UPDATED: Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,270
2,057
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
HTML:
We’ve received some new specifications for the upcoming Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III, which is scheduled to be announced in mid October. We’ve been told to think EOS M5 with a fixed lens.</p>
<p><strong>Updated Specifications & Corrections: </strong>(Update in bold)</p>

<ul>
<li>24.2mp APS-C Sensor</li>
<li>DIGIC 7</li>
<li>24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em></li>
<li>Dynamic IS</li>
<li>Touch AF</li>
<li>Dust & water resistant</li>
<li><strong>Lens hood LH-DC 110</strong></li>
<li><strong>Water proof case WP-DC56 </strong>(<a href="http://www.nokishita-camera.com/2017/10/powershot-g1-x-mark-iii.html">via Nokishita)</a></li>
</ul>
<p><del>We still don’t know if the PowerShot G1 X Mark III will come with an built-in EVF or not.</del></p>
<p>We’ll update this post if we hear anything else.</p>
<p><strong>*Update*

</strong>We’ve confirmed that the PowerShot G1 X Mark III will come with a built-in OLED EVF.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
688
852
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

"Dust & water resistant"

That's the best news. Could be a great travel camera if they manage to keep the size down.
 

AvTvM

EOS R6
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

hehehe. There are no miracles in physics and optics. ;D
A 15-44/2.8 - 5.6 lens [with f/2.8 from 15-18mm] is much more feasible in G1X form factor than a 15-75 ... :)
 

gmon750

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Jan 30, 2015
128
82
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

I was really really hoping for a better lens range that 24-70mm. My Powershot S100 has as 24-120mm which I was hoping the first iteration of rumors about this camera having the same lens was accurate.

Still... It's looking like a great camera and I'm excited to see it in person when it comes out!
 

AvTvM

EOS R6
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

EOS M5 with a bolted-on EF-M 15-45. :)
 

YuengLinger

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,516
1,961
USA
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Very disappointing focal lengths and long-end aperture. No thanks if these specs are true.
 

minaz

I'm New Here
Feb 10, 2017
10
1
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Well almost certainly better sensor than the II, but interesting trade-off in the lens:
24-120mm f/2-3.9 vs 24-70 f/2.8-5.6
In the first instance, a very versatile do-everything range going from wide to mid-telephoto good for landscapes, interiors, portraits, and in the second instance, the standard "wedding zoom" meaning good wide angle to decent short telephoto for portraiture as long as not too tight in (not the best for head shots). I guess if one did not need the telephoto end of things, this isn't too bad. I can see missing a few shots during travel where you might have wanted to zoom further in. As for the aperture, f/5.6 by 70mm certainly is a tad disappointing.
Other factors: what is dynamic IS? Is this the video-only IS again?
Better (DP)AF is nice though I must admit - the old model's big Achilles heel was the slow AF.
Still, considering I already have the waterproofing kit and EVF for the II, I'm not sure this is enough to make me want to switch. After all, if the APS-C sensor was that important, I'd still use the M5 and a faster lens. If not, then the II makes more sense. Bad trade-off, IMHO.
 

Proscribo

EOS RP
Jan 21, 2015
266
148
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Canon Rumors said:
24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>
Maybe the aperture is 35mm equiv. too. ???

So it'd be 15-44mm f/1.8-3.5... I mean, otherwise it's a bit sad IMO. I'd rather go with M5 and a couple of lenses.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,828
4,283
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Proscribo said:
Canon Rumors said:
24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>
Maybe the aperture is 35mm equiv. too. ???

So it'd be 15-44mm f/1.8-3.5... I mean, otherwise it's a bit sad IMO. I'd rather go with M5 and a couple of lenses.

Wishful thinking...
 
Sep 30, 2017
3
0
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Proscribo said:
Canon Rumors said:
24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>
Maybe the aperture is 35mm equiv. too. ???

So it'd be 15-44mm f/1.8-3.5... I mean, otherwise it's a bit sad IMO. I'd rather go with M5 and a couple of lenses.

I think you're correct and this will be the 15-43mm f2 to f4 patent that some have suggested would be the new G1X iii lens. If it really is f2.8 to f5.6 that is just sad.
 

okaro

EOS 90D
Oct 10, 2015
134
15
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

2.9x zoom would be the worst zoom range on any Canon compact camera since 2006. The f/2.8 wide angle aperture is effectively 0.4 fstops worse than with Mark II. On the tele end it is 0.5 fstops worse and this does not even count the much reduced zoom range. I fact the maximum aperture would be just 7.8 mm, much less than with G7 X (13 mm). Sure one gets twice the megapixels but they are not everything. There has to be some extra bonus like reduced size. EOS M100 with the 15-45 mm is 430 grams, G1 X Mark II is 550 grams. This has to be in the 400-450 gram range to have a chance.
 

Sharlin

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 26, 2015
1,371
1,314
Turku, Finland
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Eh, it was pretty clear that a bigger sensor and a bigger lens would bring lower f numbers. An APS-C 15-45 f/2.8, not to mention something ridiculous like f/1.8-3.5, would be huge and hilariously expensive.
 

Proscribo

EOS RP
Jan 21, 2015
266
148
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Sharlin said:
Eh, it was pretty clear that a bigger sensor and a bigger lens would bring lower f numbers. An APS-C 15-45 f/2.8, not to mention something ridiculous like f/1.8-3.5, would be huge and hilariously expensive.
Sure, but if it's a 15-45mm f/2.8-5.6... it's effectively worse than what G1X II has, hell it's actually worse than G7X II!
 

HaroldC3

EOS 90D
Jul 6, 2014
120
44
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

The only questions left are will it have 4K and how large will it be? I'd love to see Panasonic come out with an lx100 ii with a 20mp sensor.
 

powershot2012

EOS RP
Aug 3, 2012
236
5
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Not seeing the point of this camera now given the lens speed and the price Canon will be charging.

Sony a6000 with kit lens will be smaller, lighter, cheaper, and better all around.

Canonitis
 

michi

EOS RP
Jul 26, 2011
275
12
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

70mm at 5.6 is just terrible. I wouldn't buy this camera just for that fact.
 

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,916
822
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Sony 6500 with Sigma 30mm 1.8. Heaven.
 

AvTvM

EOS R6
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

would be rather unexpected, but quite funny, if a Powershot would be the first APS-C sensored Canon camera with 4k video ... luckily I don't care at all about video recording. ;D
 

Act444

EOS R
May 4, 2011
1,134
209
Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

Interesting move, but I'd have to say that personally, for me, 5.6 at 70mm is too slow to be stuck with on a fixed-lens camera. That would be the equivalent of the 15-45mm which is f6.3 at the long end, which, in my shooting experience, is quite restrictive (but serves its purpose in the right scenarios). But the key difference is that the lens is removable! One redeeming feature might be if the IQ is superior to the M + 15-45mm, though.

A FF Powershot with a fixed 35 or 50mm would be something I'd look into. Basically the Canon equivalent of Sony's RX1R.