II plus my iPhone 6s Plus.

The G1X III camera having an APS-C sensor in a G5X body is pretty amazing in my book.
... SNIP ...
I'll bet many will buy this camera for the small size and larger sensor. Hopefully the 3X zoom lens and features delivers great photos and full reviews will tell.

To each his own!

What is the point of a larger sensor if you cripple it with a slow lens?!

Will it get you good low-light performance? - NO

Will it give you a creative feature unavailable on cheaper compacts, ie Bokeh? NO!

If you can't get this camera to offer decent Bokeh and/or low light performance its pointless spending more.

You say IQ, what do you mean by that? A camera less than half this price can give you decent IQ but what you need from a more expensive camera is more tools to make shots you couldn't on the smaller camera. If you cripple it so you limit this flexibility so its the same as the smaller camera there is absolutely no point in buying it and wasting your money.

What's the point of decent IQ if all your pictures are cluttered with background objects you cannot isolate your subject from?

 

[Mikehit]

Will add my 2 cents here........

First, while I use a SLR for paying jobs I rent these days. For all personal shooting I've given up hauling big cameras, lenses, flashes etc. For two years now it's been a Canon G7X and now Mark II plus my iPhone 6s Plus.

The G1X III camera having an APS-C sensor in a G5X body is pretty amazing in my book.
... SNIP ...
I'll bet many will buy this camera for the small size and larger sensor. Hopefully the 3X zoom lens and features delivers great photos and full reviews will tell.

To each his own!

What is the point of a larger sensor if you cripple it with a slow lens?! How is it 'crippling' the camera? A fast lens has two purposes = shallow DOF and faster shutter speed. A better camera gives higher ISO and faster shutte speed. Landscape photography usually needs neither

Will it get you good low-light performance? - NO but the camera will. For a decently long DOF a 'fast' lens serves no purpose

Will it give you a creative feature unavailable on cheaper compacts, ie Bokeh? NO! Yes. Sorry, that should have been YES!! The very fact you are using the lens on a larger sensor automatically gives you more creative options

If you can't get this camera to offer decent Bokeh and/or low light performance its pointless spending more.So the only purpose of a camera is to have nice bokeh?

You say IQ, what do you mean by that? A camera less than half this price can give you decent IQ but what you need from a more expensive camera is more tools to make shots you couldn't on the smaller camera. If you cripple it so you limit this flexibility so its the same as the smaller camera there is absolutely no point in buying it and wasting your money. Bullshit. Someone who concentrates heavily on landscape or portraits or wildlife may not need 'flexibility'

What's the point of decent IQ if all your pictures are cluttered with background objects you cannot isolate your subject from? Wanting a shallow DOF is a relatively modern phenomenon - the problem used ot be you could not get enough! I had better tell the Ansel Adams estate to scrap all his photos with their worthless deep DOF

 

[merefield]

Bullshit. Someone who concentrates heavily on landscape or portraits or wildlife may not need 'flexibility'

What's the point of decent IQ if all your pictures are cluttered with background objects you cannot isolate your subject from? Wanting a shallow DOF is a relatively modern phenomenon - the problem used ot be you could not get enough! I had better tell the Ansel Adams estate to scrap all his photos with their worthless deep DOF

OK, let's look at this - landscape - this 24mm lens is using a crop sensor, so its equivalent to a crop of a 36mm lens on a FF - ballpark landscape lens, so ok there. Ansel might complain about the sensor size though! Ansel Adams is not the perfect comparison because he used large (read MASSIVE) format cameras. On balance, a pass though, I admit.

Portraits - for a serious normal portrait you'd want this zoomed all the way in - this is about a 105mm equivalent - that's ok but with these F stops - 2 stops worse than FF and at the narrowest max aperture because you are zoomed right in so equivalent to F11!! ... sorry but its not going to cut it. Portrait photographers are going to run away, even part time ones. I can't see that given any isolation to the subjects face at all, so they better be standing quite a distance from their background! Bokeh addicts definitely need not apply.

Wildlife - you'd again want this zoomed in and at high shutter speeds - better hope for a bright day because you will be at best F11 and getting no closer than a 105mm will get you.

So ok, it might make a good travel camera, but I'm not convinced on flexibility.

 

[neuroanatomist]

OK, let's look at this - landscape - this 24mm lens is using a crop sensor, so its equivalent to a crop of a 36mm lens on a FF - don't know about you but that's not very wide and its a restricted FOV. Ansel might complain! But sure you might get a nice picture, just not very much of the landscape. That might not be a problem, or it could be if you can't get far enough away. Ansel Adams is not a brilliant comparison because he used MASSIVE format cameras.

First off, you seem confused. The G1X III has a 15-45mm lens, so approximately 24-70mm FF equivalent FoV. Incidentally, simple math can be used to convert focal lengths from lenses used on 'massive' format cameras to their 35mm FoV equivalents (although the view camera movements don't translate, even with TS lenses). FWIW, Ansel Adams typically shot with 35mm FoV equivalents of 28-77mm, i.e. pretty much the exact FoV range of the G1X III.

Wildlife - you'd again want this zoomed in and at high shutter speeds - better hope for a bright day because you will be at best F11 and getting no closer than a 105mm will get you.

You seem even more confused here...the 'crop factor' does not affect exposure (and while it does affect image noise, those differences are minimally perceived at lower ISOs).

 

[Mikehit]

Bullshit. Someone who concentrates heavily on landscape or portraits or wildlife may not need 'flexibility'

What's the point of decent IQ if all your pictures are cluttered with background objects you cannot isolate your subject from? Wanting a shallow DOF is a relatively modern phenomenon - the problem used ot be you could not get enough! I had better tell the Ansel Adams estate to scrap all his photos with their worthless deep DOF

OK, let's look at this - landscape - this 24mm lens is using a crop sensor, so its equivalent to a crop of a 36mm lens on a FF - ballpark landscape lens, so ok there. Ansel might complain about the sensor size though! Ansel Adams is not the perfect comparison because he used large (read MASSIVE) format cameras. On balance, a pass though, I admit.

Portraits - for a serious normal portrait you'd want this zoomed all the way in - this is about a 105mm equivalent - that's ok but with these F stops - 2 stops worse than FF and at the narrowest max aperture because you are zoomed right in so equivalent to F11!! ... sorry but its not going to cut it. Portrait photographers are going to run away, even part time ones. I can't see that given any isolation to the subjects face at all, so they better be standing quite a distance from their background! Bokeh addicts definitely need not apply.

Wildlife - you'd again want this zoomed in and at high shutter speeds - better hope for a bright day because you will be at best F11 and getting no closer than a 105mm will get you.

So ok, it might make a good travel camera, but I'm not convinced on flexibility.

I am not doubting the flexibilty issue - just your blanket comment "What is the point of a larger sensor if you cripple it with a slow lens?!"
Flexibility is there only to maximise its use to the maximum number of people and the maximum number of situations. If you don't use the tools that make it 'flexible' then those tools do not make it 'more flexible' for you. And if a compact camera is all you can (or want to) carry at that time, then a bigger sensor give you more flexibility than a smaller sensor.

 

[merefield]

OK, let's look at this - landscape - this 24mm lens is using a crop sensor, so its equivalent to a crop of a 36mm lens on a FF

First off, you seem confused. The G1X III has a 15-45mm lens, so approximately 24-70mm FF equivalent FoV.

Wildlife - you'd again want this zoomed in and at high shutter speeds - better hope for a bright day because you will be at best F11 and getting no closer than a 105mm will get you.

You seem even more confused here...the 'crop factor' does not affect exposure (and while it does affect image noise, those differences are minimally perceived at lower ISOs).

I didn't realise Canon has quoted FF equivalent focal lengths here? I had assumed they hadn't scaled the F numbers.

On F numbers are you saying that this lens is F2.8 at 20mm equivalent - ie lets as much light in as a FF 20mm lens @ F2.8? That just doesn't sound right, especially as DoF will not be the same.

Check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=255&v=f5zN6NVx-hY

Thank you

 

[neuroanatomist]

OK, let's look at this - landscape - this 24mm lens is using a crop sensor, so its equivalent to a crop of a 36mm lens on a FF

First off, you seem confused. The G1X III has a 15-45mm lens, so approximately 24-70mm FF equivalent FoV.

Wildlife - you'd again want this zoomed in and at high shutter speeds - better hope for a bright day because you will be at best F11 and getting no closer than a 105mm will get you.

You seem even more confused here...the 'crop factor' does not affect exposure (and while it does affect image noise, those differences are minimally perceived at lower ISOs).

I didn't realise Canon has quoted FF equivalent focal lengths here? I had assumed they hadn't scaled the F numbers.

On F numbers are you saying that this lens is F2.8 at 20mm equivalent - ie lets as much light in as a FF 20mm lens @ F2.8? That just doesn't sound right, especially as DoF will not be the same.

Check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=255&v=f5zN6NVx-hY

Thank you

Once more into the breach, dear friends, once more.

The lens is 15-45mm f/2.8-5.6. It's printed right on the front.

Those numbers describe physical properties of the lens, e.g. at 15mm and f/2.8, the iris diaphragm diameter is 5.35mm. That determines the amount of light that passes through the lens. I don't know the variable aperture progression of the G1X III, so I can't say for sure that at 20mm it will still be f/2.8. But at 16mm, it is almost certainly still f/2.8, and that will let in the same amount of light per unit area as the 16-35mm f/2.8L III at 16mm f/2.8. Light per unit are is what determines exposure. Sure, the FF lens will let in more total light, because it has a bigger image circle (total light = light per unit area x area of image circle or sensor). But it's the light per unit area that determines exposure. Total light captured is inversely proportional to image noise (a bigger sensor captures more total light, so the noise at a given ISO is less).

An example: say you meter a scene on the G1X III at 16mm f/2.8 at ISO 100 get 1/500 s. If you meter the same scene with the 16-35/2.8L at 16mm f/2.8 on either an EOS M, a 7DII, or a 5DIV at ISO 100, you'll get 1/500 s.

The 'crop factor' effect on DoF occurs if you match the framing to a FF sensor – on the smaller sensor, you either need to use a wider focal length or move further from the subject, and either will give deeper DoF. If you don't match framing (i.e. shoot at the same distance, focal length, and aperture setting) on crop and FF, the crop sensor will actually yield slightly shallower DoF (and a narrower FoV)...that's due the different circle of confusion, but it's probably best to not enter that circle at this point.

So, to properly state the FF equivalent of the G1X III lens, one would state 24-72mm and f/4.5-9 in terms of DoF for the same framing. But the lens is still f/2.8-5.6, that's physics.

I will admit that closed the clip you linked as soon as I saw who created it. Going to Tony Northrup for technical information is like going to a gas station mini-mart for sushi: even if you find some there, the quality is low and consuming it is a bad idea.

 

[Jopa]

Going to Tony Northrup for technical information is like going to a gas station mini-mart for sushi: even if you find some there, the quality is low and consuming it is a bad idea.

That was the BEST analogy EVER +10000000000

 

[merefield]

So, to properly state the FF equivalent of the G1X III lens, one would state 24-72mm and f/4.5-9 in terms of DoF for the same framing. But the lens is still f/2.8-5.6, that's physics.

I will admit that closed the clip you linked as soon as I saw who created it. Going to Tony Northrup for technical information is like going to a gas station mini-mart for sushi: even if you find some there, the quality is low and consuming it is a bad idea.

Thanks for the explanation, and to be fair Mr. Northrup gave the same explanation.

I guess it comes down to this - the wider FOV of FF allows you to get in closer for same framing, leading to shallower DoF at same aperture? To reach this shallower DoF further back with a APS-C you'd need to open the aperture further. Unfortunately there is an upper limit.

Cheers!

 

[deleteme]

PBD,


OP said that he had to shoot at 1/200 and F11 and he HAD to use a much more powerful strobes to compensate for power loss:

... was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units..

.
please note OP logic: had to shoot with higher power strobes than usual.

Now, I said exactly what you said: I pointed out that he did not go into HSS and therefore he lost NO power. hence no need using more powerful 600 Ws strobes instead of usual 360 Ws Op used.

In the second part of my comment I pointed out that if OP would rather shoot at F8 rather than F11 aperture he used to avoid HSS territory, there is a simple solution to open up aperture by 1 stop and loose relatively small amount of flash power.

OP had to use F11 at 1/200s, ISO 100 instead of F7.3 at 1/500s, ISO - these are identical exposures.

repeat:

no loss of flash power at 1/200s
if F8 was required instead of F11, then ND2 application will allow to open aperture up to F8 at 1/200s but strobes will have to be cranked up by 1 stop

.. Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway..

Correct, GODOX AD360 II flash duration at full power is 1/300s. GODOX AD600B flash duration at full power is even longer: 1/220s.

your example shooting at 1/200s: you do not need to use HSS mode when shooting at 1/200s unless you are a Canon 6D user. Thus you do NOT loose any flash power. If F11 was too narrow for you, then you may have consider using decent ND2 (1 stop) filter to slow down the aperture by a 1 stop and shoot at F8 instead. Yes, this will result in a somewhat higher flash output, but you loose very substantial 2.5+ stops of flash power as soon as you crossed out of the X-Sync territory. Hence ND2 is a lesser of two evils. slight colour cast is very easy to compensate for in post.

I just returned from a shoot for a magazine cover (lifestyle) where the subjects were facing away from bright sun. I had to shoot at f11 at 1/200 with ISO at 100. Flash shooting in a large umbrella to cover 4 people needs to be very powerful. ( was using two 600 ws units as opposed to my usual very compact 360 ws units) With the G1 X mk3 I could have used f7.1 at 1/500 thus using far less powerful flash and still maintaining decent DOF.

He didn't say he went into HSS so your comparison of ND2 1 stop loss vs HSS 2.5 stop loss is irrelevant. At 1/200 he didn't go into HSS so he lost none of his 1200Ws flash power. The point is the ambient required f11 at 1/200 at 100 iso, he couldn't give the ambient less because to do so would either push the camera into HSS or affect the flash exposure. The flash exposure required 1200Ws at f11 at 100 iso. The only way to beat the equations and lower the flash power while maintaining ambient exposure level is to raise the shutter speed and have a faster sync speed.

Mind you flash duration times are pretty long at higher powers so once you go over 1/350 sec the shutter starts to limit your flash exposure power anyway. People who thing a leaf shutter or global shutter will give them full power flash at high shutter speeds really are missing the concept of flash duration.

The ENTIRE point of a leaf shutter is that you can use a lower power flash and open up your aperture and still balance the exposure by boosting your shutter speed to 1/500 or even higher.
I have been using leaf shutter cameras since the early 70's and can tell you that they exceed FP shutters when it comes to flash ALL THE TIME.
Hasselblad LS lenses had a tab that you set to the EV. Once set, the aperture and SS were linked and changing one parameter changed the other. Thus you never changed exposure, only the Fstop/SS combination. It was brilliant for fill flash.

ND filters are an annoying kludge that has become popular because of the infatuation with shallow DOF. You still need mad flash power which means you have to bring heavier gear which is a big pain in the butt.

I regularly shoot a leaf shutter camera with ISO 125 at f4 and 1/640 sec and can have a small speedlight throw great fill 15 feet at half power. This cannot be done with a DSLR and a speedlight.