Canon Canon G1X III: Finally, a huge step forward for the G X series ...

Part of my problem with this camera is that I have an EM5 ii and a compact zoom. The G1X iii is small but not much smaller than the combination I have. I also have an RX100 iii, which has lousy ergs but is pocketable. I feel like the G1X iii might perform neither task as well as these two cameras. Now, if I didn't have these two cameras the situation might be different.
 
I wonder to what extent this camera will have Awesome image quality - which for 1300usd, I would expect. It might have it in good light, but the sensor's not the best at dynamic range. And the lens slows down quickly above 24mm equivalent, leaving me to wonder about the low light performance relative to, for instance, a Sony RX10. Ofcourse it is much smaller, which is enticing, but then it doesn't have real tele reach.

I'm having some trouble fitting it in my image of an ideal travel set-up, except for a "pocketable 1-camera set-up" scenario... which is actually a very relevant travel scenario, but it probably doesn't fulfill my desires, and having this besides another camera probably leaves me with either a lot of overlap, or a lot of gaps...
 
This new camera is a dead ringer for Canon's G5X... except they swapped out the one-inch sensor for an APS-C chip and reduced the lens aperture and focal length to make it all fit. I'm sure that it works well but is it that much smaller than, say, a Nikon D3400 with kit lens?
 
This new camera is a dead ringer for Canon's G5X... except they swapped out the one-inch sensor for an APS-C chip and reduced the lens aperture and focal length to make it all fit. I'm sure that it works well but is it that much smaller than, say, a Nikon D3400 with kit lens?
Considerably so - in fact, it's smaller than even most :mu43: cameras with kit lenses. You can look here:

Compact Camera Meter
(I put the 22mm f/2 on the M5 because Camerasize.com doesn't list the 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 - that lens is considerably bigger than the Sony 16-50mm, though, yet optically no better ...)

The EVF adds bulk to the G1X III, but the camera as a whole is impressively compact - about comparable with the LX100, but the "DSLR" gestalt makes it look bigger. I find the comparison with the Sony A6000 most interesting; that's a much cheaper camera and has a very nice sensor and interchangable lenses - but the 16-50mm pancake zoom really is nothing to write home about, so if I'd go for that camera (or the A6300 - price-wise, it'd come closer to the G1 X III), I'd end up with a lens that'd make me regret my choice, and I'd end up adding more lenses, nixing the size advantage; besides, I'd lose weather-resistance with the 16-50mm at least. As pancake zooms go, the Panasonic 12-32mm is a lot better than the Sony EZ, and even the less-than-perfect Olympus 14-42mm EZ looks about competitive; the Panasonic 14-42mm PZ is a bit better ... But none of the lenses gets me a 24MP APS-C sensor with Dual Pixel AF in a weather-resistant body. So, if the built-in 15-45mm is very good at 15mm f/2.8, it'll already be an interesting alternative, maybe even to the GR, right out of the box; even more so if the optics perform well at 45mm f/5.6; yes, it's a bit of a pity that it's not brighter, but it has Canon's impressive I.S., so if the lens is a solid performer, I'll take compactness over lens speed in this case.

Anecdotally, I've shot a lot recently with an old Leica AF-C1 film camera - 40mm f/2.8 and 80mm f/5.6 (by tele-converter!); very usable when out and about, less so indoors, but still feasible at 40mm. ISO fixed (at 100, 200, 400, usually), of course ... After reading this thread, I think that sometimes, we simply worry too much. It's an interesting camera at the very least. If it turns out to be less than stellar, so be it - and in that case, its price will kill it as a product. But I'll watch for reviews on trusted sites with great anticipation.

M.
 
Because of my upcoming overseas trip at the end of the year, I've been mulling over small gear setups that would be suitable. A camera like the G1X III would meet a number of criteria but lose a few others, namely portrait and low light performance.

A Panasonic GM1 with the kit 12-32 and tiny Olympus 25/1.8 and 45/1.8 is smaller than the G1X III, has longer reach and decent portrait abilities. And I already own that setup so there is no extra expense, haha. There is a lot of existing gear that would be decent and less expensive alternatives if a 24mp aps-c sensor is not a primary criterion.
 
It looks smaller, but not really enough to make much of a difference. It's not pocket-able, for example.
True, but then, only the GR really is (of the APS-C compacts), and that camera really doesn't like pocket lint ... (or does like it too much, judging by the documented cases of it sucking it up ...). I carry my cameras in my jacket pockets throughout most of the year; summer demands a small bag or a belt pouch - feasible.

M.
 
True, but then, only the GR really is (of the APS-C compacts), and that camera really doesn't like pocket lint ... (or does like it too much, judging by the documented cases of it sucking it up ...). I carry my cameras in my jacket pockets throughout most of the year; summer demands a small bag or a belt pouch - feasible.

M.
No question, and it’s a more versatile camera than the GR. OTOH, I could put the EM5 II or X-t10 in a jacket pocket and did during the last two singles-in-January challenges. I’m just saying it’s not as tempting if you already own some small mirror less bodies.
 
Because of my upcoming overseas trip at the end of the year, I've been mulling over small gear setups that would be suitable. A camera like the G1X III would meet a number of criteria but lose a few others, namely portrait and low light performance.

A Panasonic GM1 with the kit 12-32 and tiny Olympus 25/1.8 and 45/1.8 is smaller than the G1X III, has longer reach and decent portrait abilities. And I already own that setup so there is no extra expense, haha. There is a lot of existing gear that would be decent and less expensive alternatives if a 24mp aps-c sensor is not a primary criterion.

The G1X III is a great excuse to buy a GM5!
 
The GM5 never impressed me, in fact I just sold mine as I was never using it. I found it too small to be comfortable in use and the sensor was a letdown compared to my Ricoh GR.

The new Canon looks far more interesting, larger EVF, larger sensor, less fiddly controls, articulated screen. The main question to me is if the lens quality justifies the price, if it does I'll be very tempted to pick one up.
 
Y'know, the last Canon I owned was a G7, which I upgraded to G9 spec. via firmware. The big advantages to me were the relative compactness and the rangefinder styling complete with OVF.

It met a need for me at the time; I was a Leica user, predominantly M and there were times when I wanted the flexibility of a zoom and the relative cheapness and concomitant low risk of a digital compact.

I did a bit of browsing last night and discovered that the G line as I knew it is no more, ending as it did with the G12, which itself had compromises compared to it's predecessors.

This is apparently the nearest modern equivalent.

o_O
 
No question, and it’s a more versatile camera than the GR. OTOH, I could put the EM5 II or X-t10 in a jacket pocket and did during the last two singles-in-January challenges. I’m just saying it’s not as tempting if you already own some small mirror less bodies.
Basically, I agree - but I don't own a weather-sealed :mu43: body. The E-M5 II does continue to look interesting, but good as it is, the Nikon D5500 still beats my E-M10 in terms of IQ, and now the G1X III offers a comparable (if not completely equal) sensor in a small, well featured package ... I'm not even saying I'll buy the camera, but I'm very positive about the general direction and feat Canon pulled of here. And I can't wait for more information about the GX1 III's lens IQ.

M.
 
Basically, I agree - but I don't own a weather-sealed :mu43: body. The E-M5 II does continue to look interesting, but good as it is, the Nikon D5500 still beats my E-M10 in terms of IQ, and now the G1X III offers a comparable (if not completely equal) sensor in a small, well featured package ... I'm not even saying I'll buy the camera, but I'm very positive about the general direction and feat Canon pulled of here. And I can't wait for more information about the GX1 III's lens IQ.

M.
As a photo enthusiast i’m Interested in general. It’s probably a really nice little camera.
 
I've been giving this camera a lot of thought. A small, APS-C weather sealed camera with a fixed lens for biking and hiking has been on my wish list for a long time. I'm keeping a close eye out for reviews; a couple of early hands-on previews have been favorable, and I'm going to rent one as soon as they are available. I have considered the idea of letting go of all of my Fuji gear to fund the G1X if it turns out to have great IQ.
 
Update: I'll soon be able to give a first hand accounting of the G1X MIII. I just submitted an order to rent one, and will be able to pick it up at the local ship center on Monday. I plan to test it extensively. I really hadn't expected to be able to get my hands on one so soon, but Lensrentals had one in stock. Stay tuned.

Wow. You da man! I eagerly await your real-world findings... particularly in the area of autofocus for sports and in low light.
 
Canon Powershot G1 X Mark III Full Review

I'm really very interested in this camera as well; more so than when I first posted for the very reasons Tony mentioned: portable, versatile, weather-proof. I'm a bit unsure about optical quality - the rest ist very convincing; but of course, at that kind of price, I need the camera to perform better than the LX100 - not only the sensor (that's a given), but the lens has to be competitive too. I don't much care about the speed because what I've seen of the G1X III's low light performance, I shouldn't have to worry about pushing up the ISO at least two stops higher than I would on the LX100. But again: I want to know how good the lens is, specifically at 45mm.

The trouble is, I have a 10% voucher for Canon products, expiring next Tuesday ... Tough times ;)

M.
 
Here are a few things I want to check while the camera is in my possession:

Close focus ability
High ISO (up to 6400)
Low light AF
AF with moving things (babies, if I get the chance)
How the lens handles backlighting (flare)

Any other suggestions?

Addendum: This is odd. I just opened an e-mail informing me my rental package had shipped, and they included a Pelican Storm Case: Amazon.com : Pelican 1 Storm Case iM2075 - No Foam - Black : Sports & Outdoors

It was no extra charge, but I can't imagine why that was included, as the package already included a camera bag. An OOOPs, maybe?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top