# G1X-II's larger sensor w/ EVF or newer G7X with higher MP?



## mbiedermann (Oct 11, 2014)

I'm looking for a small(ish) traveling camera. I will also buy a water-tight casing for scuba photography which is available for either camera.

Should I get the G1X Mark II or the new G7X. I'm looking for the highest IQ and greatest ability for low light possible between these two cameras. The size difference between them is not that important to me.

Here is my comparison of what is important:
G1X-II: 1.5" sensor @ 12 MP, optional EVF, hot boot for external flash, and nice grip
G7X: 1" sensor @ 20 MP, no possible EVF, no possible external flash and no grip

Again, I'm looking for the highest IQ and best low light pix since I'm used to what my 5D3 can produce.

Cheers


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 12, 2014)

The Larger sensor gives the best low light performance. I think that my G1X has better IQ than any of the G7X photos I've seen, DPR has photos from a production camera now, and they seem to lack detail. 

I've yet to use my camera in extreme low light situations as of yet.

You can use the DPR studio image comparison set to ISO 3200 Raw and compare it to the Sony RX100 III which has the same sensor as the Canon G7X. 

The large sensor of the G1X wins handily at ISO 3200, its not even close. It looks very close to a 70D.

At low ISO's where noise does not eat up the Sony cameras resolution, its more even, but there is more detail and contrast in the G1X images at ISO 100.


http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g1xii&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100m3&attr13_2=canon_eos70d&attr13_3=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=3200&attr16_1=3200&attr16_2=3200&attr16_3=3200&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.25523809523809526&y=0.6934091157503552


----------



## mbiedermann (Oct 13, 2014)

Thank you Mt Spokane Photography for your response.


----------



## tayassu (Oct 14, 2014)

Have you considered the Panasonic LX100? I'm looking for a camera for exactly the same purpose as you do, and the LX100 seems to be the perfect compromise in size, IQ, aperture, EVF and so on...
If you wanna stay with Canon, go for the G7X. The Sony sensor does true magic and the G1XII images are just too soft at high ISO's in my experience.


----------



## mbiedermann (Oct 15, 2014)

@tayassu - Does Panasonic offer a water tight case to 140 feet/40 meters for the LX100 suitable for underwater photography?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 15, 2014)

tayassu said:


> Have you considered the Panasonic LX100? I'm looking for a camera for exactly the same purpose as you do, and the LX100 seems to be the perfect compromise in size, IQ, aperture, EVF and so on...
> If you wanna stay with Canon, go for the G7X. The Sony sensor does true magic and the G1XII images are just too soft at high ISO's in my experience.


 
What experience do you actually have with the G1X II, The Sony sensor, or the LX 100? Post your photos. I'll start with one of mine and include a crop.

I don't see a issue with the sharpness of my G1X, its not as good as my 5D MK III + 24-70mm MK II lens, but it does not cost $5,600 either.


----------



## candc (Oct 15, 2014)

[/quote]
I don't see a issue with the sharpness of my G1X, its not as good as my 5D MK III + 24-70mm MK II lens, but it does not cost $5,600 either.
[/quote]

i am looking for a pocket camera. i tried an rx100iii in the store but didn't like the way it felt. too small and the controls seemed jammed together. maybe i can find a store with one of these to try. your example shot looks great.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 15, 2014)

I don't see a issue with the sharpness of my G1X, its not as good as my 5D MK III + 24-70mm MK II lens, but it does not cost $5,600 either.


i am looking for a pocket camera. i tried an rx100iii in the store but didn't like the way it felt. too small and the controls seemed jammed together. maybe i can find a store with one of these to try. your example shot looks great.


The Sony RX100 III is a great camera, I am all thumbs, and the zoom range is limited, so I passed, but I see nothing wrong with the sharpness of my G1X MK II. The lens on the MK I was indeed a weak point.

I'm just asking because the comment indicated experience with all three cameras.


----------



## tayassu (Oct 17, 2014)

mbiedermann said:


> @tayassu - Does Panasonic offer a water tight case to 140 feet/40 meters for the LX100 suitable for underwater photography?



I have no idea, but you can always go with an Ewa-Marine underwater housing or something like that 

@MtSpokane I meant at high ISO's


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 18, 2014)

I just got the G7x today and took some shots on a walk and indoors. The camera is nice but after looking at the jpeg and raw files. The picture appears to have a decent IQ but looking at it closer there is a tough distinction to determine if it was even in focus since it does not have any sharp areas in the image. there are details but slight at best. Was hoping since it was a good option for a portable camera. I liked the touch interface but the pictures are just soft even at low iso's. I can try taking a pic of a book on a shelf but that's not how I am going to use it. I am going to have to rethink this. Maybe the G1x II or look at the Sony Nex series again even though I prefer to stay all Canon. $700 is too much for just ok.


----------



## candc (Oct 18, 2014)

KKCFamilyman said:


> I just got the G7x today and took some shots on a walk and indoors. The camera is nice but after looking at the jpeg and raw files. The picture appears to have a decent IQ but looking at it closer there is a tough distinction to determine if it was even in focus since it does not have any sharp areas in the image. there are details but slight at best. Was hoping since it was a good option for a portable camera. I liked the touch interface but the pictures are just soft even at low iso's. I can try taking a pic of a book on a shelf but that's not how I am going to use it. I am going to have to rethink this. Maybe the G1x II or look at the Sony Nex series again even though I prefer to stay all Canon. $700 is too much for just ok.




That is unfortunate to hear.I looked at some crop comparisons, I think it was ir. the g7x crops looked blurry like they were a bit out of focus with a lot of fringing. I thought it was just a bad setup but maybe the lens is just not the best. Too bad. The g1xii looked good.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 18, 2014)

IPhone 6






Canon G7X






Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.


----------



## xps (Oct 20, 2014)

My personal experience: I returned the G7X. The pictures are very soft and there is much noise, more noise than expected for this price. And the AF is not very accurate, if it is darker.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 20, 2014)

KKCFamilyman said:


> Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.



Honestly, I don't care about the camera. That is an adorable picture of your dog.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 20, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> KKCFamilyman said:
> 
> 
> > Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.
> ...



Thanks


----------



## mnclayshooter (Oct 20, 2014)

KKCFamilyman said:


> IPhone 6
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Just wondering if some of the soft focus issue is actually depth of field related?? How close were you to these objects/dog? There's a fair amount of close-up wide-angle nature to these photos... wondering if you were zoomed in and very close to your targets... in other words, nearing macro-focus end of the camera's lens? 

The focal plane on my compact cameras at close range is pretty narrow for similar distances - while I don't have the G1X II or G7X - their physical lenses and types of focusing systems are very similar - with live-view, it's hard to always tell where you're precisely focused - the green box isn't all that accurate as far as the exact location of the focal point... at least that's what I found on my G1X especially. It takes very nice photos, but certainly isn't as easy to drive to sharp focus-ville as a DSLR, especially at close working distances. 

In my opinion - comparing them to an Iphone 6 (or just about any other cell phone/micro camera) isn't really a fair comparison mathematically - the aperture and physical lens size play a big role in those camera's abilities to render images. While they may shoot very nice pictures and give you "35mm equivalent focal length comparisons", they have very small physical construction - the potential for their lens components to "miss" on focus is imperceivably microscopic in comparison to the internals of an external/interchangeable DSLR or even fixed compact camera lens. Using your example photos - the Iphone photo clearly shows an unequal comparison in relative aperture - the bokeh is much less - indicating, at least to me, that it has a deeper depth of field at this given focal length. It's going to show more objects in more detail/sharp focus in this example. 

A pretty good explanation here: http://petapixel.com/2013/08/01/a-tour-of-the-equipment-found-in-modern-smartphone-cameras/


Now... I'll be the first to admit and support the argument that you should throw all of the "math/optical forumlae etc" out the window and shoot with the device(s) that get the images you want to see, unless you're one of those folks (like me sometimes) who really enjoy the math/physics part of equipment selection (including the math of sale price). If your phone's camera does what you need it to do, do you need a $700 brick in your pocket? Since getting back into SLR/DSLR cameras, I barely, if ever pick up my G1X... even on mountain-climbing/hiking adventures where the size/weight and all-in-one-nature of the G1X trumps the DSLR handily. I will fully admit my galaxy phone's camera gets quite a bit of use on those adventures though too... if for no other reason than instant ability to share photos with internet friends while still on-site at the adventure.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 20, 2014)

mnclayshooter said:


> KKCFamilyman said:
> 
> 
> > IPhone 6
> ...



I certainly understand what your saying but this camera just struggles too much to get sharp images. Since my wife will mostly use it then $700 is too much for a small travel camera. I will keep the search and look at the sony rx3 and g1x ii. I may consider the sony a6000 with the 20mm pancake for her.


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Oct 20, 2014)

How large a print will you be making at 300DPI?

A 12mpixel sensor will allow you to make a great print up to 10x16inches. A 20mpixel sensor is good to 13x19inches. If you know how to work the magic you can easily double the dimensions/quadruple the area of these prints.



mbiedermann said:


> I'm looking for a small(ish) traveling camera. I will also buy a water-tight casing for scuba photography which is available for either camera.
> 
> Should I get the G1X Mark II or the new G7X. I'm looking for the highest IQ and greatest ability for low light possible between these two cameras. The size difference between them is not that important to me.
> 
> ...


----------

