# *UPDATE 3* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 5, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/canon-powershot-g1x-revealed/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/canon-powershot-g1x-revealed/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/canon-powershot-g1x-revealed/"></a></div>
<p><strong>Canon PowerShot G1X

</strong>Canon U.S.A. is unveiling two PowerShot Elph-series point-and-shoot cameras and a new flagship Power-Shot G-series model. The G1X (shipping in February at a $799 suggested retail) will be positioned for advanced amateurs and professionals looking for a walk-around point-and-shoot model and offers a large 1.5-inch 14.3-mega-pixel CMOS image sensor and a 4x (28-112mm) optical zoom lens.</p>
<p>It is said to have a shallow depth of field and an aperture range of F/2.5-16 affording better low-light capability.</p>
<p>Other new features include 14-bit RAW file support, a new DIGIC 5 image processor with improved low-light support, high-speed burst HQ shooting of up to 6fps/4.5 fps at full resolution, multi-area white balance adjustment, expanded Smart Auto settings, child-weighted face detection system, handheld night scene and HDR mode. It will shoot up to FullHD 1080 video and includes a 720p Movie Digest mode to automatically compile a video log of all still shots.</p>
<p><strong>PowerShot G1X Specifications

</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>14.3mp CMOS (1.5inch) Sensor (1/1.5″ probably)</li>
<li>4x Zoom (28-112)</li>
<li>f/2.5-16</li>
<li>14bit RAW</li>
<li>DIGIC 5</li>
<li>6fps/4.5fps</li>
<li>Multiarea White Balance</li>
<li>HDR Mode</li>
<li>FullHD 1080p Video</li>
<li>720P Movie Digest Mode</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>New ELPH Compacts

</strong>The new Elph models both offer improved low-light shooting and the new DIGIC 5 image processor. The Elph 520HS (shipping in March at a $299 suggested retail) offers a compact form factor, MicroSD card slot, 12x zoom lens starting at a 28mm wide angle, 10.1 -megapixel CMOS image sensor and ISO range to 3,200. Also included is a 3-inch LCD, 58 scene Smart Auto settings, Intelligent Image Stabilization, burst shooting speeds of up to 6.8 fps at 4-megapixel resolution, and body color options of silver, blue, green and red.</p>
<p>The Elph 110HS (shipping in February at $249) offers a 16.1-megapixel high-sensitivity CMOS sensor, DIGIC 5 image processing to 3,200 ISO, FullHD 1080p video recording, 5x (24-120mm) zoom, intelligent image stabilization, 3-inch 461,000-dot LCD, 58-scene Smart Auto settings, high-speed burst shooting of 5.8fps at 4-megapixel resolution, full-size SD card slot and Movie Digest mode up to 720p HD resolution.</p>
<p><strong>Source [<a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2503.msg57287.html#msg57287">CRF</a>] via [<a href="https://wellsfargoadvisors.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=587442111">WF</a>]</strong></p>
<p><!--more--><strong>Update #3

</strong>I’m told the url and posting are 100% legit. There’s still some discrepancy in the sensor size, but we’ll see soon enough. I’m trying to hunt down an official Canon release.</p>
<p><strong>Update #2

</strong>The URL of the original leak has brought about some questions. It’s actually from mworld.com and not wellsfargoadvisors.com.</p>
<p>We’ll try to substantiate the information.</p>
<p><strong>Update on sensor size

</strong>Most people seem to think the sensor size is actually 1/1.5″, which is smaller than the Nikon 1.</p>
<p>*<em>Thanks John</em></p>
<div><em>

</em></div>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## smirkypants (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Looks like this will be Generation X. 1DX, G1X.

Look for the 5DX, 7DX... and maybe a 3DX.


----------



## Picsfor (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Maybe we'll see Simon Cowell advertising on the 'X Factor'


----------



## AprilForever (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Sooooo getting one of these!!!!


----------



## dstppy (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Crap -- I think I've finally become 'one of THOSE guys' but I have to ask: What is the appeal here over other Canon offerings?

Candidate 1, the S100:
F/2.0, 24mm-120mm -- is the sensor in the new G going to be THAT much better?

Candidate(s) 2, entry level rebels:
Yes, you have to purchase glass, but at $800 (call it $650 when it finally comes down below retail, in stock etc.) that's a huge chunk of change for an all-in-one. I realize that the processor is newer, but a digic V rebel has to be somewhere on the horizon.

I guess it will come down to how well it takes pictures :/


----------



## shorthand (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Are we sure that this isn't a 1/1.5" sensor?

1.5" is essentially full frame (Crop factor of 1.13) - I don't think that this can be done within a $700 price point. If it can, I would expect to see an inexpensive FF (or 1.5") DSLR coming very quickly.

1/1.5" makes a lot more sense with a crop factor of 2.55 - still an impressive sensor for the compact category ... larger than the Nikon 1.


----------



## 5D Freak (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

@Shorthand - you beat me to the punch. A 1.5inch sensor is bigger than APS-H - too good to be true! 1/1.5" would still be good and would be a great alternative to a lot of the mirrorless offerings out there - esp for those that want a second 'walk around' camera.


----------



## Woody (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Nikon 1-series sensors are equivalent to 2.7x crop, m43 is 2x. So, Canon's crop of 2.55x slots right in the middle.

Nikon V1 + 10-30 lens is priced at US$828 (B&H), Nikon J1 + 10-30 lens is priced at US$599 (B&H), So Canon's G1X priced at US$799 is close to that of V1 but higher than that of Nikon J1 or Olympus stuff.

OK... What exactly is the largest lens aperture over the zoom range? Constant f/2.5? Not exactly a small lens... Curious....


----------



## Yerry (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

1/1.5 is the same like 2/3... This reminds me of a superb cam, the Canon Powershot Pro 1.

So Canon where is the Canon Powershot Pro 1*X*

Take the same sensor like on the G1X and give it 7 or 10 times zoom.
With the size of the Pro 1 this could be Evil competiton.


----------



## OvelhaMacho (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

_Update on sensor size Most people seem to think the sensor size is actually 1/1.5″, which is still larger than the Nikon 1, yet smaller than m4/3._

If it is 1/1.5" then it's not bigger than Nikon 1.

1/1.5 = 0.66666 = 2/3

If it is 1.5" then it's bigger then an APS-H sensor (basically it can't be at that price point).


----------



## Noink Fanb0i (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

I doubt this would have a constant f/2.5 aperture, if it does have that then it would be the first compact fixed-zoom P&S to have that kind of lens AFAIK. I wish it was slightly wider (24mm FF equivalent) and slightly faster at the wide end (f/1.8 like the Samsung TL500/EX1 or even just f/2.0 like the Panny LX3/5).


----------



## dolina (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

1.5" appears to be between Full frame and APS-H (1.3x crop)


1D4 = 33.5 millimeters = 1.3 inch
1DX = 43.3 millimeters = 1.7 inch
G1X = 38.1 millimeters = 1.5 inch


----------



## 5D Freak (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Yerry - good point. G12 has a 1/1.7" sensor. Why would Canon brag about sensor size with a relatively small increase in size (maybe they would anyway)? Could a 1.5" sensor be true? Now, that would be awesome!


----------



## Yerry (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Look at this link

http://www.avcemporium.com/image-sensor-sizes/

Maybe it is that:

Table 3 - Raster Sizes for Various Focal Length Multipliers


----------



## Noink Fanb0i (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Wow, that's awesome news if it's indeed a 1.5" diagonal and not 1/1.5" sensor. Why would they say:



> offers a large 1.5-inch 14.3-mega-pixel CMOS image sensor and a 4x (28-112mm) optical zoom lens.
> 
> It is said to have a shallow depth of field and an aperture range of F/2.5-16 affording better low-light capability.



Shallow DOF from a 1/1.5" sensor?  Only slightly larger than the sensor on a Panny LX3/5 (1/1.63"). So the only other alternative is: 1.5" diagonal sensor.


----------



## Yerry (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



Noink Fanb0i said:


> Wow, that's awesome news if it's indeed a 1.5" diagonal and not 1/1.5" sensor. Why would they say:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Maybe it is not the only alternative, look at http://www.avcemporium.com/image-sensor-sizes/

1/1.5 is 24x16


----------



## Noink Fanb0i (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Still good even at that. 24mm x 16mm is APS-C 1.5x. Read: larger than Canon APS-C 1.6x and same as the other APS-C 1.5x croppers.


----------



## 5D Freak (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Yerry - just checked that link. Wow - 1/1.5" is pretty close to APS-C size (at 1.5 crop)! Digic 5 and 14 bit RAW - I think I will look at this one. Like one of the posters before me, I do wish the lens was a bit wider, say 24mm. Is constant apeture of F2.5 required on a camera that doesn't use telecoverters, etc. So variable apeture starting at F2.0 would have been a bonus.


----------



## Noink Fanb0i (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Nikon/Sony APS-C 1.5x = 23.6 x 15.7mm
Canon APS-C 1.6x = 22.2 x 14.8mm

So if we follow the logic of Table 3: 1/1.5 = 24 x 16mm -> larger than any APS-C DSLR.  ;D


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

1/1.5" is 2/3" - same as the Pro 1.

1.5" is slightly larger than 4/3 (4/3" = 1.33").

These sizes (including 1/2.5", 1/1.7", etc.) all date back to the vacuum tube era.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/sensor_sizes_01.htm


----------



## grog13 (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

It can't possibly be 1.5". The lens would be bigger and 3x as heavy as the current camera. 1/1.5" (hmmm...a lot like 2/3" isn't it ) is more like it. A teeeeny bit bigger than the current 1/1.7", but probably not enough to really make room for 14 mp without giving up some ISO / DR performance. Canon seems to be content with the low light & DR performance of all its subframe cameras, and just tries to maintain that level while adding pixels. This is not what I want in either a compact or a crop-frame DSLR............


----------



## stavreski (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Ok, about sensor sizes.

According to the next article on dpreview:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2002/10/7/sensorsizes

When some company says _we have made x" sensor_, they are actually saying that the sensor diagonal is roughly two thirds of that number x in inches. (It's an old '50s tv standard. The number x is the size of the tv tube, not the sensor itself).

Accordingly, Nikon 1 system has a 1" sensor, which is NOT a 25.4mm diagonal, but two thirds of that number, or roughly 17mm which is roughly true  (16mm is closer).

So, using the above math, a 1.5 inch sensor has a diagonal of 25.4mm, or a sensor a bit larger than 4/3" (22.5mm)

Hope this helps,

Stavreski


----------



## swblackwood (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

8) I think we need to wait for something official. If it is 1/1,5, that would make it the same size as the Fuji x10 but still smaller than the Nikon V1. If it is 1.5", that that would make it quite a large sensor and something to celebrate, even without interchangeable lenses. 

One thing I haven't noticed mentioned: does it have IS??


----------



## Meeklo (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

No viewfinder listed in specs...


----------



## samthefish (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

It drives me crazy the different ways sensor sizes are described. for me I wish they would just say "x"mm by "y"mm.

I'm planning on getting a Fuji X10 shortly. I doubt the G1X will make a difference in my decision as I like the Fuji for build quality / size / good enough photo quality. Also is a few hundred less it looks like.

SamTheFish


----------



## Caps18 (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

It sounds like a great camera for travelers and lightweight packers. If my iPhone can't take good enough photos in certain situations, this would be a good choice for when I can't bring the 5Dm2.


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Is this a CR3 rumor?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



Yerry said:


> Maybe it is not the only alternative, look at http://www.avcemporium.com/image-sensor-sizes/
> 
> 1/1.5 is 24x16



Yes, did you actually look at that? What they're calling 1/1.5 in that table (Raster Sizes for Various Focal Length Multipliers) is the focal length multiplier, i.e. a 1.5x crop factor which is Nikon's APS-C format. 

Note that 1/1.5 ≠ 1/1.5". 1/1.5" = 2/3" which is much smaller than APS-C, and also smaller than the CX sensor in the Nikon 1 (which is approximately a 1" sensor).


----------



## shorthand (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

I am going to reverse myself and say that upon further reading:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2002/10/7/sensorsizes






That I think that the G1X sensor is *more-or-less APS-C sized with a 4:3 aspect ratio*.

*That* makes sense with the price point *and* is a *very* interesting value proposition.


----------



## stark-arts (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Canon Rumors guy got this wrong - it's been floated that this would be bigger than m43 for a while...this camera is designed to attack the fuji's and the sensor size is correct...not the correct CR guy one but the one posted...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



stark-arts said:


> Canon Rumors guy got this wrong - it's been floated that this would be bigger than m43 for a while...this camera is designed to attack the fuji's and the sensor size is correct...not the correct CR guy one but the one posted...



Might I ask how you know this with any certainty? 

What does that mean in terms of the lens? The quoted spec is 'f/2.5-16' and if that's as correctly quoted as the 1.5" sensor, then based on how apertures are printed on the lens, it means f/2.5 max aperture at the wide end and f/16 max aperture at the long end. I really doubt they'd release a camera that only opens to f/16 at the long end, so I believe that that spec is indicating the total aperture range (i.e. f/2.5 max aperture at the wide end, some unknown max aperture at the long end, and a minimum aperture of f/16 throughout the range - that improves on the G12 which is f/2.8 max and f/8 min).

So, if the Wells Fargo analyst isn't relating the information on the aperture in the standard/conventional way, what makes it certain that the sensor is being specified properly? 

Bigger than m4/3? Ok, conservatively slot it between that and the Canon APS-C and give it a 1.9x crop factor. That means a 28-112mm FF-equivalent lens is really a 15-59mm lens, with f/2.5 at the wide end. That means it's got to be substantially bigger than the m4/3 kit lenses, the smallest of which (Oly 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6) is 2.5" long when retracted. The PowerShot G12 is 1.9" deep - do you think Canon will release a G1X that's well over 3" deep, probably closer to 4" deep? If it has a sensor bigger than m4/3, it would have to be...


----------



## NotABunny (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

The reason why the sensor can't be 1.5" is the lens, not the price. The lens must cover the entire sensor (otherwise it's pointless to have a big sensor). Remember how big the 24-105 lens is? And that's an F4 even at 24mm.


----------



## marinien (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



NotABunny said:


> The reason why the sensor can't be 1.5" is the lens, not the price. The lens must cover the entire sensor (otherwise it's pointless to have a big sensor). Remember how big the 24-105 lens is? And that's an F4 even at 24mm.



I do not think that comparing lenses designed for (D)SLR and lenses designed for "mirrorless" system is appropriate (see "Lens Genealogy" by Roger Cicala). And I believe that that's why Neuro used the Olympus m43 kit lens for his example. Otherwise he would have used the 17-55 f/2.8 lens (shorter focal range, smaller apurture) instead.


----------



## polpaulin (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE 2* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

for that price you get a Sony Nex 5n with aps-c sensor


----------



## moreorless (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



swblackwood said:


> 8) I think we need to wait for something official. If it is 1/1,5, that would make it the same size as the Fuji x10 but still smaller than the Nikon V1. If it is 1.5", that that would make it quite a large sensor and something to celebrate, even without interchangeable lenses.
> 
> One thing I haven't noticed mentioned: does it have IS??



The G1X is going to be in much more direct competision with the X10 than it is the V1 though, similar product in a similar price range. Given that manifacturers have always shown alot of inertia in terms of sensor size with fixed lens digital it seems to make sense Canon is looking to equal the X10 then potentially depend on the brand name and superior funcationality to sell it.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE 2* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

I agree, this is a competitor to the Fuji X10. I believe others have indicated that Canon considers Fuji to be the only competitor they are really concerned about. And, there is probably good reason for that. 

Canon and Nikon have been competing for decades and know each other inside out. Canon (right or wrong) doesn't seem overly concerned about interchangeable lens mirror-less cameras. But, Fuji successfully negotiated the transition from film to digital (while Kodak didn't) and they now how a couple of extraordinarily popular retro-rangefinders that tap into the lucrative enthusiast market. (Not to mention new organic sensor technology that could be a complete game-changer if their claims are close to true)

Looking forward, Canon may see the point-and-shoot market being killed off by camera phones; feel that interchangeable lens mirror-less cameras are just an passing fancy and that the future lies with cameras focused on enthusiasts with discretionary dollars. 

I'm not saying they are correct, I'm just speculating. 

Bottom line though, in this case, I think it's pretty obvious that the G1X is focused right at Fuji. (In which case, I'm anxious to learn more in order to see what justifies the price premium over the X10)


----------



## hmmm (Jan 5, 2012)

*1/1.5 = 2/3 -- vs. 1/1.7*

If we are talking 1/1.5", that is the same as 2/3". The sensor surface area would be over 30% bigger than the 1/1.7. 

That is a nice bump up, but when compared to the N1 or the Sony NEX intro models at very roughly the same price it is less than impressive. What could have made it more competitive is to start at 24mm wide, but that evidently is not the case.

I hope stavreski is on the right track, and we are talking about a sensor of roughly APS-C dimensions.

Or it could be the rumor is just bogus. Ah well, we'll see...

source for sensor numbers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format


----------



## roger (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



nicke said:


> Is this a CR3 rumor?



Same question. If it's real, then maybe I'll have to rethink my shopping plan.


----------



## kapanak (Jan 5, 2012)

*Odd ... Why not just go APS-C, Canon?*

If this rumoured camera really does have a 1.5″ sensor, then it would be roughly 24mm diagonally. If we assume the aspect ratio is 3:2, as is with large Canon sensors, then that would put this at 20.0 mm x 13.3mm … which is an odd size, given the fact that the Canon APS-C is 26.70mm diagonally, and its dimensions are 22.20mm x 14.80mm … Why not just use your own APS-C Canon …


----------



## swblackwood (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*






moreorless said:


> swblackwood said:
> 
> 
> > 8) I think we need to wait for something official. If it is 1/1,5, that would make it the same size as the Fuji x10 but still smaller than the Nikon V1. If it is 1.5", that that would make it quite a large sensor and something to celebrate, even without interchangeable lenses.
> ...



$200 price difference isn't much in terms of competitiveness. But you could well be right. I hope not.


----------



## KyleSTL (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



neuroanatomist said:


> What does that mean in terms of the lens? The quoted spec is 'f/2.5-16' and if that's as correctly quoted as the 1.5" sensor, then based on how apertures are printed on the lens, it means f/2.5 max aperture at the wide end and f/16 max aperture at the long end. I really doubt they'd release a camera that only opens to f/16 at the long end, so I believe that that spec is indicating the total aperture range (i.e. f/2.5 max aperture at the wide end, some unknown max aperture at the long end, and a minimum aperture of f/16 throughout the range - that improves on the G12 which is f/2.8 max and f/8 min).
> 
> So, if the Wells Fargo analyst isn't relating the information on the aperture in the standard/conventional way, what makes it certain that the sensor is being specified properly?
> 
> Bigger than m4/3? Ok, conservatively slot it between that and the Canon APS-C and give it a 1.9x crop factor. That means a 28-112mm FF-equivalent lens is really a 15-59mm lens, with f/2.5 at the wide end. That means it's got to be substantially bigger than the m4/3 kit lenses, the smallest of which (Oly 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6) is 2.5" long when retracted. The PowerShot G12 is 1.9" deep - do you think Canon will release a G1X that's well over 3" deep, probably closer to 4" deep? If it has a sensor bigger than m4/3, it would have to be...



I completely understand what you're saying neuro, but I'd like to add this for arguments sake:

*Canon 510HS:*
1/2.3" sensor
28-336mm equivalent (5.0-60mm f/3.4-5.9)
12x
dimensions: 99 x 59 x 22 mm (3.9 x 2.3 x 0.9 in)






equivalent older camera

*Canon SX200 IS:* (2009)
1/2.3" sensor
28-336mm equivalent (5.0-60mm f/3.4-5.3) slightly faster on the long end
12x
dimensions: 103 x 61 x 38 mm (4.1 x 2.4 x 1.5 in)





even older camera

*Canon S3 IS:* (2006)
1/2.5" sensor smaller sensor
36-432mm equivalent (6.0-72mm f/2.7-3.5) a little longer, and faster (1 full stop) throughout the range
12x
dimensions: 113 x 78 x 76 mm (4.5 x 3.1 x 3 in) 





I know the physics of lens design has not changed, but they have managed to cram larger range zooms into smaller cameras.

and the *Pro 1* that was mentioned earlier in this thread:
2/3" sensor
28-200mm equivalent (7.2-50.8mm f/2.4-3.5) slightly faster than S3, much faster than SX200 and 510HS
7x shorter zoom range
dimensions: 118 x 72 x 90 mm (4.6 x 2.8 x 3.5 in)





Neuro, I completely agree with you, though, that this is definitely NOT a constant aperture zoom lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE 2* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



KyleSTL said:


> I know the physics of lens design has not changed, but they have managed to cram larger range zooms into smaller cameras.



That's entirely consistent. Which are the two deepest cameras you list? The S3 IS and the Pro1, both 3" or deeper. The one with the smaller sensor has a longer tele end, the one with the bigger sensor has the shorter tele end. Granted, this may be a total redesign of the G series, but all of the recent G's have been less than 2" thick. The 1/1.5" (2/3") is the same size as the Pro1's sensor, but the reduced focal range, non-L optics (presumably; the Pro1 had UD and fluorite elements), and the trend toward smaller lenses supporting the same zoom range will allow it to be in the 2" depth range, rather than over 3".


----------



## gmrza (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*



neuroanatomist said:


> Bigger than m4/3? Ok, conservatively slot it between that and the Canon APS-C and give it a 1.9x crop factor. That means a 28-112mm FF-equivalent lens is really a 15-59mm lens, with f/2.5 at the wide end. That means it's got to be substantially bigger than the m4/3 kit lenses, the smallest of which (Oly 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6) is 2.5" long when retracted. The PowerShot G12 is 1.9" deep - do you think Canon will release a G1X that's well over 3" deep, probably closer to 4" deep? If it has a sensor bigger than m4/3, it would have to be...



This is the main consideration that makes me question the concept of a sensor that is bigger than m4/3 in a Powershot. 1/1.5" does sound more realistic.


----------



## takeapic (Jan 5, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Agree.

Is it just me, but this is something Canon could of and should come out with years ago instead of all the pointless G series updates. 

The problem now is the market keeps moving and we already have the G1X...it's the X10. Same zoom and lens range. 

Now what looks more promising is the LX5 successor.

Sorry Canon, but the G1X, like most Canons lately, is too late to the market. 




gmrza said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Bigger than m4/3? Ok, conservatively slot it between that and the Canon APS-C and give it a 1.9x crop factor. That means a 28-112mm FF-equivalent lens is really a 15-59mm lens, with f/2.5 at the wide end. That means it's got to be substantially bigger than the m4/3 kit lenses, the smallest of which (Oly 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6) is 2.5" long when retracted. The PowerShot G12 is 1.9" deep - do you think Canon will release a G1X that's well over 3" deep, probably closer to 4" deep? If it has a sensor bigger than m4/3, it would have to be...
> ...


----------



## PowerShotG2 (Jan 5, 2012)

This will be a 2/3" sized sensor (close to the 8.8 x 6.6 mm Fuji X10) looking at the optical range and price. 
If it were APS-C, then it would be around $1100-$1300. Canon won't let this cannibalize Rebels.

The key is for the camera lens to remain compact to be truly pocketable. The X10 feels about as bulky as MFT w/ pancake prime. If Sony improves the NEX kit lenses, then that would affect the market.
I'm still excited to learn more about this new Canon.


----------



## kapanak (Jan 5, 2012)

For the price, I still feel that it would be a total rip-off.


----------



## OvelhaMacho (Jan 5, 2012)

There's no doubt that it will have a 1/1.5" (smaller than Nikon 1) and not a 1.5" (bigger than Canon 1D) at this price point. Also Canon wouldn't dare create such a rift in their lineup, using a sensor that big in a "compact" body.

Still, the f/16 (minimum) aperture is interesting, usually compact don't go that small.


----------



## marinien (Jan 5, 2012)

OvelhaMacho said:


> There's no doubt that it will have a 1/1.5" (smaller than Nikon 1) and not a 1.5" (bigger than Canon 1D) at this price point. Also Canon wouldn't dare create such a rift in their lineup, using a sensor that big in a "compact" body.
> 
> Still, the f/16 (minimum) aperture is interesting, usually compact don't go that small.



1/5" is bigger than the 1D series' sensor??? Come on ... Have you read anything at all? Ah, I see, 1.9 (crop factor) is bigger than 1.3 8)


----------



## unfocused (Jan 5, 2012)

Looks like Wells Fargo pulled the release off their site. 

I'm guessing someone didn't see the Jan. 10 release date, although I'm surprised it didn't have an "EMBARGOED UNTIL (Time) JAN. 10, 2012" which is the usual convention for news releases that aren't supposed to be printed before an official announcement/event. 

Or, if it did, someone in the Wells Fargo office ignored it. Same thing happened with the Fuji camera (same release date), so I wouldn't be surprised if an intern at Wells Fargo just posted the releases without paying any attention to the dates/embargo.


----------



## pwp (Jan 5, 2012)

Oh oh...no viewfinder either optical or EVF on the G1X. I know plenty of Gxx owners who made their choice _because _of the viewfinder. Viewfinders on compacts are few and far between these days. Much better for refined composition, use in bright sunlight and especially holding steady at slow shutter speeds.

Are you a viewfinder aficionado? Quick! Snap up a bargain G12 today and secure your (compact) viewfinder future.

The price of the G1X? The G's are always high priced on release to cash in on the upgrade tragics. (Me!) Wait just a few months and see meaningful price drops.

Paul Wright


----------



## takeapic (Jan 5, 2012)

Close in size to the LX5.




OvelhaMacho said:


> There's no doubt that it will have a 1/1.5" (smaller than Nikon 1) and not a 1.5" (bigger than Canon 1D) at this price point. Also Canon wouldn't dare create such a rift in their lineup, using a sensor that big in a "compact" body.
> 
> Still, the f/16 (minimum) aperture is interesting, usually compact don't go that small.


----------



## takeapic (Jan 5, 2012)

Good point. Already starting to happen with the S100.



pwp said:


> Oh oh...no viewfinder either optical or EVF on the G1X. I know plenty of Gxx owners who made their choice _because _of the viewfinder. Viewfinders on compacts are few and far between these days. Much better for refined composition, use in bright sunlight and especially holding steady at slow shutter speeds.
> 
> Are you a viewfinder aficionado? Quick! Snap up a bargain G12 today and secure your (compact) viewfinder future.
> 
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 5, 2012)

marinien said:


> OvelhaMacho said:
> 
> 
> > There's no doubt that it will have a 1/1.5" (smaller than Nikon 1) and not a 1.5" (bigger than Canon 1D) at this price point. Also Canon wouldn't dare create such a rift in their lineup, using a sensor that big in a "compact" body.
> ...



Ummmm...not quite. What was stated was that 1.5" (not 1/5") is bigger than APS-H. Decimal point, not fraction. It's still not correct, but a 1.5" sensor would fall between 4/3" and APS-C in terms of size. The fractional and larger inch designations are the outmoded nomenclature used for digicam/camcorder sensor sizes (which derives from vacuum tube diameters of the 50s era), and a 1.5" sensor would have approximately a 1" diagonal measure = 25.4 mm, and the diagonal measure of Canon's APS-C is 26.7mm.



marinien said:


> Come on ... Have you read anything at all? Ah, I see, 1.9 (crop factor) is bigger than 1.3



It seems that someone wasn't reading, but that someone was _you_, not OvelhaMacho. :


----------



## marinien (Jan 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> marinien said:
> 
> 
> > OvelhaMacho said:
> ...



Neuro, I am disappointed :-\. Of course I knew he meant decimal point and not fraction. I was just teasing him while saying 1.9 is bigger than 1.3. I said that he wasn't reading because you, among others, have said in this thread that a 1.5" sensor is smaller than APS-C and bigger than 4/3" sensor. Besides, you are the first in this thread who mentioned the 1.9 crop factor. See ... I was reading


----------



## davidlog (Jan 6, 2012)

This so called “pre-release” announcement might be a way that Canon is doing some survey for what kind of pro DC camera people like you are waiting for.

Why there is no such question asked how this announcement was found, who found it? 

If this is true, your guys are doing good trying to answer Canon’s long list of questions…


----------



## kirispupis (Jan 6, 2012)

Dear Canon,

I am a huge fan of your cameras and currently own a 5D2, 7D, and G11. I also have a 1D-X on preorder. I never bought the G12 because it did not appear to be a huge step up from the G11 and rececently I picked up the X10 finally to replace it. At the time I was a bit worried that Canon would release some 'supercompact' in the G12 space that would make me regret picking up the X10.

After the news on the GX1 today, I no longer regret my choice. From the specs the X10 still appears superior in almost every way.

When I was growing up I lived in the same town as Eastman Kodak. Many of my friends' parents worked there and we used to tour the factory every year as kids. It is very sad that due to management oversight they will likely no longer exist by the end of the year.

Please wake up and look at what your competition is doing out there. Do not become another Kodak.


----------



## WoodyWindy (Jan 6, 2012)

Those saying Canon can't put a large sensor and a fairly long zoom in a compact camera are forgetting that it used to be done all of the time with film:





http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/compact_film_cameras/sure_shot/sure_shot_classic_120#Specifications

- Woody -


----------



## dougkerr (Jan 6, 2012)

Hi,



PowerShotG2 said:


> This will be a 2/3" sized sensor (close to the 8.8 x 6.6 mm Fuji X10)...
> 
> 
> > Yes, I assume that this is the case.
> ...


----------



## dougkerr (Jan 6, 2012)

*Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed*

Hi, Freak,



5D Freak said:


> Yerry - just checked that link. Wow - 1/1.5" is pretty close to APS-C size (at 1.5 crop)!


This absurd system of specifying sensor sizes goes back to the "2/3 inch" Vidicon tube (so-called because of the diameter of its "bottle"), which had a target (sensor) 8.8 x 6.6 mm in size. That relationship was continued, proportionally, for small-sensor digital cameras (since stating the actual size would have worried the consumer by seeming "terribly small").

But because even those numbers sounded so small (still worrying the marketing people), the further convention was adopted of specifying the "size" as the reciprocal of a number larger than 1 (to make the stated number bigger).

Thus the "2/3 inch" size became the "1/1.5 inch" size.

And that is the size presumably being discussed here - implying a sensor size of about 8.8 x 6.6 mm.

Best regards,

Doug


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 6, 2012)

For reference, a 2/3" (1/1.5", whatever...) sensor should be about 1 full stop better than the sensor in my little Elph 500 HS. Now, my Elph is f/2 at 24mm-equivalent and if the new camera is indeed 2/3" and 28mm-equivalent and f/2.5, it would only be a little bit faster than my Elph is already at maximum wide angle.

I'm actually pretty impressed with what Canon has done with the tiny sensor in my little Elph, and I am a 5D and fast prime owner so I do have a solid reference point. But for this camera to be interesting to SLR owners, in my opinion, it has to be as fast as, or faster across the whole range than something like the S90/95/100 cameras are, since they are already f/2 at the wide end, are pocketable, and have bigger sensors than the one in my little Elph. To do that, f/2.5 at the wide end probably won't cut it with a 2/3" sensor. So it either needs a faster lens or a bigger sensor. If it really has an almost-APS-C sized sensor and f/2.5 at the wide end, well that's something.


----------



## takeapic (Jan 6, 2012)

I think you nailed it. The G1X is nothing more than what Canon could and should have done years ago. Looks like Canon is now trying to play catch up to Fuji and has taken all of the attention. Next up, their XS-1 and just going to keep it going.




kirispupis said:


> Dear Canon,
> 
> I am a huge fan of your cameras and currently own a 5D2, 7D, and G11. I also have a 1D-X on preorder. I never bought the G12 because it did not appear to be a huge step up from the G11 and rececently I picked up the X10 finally to replace it. At the time I was a bit worried that Canon would release some 'supercompact' in the G12 space that would make me regret picking up the X10.
> 
> ...


----------



## ippikiokami (Jan 6, 2012)

takeapic said:


> I think you nailed it. The G1X is nothing more than what Canon could and should have done years ago. Looks like Canon is now trying to play catch up to Fuji and has taken all of the attention. Next up, their XS-1 and just going to keep it going.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Are you guys kidding? If you are talking about cameras in the G11-G12 class + most of the point and shoot line up Canon had the best or close to the best until just recently. Fuji's X10 just recently came out. Up to that and the x100 point you could easily say Fuji hasn't released anything of note for years. We don't even know the real specs of this camera yet.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jan 6, 2012)

I could care less about the sensor size, but I do care about the sensor's performance. This camera fits in that
"too big to fit in a normal pocket, too small to be taken seriously" category, at the high end of the usual $350-$700 price range, and with nothing to make it stand out from the crowd. Canon might have done better
with a fixed, fast lens (think QL1.7 from film days) in a more compact package to compete with the Fuji x100.
This particular offering strikes me as something only a product manager could love unless the images blow away
a Rebel XT (which I could buy and save $250). This stands pretty poorly against the m43 and NEX offerings in
the price range.


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 6, 2012)

dickgrafixstop said:


> "too big to fit in a normal pocket, too small to be taken seriously" category, at the high end of the usual $350-$700 price range, and with nothing to make it stand out from the crowd.



Some of us carry things like backpacks, briefcases, or computer bags everyday. If you're one of those, there's a huge difference between carrying a Rebel + lens and something the size of a G12.

It doesn't have to fit in a pocket, but it does have to be a lot smaller than the Rebel. If it can do that, and come close to DSLR quality, they'll get my $800.

BTW, my theory is that the "1.5inch" sensor is neither 1.5 inch (that would be almost full-frame, unaffordable at $800) nor 1/1.5" (because that's incompatible with f/16 and "shallow depth of field").

I think it's a 1.5x crop sensor. That would make it a little bigger than APS-C. Which would be very exciting.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 6, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> BTW, my theory is that the "1.5inch" sensor is neither 1.5 inch (that would be almost full-frame, unaffordable at $800) nor 1/1.5" (because that's incompatible with f/16 and "shallow depth of field").
> 
> I think it's a 1.5x crop sensor. That would make it a little bigger than APS-C. Which would be very exciting.



Shallow depth of field is marketing terminology in this case. Canon said exactly the same thing about the PowerShot S95 and S100, claiming they were great for portrait photography. That was with f/2 and a 1/1.7" sensor, so it's no surprise that they would say the same thing about f/2.5 and a 1/1.5" sensor. As for f/16, what is incompatible about that? There will be a lot of potential buyers who have not even heard the term diffraction. It's marketing again - the G12 can be stopped down to f/8, so this would be bigger, and bigger is better.

BTW, a 1.5x crop is APS-C, just not Canon's. Nikon, Pentax and Sony all use 1.5x APS-C. But don't get excited - the G1x won't have APS-C, it'll have a 1/1.5" sensor.


----------



## elflord (Jan 6, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> dickgrafixstop said:
> 
> 
> > "too big to fit in a normal pocket, too small to be taken seriously" category, at the high end of the usual $350-$700 price range, and with nothing to make it stand out from the crowd.
> ...



Sure, but the problem for the G12 and similar is that they are similar in size to Sony NEX, Micro 4/3 and similar, but in terms of performance it's basically another small sensor compact. What makes the S100 a strong product is that it is a solid performer for its size.



> BTW, my theory is that the "1.5inch" sensor is neither 1.5 inch (that would be almost full-frame, unaffordable at $800) nor 1/1.5" (because that's incompatible with f/16 and "shallow depth of field").



Olympus which has a slightly smaller (1/1.6") sensor make the same claim about the XZ-1. The numbers for the XZ-1: the 112 'effective' is a real focal length of 24mm, so at f/2.5, that's a 9.6mm aperture. That is bigger than 50mm/5.6 aperture of a kit zoom for an APS-C SLR. 



> I think it's a 1.5x crop sensor. That would make it a little bigger than APS-C. Which would be very exciting.



That would be a 17-70mm f/2.5 APS-C lens -- kind of like a big brother to Canon's 17-55mm EF-S lens.


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 6, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> But don't get excited - the G1x won't have APS-C, it'll have a 1/1.5" sensor.



We'll see in a few days, but Canon isn't crazy and although the marketing folks do love to exaggerate (like all the vendors), I really don't think Canon's engineers would offer f/16 on a 1/1.5" sensor (because of diffraction, as you implied).

And how will they justify a 1/3 price hike for a tiny increment of sensor size? 

For me, a 1/1.5" sensor would still be OK (I don't think the small sensor is the G12's biggest problem), but I was expecting something closer to the Nikon 1's 1.0 inch sensor. 

But given the f/16 spec, the price hike, and the 4x zoom (instead of 5x on the G12), I think there's a considerably bigger sensor in there.


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 6, 2012)

elflord said:


> Sure, but the problem for the G12 and similar is that they are similar in size to Sony NEX, Micro 4/3 and similar, but in terms of performance it's basically another small sensor compact. What makes the S100 a strong product is that it is a solid performer for its size.



I agree the S100 is a great camera for its size (at least, it will be once they iron out their QC problems), but that's in a different size class than the G-series.

The G11/G12 is actually much smaller than the Sony NEX or 4/3 cameras when you include a similar range zoom lens. To me, those cameras are nearly as big as a Rebel - not something I'd carry every day, as I do with the G11.



> That would be a 17-70mm f/2.5 APS-C lens -- kind of like a big brother to Canon's 17-55mm EF-S lens.



And the 17-55mm EF-S is a huge lens - bigger than the whole G12 camera - despite covering a smaller zoom range than claimed for the Gx.

So either the Gx has a smaller than APS-C sensor, it's huge, or there's a big size advantage from not having to do backfocus past the mirror box... (I hope the latter.)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2012)

Hold on now - it's not going to be an f/2.5 constant aperture lens. Consider - the 17-55/2.8 and 18-55/3.5-5.6 have essentially the same focal range, and look at the difference a variable aperture and reduced optical quality make in the size. Point is, if it really does have an APS-C sized sensor, the relevant comparator lens is the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 (a little wider and longer, but also slower). Now, who wants to argue that a lens nearly 4" long when retracted and weighing close to 2 lbs. will be seen in a G-series PowerShot? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?


----------



## elflord (Jan 7, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> I agree the S100 is a great camera for its size (at least, it will be once they iron out their QC problems), but that's in a different size class than the G-series.
> 
> The G11/G12 is actually much smaller than the Sony NEX or 4/3 cameras when you include a similar range zoom lens.



Much smaller when you attach a prime, right ? btw, the new Panasonic X lens is pretty small -- about the same size as the 20mm pancake prime when retracted 

http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/panasonic_x_14-42_3p5-5p6/images/1442vs20.jpg



> To me, those cameras are nearly as big as a Rebel [
> - not something I'd carry every day, as I do with the G11.



The panasonic GF2 is about the same size as the G11 -- weight 310gm+lens to the G11's 375gm. Most of the smaller lenses for the GF2 are about 100gm. Body dimensions 112x76x48 mm for the G11, versus 113x68x33 mm for the GF2. The 20mm pancake or the X lens brings that to 113x68x58mm (these lenses are about 25mm deep). 



> So either the Gx has a smaller than APS-C sensor, it's huge, or there's a big size advantage from not having to do backfocus past the mirror box... (I hope the latter.)



Smaller flange distance helps make small wide to normal lenses, one can review specs of rangefinder lenses to see how this plays out. 

One hurdle is that there is no easy way to make a lens with a big aperture -- if it were APS-C, it would need a 28mm aperture, and that requires some glass. Even the micro 4/3 kit zooms and pancake primes need to keep the aperture to about 10mm or smaller.


----------



## elflord (Jan 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Hold on now - it's not going to be an f/2.5 constant aperture lens. Consider - the 17-55/2.8 and 18-55/3.5-5.6 have essentially the same focal range, and look at the difference a variable aperture and reduced optical quality make in the size. Point is, if it really does have an APS-C sized sensor, the relevant comparator lens is the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 (a little wider and longer, but also slower). Now, who wants to argue that a lens nearly 4" long when retracted and weighing close to 2 lbs. will be seen in a G-series PowerShot? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?



f/2.5 at the tele wouldn't be unprecedented (Olympus XZ-1 is f/1.8-f/2.5), but I suppose a constant maximum aperture in a point and shoot would be unusual. If it's f/4 or so, I think it would be a stretch to get shallow depth of field with the ~6mm aperture unless one took advantage of the tiny MFD, but applying that approach to portrait photography is not a good way to make friends.


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 7, 2012)

After reading the spec list, I would have to say that IF the starting price is $799.99 (or anywhere close to it) I would have to say NO. Wait, make that a H*** NO! 

P&S are great cameras and everyone should have one. (I have a couple) I have even taken (or seen) some awesome photos that came out of P&S's. But 800 bucks? Now THAT is a lot of money to spend on a camera that you cannot change lenses on... I would hope Canon rethinks this one, or at least the rumors are false.

Even if the sensor is FF or even close... doesn't make much sence to "give" that much power to a non-lens changable camera... at least in my opinion. Besides ANY lens Canon gives it CANNOT give justice to the sensor, at least anything that they can squeeze into THAT small of a package.  Guys sorry, lenses are better than sensor, period. Great sensors REQUIRE great lenses... without them the body is nothing.

Don't believe me? Pick up even the cheapest "L" lens and think about the fact that it IS in fact more expensive than the G1X and weighs more. APS-C, APS-H and esp FF sensors benefit greatly from good glass, no matter what the MP is. Remember we are talking about $800 bucks!!! Wow... You can get a 60D (body only) for that!!!

I would buy a T3 before I spent THAT kind of money on a P&S. (and it's cheaper and expandable... IE lenses!!!)

D


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Point is, if it really does have an APS-C sized sensor, the relevant comparator lens is the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 (a little wider and longer, but also slower). Now, who wants to argue that a lens nearly 4" long when retracted and weighing close to 2 lbs. will be seen in a G-series PowerShot?



Excellent point. 

OK, maybe I'm wrong and it's not a 1.5x crop sensor. Then how do you explain the $800 price (the G12 was $600), the f/16, and the reduced zoom range (compared to the G11/G12)? (I'll ignore the shallow DOF promise as marketing nonsense.)

The only way that makes sense to me is if the sensor is considerably bigger than the 1/1.7" sensor in the G12. I don't think 1/1.5" is enough to explain those.

I think 1/1.0" (ala Nikon V1) would, overall, make more sense in a compact than an APS-C sensor, but I don't see how that fits with the "1.5inch" sensor comment in the press release.

Of course, the press release could simply be fake, or wrong...

Isn't it fun to speculate when we'll find out who is right in a few days?


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 7, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> Isn't it fun to speculate when we'll find out who is right in a few days?



Of course.


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 7, 2012)

Richard8971 said:


> Even if the sensor is FF or even close... doesn't make much sence to "give" that much power to a non-lens changable camera... at least in my opinion.



I have to disagree there. The best camera is the one you have with you. If all I have room for is a G13, then I wan t the best G13 I can have (within the limits of size, weight, cost, etc.). Sure, it may be pricey compared to an interchangeable lens camera, but if it's a lot smaller, then it's worthwhile - to some people anyway.



> I would buy a T3 before I spent THAT kind of money on a P&S. (and it's cheaper and expandable... IE lenses!!!)



Perhaps you would, but other people (perhaps with bigger budgets) are willing to pay something extra for portability. 

IQ and flexibility are great, but they're not worth a thing if you don't have the camera with you.


----------



## Tallyhawk (Jan 7, 2012)

We know this Powershot is the answer to M4/3, Nikon, Sony, et al, with all those Canon statements about how they're not convinced mirrorless compacts are the way to go, and that they're totally revamping the G series.

Why isn't it feasible for the G1X to have a 1.5" sensor instead of the 1/1.5? $800 is totally nuts unless it can compete with the $1000 (at this point) Fujifilm - doesn't the X100 have an aps-C?

It does seem kinda silly to throw on a zoom lens instead of a prime on the G1X, but whatever, zoom appeals to the mass market.

There's no such thing as a "$500-$800" price point on point-and-shoots. For $800, it's gotta be something completely different.

I'm not a pro (I don't usually get paid to take photos), so I can't justify any ILC because of the cost of lenses, and I'd much rather buy from Canon than Fuji. If it's comparable, this camera sounds great. For $800, there's no way it's just an S100 with external controls. Right?


----------



## elflord (Jan 7, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> OK, maybe I'm wrong and it's not a 1.5x crop sensor. Then how do you explain the $800 price (the G12 was $600), the f/16, and the reduced zoom range (compared to the G11/G12)? (I'll ignore the shallow DOF promise as marketing nonsense.)



Re the shorter zoom range, they could have gone for faster or better quality glass. We still don't know what the aperture spec of the lens is (e.g. how big is the aperture at 112mm) Most of Canon's L lenses have a zoom ratio of no more than 3. 

I agree that the pricing seems odd, but then, it's their flagship compact. My opinion is they really needed to go with a substantially larger sensor to keep the G line competitive, but it doesn't look like they've done that here. 



> Why isn't it feasible for the G1X to have a 1.5" sensor instead of the 1/1.5? $800 is totally nuts unless it can compete with the $1000 (at this point) Fujifilm - doesn't the X100 have an aps-C?



That would basically make it the same size as an APS-C sensor. It's not plausible that they could build an APS-C zoom lens with the stated specs. Fuji X100 has a normal length prime -- if it had a 17-70 zoom with f/2.5 at the wide end, it would be much larger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Compact_digital_camera_formats


----------



## moreorless (Jan 7, 2012)

Tallyhawk said:


> We know this Powershot is the answer to M4/3, Nikon, Sony, et al, with all those Canon statements about how they're not convinced mirrorless compacts are the way to go, and that they're totally revamping the G series.
> 
> Why isn't it feasible for the G1X to have a 1.5" sensor instead of the 1/1.5? $800 is totally nuts unless it can compete with the $1000 (at this point) Fujifilm - doesn't the X100 have an aps-C?
> 
> ...



The G series isnt "Point and Shoot" though, that would be the S series.

I can certainly see a larger sensor size than the X10 being possible but going beyond ASPC doesnt seem likely to me.

One area the rumours havent said anything about either is the viewfinder. If the G1X had a much larger viewfinder with better coverage and maybe some display info then that could make a massive difference.


----------



## kapanak (Jan 7, 2012)

I am not going to say it will happen, but ruling out the possibility of a 1.5" sensor (24mm diag.) completely is naive. There have been compacts with very similar sensor size in the past. Of note, the Sigma DP1 and DP2 both had a sensor that is just a hair larger than this alleged G-series future sensor (1.7x vs 1.8x). They were also quite compact and took great photos. Also, they both started at $800.


----------



## polpaulin (Jan 7, 2012)

This powershot has no interest art all when Fuji, Sony and Ricoh, are making small APS-C


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> But given the f/16 spec...



So...here's a question. Even a very low (<6) MP APS-C sensor is diffraction-limited at f/16. Why can EF-S lenses be stopped down to at least f/22 and in many cases to f/38?



Dave92F1 said:


> Of course, the press release could simply be fake, or wrong...
> 
> Isn't it fun to speculate when we'll find out who is right in a few days?



Absolutely right on both counts!


----------



## I Simonius (Jan 7, 2012)

I too want a wee camera I can carry round easily BUT if it focusses as slowly as Canons other small offerings it's not for me. The panasonic focusses SO much faster on similar type models.

Just saying.....


----------



## elflord (Jan 7, 2012)

kapanak said:


> I am not going to say it will happen, but ruling out the possibility of a 1.5" sensor (24mm diag.) completely is naive. There have been compacts with very similar sensor size in the past. Of note, the Sigma DP1 and DP2 both had a sensor that is just a hair larger than this alleged G-series future sensor (1.7x vs 1.8x). They were also quite compact and took great photos. Also, they both started at $800.



The DP1 and DP2 had pancake primes -- 16.6mm f/4, and 24mm f/2.8. The G series according to the press release has a 4x zoom which is f/2.5 at the wide end. 

It's possible to make a big sensor compact, but not with that lens spec.


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 7, 2012)

Dave92F1 said:


> I have to disagree there. The best camera is the one you have with you. IQ and flexibility are great, but they're not worth a thing if you don't have the camera with you.



Touche' I would have to agree with you on that.  I carry a Powershot A590IS with me at all times for that possibility. I was just suggesting that 800 bucks is A LOT of money to spend on a pocket camera that cannot be "expanded" and more than likey will not have a lens that will bring true justice to a larger sensor. The lens is everything. That being said, there are plenty of less expensive Powershots out there that will fit the need.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dave92F1 said:
> 
> 
> > But given the f/16 spec...
> ...



No, they aren't.



> Why can EF-S lenses be stopped down to at least f/22 and in many cases to f/38?



Because sometimes DOF or correct exposure are more important than preservation of detail.

Note that many planetary astrophotographers use 40D-sized pixels, and shoot at f/30 or so for maximum detail (they get the slow f-numbers by using barlows [teleconverters], not by stopping down - the aperture is always wide open on most telescopes).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2012)

Lee Jay said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Dave92F1 said:
> ...



You're saying images taken using a dSLR with a typical APS-C sensor are not affected by diffraction at f/16? Can you provide some evidence to back up that claim? 

BTW, the question about why diffraction-limited apertures are available was rhetorical. Your examples illustrate my point - diffraction resulting in loss of sharpness is not a reason for Canon not to make f/16 available on a 1/1.5" sensor, which was the argument being made to support the idea of an APS-C-sized sensor in the G1x.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2012)

Richard8971 said:


> Dave92F1 said:
> 
> 
> > The best camera is the one you have with you.
> ...



+1

If Canon comes up with some clever way to flout the laws of physics and mate a large sensor with the rumored lens, and manages to sidestep the compromises and deliver excellent IQ from the G1x, it will be very interesting. I think it's a pipe dream, but hey...dreams are good!

But for decent IQ in a truly portable package, I like my S100 (had an S95, which my wife now carries in her purse). The S100 fits in my pocket, which is ideal if I can't bring a larger camera. A G series or m4/3? Might as well bring the 5DII and 24-105mm, at least. Fortunately, my wife has grown very tolerant of me carrying lots of gear around on family outings, and also to me shooting frequently at home. The key, for those with wives and kids, is taking great shots of the kids. The proof in the pudding was in early December - my wife was heading out to do some shopping, and said she wanted to take some family portraits for cards later that day. She returned and walked into the living room, to find a 9' backdrop set up, and three light stands with a pair of 24" softboxes (430EX II's in them), and a monolight with a 48" octabox. All I got was a raised eyebrow. ;D


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 8, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think it's a pipe dream, but hey...dreams are good!



If people didn't dream where would we be? I am sure everyone on here is here because we want some "inside" information on the technology that will be offered in the new cameras! Canon will produce whatever they think will sell and of course, we might get insights because a couple of reps sneek info now and then based on prototypes. Part of the business I suppose. How many rumors have you heard that were 100% accurate? Just about every camera that has been rumored has MOSTLY been true... so think about it.

I welcome a new high-end powershot. $800 bucks? Personally, I will never buy it. Canon... if you are listening. A "point and click" no matter HOW advanced you make it, should NEVER cost as much as a DSLR. Just my opinion guys.  

It's all in the lens... don't forget that... (Why? Show me a SMALL [point and shoot size] "L" quality lens... Which of course you WILL need for a FF or similar sized sensor!!!) 

D


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 8, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> You're saying images taken using a dSLR with a typical APS-C sensor are not affected by diffraction at f/16? Can you provide some evidence to back up that claim?



Some quick work with Excel: 

The Airy disc at f/16 is about 21 microns across (at 550 nm wavelength; that's greenish-yellow).

The 60D sensor has a pixel pitch of 4.28 microns, so it's definitely diffraction limited at f/16 - the Airy disc is about 5 pixels in diameter. In fact it's diffraction limited starting around f/8 (generously).

A hypothetical Gx 1/1.5" sensor with 14.3 Mpixels (per the press release) would have a pixel pitch of about 1.53 microns (assuming it's a 4:3 aspect ratio sensor, as in all prior PowerShots). 

If you assume a sensor is "diffraction limited" when the Airy disc gets to be 2 pixels wide, that sensor would be diffraction limited starting at f/2.3 !!! Which would be a crazy way to design a sensor - if you're diffraction limited even wide-open, why not reduce the number of pixels on the sensor? You wouldn't lose any resolution at all, and you'd improve the low-light sensitivity.

Which makes me think, again, that the sensor is probably bigger than 1/1.5".



neuroanatomist said:


> BTW, the question about why diffraction-limited apertures are available was rhetorical. Your examples illustrate my point - diffraction resulting in loss of sharpness is not a reason for Canon not to make f/16 available on a 1/1.5" sensor, which was the argument being made to support the idea of an APS-C-sized sensor in the G1x.



OK, another interpretation is that they figured the best lens they could make for a 1/1.5" sensor is f/2.5 wide open, and they use a definition of diffraction-limited of slightly more than 2 pixels.

If you follow that logic, then they picked 14.3 Mpixels as the most they could fit in and still have them be useful (at least wide-open). And it's true that compacts are used wide-open a lot (small lenses can still be extremely sharp wide-open; unlike DSLR lenses which almost always get sharper a stop or two down from wide-open).



Richard8971 said:


> A "point and click" no matter HOW advanced you make it, should NEVER cost as much as a DSLR.



I don't see what the price of a DSLR has to do with it, because a DSLR doesn't compete with a compact - the compact does things a DSLR can't (namely, fit in a small space). 

I can imagine Gx cameras that I wouldn't pay $800, or even $500 for.

I can also imagine a (buildable) Gx camera that I'd happily pay $800 for. It would have to have the flippy screen, a viewfinder (any viewfinder; electronic or optical, but not just the screen), faster focus than the G12, and be no larger than the G12. The GPS and high-speed video features of the S100 would be a bonus. If it had all that, I'd happily fork over the $800 even if the sensor is only 1/1.5". I'd like more low-light capability as much as anyone, but in truth the G12's biggest weakness isn't in that department.



Richard8971 said:


> It's all in the lens... don't forget that... (Why? Show me a SMALL [point and shoot size] "L" quality lens... Which of course you WILL need for a FF or similar sized sensor!!!)



It's not all in the lens once you're diffraction-limited. Once you've resolved all the detail that physics will let you resolve, you're done with resolution. But you can still improve other things (focus speed, light sensitivity, etc.).

And I think the G11/G12 _does_ have a L-quality lens already. It is always much easier to make really sharp lenses for small sensors - the lenses are smaller and you can do things when making small lenses that aren't practical on larger ones.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 8, 2012)

Don't forget that Canon called the lens on the PowerShot Pro1 an L lens, red ring and all. IIRC, that camera had a 1/1.5" sensor, too.


----------



## traveller (Jan 8, 2012)

Anyone else think that the G1X (stupid name considering Panasonic's recently announced GX1) is going to be completely overshadowed by Monday's Fuji X-Pro 1? (http://photorumors.com/2012/01/07/detailed-fuji-x-pro-1-specs-you-must-read-this/). 

Perhaps Canon have finally cottoned on to what they're missing, as they are now promising their own compact system camera this year? Presumably they must have already be developing it for some time... 

http://photorumors.com/2012/01/07/canon-promises-mirrorless-camera-system-for-2012/


----------



## Dave92F1 (Jan 8, 2012)

traveller said:


> Anyone else think that the G1X (stupid name considering Panasonic's recently announced GX1) is going to be completely overshadowed by Monday's Fuji X-Pro 1? (http://photorumors.com/2012/01/07/detailed-fuji-x-pro-1-specs-you-must-read-this/).



I think it's an interesting camera, but too large for the compact segment the G12 competes in. Still, if it had a flippy screen I'd consider buying one. But I think Canon has a patent on that, and few vendors want to risk a fight over that. (Nikon is an exception; I suppose they either made a deal with Canon or have some patent of their own to hold over Canon's head.)

Re the Gx sensor size, on that site there was a post from a year and a half ago that got me thinking:

http://photorumors.com/2010/06/09/canon-aps-h-1-3x-mirrorless/

Obviously that camera didn't happen (if it was ever real), but I think the technical points in the post are valid.

Considering:


The f/16 claim in the press release
The "shallow DoF" claim (ok, maybe marketing BS)
The reduced zoom range compared to the G11/G12 lens
The huge price hike from $600 to $800
Competitors with sensors of 1/1.0" (Nikon), 4/3, and APS-C (Sony)
The fact that full-frame film compacts were no larger than a G12
Last, the 14-bit RAW spec. I haven't run the numbers, but I suspect it makes no sense to do 14-bit RAW on a 1.53 micron pitch sensor. 2^14 is 16384, and I'm not sure such a small sensor can even hold that many electrons, so what would be the point of an expensive 14-bit ADC?

I still think the Gx sensor is bigger than 1/1.5" (if the Gx is even real).

I think it's bigger than the Nikon 1 sensor (1/1.0), and probably 1.5x crop, because that would make it a little bigger than Sony's APS-C sensor and all these companies love to bash each other with spec numbers. At $800 they can afford that, and Canon is well aware of how price affects sales - they know very well that a $800 camera with a 1/1.5" sensor will have problems in today's market.

I'll try another prediction - the lens will be very sharp, but will have lots of geometric distortion (barrel, pincushion, etc.). Then they'll correct that in software with the DIGIC 5, so you'll never see it. This will be their way of squaring the circle to get a small, sharp, f/2.5 lens that will cover a larger sensor.


----------



## Yerry (Jan 9, 2012)

So it is official and it has a giant sensor:

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/09/canon-powershot-g1-x/

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/09/CanonG1X_Preview
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canong1x/


----------



## swblackwood (Jan 9, 2012)

Not APS-C but it does use the larger four thirds sensor, larger than the Nikon 1 series. The only disappointment for me is the f5.8 at telephoto.


----------



## ippikiokami (Jan 9, 2012)

Yerry said:


> So it is official and it has a giant sensor:
> 
> http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/09/canon-powershot-g1-x/
> 
> ...



Wooo!!

And the crow is being eaten.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 9, 2012)

It does indeed - but we also see the compromises that were made. It's much thicker than the G12, most of that is the protruding lens. It's not f/2.5, but f/2.8 at the wide end. Where the G12 is f/4.5 at the long end, the G1X is a narrow f/5.8. We'll have to wait and see if other compromises were made in lens design, and how the lens quality holds up to the large sensor. 

One more thing occurs to me - I did overemphasize comparisons to EF/-S lenses. Thinking back, the combination of 1/3-stop narrower at the wide end, a very narrow long end make some difference, but importantly, it's a 4:3 sensor, not 3:2, and 4:3 makes more efficient use of the image circle, so all of the lens elements can be smaller than would be inferred from a lens needed for a 3:2 sensor. 

Still - the big sensor makes it interesting, and justifies the price tag!


----------



## Meh (Jan 9, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Still - the big sensor makes it interesting, and justifies the price tag!



But will you buy one neuro? You may recall my previously stated gear buying policy.


----------



## ippikiokami (Jan 9, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> It does indeed - but we also see the compromises that were made. It's much thicker than the G12, most of that is the protruding lens. It's not f/2.5, but f/2.8 at the wide end. Where the G12 is f/4.5 at the long end, the G1X is a narrow f/5.8. We'll have to wait and see if other compromises were made in lens design, and how the lens quality holds up to the large sensor.
> 
> One more thing occurs to me - I did overemphasize comparisons to EF/-S lenses. Thinking back, the combination of 1/3-stop narrower at the wide end, a very narrow long end make some difference, but importantly, it's a 4:3 sensor, not 3:2, and 4:3 makes more efficient use of the image circle, so all of the lens elements can be smaller than would be inferred from a lens needed for a 3:2 sensor.
> 
> Still - the big sensor makes it interesting, and justifies the price tag!



While it did lose some speed on the lens.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canong1x/images/sensorsizes.jpg

Considering how much bigger the sensor is I think we'll be ok. The pic from dpreview gives you a better idea of how giant that thing is. And considering about the amazing amount of detail everyone goes in about how important pixel / sensor size is whenever that subject comes up I think we have a lot to be happy about with Canon in their general direction.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 9, 2012)

Meh said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Still - the big sensor makes it interesting, and justifies the price tag!
> ...



LOL. No, I don't plan to buy one. For me, it's still too big - larger than truly pocketable (and I don't count cargo pants or coats for that), I'll just bring a dSLR. 

There's one thing that might change my mind - if the AF speed and shutter lag approach those of a dSLR, then I'd consider it. That's one of the biggest downsides to a P&S, and one of the reasons I bring a dSLR unless I just can't. I'm sure that someday, contrast-detect AF will get fast enough, but I don't think it's there yet. In that regard, the bigger sensor is a disadvantage - the S100 has a fast burst rate, and because the DoF is deep, the lack of AF between shots isn't a big deal. But with a shallower DoF, a moving subject can more easily move out of the DoF. In fact, I often set my S100 to MF and rely on the deep DoF you get even with a wide aperture to eliminate the need for (and more importantly, the time it takes to) AF. 

EDIT: one thing I just noticed - an optional 40m waterproof case. The ISO capabilities of a large sensor might make this a great option for diving. But then again, the combined price of the G1X and the housing will start to approach the cost of an Ikelite dSLR housing, and 28mm isn't really wide enough, and the 'extensive accessories' don't include a WA adapter.


----------



## Meh (Jan 9, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I agree with the "pocketability" issue. I have a G10 and find it's just big enough to be a burden and once it's a burden I don't mind the greater burden of carrying my small backpack with DSLR. Now, not all of us need to put it into a pocket. Some of us carry purses which makes a huge difference in how large a P&S can be carried without it being inconvenient. And many of the European style shoulder bags for men (a.k.a. "murses") are very fashionable so there's no gender excuses.

Great point about the focus issues. Hadn't thought about it that way before. When out and about with a P&S for emergency photographic opportunities we may not have a lot of time to set up and compose a shot. The large DoF of the P&S means we can be quicker and still be sure the subject will be in focus.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 9, 2012)

ippikiokami said:


> Considering how much bigger the sensor is I think we'll be ok. The pic from dpreview gives you a better idea of how giant that thing is. And considering about the amazing amount of detail everyone goes in about how important pixel / sensor size is whenever that subject comes up I think we have a lot to be happy about with Canon in their general direction.



Well, yes, sensor size is important. But even more than hammering on 'bigger sensors are better', we hammer on 'glass before body'. A good lens on a smaller sensor (e.g. a 70-200 L-series on APS-C) will far outperform a poor lens on a larger sensor (e.g. the cheap 75-300mm III on a 5DII). With a sensor nearly the size of APS-C, but a lens smaller than the 18-55mm kit lens, I do have some concerns about IQ. Not that the 18-55mm is horrible, but compared to lenses like the 17-55mm or 15-85mm, it's not in the same class, and a bigger sensor exposes more flaws in a lens. 



Meh said:


> When out and about with a P&S for emergency photographic opportunities we may not have a lot of time to set up and compose a shot. The large DoF of the P&S means we can be quicker and still be sure the subject will be in focus.



Yep. Oh, and with the G1X, you'll have to factor in time to remove the lens cap - no auto-retracting cover. Canon helpfully includes an attachment string, so the cap can dangle around while you shoot (hmmm, what's that loud click-click-click on that video I just shot?).


----------



## kidnaper (Jan 9, 2012)

I was really hoping for integrated GPS, but I'm still interested. That price though... While its a lot of kit, it's just hard to justify this rather than putting that towards a 1DX in my eyes.


----------



## kidnaper (Jan 10, 2012)

I couldn't find to edit my last post, but it's up on Amazon for preorder.
http://tinyurl.com/7lm4dwy


----------



## kubelik (Jan 10, 2012)

ippikiokami said:


> Wooo!!
> 
> And the crow is being eaten.



there are a lot of crows being eaten ... but happily so


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 11, 2012)

I just finished looking at the size of this thing. It is as almost as big as the T3i/T2i. (and weighs just as much 19oz) So much for the "pocket camera" theory.

It looks like a sweet camera. But really, for something THAT size (and price) you might as well carry around a Rebel, and if you do, you can at least change lenses when you need to!!!

I have nothing against the G1X. I have something against the price Canon wants for it considering the fact that a T2i has more megapixels, is almost the same size (within reason as a Rebel), you cannot change lenses (BIG factor) and the fact the T2i is cheaper at this time!

I am sure the market will support it, or at least for Canon's sake I hope so. But hey, even Ford made the Edsel.  (j/k)

D


----------



## kapanak (Jan 11, 2012)

Richard8971 said:


> I just finished looking at the size of this thing. It is as almost as big as the T3i/T2i. (and weighs just as much 19oz) So much for the "pocket camera" theory.
> 
> It looks like a sweet camera. But really, for something THAT size (and price) you might as well carry around a Rebel, and if you do, you can at least change lenses when you need to!!!
> 
> ...



Personally, I am not interested. However, the weight you state is only for the Rebel body. Try attaching a lens with similar focal length to the G1X to your Rebel, and see if you can find a pocket large enough to fit it in ...


----------



## michi (Jan 11, 2012)

Too much money for me for a point and shoot. Here's my question. Will Canon still release something like a G13 which will be around $450? Or are we now forced to spend $700+ to upgrade? I think that's a steep jump...


----------



## Ryusui (Jan 11, 2012)

In the Q&A with Chuck, it was asked if the G12 would still be available and he indicated yes. And it's been said that the G1 X is not a replacement for the G12, but a different category of camera completely. So it's possible they're still planning a G12 direct upgrade.


----------



## kubelik (Jan 11, 2012)

michi said:


> Too much money for me for a point and shoot. Here's my question. Will Canon still release something like a G13 which will be around $450? Or are we now forced to spend $700+ to upgrade? I think that's a steep jump...



I'm sure Canon will want to have a camera (not necessarily named the G13) sitting in that $400 - $500 spot. but maybe they already do, and it's called the S100. to me, the G12 and S100 were already strangely overlapping one another in terms of pricing and specifications.


----------



## michi (Jan 11, 2012)

I actually have both a G10 and a S100. Even though they do overlap in what they can do, the S100 is the perfect travel camera, as it fits in a pocket. I often use the G10 coupled with a 420EX for parties, events, that sort of thing. It's smallish that way and still delivers amazing results.

I wouldn't mind the G1X but at that price, as others have said, I'm more tempted to get myself a new L lens. Now if the aperture was constant or close to constant, let's say f3.5 at the long end, then it might be usable for portraits with a nice amount of blur, but at f5.6 I am afraid it may look more like a point and shoot again which sort of defeats the purpose of the large sensor and money spent. I do look forward to some in depth reviews and sample shots though, maybe they will change my mind.


----------



## moreorless (Jan 11, 2012)

kapanak said:


> Personally, I am not interested. However, the weight you state is only for the Rebel body. Try attaching a lens with similar focal length to the G1X to your Rebel, and see if you can find a pocket large enough to fit it in ...



You've also got a longer lens with a better appature than the 18-55 kit plus a more pocketable form factor, personally the latter.

I'm say the more important comparison would be to the Sony NEX 5, including the kit zoom there pretty much the same weight but again the Canon has the advanatge of a longer zoom range, faster lens and form factor plus an OVF and built in flash.


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 12, 2012)

kapanak said:


> Try attaching a lens with similar focal length to the G1X to your Rebel, and see if you can find a pocket large enough to fit it in ...



Hmmm... would be interesting to do just that and compare the two images and see which one is better.

D


----------



## daveswan (Jan 13, 2012)

Something almost buried in the spec that people have missed with all the obsessing over sensor size and lens spec:

I-Frame Movie woo-hoo!

On a single Digic V yet, not even the souped up Digic V+ (Of which the 1Dx has 2).

If the data-rate and compresion are good, this may hint at exiting things to come with the 600D's successor.


----------



## kapanak (Jan 14, 2012)

Richard8971 said:


> kapanak said:
> 
> 
> > Try attaching a lens with similar focal length to the G1X to your Rebel, and see if you can find a pocket large enough to fit it in ...
> ...



I agree. Certainly would make a good comparison to test the 600D with, say the EF-S 18–135mm, against the G1X upon availability. Both the quality of images (since we are assuming the G1X sensor is really just a cropped 600D sensor), and the weight, ergonomics and size should be weighed into the comparison. 

I would take the 600D with the 18-135 over the G1X if it was my only camera to take somewhere. However, to a professional with a complete DSLR kit, the G1X as the (relatively) pocketable alternative is quite attractive. 

One other place that I can see the G1X becoming quite handy is for concert go-ers and those who prefer to take a few snapshots and videos of the concerts they attend. Almost universally, you will not be allowed to take a DSLR into a concert without a press pass, so the G1X becomes quite the alternative, especially given the adequately long reach.


----------



## gmrza (Jan 14, 2012)

michi said:


> I actually have both a G10 and a S100. Even though they do overlap in what they can do, the S100 is the perfect travel camera, as it fits in a pocket. I often use the G10 coupled with a 420EX for parties, events, that sort of thing. It's smallish that way and still delivers amazing results.
> 
> I wouldn't mind the G1X but at that price, as others have said, I'm more tempted to get myself a new L lens. Now if the aperture was constant or close to constant, let's say f3.5 at the long end, then it might be usable for portraits with a nice amount of blur, but at f5.6 I am afraid it may look more like a point and shoot again which sort of defeats the purpose of the large sensor and money spent. I do look forward to some in depth reviews and sample shots though, maybe they will change my mind.



I agree - in order to get a portrait with any sort of background blur, you will need a lot of distance between your subject and the background. Unfortunately, to give a larger aperature, Canon would have needed more glass, and the camera would have been even less "pocketable". - After all, every camera/lens is a compromise - whether that is on size, cost, weight, aperture, sharpness etc. - It is very difficult to have it all.

When I upgraded my G5 to a G11, it was an absolute no-brainer that the G11 was worth getting. With the G1X, the answer is not as clear. Some of the sample images I have seen seem to show a lot of softness at the edges, which is a concern.

Half of me is wondering whether I should wait until next year for the "G2X" - that is assuming the update cycle is annual...

I have no doubt that the G1X is a big step in a new direction, but given the cameras I already have, I am wondering whether it is worth it.


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (Feb 8, 2012)

G1 X User Guide:
http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/5/0300006975/01/psg1x-cug-c-en-web.pdf


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (Feb 22, 2012)

Today received I my G1 X! ;D


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (Feb 23, 2012)

A friend of mine have helped me with the test of my new G1 X,
http://rust.se/canon-powershot-g1x/


----------

