# The New Canon PowerShot G7 X



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 13, 2014)

```
<p>This  is  the  new  1″  sensor  Canon  PowerShot  G7  X.</p>
<a  href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/g7x.jpg"><img  class="alignnone  size-full  wp-image-17284"  src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/g7x.jpg"  alt="g7x"  width="500"  height="384"  /></a></p>
<ul>
<li>Sensor  1  inch  20MP  CMOS  sensor</li>
<li>Lens  conversion  24-100mm  F1.8-2.8</li>
<li>Intelligent  optical  Image  Stabilizer</li>
<li>Video  5-axis  camera  shake  correction</li>
<li>DIGIC6</li>
<li>AF  is  31  points.  Allows  Touch  AF</li>
<li>LCD  monitor  tilting.  1.04  million  dots.  Touch  panel</li>
<li>Built-in  flash</li>
<li>Exposure  compensation  dial</li>
<li>Control  ring</li>
<li>ND  filter  built-in</li>
<li>Video  Full  HD  60p.  Stereo</li>
<li>Manual  video  control</li>
<li>Wi-Fi  Built-in.  NFC.  The  remote  control  function  with  smartphone</li>
</ul>
<p>Source:  [<a  href="https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdigicame-info.com%2F"  target="_blank">DCI</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span  style="color:  #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 13, 2014)

Looks nice


----------



## noncho (Sep 13, 2014)

Yep, looks like great little camera with good lens.


----------



## retina (Sep 13, 2014)

this is interesting! specs wise looks a lot like the sony rx100 series, even with a suspicious 1" 20MP sensor 

lens reach is better, 100mm f/2.8 is quite nice!


----------



## Ivan Muller (Sep 13, 2014)

Nice, but where is the EVF???


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 13, 2014)

Ivan Muller said:


> Nice, but where is the EVF???



In RX100 III


----------



## sanj (Sep 13, 2014)

Seems nice. I would have bought it but I prefer camera with EVF. For one simple reason - I wear glasses sometimes and find myself struggling to see focus in the LCD. 
My 'casual' camera is Fuji XE2 but am looking out for something smaller.


----------



## liv_img (Sep 13, 2014)

Nice, but miss a viewfinder


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 13, 2014)

retina said:


> this is interesting! specs wise looks a lot like the sony rx100 series, even with a suspicious 1" 20MP sensor
> 
> lens reach is better




Indeed. We'll see if it's the Sony sensor. That plus the longer lens plus real RAW files plus Canon's ergonomics/menus, we have a winner!


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 13, 2014)

*Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X YAWN*

EVF? Or Hotshoe, 4K, or something.

Seems like something from 2012. LOL

Sorry Canon YAWN.



Ivan Muller said:


> Nice, but where is the EVF???


----------



## LifeAfter (Sep 13, 2014)

To conquer the RX100 MkIII, it should have at least the EVF, "flexible" flash, and OF course the DR of Sony's sensors. 

I'm quite sure that ergonomics and the menu's are best made by Canon, the material and finish are also. But anyway, EVF, DR, and potentially the "flipsable" flash would make it a winner.

And what about the PRICE?!!! Canonic PRICE.!!!
P.S. Don't forget that Sony has Zeiss lens, so that isn't an argument over Sony.


----------



## Krob78 (Sep 13, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> retina said:
> 
> 
> > this is interesting! specs wise looks a lot like the sony rx100 series, even with a suspicious 1" 20MP sensor
> ...


I agree, looks like a winner to me too!  I'm in the same camp with several of the others though, the evf would be nice.. That and seeing the wifi feature, still makes me wonder why they didn't throw it in the 7D Mk2...


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 13, 2014)

retina said:


> this is interesting! specs wise looks a lot like the sony rx100 series, even with a suspicious 1" 20MP sensor
> 
> lens reach is better, 100mm f/2.8 is quite nice!




If my calculations are correct it's a 35mm equivalent to f4.9 to f7.6.

So, that's 100mm f7.6 in normal exposure values.

I wish they would have stuck this sensor in the SX60, they can't for marketing reasons because it would technically reduce the "zoom ratio" (unless they used the extra space to go really wide) but I still want maximum IQ from my superzoom compact.
The adjusted aperture for the SX60 (if it has the same 1/2.3" sensor size) would be f22.56 to f36.66, which is great since you'll never have to worry about limited DOF (so I tell myself in consolation).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 13, 2014)

9VIII said:


> If my calculations are correct it's a 35mm equivalent to f4.9 to f7.6.
> 
> So, that's 100mm f7.6 in normal exposure values.



Might be a semantic thing, but to be clear...it's f/7.6 in terms of DoF, but f/2.8 in terms of exposure (until you factor in ISO noise, anyway).


----------



## tcphoto (Sep 13, 2014)

Looks like a great little camera, perhaps I'll be motivated to replace my G12. I'm a little confused about Canon's numbering, how do they go from G1X Mark II to G7X?


----------



## distant.star (Sep 13, 2014)

.
And the picture (looking very manipulated) seems to even show a touch of red swoosh. Can we turn that into a merger rumor???


----------



## hachu21 (Sep 13, 2014)

tcphoto said:


> Looks like a great little camera, perhaps I'll be motivated to replace my G12. I'm a little confused about Canon's numbering, how do they go from G1X Mark II to G7X?


No they go from G16 to G7 X. The expo adjust dial and tilting screen are there to show the link.
But i wonder if will see a new S-series camera.


----------



## hachu21 (Sep 13, 2014)

distant.star said:


> .
> And the picture (looking very manipulated) seems to even show a touch of red swoosh. Can we turn that into a merger rumor???


the red touch has been allready seen on the s120 limited. Here Nice uh?!


----------



## Wally in Austin (Sep 13, 2014)

Looks nice any word on mic input? It's clear Sony set the market for good quality 1 inch cameras and Canon is doing something that doesn't look like their other kludgy mirrorless design. Nikon is trash talk in this arena for now primarily due to being way over priced. My wife has a RX 100 II and I am in the market for a 1 inch sensor camera and Canon for the first time ever just got my attention.


----------



## JPAZ (Sep 13, 2014)

Hmmm. Maybe it is time to upgrade my G6! Well, when I want something small I've got my M. And, my wife is VERY happy with her RX1000iii 'cause she really wanted a viewfinder.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 13, 2014)

JPAZ said:


> Hmmm. Maybe it is time to upgrade my G6! Well, when I want something small I've got my M. And, my wife is VERY happy with her RX1000iii 'cause she really wanted a viewfinder.



It's too early to tell, but I doubt this will out perform your RX100 III. The EVF is a nice feature to shoot outdoor. The price remains primary factor for these two. I don't see how Canon would priced at $800ish. If it around $600ish and MUST BE pocketable then Canon has upper hand.


----------



## Pny (Sep 13, 2014)

Looks more like a successor to the Canon S120 than the Canon G 16.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 13, 2014)

Pny said:


> Looks more like a successor to the Canon S120 than the Canon G 16.



Yes, but it has a bigger sensor. I guess according to Canon that makes it more like a G_ X camera. 

_**Thumbs my nose at all those who claim Canon thinks the sensor doesn't matter.**_


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 13, 2014)

*sigh*
with these specs it'll be rather expensive. 
Otherwise I'm in...


----------



## sanjosedave (Sep 13, 2014)

There is no wow in this camera. I'll wait for the reviews, doesn't seem like a camera to jump on out of the gate. It seems to be a me-too-ish camera


----------



## mpphoto (Sep 13, 2014)

It appeals to me as the owner of a G15, but I just bought mine last summer. This G7 X looks like it would be a nice upgrade, but I just can't justify replacing my G15 so soon. I'm sure I will buy one (or a successor) in 2-3 years. Probably not what Canon wants to hear.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 13, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > If my calculations are correct it's a 35mm equivalent to f4.9 to f7.6.
> ...



Very interesting.
So to be clear, a 1DX with a 100mm f2.8 lens at ISO 100 and the G7X at ISO 100, zoomed all the way in (maximum telephoto) and wide open, will produce images with the same brightness?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 13, 2014)

well, no winner. too late. Should have come out with that thing 2 years ago instead of stupid Powershot S 100/110/120 and instead of also stupid G1 X/II 

+ 
at least a 1" sensor
fast lens, useful focal length range 
built in fill flash
WiFi + NFC built in ... but not in much bigger 7D II ... so incredibly and utterly ridiculous! 
Control Ring ... yes, yes yes (if fully user assignable) 
Touch LCD

-
no APS-C sensor
no top-notch EVF
price (whatever it is, it will be way too high)
not Retina/hi Res LCD, only 640x480 

=
no buy, as far as I am concerned


----------



## ihendy (Sep 13, 2014)

Just got the RXIII a month ago after waiting for 2 generations of RX's for canon to release something like this. Had an S90 a few years back. Good camera but it broke just after the warranty expired. Seems like canon is beginning to react, but alas no EVF. I prefer canon colours but the Sony RXIII is going to be a hard act to follow. The only thing I'm not crazy about on the sony is the front control ring and 70mm is a little short. Otherwise it's pretty much perfect. It will be interesting to see the image quality comparisons, but Canon seems to be adopting the too little to late strategy. Not the best marketing plan if they want to stay on top. Come on canon - get in the game.


----------



## retina (Sep 13, 2014)

9VIII said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



yes correct, exposure is exposure.

if you meter a scene with a 1DX + 100mm lens at ISO 100 & f/2.8 and say you get 1/100, you will get the same shutter speed with the G7X, using same settings ( ISO 100 & f/2.8 ) = resulting in the same exposure value.

DoF otoh will be equivalent to f/7.6 of 1DX + 100mm lens, due to 2.7x crop factor of this 1" sensor.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 13, 2014)

Anything more than $550 isn't worth the money. Better value on the RX100 II or III.



Dylan777 said:


> JPAZ said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm. Maybe it is time to upgrade my G6! Well, when I want something small I've got my M. And, my wife is VERY happy with her RX1000iii 'cause she really wanted a viewfinder.
> ...


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 13, 2014)

+1

Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed. LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks!



AvTvM said:


> well, no winner. too late. Should have come out with that thing 2 years ago instead of stupid Powershot S 100/110/120 and instead of also stupid G1 X/II
> 
> +
> at least a 1" sensor
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2014)

9VIII said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



Yes. Exposure (aperture + shutter speed) is determined by _light per unit area_ hitting the sensor. An f/2.8 lens with a given shutter speed (say 1/100 s) and a given ISO (say ISO 100) will give the same 'brightness' (within a reasonable variation due to different meters) whether the sensor is an iPhone or a Hasselblad medium format. 

However...the image noise is determined by the _total light_ collected, so at a given aperture + shutter speed + ISO, the larger the sensor the lower the noise. 

For the same framing with a smaller sensor, you're either using a shorter FL or you're further away, resulting in a deeper DoF. That's why a 'crop factor' applies to DoF as well as FL. If you need that deeper DoF with the larger sensor, you simply stop down and you have it. If you need to keep the shutter speed up, you raise ISO; the lower noise from the larger sensor means when you match DoF, you match noise and you're no worse off. 

Basically, larger sensors give you the option of thinner DoF if you want it (and lower noise if you do), or the same DoF with no penalty.

For further reading: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed. LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks



If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket. Is that true of the LX100?


----------



## Khufu (Sep 14, 2014)

I'm not a fan of these things being labled 1" Sensors... I hope everyone considering this thing is aware it's much smaller than an inch and only around 15.9mm measured diagonally! 

Go buy an EOS M instead


----------



## Woody (Sep 14, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> well, no winner. too late. Should have come out with that thing 2 years ago instead of stupid Powershot S 100/110/120 and instead of also stupid G1 X/II



G1X II is not stupid. It is let down by poor sensor. It is incomprehensible how a small RX100 MK3 sensor can perform better.

Let us hope the G7X has a better sensor


----------



## Woody (Sep 14, 2014)

Khufu said:


> I'm not a fan of these things being labled 1" Sensors... I hope everyone considering this thing is aware it's much smaller than an inch and only around 15.9mm measured diagonally!
> 
> Go buy an EOS M instead



I am in the market for a small camera. Deciding between EOS M, SL1 and this G7X


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 14, 2014)

Does seem to be aimed directly at the Sony RX100 family, but like many others beforehand I would have liked EVF. 

Even Sony realised their mistake by selling the EVF as an extra on the Mark II only to incorporate one (very cleverly) into the Mark III.

The video on this seems to be lacking as well, when compared to the Sony RX100 Mark III.

For Canon users, the main advantage to not buying Sony as a pocketable camera, is the menu system. I guess Canon uses a similar system on these smaller cameras as they do on their DSLRs?

When it comes out I will definitely go and take a look, but I do not have the same expectations or excitement as I did when I first saw the RX100 Mark III.

I doubt Sony are worried, which is a shame. How long is it until the RX100 Mark IV comes out?!! ;-)


----------



## Woody (Sep 14, 2014)

expatinasia said:


> The video on this seems to be lacking as well, when compared to the Sony RX100 Mark III.
> 
> For Canon users, the main advantage to not buying Sony as a pocketable camera, is the menu system. I guess Canon uses a similar system on these smaller cameras as they do on their DSLRs?



There's also Canon colors. 

But the G7X has a touch screen and Canon's touch screens are one of the best in the camera market right now. If the G7X has a responsive AF, it'll be a winning combination.

I believe the G7X can also do 1080p 60p just like RX100 M3, so I don't understand your comment that its video capabilities being lacking.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 14, 2014)

Woody said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > well, no winner. too late. Should have come out with that thing 2 years ago instead of stupid Powershot S 100/110/120 and instead of also stupid G1 X/II
> ...



The G1 X I and II are stupid. Because Canon did not stick the best APS-C sensor available at production time into them, but chose a weirdo 4:3 format sensor instead. Or otherwise use a 1" sensor and make the damn thing smaller, rather than waiting more than 2 years until they finally come up with a response to the Sony RX-100.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 14, 2014)

Looks nice. I wonder exactly how large and the weight?
And how it will fair vs the Sony RX100, the current king of pocket cams and something to which Canon, before this at least, had nothing to answer with.


----------



## Woody (Sep 14, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Or otherwise use a 1" sensor and make the damn thing smaller, rather than waiting more than 2 years until they finally come up with a response to the Sony RX-100.



That is why I previously wrote Canon management is now eating crow:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0336328811/cp-2013-interview-with-canons-masaya-maeda

"...he ruled out the idea of a larger sensor camera along the lines of the Sony RX100 to offer more of an image quality distinction between smartphones and compact cameras. 'I think the market does exist but it wouldn't be very large. We think we have a good balancing point in terms of price, image quality and size. Lots of other combinations are possible, but, once you go below APS-C the next logical size is 1/2.3 inch', he says."

The RX100 series is a roaring success, the bestselling high end compact camera.


----------



## Tanispyre (Sep 14, 2014)

I'm kinda mad I just bought a rx100. This looks much nicer.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 14, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



1. Avtv--you make some good points sometimes but you sound so angry!

2. I own the S95 and the M. What is terribly important to me is how responsive the new rig really is.

3. It really is neat to read some of the posts here--quite entertaining and sometimes educational, although not in the way that the posters intend.


----------



## rt (Sep 14, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket.


Yeah, has it? Compared to S120 -- the sensor is bigger, the lens it faster, the screen is articulated. As much as I'd like to believe the S series form factor and size -- is this possible?


----------



## Rocky (Sep 14, 2014)

rt said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket.
> ...


If I can put the EOS-M with 22mm lens in my jacket pocket and even my dress pant pocket, I cannot see why the G7 X cannot be put in the same way.


----------



## Woody (Sep 14, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> Anything more than $550 isn't worth the money. Better value on the RX100 II or III.



The RX100 M3 is selling for $800. While G7X has touch screen, the RX100 M3 has EVF. Is the EVF worth $250? Not to me.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 14, 2014)

a viewfinder is one of the most valuable features on any camera to me (and others). Adding a good EVF also is significantly more costly than the difference between a touch LCD + user interface and a non-touch LCD. 

As far as I am concerned, an EVF might be worth paying something extra. 250 would be a little high, compared to overall camera price. I'd imagine Canon can source those little EVF-screens for less than 50 from Epson or Sony ... depending on number of units ;D



Woody said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > Anything more than $550 isn't worth the money. Better value on the RX100 II or III.
> ...


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 14, 2014)

Woody said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > The video on this seems to be lacking as well, when compared to the Sony RX100 Mark III.
> ...



The Sony RX100 Mark III can also record video in XAVC S format at 50Mbit/s and up to 120fps in that system.



Tanispyre said:


> I'm kinda mad I just bought a rx100. This looks much nicer.



Nicer in what way?! You do not even know the price yet, and the RX 100 iii has so much more things going for it. I presume you bought the Mark III if you have only just bought it?


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Sep 14, 2014)

IF I replace my beloved RX100Mk1, this camera has to be better then the Mk3 oder the LX100 from Panasonic.
Seems to be a good camera, coming a bit late.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2014)

Rocky said:


> rt said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



That would work well...if I wore dress pants or a jacket on summer weekend outings with the family...


----------



## Hillsilly (Sep 14, 2014)

Khufu said:


> I'm not a fan of these things being labled 1" Sensors... I hope everyone considering this thing is aware it's much smaller than an inch and only around 15.9mm measured diagonally!


Camera makers use the "non-standard" inch, where everthing is inflated 1.5x. The concept gets a surprising amount of real world use.


----------



## Kevin (Sep 14, 2014)

This is a decent pocket camera. EVF means nothing here. I cant imagine anyone would use an EVF with such a small point and shoot camera. A tilt lcd is much more important, and GX7 has a good 4x zoom vs Rx100's 3x.

If this is not just a rumor and Gx7 can be this S-size packing all the specs, I would say although late but finally a nice one.


----------



## rt (Sep 14, 2014)

Khufu said:


> I'm not a fan of these things being labled 1" Sensors... I hope everyone considering this thing is aware it's much smaller than an inch and only around 15.9mm measured diagonally!


I am not. What do you mean?


Khufu said:


> Go buy an EOS M instead


I'd love to, I need fast & reliable AF though, at least on par with 7D. Lacking this I think I'll stay with my trusty S90


----------



## tayassu (Sep 14, 2014)

Well, assuming it is the Sony sensor and it is S series size, the critical question to decide between this and the Sony RX100III is: Do you need 30mm more FL or do you need an EVF? Maybe Canon surprises us with an EVF and we don't have to decide anymore... :


----------



## rt (Sep 14, 2014)

Overall, I think I am going to buy it, unless they seriously underdeliver on something...

I wonder about video performance (AF, can it chase my 2 year old daugther playing, not a huge challenge given the relative DOF) and whether this thing is able to control speedlites -- I'd love it, I usually have a few set up around the house at any given time but I don't always feel like grabbing the full DSLR setup, the ability to use a much smaller cam with that would be great. Not holding my breath though, knowing Canon...


----------



## Rocky (Sep 14, 2014)

Hillsilly said:


> Khufu said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not a fan of these things being labled 1" Sensors... I hope everyone considering this thing is aware it's much smaller than an inch and only around 15.9mm measured diagonally!
> ...


That size system is a carry over from the vacuum tube image senser in the old days.


----------



## LifeAfter (Sep 14, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed. LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks
> ...



I don't know why you favor Canon over Sony, you're looking for an argument to make it a better camera!
Sony's not a perfect Camera (RX 100 III), and i am a Canon user, but BE objective and accept what is real.
Anyway we're just talking about something we just saw a picture.

"Fit in a jeans pocket" vs "small enough to store it + EVF + better DR + better ISO"

Actually we don't know anything about the DR and ISO, but knowing the current line of Canon DSLR's we don't expect much.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 14, 2014)

Not sure, but I wouldn't care about stuffing a camera in my pocket. Given the smaller sensor, lack of EVF, lack of Hotshoe, lack of 4K, etc. I wouldn't know or care as the Four Thirds camera offers superior IQ.




neuroanatomist said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed. LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks
> ...


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 14, 2014)

It's the Canon Me2 camera. LOL

Some innovation would have been asking to much I guess. Would take the RX100 III any day over a fake wanna be GwannaB X



expatinasia said:


> Does seem to be aimed directly at the Sony RX100 family, but like many others beforehand I would have liked EVF.
> 
> Even Sony realised their mistake by selling the EVF as an extra on the Mark II only to incorporate one (very cleverly) into the Mark III.
> 
> ...


----------



## l_d_allan (Sep 14, 2014)

*BSI sensor? n/t*

no text


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 14, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> Not sure, but I wouldn't care about stuffing a camera in my pocket. Given the smaller sensor, lack of EVF, lack of Hotshoe, lack of 4K, etc. I wouldn't know or care as the Four Thirds camera offers superior IQ.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Some in this thread talk about the essential nature of a viewfinder (for their style of shooting). I suspect that the vast majority of those folks who post on this board who own a full-featured DSLR (a 5D Mk whatever) as well as the EOS M and maybe even an S90-120 or whatever...view 'pocketability' as essential--FOR CERTAIN USES.

Mark me down in that category--when examining our Adorama 8x8" books, some of the best vacation shots I have ever taken were with a Canon S95. Its small size was purrrrrrfekt for our needs. No viewfinder.

I've thought about starting a separate thread for the following topic...my guess is it is already on here somewhere.

Specifically, most of my best pics involve family travels and/or sports. My philosophy is this: I want to take the LEAST sophisticated camera/lens combination possible. This generally translates to the smallest possible, too.

As I've posted here before, I find the 11-22mm lens for the EOS M invaluable. I also find the Canon XYX-270 flash indispensable, on the M as well as the 5DMkIII.

Since I purchased the M, I have found less use for the S95. Its larger sensor enables more cropping as well as all of the other advantages you all know about.

What is troublesome about both the M and the S-series of cameras...is their lack of responsiveness. If Canon builds this new one to be as responsive as a DSLR I think I will buy one.

And, assuming it is pocketable, I will use it. A lot. Not for the same shots as a full-field or APS-C...but for when it suits my needs at the time.

And sometimes, when traveling, pocketable is _*GOOD*_.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 15, 2014)

LifeAfter said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > powershot2012 said:
> ...



I've been tempted by the RX100 since the first one. The series are very nice cameras. 

"Fits in a jeans pocket" is an important priority in some some situations, which is why I got the S95 then the S100. The EOS M has better IQ (especially in low light or when a fast shutter is needed), but it's bigger and sometimes the 18-55 isn't wide enough, whereas 24mm FFeq would be (that happened today). 

The current line of Canon dSLRs is quite possibly irrelevant as far as this camera goes, as Canon most likely bought the Sony sensor (my S95 has a Sony sensor, too).


----------



## Frage (Sep 15, 2014)

> Lens conversion 24-100mm F1.8-2.8



This might be not completely accurate. Shouldn't we multiply the aperture as we do with the focal length?

Correct me if I'm wrong please.


----------



## 123Photog (Sep 15, 2014)

Frage said:


> > Lens conversion 24-100mm F1.8-2.8
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I normaly do.


----------



## tayassu (Sep 15, 2014)

The lens is a 8,8-36,7/1,8-2,8. It gives us the the same field of view like a 24-100mm lens and the same DoF like a 4,9-7,6 lens with the FL of 24-100mm. However, the brightness in the picture is the same like a 1,8-2,8 lens on FF, because you have to factor in that the ISO must be multiplied by the crop factor Square, which makes ISO 100 on the G7X look like an ISO 744 on a FF sensor that is made with the exact same technology, assuming something like that is possible.


----------



## Jamesy (Sep 15, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> "Fits in a jeans pocket" is an important priority in some some situations, which is why I got the S95 then the S100. The EOS M has better IQ (especially in low light or when a fast shutter is needed), but it's bigger and sometimes the 18-55 isn't wide enough, whereas 24mm FFeq would be (that happened today).



You should try the ef-m 11-22 - you can get it here in Canada through Canon for $399. It is a fantastic lens - I used it %70 of the time on a recent NYC vacation trip.

My S90 is a little long in the tooth and has not seen the light of day since I got the M but this little G7 X seems interesting. The latest RX III seemed a tad short on the long end though at 70mm.

Correct me if I am wrong, don't the G series all have hot shoes whereas this one does not?


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 16, 2014)

But the RX100 III has smaller dimensions than the larger G7X?????

LX100 competes with the G1X given the advanced features and much larger sensor doesn't it?



neuroanatomist said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed. LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks
> ...


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 16, 2014)

Maybe the G9X will address the shortcomings of the G7X?




expatinasia said:


> Does seem to be aimed directly at the Sony RX100 family, but like many others beforehand I would have liked EVF.
> 
> Even Sony realised their mistake by selling the EVF as an extra on the Mark II only to incorporate one (very cleverly) into the Mark III.
> 
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> But the RX100 III has smaller dimensions than the larger G7X?????
> 
> LX100 competes with the G1X given the advanced features and much larger sensor doesn't it?
> 
> ...



Perhaps you missed the part in red, or the fact that when I posted that, we had only a picture and no specs. The RX100-III is the same size for all practical purposes (0.1" in two dimensions aren't really significant). Canon managed to fit a much better spec'd lens in the same size body, we'll see about the IQ.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 16, 2014)

Dimension of G7X: 103 x 60 x 40 mm (4.06 x 2.36 x 1.57″)
Dimension o fLX100: 115 x 66 x 55mm
That makes the LX100 even less pocketable than the EOS-M with 22mm lens.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 16, 2014)

Far easier to fit a Sony RX100 III into a pocket than a Canon G7X, but if your talking about the LX100, then compare it to the G1X II at 4.6 x 2.6 x 2.9 inches which is more an appropriate competitor given the sensor size and features.

EOS-M??? Do they still make those things?



Rocky said:


> Dimension of G7X: 103 x 60 x 40 mm (4.06 x 2.36 x 1.57″)
> Dimension o fLX100: 115 x 66 x 55mm
> That makes the LX100 even less pocketable than the EOS-M with 22mm lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> Far easier to fit a Sony RX100 III into a pocket than a Canon G7X



WTF??

Sony RX100-III: 4.0 x 2.3 x 1.6" / 101.6 x 58.1 x 41.0 mm
PowerShot G7 X: 4.1 x 2.4 x 1.6" / 104.1 x 61.0 x 40.6 mm

Far easier? Care to share whatever it is you're smoking/drinking/injecting that makes you think 2.5mm more width, 1.9mm more height, and 0.4mm less depth makes any sort of significant difference that would mean it's far easier to fit the RX100-III into a pocket than the G7 X?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 17, 2014)

Sony RX100 III vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compare/#555,573
Canon Powershot S-120 vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compare/#475,573
Canon EOS M2 vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compact/#496,573,ha,f 
Canon EOS M2 w/ 22/2.0 vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compact/#496.349,573,ha,t
Canon G1X II vs. EOS M2 vs. G7 X vs. S120: http://camerasize.com/compact/#534,496,573,475,ha,f

Panasonix LX100 vs Canon G7 X: not available yet


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 17, 2014)

Frage said:


> > Lens conversion 24-100mm F1.8-2.8
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It might help if you read the thread.




neuroanatomist said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


----------



## Jamesy (Sep 17, 2014)

Is the G7X the first G-Series without a hotshoe?


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 22, 2014)

Yes that's correct, if you wanted a pocketable camera, the dimensions of the RX100 III fits the criteria much better and you get an EVF. 




neuroanatomist said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > Far easier to fit a Sony RX100 III into a pocket than a Canon G7X
> ...


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 22, 2014)

In reality the G7 X is more of a Powershot S-series with a less dwarfy-sensor ... basically a S-130 ... rather than a G-series. 

G1-X II should be the last G-series with a sensor smaller than APS-C. To be succeeded - if at all - by a version of a future EOS-M3 without lens mount but hi-performance 4x zoom bolted-on, EVF, hotshoe and fully articulated LCD. It could then be designated as Canon Powershot G-M1.


----------



## jamiewednesday (Sep 25, 2014)

I got a G7X (or G7 X) yesterday. It's nice. It may not be especially sharp though.

This is what I put in thread on DP Review, if it helps.



Had a try out with it in the late afternoon/early evening.

Firstly it's slightly bigger than the S95 it's replacing. Not significantly, but noticeably. It's more LX3 in size. The S95 is quite svelte and slips in your jeans pocket, the G7X fits in the pocket, but is a bit lumpy. It feels very industrial in the hand too, I don't think anything's going to break on it.

At first I found it a bit awkward to hold, with the pad of my thumb on the thumbrest, the 'heel' of my thumb kept hitting the record button and I found it awkward to reach the shutter button. But I then moved the heel of my thumb to the thumbrest and now my finger was over the shutter button and I didn't press 'record', much more sense and it now felt good in my hand. The record button is customisable though and can be switched off entirely if easier.

I really like a tilt screen, especially in combination with the touch/drag focus point on this one. I like using tilt screens at 90 degrees, like a TLR as it gives a different perspective and is also useful for low down shots and shading the screen from the sun too. The touch focus works very well in combination with this and is quick.

The operation and menus will be familiar to any Powershot user, nothing much has changed from what I can see so far.

The pictures look like they do from other Powershots too, all that Canon colours stuff.

So far images have come out pretty well, I've only just downloaded DPP update from Canon HK today so all images from yesterday are jpeg so far and seem OK to me. You can get a decently shallow depth of field at wider apertures and the bokeh circles look alright too.

IQ. This is the 'hum' part. I think the images are fine for what I expected. In terms of sharpness, well I've perhaps been spoiled by my other larger sensor 'small' cameras like the GR and I don't think this is up there. I know this will be a 'deal breaker' for some who expect all things from a camera with a larger price tag.

However I don't think that stops it from being a really nice tool to make nice pictures with. Also, this is just an initial impression from first use in the gathering light. I'm also firmly convinced that after use, many electronic items get 'better', whether that's because the user gets better at using them and/or they need 'running in'. So with more use in better light incoming days, I'm looking forward to it and I may well think IQ is better than OK, certainly the detail in some initial cat pictures look alright.

In short, it's a decent, chunky but still quite small camera with that great tilt/touch screen.

Some images on flickr which may help:

https://flic.kr/p/pnZdc6

https://flic.kr/p/pohChy

https://flic.kr/p/p6QXfr

https://flic.kr/p/pojX8Z


----------



## dufflover (Oct 9, 2015)

Only have a quick Q here I haven't been able to get conclusive hits on Google with.

Does this camera have an IR receiver to use any existing Canon IR remotes, e.g. the RC-6?

Part of my whole weigh up between RX100 III or G7X. (wanting to step up from RX100 mk1)


----------

