# Canon Officially Announces The PowerShot G1 X Mark III



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 16, 2017)

```
<em>The New Flagship G1 X Mark III PowerShot Camera Features the Largest Imaging Sensor Ever in a Canon Point-and-Shoot Camera</em></p>
<p><strong>MELVILLE, N.Y., October 16, 2017</strong> – Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced a new flagship addition to its acclaimed G-series of premium compact cameras, the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III. Lightweight and portable without sacrificing the very best in Canon digital imaging technologies, the new G-series flagship features a 24.3- megapixel* APS-C CMOS sensor and Canon’s revolutionary Dual Pixel CMOS AF (Auto-Focus) technology, both firsts for a Canon point-and shoot compact camera offering.</p>
<p>“As we continue to evolve the popular Canon PowerShot G-series line, we remain committed to incorporating both our latest innovations and the features photographers are looking for in an advanced, compact camera,” said Yuichi Ishizuka, president and COO, Canon U.S.A. “With the new PowerShot G1 X Mark III, users will appreciate the quality and overall performance made possible using a APS-C sensor, alongside upgraded capabilities that can enable the capture of amazing photo and video, even in lowlight conditions.”</p>

		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-1 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 33%;
			}
			#gallery-1 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-1' class='gallery galleryid-31746 gallery-columns-3 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5816840304.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5816840304-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5816840304-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5816840304-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5688323332.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5688323332-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5688323332-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5688323332-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/1572836502.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/1572836502-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/1572836502-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/1572836502-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" /><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/7944126480.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/7944126480-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/7944126480-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/7944126480-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/0523120261.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/0523120261-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/0523120261-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/0523120261-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/3691795763.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/3691795763-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/3691795763-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/3691795763-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" />
		</div>

<p><strong>Ultimate in Compact Image Quality</strong></p>

<p>The new Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III offers dramatic improvements from the series’ previous flagship, the PowerShot G1X Mark II, headlined by a larger, 24.3-megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor, resulting in fantastic image quality in both stills and video. This dramatic sensor upgrade pairs with a wide-angle 24-72mm** (3x zoom) lens with Optical Image Stabilization featuring a wide f/2.8-5.6 aperture to allow for maximum brightness and increased sharpness in images and an ISO range of 100-25,600. This provides users with the versatility to shoot in low-light scenarios like a dimly lit restaurant which can frame subjects with beautiful background blur.</p>
<p>Technology commonly found in Canon DSLRs and advanced cameras has now arrived for the first time in the PowerShot G-series, as the G1X Mark III will feature Canon’s acclaimed Dual Pixel CMOS AF system. This feature, popular amongst enthusiast and professional users, provides extremely fast and smooth autofocus capabilities across nearly the entire focal plane, allowing for more creative compositions when framing a subject away from the center of a shot.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p><strong>Versatile and Intuitive Operation</strong></p>
<p>Dust and water resistant, the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III is a compact and powerful imaging companion ready for a variety of challenging shooting scenarios. Designed for enthusiast and professional users, it offers a host of useful features to help inspire creativity and improve operability. These include:</p>
<p>• 2.36 million dot Organic LED Electronic Viewfinder provides customization options to match nearly any shooting style or scene

• Touch & Drag AF allows for intuitive operation linking the Electronic Viewfinder and touch panel monitor to quickly adjust focus targeting without looking away from the viewfinder, or using Smooth Zone AF to effortlessly track subjects with the touch of a finger.

• 3.0 inch Vari-angle Touch LCD Monitor helps capture the perfect shot from a variety of challenging angles, including overhead or low-angle shooting.

• The G1 X Mark III is capable of fast continuous shooting up to approximately 7 frames per second (fps), or up to 9fps with AF fixed – working easily with Dual Pixel CMOS AF to track even the most fleeting of subjects with ease.

• A New Shutter Release function offers a sophisticated sense of operation, similar to high-end EOS models, providing a comfortable hold during continuous shooting</p>
<p><strong>Canon Technologies Worthy of a Flagship</strong></p>
<p>With technology ranging from HD video capabilities to the latest in connectivity features, the G1 X Mark III is versatile enough to achieve high-level performance on the go. Additional features include:

• Instantly connect to a smart device* via built-in Wi-Fi***, NFC^ or Bluetooth^^ to facilitate easy sharing with friends and family or utilize the Camera Connect app to shoot remotely.

• Panoramic Shot Mode functionality allows users to easily capture panoramic photos, simply be swinging the camera while shooting either vertically or horizontally.

• Capture Full HD 1080/60p Video with high ISO speed shooting and smooth accurate focus when used alongside Canon’s Dual Pixel AF technology, while 5-axis movie IS helps reduce the effect of camera shake when shooting handheld

• Easily capture picturesque Time-Lapse Movies with intuitive settings that help determine intervals and exposure</p>
<p>The Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III is scheduled to be available in November 2017 for an estimated retail price of $1299.00¹. In addition the Canon Lens Hood LH-DC110, Waterproof Case WP-DC56 and Deluxe Leather Case PSC-6300 for the PowerShot G1 X Mark III will be available for an estimated retail price of $59.99, $499.99 and $99.99 respectively ¹. For more information please visit usa.canon.com.</p>
<p><em>*</em><em>Image processing may cause a decrease in the number of pixels.</em></p>
<p><em>**</em><em> 35mm film equivalent.</em></p>
<p><em>***Compatible with iOS</em><em>® </em><em>versions 9.3/10.3, Android™ smartphone and tablet versions 4.4/5.0/5.1/6.0/7.0/7.1. Data charges may apply with the download of the free Canon Camera Connect app. This app helps enable you to upload images to social media services. Please note that image files may contain personally identifiable information that may implicate privacy laws. Canon disclaims and has no responsibility for your use of such images. Canon does not obtain, collect or use such images or any information included in such images through this app.</em></p>
<p><em>^</em><em> Compatible with Android™ smartphone and tablet versions 4.4/5.0/5.1/6.0/7.0/7.1.</em></p>
<p><em>^^</em><em> Compatible with select smartphone and tablet devices (Android™ version 5.0 or later and the following iOS® devices: iPhone 4s or later, iPad 3rd gen. or later, iPod Touch 5th gen. or later) equipped with Bluetooth® version 4.0 or later and the Camera Connect.</em></p>
<p><em><sup>¹</sup></em><em>Availability, prices and specifications subject to change without notice. Actual prices are set be individual dealers and may vary.</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## josephandrews222 (Oct 16, 2017)

...years ago I purchased two original Ms (one for each child) along with the 22mm and 18-55mm lenses.

Both young ladies love their Ms.

One of them, I think, likes the concept (and fun) of the MILC system while the other...not so much, while both very much enjoy the images that they themselves can produce.

This new G1X3 will be perfect, I think, for the daughter who doesn't care so much for the idea of changing lenses to get a better/different image.

But, to be honest, this young lady has little use for a viewfinder...and the added size-and-weight that goes with it.

So we're back to that again; we'd be more interested in this system if it did NOT include a viewfinder.


----------



## bf (Oct 16, 2017)

Who writes these anouncements? Who reads them?
Anyway, I think the form-factor is noticable. Other than that it's not for me and I pass! I was never a fan of flagship compacts and their price tags.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Oct 16, 2017)

...despite the hot shoe, no microphone port (I think).


----------



## tomri (Oct 16, 2017)

How about this (299,- EUR in 2013 vs 1299,- EUR now, both with lens, both APS-C)


----------



## whothafunk (Oct 16, 2017)

who the hell buys this anyway. we are living in an era where modern smart phones have beyond sufficient camera for things you are able to take photos of. sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> but the images will be crap anyway.


That alone invalidates your whole post.


----------



## jitesar (Oct 16, 2017)

I waited for this camera, but the lens degrades it for my use. When it comes usable for portrait, we have 5.6 aperture. I know we have bigger chip, but still ... :-(


----------



## CanonGuy (Oct 16, 2017)

Canon is stirring the whole imaging industry with their innovations decades after decades (according to some in this forum anyways). In continuation, Canon announced this 1080p 'beast' with superfast f2.8-5.6 (). 

Meanwhile DJI announces Zenmuse 6K Camera. 

But Canon is innovating. Yup believe the forumers here.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 16, 2017)

CanonGuy said:


> Canon is stirring the whole imaging industry with their innovations decades after decades (according to some in this forum anyways). In continuation, Canon announced this 1080p 'beast' with superfast f2.8-5.6 ().
> 
> Meanwhile DJI announces Zenmuse 6K Camera.
> 
> But Canon is innovating. Yup believe the forumers here.



At 2,700 USD for the camera and 1300 USD for each lens I would hope it is better. But do you fancy using that handheld?


----------



## dolina (Oct 16, 2017)

I hope Canon made sure their wireless connectivity app works. More people own smartphones than all other devices combined.

Although I am not the target market for this camera I am happy Canon has come around to offering a point & shoot with an APS-C sensor.

Now do the right thing and slowly consolidate the 17 point & shoots into just 3 refreshed models. 1 for the SX Series and 1 for the ELPH series.

Same goes with all the brands as well.

I am still surprised that 4K @ 60fps isnt the norm for flagship point & shoots when the iPhone 8 can do it.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2017)

So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?

And who is this body aimed at market-wise? 2nd body for people who love their Rebels? 1st body for people who don't want to deal with the footprint of a Rebel? RX100 buyers? (Surely not X100 buyers, right?) 

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 16, 2017)

CanonGuy said:


> Canon is stirring the whole imaging industry with their innovations decades after decades (according to some in this forum anyways). In continuation, Canon announced this 1080p 'beast' with superfast f2.8-5.6 ().
> 
> Meanwhile DJI announces Zenmuse 6K Camera.
> 
> But Canon is innovating. Yup believe the forumers here.



hehe. Only the forum denizens of the "Canon apologist cult".


----------



## dolina (Oct 16, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?
> 
> And who is this body aimed at market-wise? 2nd body for people who love their Rebels? 1st body for people who don't want to deal with the footprint of a Rebel? RX100 buyers? (Surely not X100 buyers, right?)
> 
> - A


Supplement to a smartphone when even the Google Pixel 2 & iPhone 8 aren't good enough.

The market for point & shoot has been largely eaten by the smartphone. 

Only way for them to compete is on superior image quality over smartphones through larger image sensors like full frame, aps-c, four thirds, 1.5", etc.

The WiFi, Bluetooth and NFC connectivity options it has points to that application.

Almost everyone now owns a new smartphone every 22 months on average. A very small minority owns a full fledged computer. Sales of PCs have declined for 5 straight years and ownership now lengthened to an average of 6 years. In spite of sales slump Apple's Mac is gaining market share pointing to consumers going for quality.

I expect all brands to consolidate the over 1 dozen point & shoot per brand to just under a handful of refreshed models in the next 5 years.

Watch this video on how the camera business has performed since 2009. It is both awesome and sad. Awesome because everyone now has a camera via smartphone ownership. Sad because I expect increase in selling price for future Canon cameras.


----------



## whothafunk (Oct 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> whothafunk said:
> 
> 
> > but the images will be crap anyway.
> ...


because first i mention smart phones have sufficient enough cameras and then images will be crap? when you zoom in on those wannabe zooms, images will be crap, especially because AI Servo on those things aren't worth donkey dong.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > whothafunk said:
> ...



Right, because IQ is strictly a function of servo AF performance. I totally forgot. People are only shooting _wildlife_ with the 15-45 f/2.8-5.6 crop lens. :

I've had a 5D3 for 5 years and I use Servo AF all of twice a year when I see an interesting bird or take photos of my friend's kids at a soccer game. _Somehow_, my 5D3 still delivers nice images with One Shot AF. I'm going to go out on a very short and sturdy limb and predict this PowerShot will do the same.

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > whothafunk said:
> ...



Well when you say "sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway." I could only assume that the Canon with its 'AI servo' would be 'crap.
If you meant the iphone was 'crap' maybe you should learn to express yourself less ambiguously


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> who the hell buys this anyway. we are living in an era where modern smart phones have beyond sufficient camera for things you are able to take photos of. sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway.


About 95%-99% of the image quality depends on the photographer. Have you just rated yourself?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> because first i mention smart phones have sufficient enough cameras and then images will be crap? when you zoom in on those wannabe zooms, images will be crap, especially because AI Servo on those things aren't worth donkey dong.



The idea of 'if cell phones are ascendant and ubiquitous, buying any camera is pointless' gets a little old.

Cell phone tech is improving all the time and cell phone photography is awesome, don't get me wrong. But the stock cell phone camera cannot:


Generate small DOF / bokeh without computational methods (that are fledgling at best in 2017)
Work well at high ISO
Cover much of anything beyond standard zoom FLs, work with macro, tilt-shift, etc.
Get anywhere near the AF and shutter responsiveness of a proper camera

So this G1X Mark III is just another option (in a sea of options) between the cell phone and larger options. Consider: even a ground-floor Rebel mops the floor with a cell phone for responsiveness, IQ, high ISO, small DOF, etc. because physics is physics. This is simply another / smaller / pricier way to get those benefits.

It's not for me, but I'm pretty sure someone has been waiting for this and will pony up the bucks on day one for this.

- A


----------



## josephandrews222 (Oct 16, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?
> 
> And who is this body aimed at market-wise? 2nd body for people who love their Rebels? 1st body for people who don't want to deal with the footprint of a Rebel? RX100 buyers? (Surely not X100 buyers, right?)
> 
> - A



You nailed it...I guess what I'd be even more interested in is a Powershot like an M6 +15-45 kit zoom.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 16, 2017)

josephandrews222 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?
> ...



Retractable zoom, but not as crappy as Sony's.


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> who the hell buys this anyway. we are living in an era where modern smart phones have beyond sufficient camera for things you are able to take photos of. sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway.



Were you an extra in K-Pax by any chance ?


----------



## deleteme (Oct 16, 2017)

whothafunk said:


> who the hell buys this anyway. we are living in an era where modern smart phones have beyond sufficient camera for things you are able to take photos of. sure this has a bit more zoom and "ai servo" but the images will be crap anyway.


Gee, I don't know.
Fuji seemed to sell boatloads of X-100s with a fixed 35mm FOV lens.
This has a zoom and a decent EVF plus superior AF for the same money.
As for IQ I would presume that a Bayer filtered APS-C sensor will get better PP in LR and C1 than the Fuji.

While it is similar to the M5 with a fixed lens, this is aimed at that segment that does not want interchangeable lenses and wants compactness.
It will sell decently well.


----------



## infared (Oct 16, 2017)

Seems like a very odd camera to make at this point in time, with the market and all things being what they are, phones, etc. It is not a camera that I would have any interest in.... for a lot of reasons.


----------



## bholliman (Oct 16, 2017)

josephandrews222 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > So... how far off am I when I peg this as an EOS M5 + a slightly quicker / slightly smaller fixed 15-45 kit zoom?
> ...



This one has me scratching my head as well. At this price point, you can buy an M5 + 15-45 kit ($1,049) and EF-M 22 ($199 refurbished) and have a camera that will accept other lenses. Or, an M6 with a 3rd lens lens. 

I suppose a buyer who would never consider changing lenses... Seems overpriced to me.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 16, 2017)

bf said:


> Who writes these anouncements? Who reads them?



Marketing drones; journalists.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> whothafunk said:
> 
> 
> > but the images will be crap anyway.
> ...



Well especially juxtaposed with 'phones are good enough for everyone'.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 16, 2017)

dolina said:


> I hope Canon made sure their wireless connectivity app works. More people own smartphones than all other devices combined.
> 
> Although I am not the target market for this camera I am happy Canon has come around to offering a point & shoot with an APS-C sensor.
> 
> ...



I said it on another thread but I'll repeat: how do you know fewer lines would mean more sales? Do you know anything about selling cameras?

And my eyes are in pain from rolling at your last comment. This is APS-C, not a tiny smartphone camera sensor.


----------



## Talys (Oct 16, 2017)

That is actually a very cool video that does a good explanation of some things like DPAF without a lot of words. It also demonstrates how small the camera is -- with the lens -- very well.

I kind of want one now. If only it were cheaper or full frame. Am I greedy or what? 

But seriously, I'd pay a few bucks for a full frame version of that.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 17, 2017)

Talys said:


> That is actually a very cool video that does a good explanation of some things like DPAF without a lot of words. It also demonstrates how small the camera is -- with the lens -- very well.
> 
> I kind of want one now. If only it were cheaper or full frame. Am I greedy or what?
> 
> But seriously, I'd pay a few bucks for a full frame version of that.



Agree. But a Canon FF version of that (a) is up against some pricey competition going after wealthy folks who want a great camera and (b) surely wouldn't have a zoom for size reasons. It'd likely be a 35 f/2 or so and run something like $3-4k depending on what they put inside.

It's amazing design/aesthetic-wise where Canon went with this. The X100, RX1R, Leica Q invite being held in the hands and tinkered with, while this -- though I'm sure well-informed with Canon's 'ergonomic/control DNA' -- still looks like an engineery mess to the eye. It even looks more Knight Rider-like than the M5 it surely took its design cues from. 

I generally roll my eyes at how cameras look as they are simply instruments to be used, but something about the G1x3 looks 80s and 'point & shooty'. I think the collapsible lens is putting me off for some reason.

(Sorry to design snob, it's almost never my bag.) Good call on a fixed lens FF. That still may happen.

- A


----------



## dolina (Oct 17, 2017)

scyrene said:


> I said it on another thread but I'll repeat: how do you know fewer lines would mean more sales? Do you know anything about selling cameras?
> 
> And my eyes are in pain from rolling at your last comment. This is APS-C, not a tiny smartphone camera sensor.


I never said it will "mean more sales" but it will mean "better business". What I want Canon to do is to leverage economies of scale in the hopes that fewer SKUs at increased output will (a) reduce their cost, (b) keep the company profitable & (c) keep selling at prices relatively low.

This is especially true for the 17 point & shoots under the ELPH Series, G Series and SX Series cameras.

Dump the bottom 80% SKU that sold the least volume and focus on doing really well the top 20% SKU that generates the 80% profitability.

In a declining industry be more like Apple and less like Samsung.

Canon is doing this rather slowly already. These are the compact series and their last updated product that are not discontinued.

A Series in 2012 
D Series in 2014 
S Series in 2014

These are the compact series that continued and went up market to stay relevant in the era of smartphones.

G Series increased in image sensor size to APS-C within this week.
SX Series has WiFi and location information via smartphone last April 2017

The ELPH series has not updated since January 2016 and this product line renews on a 11-12 month cycle since 2012. This product line may not be updated anymore.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 17, 2017)

dolina said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I said it on another thread but I'll repeat: how do you know fewer lines would mean more sales? Do you know anything about selling cameras?
> ...



I agree with the thinking behind it, but unfortunately in marketing you are contending with human nature and things that do not fit onto a manufacturing balance sheet. Firstly, everyone wants to think there is a specific model for them (you only need to see the complaints and portents of doom that goes on whenever a new model is released). Secondly it has long been known that having more products creates an atmosphere of competition (albeit false) which actually increases sales. Thirdly, people often buy into a particular brand because they like the idea of stepwise progression to doing things like the professionals do - whether they ever take advantage of it is irrelevant but it is often a factor.
Do you really believe that Canon keep these models going for fun and 'aw, what the hell, we can afford it'? They make them because they serve a purpose in the market place.


----------



## dolina (Oct 17, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Do you really believe that Canon keep these models going for fun and 'aw, what the hell, we can afford it'? They make them because they serve a purpose in the market place.


Canon is conservative enough to be more of a "follower" than a "pioneer" when it comes to product releases.

If a product does not sell they just quietly discontinue the product line like what happened A, D, S and soon the ELPH Series.

What I have issue is how slow they are to change & improve in light of the competition coming from smartphones, action cameras, 360 cameras, mirrorless and Sony image sensor technology.

I have a vested interest in Canon continuing to do business until the year 2100 as I want better full frame bodies every 3-5 years.

I am even open to Canon outsourcing their image sensors to Sony just to keep up as I doubt they have the R&D money to produce superior components.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 17, 2017)

dolina said:


> Canon is conservative enough to be more of a "follower" than a "pioneer" when it comes to product releases.
> 
> If a product does not sell they just quietly discontinue the product line like what happened A, D, S and soon the ELPH Series.
> 
> ...



People keep on banging on about the sensors as the prime example of how Canon fail to innovate, but it is clear they have little understanding of how product development works. Canon choose to make their own sensors which is a solid business decision. In any competitive product development one company gets a jump on the technology through little more than good luck - the right people at the right time seeing something and taking it on. The company who 'misses' this opportunity then has a choice to carry on their own route or buy in the (what is at the time) superior technology and the question they have to answer is 'is this hurting us?' And despite 10 years of supposedly inferior sensors, Canon has increased market share so the answer is probably 'we would love a sensor with Sony's qualities but sensor performance is clearly not a defining factor for success'. No matter how many times I and others point this out, many (including you) seem to not want to listen to this simple self-evident truth. 
As it is, Canon latest sensors have pretty much caught up on sensor technology as evidenced by the 5D4 and 1Dx2. The choices they made with the 6D2 have created such a furore that has drowned out that one simple fact. Canon. Have. Pretty. Much. Caught. Up. On. Sensor. Performance.
So now, Canon do not have any reason to outsource sensors to Sony especially as it seems even Sony have reached a technological limit. As for BSI, a recurring comment I have read is that the practical advantages seem to be far less than people were hoping for. 

So not only have Canon been developing their sensors and now got technology to truly rival Sony, they retain the biggest market share so yes, they are doing good business. They are reportedly expanding their mirrorless. So they seem to be doing good business. Their market share remains the highest of any single company. So they are clearly doing good business.
Why you think 'action cameras' are a threat to them I don't know - I would be very surprised if Canon were not looking at them but they remain a niche product.
The biggest threat to Canon is not their technological development but their size. Not always because of their 'oil tanker' like ability to change track, but because bigger companies are more exposed when a market shrinks rapidly because they have production plants with assets that have a fixed cost. You can sack workers but the plants still need maintenance etc and even reducing the number of production plants have costs. Ask Nikon about the number of re-structurings they have undergone recently - nice technology but poor financials.



> I want better full frame bodies every 3-5 years.


Have you ever seen a 'full frame' action camera? I haven't
But isn't a 'better FF camera' what you are getting every 5 years? And in 2100 I very much doubt you will even be able to pick one up, let alone use it!

So to me your comments about Canon doing 'good business' are based not on what 'good business' actually means, but on what you want to see and little knowledge of how marketing and product development actually work.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 17, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> As it is, Canon latest sensors have pretty much caught up on sensor technology as evidenced by the 5D4 and 1Dx2. The choices they made with the 6D2 have created such a furore that has drowned out that one simple fact. Canon. Have. Pretty. Much. Caught. Up. On. Sensor. Performance.
> So now, Canon do not have any reason to outsource sensors to Sony especially as it seems even Sony have reached a technological limit. As for BSI, a recurring comment I have read is that the practical advantages seem to be far less than people were hoping for.
> ...
> So to me your comments about Canon doing 'good business' are based not on what 'good business' actually means, but on what you want to see and little knowledge of how marketing and product development actually work.



Well, to me your comments read like typical Canon fanboy apologist, rather than being based on actual knowledge of Canon and competitor products.

1. After about 7 years Canon of lagging dramatically behind [1 to 2 stops poorer performance] Canon has even now still not managed to fully catchup to Sony sensors, not even with their latest and most expensive models [5d4, 1dx2]. Not to mention, Canon being able to *innovatively leapfrog* Sony sensors ... as a matter of fact, Canon is only now being able to make ADC sensors ... 

2. there is no indication that Sony sensors should have "reached a technological limit". There is no reason to believe Sony cannot further develop their sensors and maintain the lead ovr Canon sensors in a number of crucial parameters. 

3. BSI has very visible practical performance advantages for both video and stills image capture. It is definitely not "underwhelming" in any way. 

4. If anything then the much hyped canon DP-AF technology is way overrated and has limited advantages in practical use - and those only for video capture (AF), not for stills. As evidenced by the fact, that AF performance of even the latest and most expensive Canon mirrorless cams with DP-AF [M5, M6] is still well behind what Fujifilm, Sony and Olympus deliver in AF performance - specifically tracking AF, face/eye-AF etc. -
by using "regular hybrid" AF [on-sensor PD-AF plus CD-AF]. Sony A6300/6500, Fuji XT-2, X-20 draw circles around any Canon EOS M in terms of AF performance.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 17, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Well, to me your comments read like typical Canon fanboy apologist, rather than being based on actual knowledge of Canon and competitor products.



How did I know you would be the first to come back with little more than an insult? Does logic hurt you so much that you are unable to put a cogent argument together?
Tell me what knowledge of Canon products am I missing that you are privy to? Where in the above did I even attempt an explanation of competitor products? Answer - I didn't. 

I occasionally participate in Nikon forums and have said pretty much the same thing in looking at decisions from a business point of view. So no, this is not about being a fanboy. 



AvTvM said:


> 1. After about 7 years Canon of lagging dramatically behind [1 to 2 stops poorer performance] Canon has even now still not managed to fully catchup to Sony sensors, not even with their latest and most expensive models [5d4, 1dx2]. Not to mention, Canon being able to *innovatively leapfrog* Sony sensors ... as a matter of fact, Canon is only now being able to make ADC sensors ...


Read what I said. Canon have a choice - do they continue to plough their won furrow? Do they buy in other technology simply to impress the measurebators? Do they buy in new technology because their current choice is hurting them?
Does any sensor made in the last 5 years meet the needs of 99% of photograpehrs 99% of the time?. Yes. 
Is their current Is having an inferior sensor hurting their sales? No. Period.
Therefore do they need to buy in other peoples' technology? No. 
So explain to me why they have to. Explain it in terms of sales and profit. And explain to me what part of your so-called knowledge Canon does not know.



AvTvM said:


> 2. there is no indication that Sony sensors should have "reached a technological limit". There is no reason to believe Sony cannot further develop their sensors and maintain the lead ovr Canon sensors in a number of crucial parameters.


Where are the significant changes that Sony have made? Why else have Canon closed the gap on Sony's wonderful technology. I am not saying advances are not possible but those advances are getting less and less. Please educate me otherwise. That is strongly indicative of getting closer to limits. Why else have 



AvTvM said:


> 3. BSI has very visible practical performance advantages for both video and stills image capture. It is definitely not "underwhelming" in any way.


I did not say it did not have visible advantages. I said it has not promised the level of improvement that many had predicted. 



AvTvM said:


> 4. If anything then the much hyped canon DP-AF technology is way overrated and has limited advantages in practical use - and those only for video capture (AF), not for stills. As evidenced by the fact, that AF performance of even the latest and most expensive Canon mirrorless cams with DP-AF [M5, M6] is still well behind what Fujifilm, Sony and Olympus deliver in AF performance - specifically tracking AF, face/eye-AF etc. -
> by using "regular hybrid" AF [on-sensor PD-AF plus CD-AF]. Sony A6300/6500, Fuji XT-2, X-20 draw circles around any Canon EOS M in terms of AF performance.


DPAF may be overrated to you, but then you have a strong track record in believing your view is what everyone else wants and believes. 
I am not surprised that elements of the mirrorless techology lag behind Olympus and Sony. Canon (and Nikon) concentrate on their core market which are DSLR.


----------



## dolina (Oct 17, 2017)

Canon has yet to reach the tipping point where in they will try to equal or exceed Sony sensors. Hopefully we wont need to wait until the year 2100 for that to happen.

People are locked into Canon because of the EF mount so stick to it. I just hope Canon isnt in the habit of abusing that loyalty.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 17, 2017)

dolina said:


> Canon has yet to reach the tipping point where in they will try to equal or exceed Sony sensors. Hopefully we wont need to wait until the year 2100 for that to happen.
> 
> People are locked into Canon because of the EF mount so stick to it. I just hope Canon isnt in the habit of abusing that loyalty.



You are again making the mistake that sensor performance is central to any camera's success. Tell me how the 1Dx2 and 5D4 sensors will limit your photography as opposed to Sony. 
The very fact you are staying with Canon shows how important the difference in sensor performance is to you - and it shows Canon they are giving a whole package that is competitive.


----------



## dolina (Oct 17, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> You are again making the mistake that sensor performance is central to any camera's success. Tell me how the 1Dx2 and 5D4 sensors will limit your photography as opposed to Sony.
> The very fact you are staying with Canon shows how important the difference in sensor performance is to you - and it shows Canon they are giving a whole package that is competitive.


Image sensor performance and size does matter. It is a selling point whether it be a smartphone or dedicated still camera.

It is such a selling point that PowerShot G1 X Mark III prominently mentions that it has a APS-C image snsor.

I bought a Sony a7R II in 2016 and a Leica X Type 113 in 2014 because Canon did not have products like these until recently.

I am willing to go multi system when the technology is there. I am in the very small minority who does this and it is somewhat inconvenient.

The 1Dx2 and 5D4's advantage is its AF system. But Sony is making strides with the A9.

Which now leaves us with the lens system where only Nikon could compete in in ts completeness.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 17, 2017)

dolina said:


> Image sensor performance and size does matter. It is a selling point whether it be a smartphone or dedicated still camera.
> 
> It is such a selling point that PowerShot G1 X Mark III prominently mentions that it has a APS-C image snsor.
> 
> ...



I am not sure if it is me not explaining myself properly or your wilfully ignoring what I am saying.
Nowhere have I said that sensor performance does not matter. No-one I know who has bought a higher res camera has ever said 'Dang, I don't need those pixels. I wish they had kept it at 8MP of the 30D'. Likewise for dynamic range

What I am saying is that sensor performance is not a factor that in itself defines the success or failure of a camera. Because if it was, Sony would be #1. 



dolina said:


> The 1Dx2 and 5D4's advantage is its AF system. But Sony is making strides with the A9.


I would say Sony AF to Canon AF is about the same as Canon sensor performance to Sony sensor performance. 



dolina said:


> I bought a Sony a7R II in 2016 and a Leica X Type 113 in 2014 because Canon did not have products like these until recently.


Which sort of goes against your criticisms of Canon.
So what you really seem to be doing is comparing the A9 to the whole range of Canon cameras including the xxxxD models.
So tell me, as an 'ecosystem' it seems Canon still rocks it.


----------



## dolina (Oct 17, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> I am not sure if it is me not explaining myself properly or your wilfully ignoring what I am saying.
> Nowhere have I said that sensor performance does not matter. No-one I know who has bought a higher res camera has ever said 'Dang, I don't need those pixels. I wish they had kept it at 8MP of the 30D'. Likewise for dynamic range
> 
> What I am saying is that sensor performance is not a factor that in itself defines the success or failure of a camera. Because if it was, Sony would be #1.
> ...


Canon's overall product is good enough not to leave for most people because switching is really expensive as you need to rebuy the Sony equivalent of all your Canon or Nikon gear. Some lenses Sony doesn't really have at all like say the 200/2.0, 800/5.6 or 400/2.8.

So you get a lot of complaints and few switchers because no system is complete or perfect.

After sales support is another plus with Canon that Sony needs to learn.

Image sensor may be awesome but Sony takes its sweet time to repair something you may as well just go with something more timely and reliable.

This is in contrast to the smartphone market. Sony offers the top half of all smartphone image sensors used. Quality varies from model to model depending the image sensor used, what hardware is matched to it, quality of software, cloud support and after sales support. If a consumer has a bad experience with brand ABC they can easily switch to a Google Pixel 2 or iPhone X because the accessories are relatively cheap.

The A9 is the sports camera of Sony and is priced at $4,999 to reflect this. 1DX2 and 5D4 does not make up the whole body lineup of Canon and the A9 is priced to slot between these two full frame bodies.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 17, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> 1. After about 7 years Canon of lagging dramatically behind [1 to 2 stops poorer performance] Canon has even now still not managed to fully catchup to Sony sensors, not even with their latest and most expensive models [5d4, 1dx2]. Not to mention, Canon being able to *innovatively leapfrog* Sony sensors ... as a matter of fact, Canon is only now being able to make ADC sensors ...
> 
> 2. there is no indication that Sony sensors should have "reached a technological limit". There is no reason to believe Sony cannot further develop their sensors and maintain the lead ovr Canon sensors in a number of crucial parameters.
> 
> ...



1: That simply isn't true when you compare comparable products. http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%201D%20X%20Mark%20II,Sony%20ILCE-9

2: Except for the fact that they have plateaued. http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7,Sony%20ILCE-9 As have Nikon. http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D4S,Nikon%20D5

3: For small sensors that is true, for larger senses it doesn't seem to be so far. http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7R,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2

4: I tend to agree that dual pixel tech has limited value for stills shooters using primarily phase detection AF, which is one of the strongest plus points of the SLR design.

But why let facts get in the way of a good rant?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 17, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> So tell me, as an 'ecosystem' it seems Canon still rocks it.



no, you are not a fanboi ... ;D ;D ;D

some days i really believe you are paid in some way by Canon. Hard to believe a normal person would so persistently and doggedly defend any gear supplier and all its shortcomings including blatant, factual, measurable and practice relevant deficits ... 

btw: Sony A9 AF is absolutely on par with 1DX II - and both are (slightly) behind Nikon D5. Just saying.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 17, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > So tell me, as an 'ecosystem' it seems Canon still rocks it.
> ...




Where have I ever denied the deficits of Canon gear? Please show me three quotes to support that. You on the other hand have absolutely no data to support your contention that Canon is suffering in the market place because of a supposedly inferior sensor. That Canon is suffering due to lack of FF mirrorless cameras. 
So by your criteria it seems you are a Sony fanboy so completely blind to what really matters to the camera-buying market. You are waffling on about your personal desires believing they are what everyone else prioritises and yet have zero evidence to support it. 

Show me a review that the Sony A9 with 400mm f2.8 is on par with Canon 1Dx2. Or with a 400mm f4. Or 500mm f4+1.4tc. I would be interested to see those reviews.


----------



## dolina (Oct 17, 2017)

See the text in bold on the earnings related to cameras.

http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-q1-2017-results-canon-raises-annual-profit-outlook/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 17, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > So tell me, as an 'ecosystem' it seems Canon still rocks it.
> ...



Gee, I guess the people who have bought 90 million EOS cameras and 130 million EF lenses, and kept *Canon as the #1 ILC manufacturer for 14 years and counting*, have just turned a blind eye to, are are simply too dumb to care about the, "...shortcomings including blatant, factual, measurable and practice relevant deficits." 

Or maybe, just maybe, you don't know what you're talking about and as an ecosystem Canon does, indeed, continue to rock it.


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 17, 2017)

dolina said:


> See the text in bold on the earnings related to cameras.
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-q1-2017-results-canon-raises-annual-profit-outlook/



what's your point? the industry as a whole as been under declines YoY. Canon has been overperforming with respects to the declines though.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Oct 18, 2017)

It looks like a fine camera (I do use a point and shoot M and do not own a cell phone). However I cannot imagine who would pay this much for this camera. It seems to me the price should be at least half.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 18, 2017)

MrFotoFool said:


> It looks like a fine camera (I do use a point and shoot M and do not own a cell phone). However I cannot imagine who would pay this much for this camera. It seems to me the price should be at least half.



Agree, it's pricey, but that's what this fixed lens APS-C market is. 

Current fixed lens APS-C cameras you can buy new @ B&H (filter = point & shoot and APS-C):


Fuji offers two at $799 (16 MP, f/2.8 prime, EVF) and $1299 (24 MP, f/2 lens, hybrid OVF / EVF)

Ricoh GR2 for $600 or so (16 MP, f/2.8 prime, no viewfinder)

Odd, pricey and 'not remotely your normal camera' cameras (Leica Typ 113, Sigma dp0/1/2/3 Quattro models, etc.)

I'm not sticking up for a $1299 asking price by Canon, but I guess I'd coach to look for the value of these rigs above and beyond the cheaper APS-C ILCs out there. For a moment, throw the perceived value of an APS-C ILC out the window and instead _add_ value to the notion that a fixed lens rig is: 


Considerably smaller to carry: possibly not requiring a dedicated bag, could fit in a coat pocket, etc.
Considerably smaller to shoot with: doesn't make people gunshy from a large camera, better for street, etc.
Has a leaf shutter (if you care about that)
Won't get turned away by security at a concert or sporting event

...and maaaaaybe a small premium over an M5 + EF-M 15-45 is warranted.

- A


----------



## Aglet (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> What I am saying is that sensor performance is not a factor that in itself defines the success or failure of a camera. Because if it was, Sony would be #1.



considering Sony has only been producing (higher end) cameras for a few years vs _decades_ of history, competition and promotion by the likes of Nikon and Canon that's a very weak argument from a marketing side. The incumbents are hard to dethrone even when they're potentially inferior.

As for Canon's latest sensor tech... the 5D4 has _almost_ caught up to the D800 from 2012 in sensor metrics. (now less than a stop behind at base ISO)
So it's pretty good, plenty good-enough, IMO, but I would not state that they've caught up. 


> Canon. Have. Pretty. Much. Caught. Up. On. Sensor. Performance.


 Rather, they have managed to improve enough that those remaining disadvantages in sensor metrics are much less relevant in that particular body.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 18, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Won't get turned away by security at a concert or sporting event



The lens is too dark to shoot at a concert IMHO. And probably too short?


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

Aglet said:


> considering Sony has only been producing (higher end) cameras for a few years vs _decades_ of history, competition and promotion by the likes of Nikon and Canon that's a very weak argument from a marketing side. The incumbents are hard to dethrone even when they're potentially inferior.



In any other forms of technology, and the main ones that come to mind are cars and computers, a superior technology very quickly takes the top spot in new purchases, and by superior I mean one that offers real world advantages and not personal preference. And yet not a single Sony mirrorless product outsells its DSLR counterpart. Not a single one since Sony overtook sensor technology 7+ years ago. I know what you mean by dethroning incumbents, but this period is an age in technology.
What are the possible reasons - 
People have already bought into the Canon environment and it is too expensive to change. I am not convinced. Canon have been behind on sensor technology for years and people complain repeatedly about how Canon do not innovate and never will, how they will always be behind yet still they don't switch. Surely if owning Canon is causing so much grief then it is worthwhile to take the short term financial hit on selling up and buying a system you will enjoy than year after year use a system you feel is inadequate from a manufacturer who is taking you for a ride. Maybe the differences are not so great as to make it worthwhile. 
Another possible is the Canon environment. They have lenses that other manufacturers do not have. They have a range of products that few others have. Taking a picture involves than just the sensor
Then there is the intangibles: they have a quality and reputation of service others do not have. The have a reliability, a kudos (which is just as valid as any other reason) or a line of progression that others do not have. 

Owning a product about such as a camera is more than just about the sensor. Spending your money on a system is about cost/value and given the number of potential points in a photographers evolution where it is cost effective to switch, many do not seem to be doing so. Nor do people seem to be buying into Sony at the lower end, the one where people really start their life with a brand.
So the only conclusion I can draw (and it is the only one I have ever really made) is that is that sensor performance is not _as important_ as some people think it is. The fact that some people like it, the fact that some people need it, is irrelevant to a marketing man - what they are bothered about is whether adding or leaving out a functionality will have a measurable effect on sales, and it seems sensor performance does not.
Will it come? Yes. Is it urgent? No.

And I think you touched on one point when you said "considering Sony has only been producing (higher end) cameras for a few years " maybe they need to make some lower models to get people into the environment rather than rely on experienced photographers switching. Stupid Sony.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> And I think you touched on one point when you said "considering Sony has only been producing (higher end) cameras for a few years " maybe they need to make some lower models to get people into the environment rather than rely on experienced photographers switching. Stupid Sony.



i agree. High prices for cameras and lenses are what limit Sony sales. First gen A7 was priced about right, Mk. II was too much of a hike. An A7 III priced like the first A7 would sell a lot better. 

And a bare-bones Sony "A5" with same FF sensor priced at USD/€ 999 would sell like hotcakes. it would be repeating Canons' big bang success with the EOS 300D in 2003 - first DSLR for a grand - and now in 2017 time for "first FF ILC for a grand". It would likely really tip the scales for Sony in terms of market share ... and later lens sales. But, stupid Sony. 

In addition Sony really needs to reconsider their FF lens pricing. FE lenses at any level at a 20-40% price premium over corresponding Canon and Nikon glass is seriously limiting Sony sales. 

For APS-C, Sony A6500, A6300 are priced high as well, and lens selection sucks. Either decent [eg 16-70/4.0] but way more expensive than Canon/Nikon crop lenses or totally sub-par performance (e.g. 16-50 and still not cheap). Add a truly inferior UI and service availability / issues and you have the full explanation why Sony/MILC systems have made some inroads, but not taken over the market by storm. 

Similar story for Fujifilm: good products, but retro-styling and sky-high "FF prices for crop-only gear". Good for Fuji's profitability, bad for their marketshare. Their decision to go for "pseudo medium format" instead of offering a really great FF sensored lineup (at reasonable prices) is absolutely dumb in my business economics book. It may well end up as "prototypical case study for misjudgement of market demand" at business schools. 

So, dumb Fuji, dumb Sony. Had they gotten it right, myself (and many others) would never have bought a Canon EOS M system plus 5D3 mirrorslapper but one nice, compact, universally useful FF MILC system. 

1299 for G1X III are also way overpriced. should have been 999 max or even 899. no reason why it should cost so much more than an SL-2 plus kitlens.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> 1299 for g1X III are also way overpriced. should have been 999 max or even 899. no reason why it should cost so much more than an SL-2 plus kitlens.



My first response was 'SL2 plus kittens?? I know the internet is run by cats but that is taking things too far.....'. Then I saw you wrote 'kit lens'. Time for a coffee methinks.

Yes, 1299 seems high and I wonder how long that will last.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 18, 2017)

but.. you can crank up ISO up to 25600!  (just kidding).




Jopa said:


> The lens is too dark to shoot at a concert IMHO. And probably too short?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 18, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> but.. you can crank up ISO up to 25600!  (just kidding).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, right...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 18, 2017)

Jopa said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Won't get turned away by security at a concert or sporting event
> ...



Forgive me, I don't mean professional concert work in the pit. I mean personal photography from the crowd. I'm in Southern California and I go to concerts often -- 90% of venues' security see a lens mount (or even a stout-lensed, higher zoom 'bridge' camera) and it is not allowed inside. X100s, RX100s, P&S, etc. get in just fine almost every time.

So, what's worse? An f/2.8 long end of an RX100 V on a 1" sensor shooting at ISO X for proper exposure or an f/5.6 long end of a G1xM3 APS-C sensor having to shoot at ISO 4X due to f/5.6? 

For sports it's a complete mixed bag. Major venues (MLB, NBA, etc.) have clearly printed policies but often are interpreted differently when you walk into security. For instance, Dodger Stadium is A-OK with a FF SLR provided the lens is under 6", while the nearby Staples Center prohibits any camera with an interchangeable lens or telephoto lens (targeting bridge / superzooms). But a fixed lens rig with a modest lens will get in.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Forgive me, I don't mean professional concert work in the pit. I mean personal photography from the crowd. I'm in Southern California and I go to concerts often -- 90% of venues' security see a lens mount (or even a stout-lensed, higher zoom 'bridge' camera) and it is not allowed inside. X100s, RX100s, P&S, etc. get in just fine almost every time.
> 
> For sports it's a complete mixed bag. Major venues (MLB, NBA, etc.) have clearly printed policies but often are interpreted differently when you walk into security. For instance, Dodger Stadium is A-OK with a FF SLR provided the lens is under 6", while the nearby Staples Center prohibits any camera with an interchangeable lens or telephoto lens (targeting bridge / superzooms). But a fixed lens rig with a modest lens will get in.



Maybe all you need is a printer and a laminator...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 18, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maybe all you need is a printer and a laminator...



Stay classy, Neuro. 

Yeah, the guy who pulled off the Conor MacGregor laminated pass move wins the prize. I'm not in MMA/boxing at all, but holy hell did that guy pull off quite the caper.

- A


----------



## Jopa (Oct 18, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> So, what's worse? An f/2.8 long end of an RX100 V on a 1" sensor shooting at ISO X for proper exposure or an f/5.6 long end of a G1xM3 APS-C sensor having to shoot at ISO 4X due to f/5.6?



The surface sq size difference is 2.83x, theoretically shooting at ISO 4X would be still worse. I think it would be beneficial only if both cams shoot at the same ISO or at least 2X (1 stop diff).



ahsanford said:


> For sports it's a complete mixed bag. Major venues (MLB, NBA, etc.) have clearly printed policies but often are interpreted differently when you walk into security.



Haha  I use to live in Dallas and several times managed to carry my A7r2 + 55/1.8 through the security (American Airlines Center). An RX-100 size cam won't be a problem either.

The G1-3 is a little bigger than the RX100, I wish they would make it a fraction bigger but put a 1 stop brighter lens, it would be an instant pre-order from me.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 18, 2017)

Jopa said:


> The G1-3 is a little bigger than the RX100, I wish they would make it a fraction bigger but put a 1 stop brighter lens, it would be an instant pre-order from me.



Ja, the f/5.6 is strangely faster than the EF-M 15-45 but even still seems too slow vs. the compacts. Most of the premium fixed lens rigs with smaller sensors miraculously jam fast glass in there, but I'm guessing that may have been problematic for APS-C.

What the smallest APS-C zoom anyone has ever seen? Would f/4 on the long end have made this collapsible lens design impractical or too large?

- A


----------



## Jopa (Oct 18, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > The G1-3 is a little bigger than the RX100, I wish they would make it a fraction bigger but put a 1 stop brighter lens, it would be an instant pre-order from me.
> ...



An f/4 would be da bomb 

IMHO all Canon needs is to make this lens https://www.sony.com/electronics/camera-lenses/selp1650 but good quality. Put it on an M6 and all problems solved.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 18, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe all you need is a printer and a laminator...
> ...



thx! ;D ;D ;D

He could have used a G1X III ... he got close enough to make do with a 24-70 eq. zoom ;-) ... but his iPhone shoots 4k, so he just went with it. ;D


----------



## Shellbo6901 (Oct 19, 2017)

yea, it lost me at 3x zoom, especially since they have such a long zoom on the G3 X and its only slightly larger


----------



## bf (Oct 19, 2017)

Looking at several comments and general reaction, it seems to me the APS-C sensor is not a big deal for a potential group of audience who looks at this camera. From lens speed to zoom range it's compared to classic compact camera ecosystem where the largest sensor you may have is 1". On the other hand, it does not have the retro range finder look that Fuji X100 offers. It's a somewhat new offering and I'm curious how will it be received in the market.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 19, 2017)

Thom Hogan's take on the G1X III ... http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/another-canon-aps-c-option.html

I totally agree with his assessment, why the G1X III has such #Canon-fugly llooks


> The G1 X Mark III is a bit of an *ugly duckling. The proportions don't look right*, with a large EVF+flash up top and the declining size, multi-stage power zoom lens looking very odd together. It's also unclear why the right hand grip is as shallow as it is, given that the collapsed lens still sticks out further.


----------



## eninja (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Thom Hogan's take on the G1X III ... http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/another-canon-aps-c-option.html
> 
> I totally agree with his assessment, why the G1X III has such #Canon-fugly llooks
> 
> ...



I disagree. I read it like as if there was nothing to talk about at this point, so why not wrote it is ugly.
To be honest, I've been waiting for this camera since Mark II was out.
Where else can you find this camera with these features. And Canon made if possible.
1. I wonder if a camera exist with APC size that is small enough?
2. I want it to have vari-angle so I can take selfie.
3. I want it to have touch screen and DPAF so I can ask some one take photo of me, and easy for them.

How else can you mount flash and EVF. It should be on the center - this is the specs and they made it right.
Why would you want hand grip to be thicker? - we want it to be small factor.

And to compare it with Eos M5. LOL. Does the eos M5 has vari-angle screen?
The question is, if the G1x M3 is as capable as M5, why buy the M5, if you don't change lens as much?

And Really.. You want to debate manufacturer about pricing?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 19, 2017)

eninja said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Thom Hogan's take on the G1X III ... http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/another-canon-aps-c-option.html
> ...



i don't debate. i observe, comment, criticize abd applaud. and yes, i am entitled to do so. 

E.g. that fully articulated LCD on the G1X III just highlights how stupid Canon's half-assed implementations of the flip-flap LCDs on both EOS M5 and M6 really is. 

and i would prefer the EVF placed as pop-up in top left corner of camera, not in a hump. much better for the clear majority of right-eyed users like me.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 19, 2017)

As far as pricing goes, Canon's only competing against itself it would appear:

EOS M5 + 15-45 kit = $1049

G1x3 = same as above + leaf shutter + smaller footprint + slightly brighter lens + non-modular mount (for getting into events/sports) = $1299

Seems about right in that light. Both are overpriced, of course, but I see why a G1x3 would have a higher price than the M5 kit. 

- A


----------



## eninja (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> i don't debate. i observe, comment, criticize abd applaud. and yes, i am entitled to do so.



I meant the author of the article, in the end he insist Canon explain to him for the high price.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 19, 2017)

eninja said:


> I meant the author of the article, in the end he insist Canon explain to him for the high price.



Questioning Canon pricing is tantamount to wondering why a dog licks its stuff.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 19, 2017)

not questioning each and every supplier's pricing for each and every product ... is ... plain stupid.


----------



## Talys (Oct 19, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> eninja said:
> 
> 
> > I meant the author of the article, in the end he insist Canon explain to him for the high price.
> ...



Wow, I never knew... Dogs think that licking their stuff is how they squeeze the most of you?


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> not questioning each and every supplier's pricing for each and every product ... is ... plain stupid.



Why?
See the product, try it out, look at the price...are you willing to pay. 
Knowing the cost model they used will not change the fact whether it is worth buying. On that basis, non-one would buy Apple gear.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> not questioning each and every supplier's pricing for each and every product ... is ... plain stupid.



Try pissing into the wind instead, it may be more effective…


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 20, 2017)

Some people do this all the time, day in and day out, that is why their logic smells and it is in your best interest to avoid arguing with the stinker. 



neuroanatomist said:


> Try pissing into the wind instead, it may be more effective…


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 20, 2017)

public questioning of prices or business practices often is surprisingly effective ... probably more so than just quietly making a personal buy/no buy decision. Every business is fully dependent on trust and reputation. Even infallible Canon. ;-)


----------



## Talys (Oct 20, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> public questioning of prices or business practices often is surprisingly effective ... probably more so than just quietly making a personal buy/no buy decision. Every business is fully dependent on trust and reputation. Even infallible Canon. ;-)



I disagree. You see lots of "public outcry" over things like Lightroom pricing, or iPhone ##, iPad ##, Galaxy S# yet those products are smashing commercial successes by every metric that matters to the company (like profits, growth, marketshare, and mindshare).

At the end of the day, the ratio of people who buy things (or not) and are passionate enough about that decision and prefer to spend their time to post about it online versus the number of people who just buy things (or not) is really tiny. And, the people who go online are often strongly set in their opinion, and are difficult to sway either way. 

Also, as much as we love to think that price is a priority, for people who buy luxury items or work tools, price often is only a superficial priority. Someone might SAY price is very important to them (even a determinant factor), yet when push comes to shove, they buy what they want and justify it, rather than an alternative.

The way to convince a company that product that it's too expensive is to not buy it. It's unlikely that the price will change in the short term (among other things, large companies are not nimble), but long term, or a future generation product may see a change. 

The other way to convince a company that price is very important or how relatively determinant price is, is to participate in surveys, focus groups, round tables (especially the latter two) and bring along well-thought points. Usually, that will require you to be a professional in its target market.


----------



## merefield (Oct 21, 2017)

Talys said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > public questioning of prices or business practices often is surprisingly effective ... probably more so than just quietly making a personal buy/no buy decision. Every business is fully dependent on trust and reputation. Even infallible Canon. ;-)
> ...



The marketing guys usually get it right ... there are many reasons why you price and spec a product a certain way not least to fill a gap in the market to capture a certain kind of customer, act as halo product etc.

Take the iPhone X ... CLEARLY over priced for most, but there are a sufficient number of well-healed customers with fat wallets who are prepared to pay almost ANYTHING to get the latest greatest Apple product. The marketing team knows this and doesn't care that the rest of the market is not interested, they only want to maximise profit and brand.


----------



## dolina (Oct 21, 2017)

merefield said:


> The marketing guys usually get it right ... there are many reasons why you price and spec a product a certain way not least to fill a gap in the market to capture a certain kind of customer, act as halo product etc.
> 
> Take the iPhone X ... CLEARLY over priced for most, but there are a sufficient number of well-healed customers with fat wallets who are prepared to pay almost ANYTHING to get the latest greatest Apple product. The marketing team knows this and doesn't care that the rest of the market is not interested, they only want to maximise profit and brand.


The price of the G1 X Mark III matches the Fujifilm X100F

Canon EOS M5 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 15-45mm Lens is $1,049 but is heavier, larger and has a slower lens than the G1X Mark III. Both cameras share the same focal length range and APS-C image sensor.

The PowerShot isnt primarily targeted at people who need an ILC. 

Its for people who want as small and light a camera possible that provides superior image quality to supplement and connect to their smartphone.

To further assert this position that there is a market for the G1X Mark III on October 12, 2017 Canon manufactured it's 90 millionth EOS body and 130 millionth EF lens. 

That comes out as 1.4444 lenses for every 1 body.

This tells me that the majority of body owners probably own 1 lens. This lens is probably the bundled kit lens hence the popularity of body kits from as high as a the 5D series to the entry 200D/SL2.

The minority own more than 1 lens.

I vaguely remember that the 1-Series bodies make up 1% of the annual production run of EOS bodies of Canon. I have never seen a 1-Series body kit bundle offered since I kept track of dSLRs in 2003.

This would be similar to Nikon as well. 

So at most 1-Series bodies will not exceed 1 million units in its whole production run.

This is the same as the iPhone X. It might appeal to the top 1% or top 10% of iPhone users.


----------

