New PowerShot G1 X Sample Images

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=8544"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=8544" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=8544"></a></div>
<strong>From LensTip

</strong>The folks at LensTip have posted full sized sample from the just announced Canon PowerShot G1 X. They took shots at various ISO and aperture settings.</p>
<p>All the sample images look very good to me. There’s some NR smearing at higher ISO, but that is to be expected.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lenstip.com/1962-news-Canon_PowerShot_G1_X_-_sample_images.html"><strong>View sample images</strong></a></p>
<p><em><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/838600-REG/Canon_G1X_PowerShot_G1_X_Digital.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296">Preorder the PowerShot G1 X from B&H for $799</a></em></p>
<p><em><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r </strong></em></p>

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The images look similar to those i've seen elsewhere, maybe a tad better. Certainly a far cry from my wifes G11 which she really likes. I've pre-ordered, I could use it this week, since I have some low light no flash theatrical photography coming up.

I usually use my 5D MK II at ISO 3200, and only a few at 6400 where I have no choice. LR 3 has improved those high ISO images enough that I might be happy with ISO 6400, but I still avoid it, detail is definitely missing. My 7D is limited to ISO 1600, maybe stretched to ISO 2000 in a emergency.

The printed images look fine at even high ISO, of course.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Now, I notice that DPR has sample images, so Canon must be giving out pre-production cameras and allowing the publication of images.

I think its going to be a hit in two areas.

1. G series Point and shoot users wanting better images but not wanting to fool around with interchangable lenses

2. Those with big DSLR's wanting something smaller to carry on a walk-around or vacation and still get high quality images.

 

[arn]

The images in the last series show significant smearing in corner/border areas at 36mm. More than is healthy for any lens or camera, IMO. The shots taken at 15mm and 60mm seem good to me. I definitely would not be very happy with such performance in any lens or camera. I've seen bahaviour like this in the 17-85 and didn't like it then either.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The images in the last series show significant smearing in corner/border areas at 36mm. More than is healthy for any lens or camera, IMO.

Chuck Westfall likened the performance of the G1X's lens to that of the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, and that lens is mediocre at best, downright poor at some focal lengths. It's a big sensor in a not-that-big body, and it still has a 4x zoom. Compromises had to be made, and unfortunately, it may be that lens IQ was one of those compromises.

 

[pwp]

DP Review has a gallery of G1X sample images shot with a pre-release camera.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/16/Canon_G1X_Sample_Images

Noise right up to 12,800 iso looks remarkably well controlled, with just a small dynamic range reduction evident while toggling through the 100, 400, 800 and 12,800 iso samples.

Not so good is the apparent sharpness of most of the files. It's probably worth reserving judgement until we can see more controlled tests, plus real-world user responses when the G1X starts shipping in meaningful numbers.

I really want this to be a great, highly useable camera. After a disappointing year with a G3 ten years ago, I've been holding off returning to the G's until it shipped with a decent size sensor. And here it is, but with a potentially compromised lens.

Paul Wright

 

[whatta]

DP Review has a gallery of G1X sample images shot with a pre-release camera.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/16/Canon_G1X_Sample_Images

Noise right up to 12,800 iso looks remarkably well controlled, with just a small dynamic range reduction evident while toggling through the 100, 400, 800 and 12,800 iso samples.

I really want this to be a great, highly useable camera.

I hope it is good too, since it can be a sign what the new rebel (or new apsc sensor + digic5) will be able to do.

 

[pwp]

Chuck Westfall likened the performance of the G1X's lens to that of the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, and that lens is mediocre at best, downright poor at some focal lengths.

Oh oh...Chuck may regret having made that comment, it's not exactly a great endorsement. We'll see won't we?

Paul Wright

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The images in the last series show significant smearing in corner/border areas at 36mm. More than is healthy for any lens or camera, IMO. The shots taken at 15mm and 60mm seem good to me. I definitely would not be very happy with such performance in any lens or camera. I've seen bahaviour like this in the 17-85 and didn't like it then either.

I noted that, at ISO's 6400 and higher. Thats a pretty high ISO, and NR can cause this. I looked at the several other sets of high ISO images on the internet and did not see the smearing, so It could be the developing or the particular pre-production camera. I'm hoping to see more images.

 

[Policar]

On preview's original sample images there is some serious smearing on high frequency detail (fur, etc.) even at 800ISO and possibly beginning at 400ISO. But the images look great otherwise. Nikon has long employed more aggressive NR than Canon and been praised for it so it's no surprise seeing some sacrifice in detail as Canon makes up the difference.

The video...yikes. Skew might be improved over the 7D (possibly due to the smaller sensor, possibly due to something else) but the aliasing is really bad! I'm no longer so sure I want a t4i for video...

As for performance along the lines of the 18-55mm IS, what's wrong with that? That's a fantastic little lens, a bit of CA and weaker at full telephoto, but overall a remarkable performer.

 

[pwp]

As for performance along the lines of the 18-55mm IS, what's wrong with that? That's a fantastic little lens, a bit of CA and weaker at full telephoto, but overall a remarkable performer.

I'm pretty sure the lens Chuck Westfall was referring to was the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6.

Regarding the EF-S 18-55is it's one of those YMMV lenses. I got one for my daughter for her 20D and it's surprisingly good, way better than I was expecting.

Paul Wright

 

[Policar]

Ah, my bad... Never used the 18-135mm IS.

The 18-55mm IS is a personal favorite, though I know others dislike it. At 18mm, I might prefer it to the 17-55mm f2.8. Better IS, better bokeh, insignificantly slower, and so small....but not quite as sharp.

 

[K-amps]

Not in the market for a compact but I was curious to see the Noise on these new sensors.

Below is a 100% crop of one of the images posted at ISO 12,800.

I did a bit of NR other PP (in PS elements) and got a very usable image. I am impressed. I cannot get this level of clarity from my 5Dc at even ISO 800 (This is almost 4 stops better performance... is the right?) . If the 5D3 comes out soon, it's going to be a sweet bump-up in IQ for me ;D

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The images were, and processed in-camera. I'd like to see raw images. The digic V processor has improved in camera NR quite a bit, but I expect that most external raw software can recover more detail and have less smearing.

i'm interested, for my wife to replace her G11 with something that does better in low light and has all around better IQ for walk-around photos. I'll try one when they reach Best Buy or our local camera store, Onecall.com / Huppins.