And that is a matter of priorities. The longer zoom is a much slower lens. For my travel pictures, having an f/1.8-2.8 lens is more important than having a longer zoom. Now perhaps having f/2.8 at 200mm equivalent would be the best of both worlds, but then it would be harder to make it fit in my pocket. I don't do vlogging, and can't imagine that I'd ever want to.As a travel camera I think the 24-200mm equivalent lens is a better option than a 24-70mm. For a vlog'ing camera it's probably not.
On the other side, I wouldn't want to be limited to 70mm, either. The 100mm equivalent of the G7X II or III works fine for me. I'm much more likely to wish I had something wider than 24mm than to wish for something longer than 100mm when I'm traveling. For wider, I make shots to stitch together once I get home. For a little more telephoto, I can crop, up to a point, of course. The G7X II replaced an S120 as my travel camera. It would zoom to 120mm equivalent. I have not missed the difference. There is enough more resolution with the 1" sensor so that I can crop the pictures tighter than the 120mm would give me, and can still have more pixels than with the S120 shot's whole frame when zoomed in. Other folks will want different zoom ranges, and that's fine.
Anyway, I don't need to rush into this purchase (or nonpurchase). If by October when I'm traveling again I'm that the III (or the 5 II) will be advantageous for me, then I might make a purchase. I'll still watch these threads and look at reviews over the next month or two. Otherwise, I'll be happy to tromp around Italy and sail to some Greek islands using the G7X II to document the trip but not get in my way. I might have to restrain my residual amount of GAS, however.
Thanks to you and to the others who are helping provide ideas and links to consider.