no, no, no . . . this is a good option with the fixed lens. The last thing we need is yet another proprietary lens mount! Now, if they had opted for a m4/3 mount then that would be great, but that won't happen.
bobbytan wrote:
Looks as good as the Fuji X100 which is quite impressive. Pity that the G1X is not an ILC.
Also the Fuji shot has a clear advantage, it's at least 1/3 EV brighter than the others, but the Sony NEX-5N is alos excellent. Canon noise is very good, but lens seems a little soft or focus was off.
Very nice! The G1X exposure looks right on the money, not too light (Fuji) or too dark (NEX). The Nex looks like the clear winner for low noise and sharpness, with the Canon tied with (or beating) the Fuji. Nice color with both Canon models.
Looking forward to more comparisons with the Canon.
Sanlameer wrote:
As more info about the camera's low light abilities becomes available, the number of totally negative views are definetely decreasing!
Well with the aperture at the long end you're going to be using the higher iso's a lot.
Seems to me that in these G1X samples the edges of the the frame, extending quite a way in, are very soft compared to the centre. I guess this means that the non-user upgradeable lens is either only sharp in the centre or has serious field curvature problems causing the edges to be out of focus.
IMO this is the key problem with this concept, i.e large sensor mirrorless camera with integral lens. The lens range, speed, and quality is a compromise while still being too large to retain compact camera pocketability. If you are going to buy a camera this big you might as well have one with an interchangeable lens so that you have the flexibility to make your own trade-offs regarding focal length and lens quality.
thw2 wrote:
Indeed. But it's same with V1/J1/Nex5N/Nex7/GX1/PEN cameras and their kit lenses.
That's not true. I recently bought an Olympus E-P3 Kit and it came with a 17mm F2.8 prime. High ISO is excellent but I rarely need to go beyond ISO 1600. I planned to only buy the body and pair it with the Panasonic 20 F1.7, but the camera is only available in kit form. Still, the kit lens a great little lens and very good wide open.
Gochugogi wrote:
That's not true. I recently bought an Olympus E-P3 Kit and it came with a 17mm F2.8 prime. High ISO is excellent but I rarely need to go beyond ISO 1600. I planned to only buy the body and pair it with the Panasonic 20 F1.7, but the camera is only available in kit form. Still, the kit lens a great little lens and very good wide open.
I should be more specific. Are there faster kit ZOOM lenses from the list of platforms I mention? Yours is a prime lens and for the average man on the street, it's really not very attractive nor convenient. The G1X is targeted specifically at that group of buyers.
Most people I know buy the E-P3 Kit with the prime and then they buy more micro 4/3 primes and adapters for Leica, Nikkor, etc. Cameras like that are not really marketed to the "man on the street" but, instead, are directed at photogeeks and aficionados. I haven't paid much attention to the zooms but I know you can get one if you want.
Gochugogi wrote:
That's not true. I recently bought an Olympus E-P3 Kit and it came with a 17mm F2.8 prime. High ISO is excellent but I rarely need to go beyond ISO 1600. I planned to only buy the body and pair it with the Panasonic 20 F1.7, but the camera is only available in kit form. Still, the kit lens a great little lens and very good wide open.
If we are in the mood of fighting tiny factual errors, the G1X is also F2.8 at ~17mm. So thw2 is still correct saying your kit lens is no better aperture wise.
That's why I wanted to buy it bundled with the Panasonic 20 1.7. I have a Nikkor adapter and my ancient fleet of fast AIS/AI Nikkors so it's okay for now. Moreover the pancake squeezes into pockets a lot easier than a zoom. The biggie is I can change lenses at will whereas the G1X is not so flexible and certainly it's weak point compared to it's similarly priced competition.
fred -- I don't know what images you are talking about for weak edges. Have you looked at the French images on the link? I'd call those pretty amazing, and I'm not trying to be a fanboy. The building shots (yellow near top, and grey near the end) shot at ISO 800 are striking -- nearly wide open, but sharp and almost no CA fringing visible. I have full frame primes that don't do that well on the edges without PP. And those tangerines are awesome, even on the sides.
To my eyes, imaging-resource's studio samples show:
G1X (1.9X crop) ISO3200 jpeg IQ roughly = NEX-5N (1.5X) ISO6400 - one stop worse. Sensor size still matters!
G1X (1.9X crop) ISO6400 jpeg IQ roughly = Panasonic GH2 (2X) ISO3200 - one stop better. Good job Canon!
G1X (1.9X crop) ISO6400 jpeg IQ is better than Nikon 1 (2.7X) ISO3200 - more than one stop better. No Nikon miracle here!
If the upcoming Canon mirrorless system will share the same 1.9X crop sensor instead of an APS-C chip, I'll immediately pass because I shoot in the ISO3200 range under show lighting too often and cannot afford to give up any high-ISO IQ.
It's puzzling why Canon P&S, G1X included, still only offer 1080 24p while the competitions have offered P&S models with 1080 30p and 60i for over a year and a half already, and 1080 60p for about a year.
BTW, Jame Cameron wants to shoot the Avatar 2 in 60 frame per second and this can be the beginning of the end of the 24fps film standard, which will be a VERY welcoming news to people in the entertainment industry. Soon, people who want to shoot like a filmmaker will switch from 24p to 60p/50p and all consumer cameras and camcorders will eventually get 1080 60p/50p video, for sure.
