# Consumer Reports: Canon G1X MK2 Best Ever



## JumboShrimp (Aug 31, 2014)

FWIW department: The October 2014 issue (p. 47) of Consumer Reports says that the Canon G1X Mark II is "our best-scoring camera ever". :


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 31, 2014)

I have one, and I like it for general carry around use, as opposed to a DSLR with 24-105mm lens. Its far too big to be pocketable, but small enough to be carried with a wrist strap.

Consumer reports slants their reviews towards a different type of user than those who post here. Photo enthusiasts are a very diverse group, and are generally going to sacrifice all around utility for best performance. 

I feel that the camera is priced too high, but I sold my old G1 X MK I for 3X what it cost me new, so the difference to upgrade wasn't bad.

My wife just spent a week horse riding on the ocean beach, and was worried about taking a $800 camera on the horse. I spotted a used Nikon s9700 on CL for $120 and bought it for her. I played around with it, its fine for what I paid, but a huge step down in IQ and overall performance. Noise is horrible at almost any setting above base ISO. It survived the beach just fine, she is careful with her cameras, so I don't know if we will keep it or not. It fits in her purse, so she likes that. The GPS feature works well, in Lightroom I could zoom into a satellite view of the camp and see where each photo was taken. I would not want her to use that feature to post online and let someone track her. The camera has Wi-Fi, but she does not use it. I thought the Wi-Fi on the G1 X was crippled, but when I tried the primitive Wi-Fi on the Nikon, Canon started looking very good.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 2, 2014)

You can't trust Consumer Reports opinion on cameras. Back in the day, when the majority of Pros were using the Nikon F, Consumer Reports said it was the worst camera. 

If you gave Consumer Reports a Canon 1D X to test, they wouldn't like it. They know nothing of photography, and treat cameras like toasters or hair dryers.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 2, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> You can't trust Consumer Reports opinion on cameras. Back in the day, when the majority of Pros were using the Nikon F, Consumer Reports said it was the worst camera.
> 
> If you gave Consumer Reports a Canon 1D X to test, they wouldn't like it. They know nothing of photography, and treat cameras like toasters or hair dryers.



Actually, you can trust them, you just need to know who they are rating products for. A My Nikon F would be a horrible experience for a general consumer, as would a D1X.

It would be really poor advice to recommend that a ordinary Consumer looking for a camera buy a D1 X. It is for Pros as was the Nikon F.

A Sony RX100 III likewise is not a top camera for a ordinary consumer who expects a 5-1 zoom range. It does not even cover portrait focal lengths, its pretty much a enthusiast camera. That does not mean it isn't a fine camera, just that its not the best pick for a general consumer.


----------



## thepancakeman (Sep 2, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > You can't trust Consumer Reports opinion on cameras. Back in the day, when the majority of Pros were using the Nikon F, Consumer Reports said it was the worst camera.
> ...



While this defense of CU may have merit for cameras due to complexity, I stopped caring what they said about most anything many years ago when they did loudspeakers (plug and play--no user complexities to deal with) and their worst rated speaker was the same won that was winning awards in the audio world. Apparently didn't have enough "boom" and "sizzle" for them.


----------



## distant.star (Sep 2, 2014)

.
Speaking of speakers, so to speak...

Consumers Union (publisher of Consumer Reports) lost a major case in the U.S. Supreme Court when sued by Bose. The speaker manufacturer didn't care for the review and showed CR to be full of shirt.

In case no one is interested....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose_Corp._v._Consumers_Union_of_United_States,_Inc.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 2, 2014)

Its pretty rare for them to lose a lawsuit, and most of their reviews are right-on. I prefer reviews where actual measurements can be made, but sometimes, its just a opinion based on using a product.

I've come to disregard consumer Magazines where the product that advertises in the magazine with big $$ budgets get the top reviews. Those ratings do not impress me, be it speakers or automobiles.

As for Bose, I have a old set that I really like, I have owned many different vintage speakers, I find them used at garage sales, or occasionally, on Craigslist. I even buy new ones once in a while. Often, the the old ones need new surrounds (easy to replace), and sometimes they turn out to be junk. Most of the Bose Speakers (about 5 or 6 types) sounded poor to me, but the ones I kept, I like. 

Right now, I need to get rid of several sets, they are taking up a lot of room in my shop. I bought a set of Criterion VI speakers at a estate sale last week for $5. Turns out that they were from Layfayette Radio many years ago, and worth all of $5.00 . They have a good mid and high sound, but no bass. If they weren't so big, they would go well with a subwoofer.

I used to build my own bass reflex and horn speakers when I was in high school, there is no secret to tuning them for the right frequencies. I still have the book I used with the formulas, they are probably found on the internet now, but that was 1959.


----------



## LSV (Sep 2, 2014)

distant.star said:


> .
> Speaking of speakers, so to speak...
> 
> Consumers Union (publisher of Consumer Reports) lost a major case in the U.S. Supreme Court when sued by Bose. The speaker manufacturer didn't care for the review and showed CR to be full of shirt.
> ...



Actually, Consumer Union won by 6-3 at the US Supreme Court:

"Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., 466 U.S. 485 (1984), was a product disparagement case ultimately decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court found, on a 6-3 vote, in favor of Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports magazine, ruling that proof of "actual malice" was necessary in product disparagement cases raising First Amendment issues, as set out by the case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. The Court ruled that the First Circuit Court of Appeals had correctly concluded that Bose had not presented proof of actual malice."


----------



## teedidy (Sep 2, 2014)

i have the G1X mkII and i love it. if you ignore every persons comment on price, all you ever see is glowing reviews. if you compare noise at a pixel level, there are only a few cameras that beat it. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii/10 check out the comparison to the sony rx100 raw at 3200 iso, its pretty clear how much better the canon g1x is. if you flip through other cameras, only half of the full frame cameras clearly beat this little G1X.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 7, 2014)

LSV said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



That makes sense. Someone who evaluates a product and gives a honest opinion should not be liable for a defamation lawsuit. If they do it out of Malice, that's a different story. Consumers Union has been called out a very few times on errorenous conclusions, and they have corrected them. They are not DXO, who lists Nikon as a customer.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 7, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > You can't trust Consumer Reports opinion on cameras. Back in the day, when the majority of Pros were using the Nikon F, Consumer Reports said it was the worst camera.
> ...



Consumer Reports didn't like the Nikon F because they thought *IT WAS UNRELIABLE*. That it broke-down too often ???

BTW a Nikon F, at the time it was a NEW camera, was no different than many other cameras. It had manual focusing, a shutter speed dial on the camera and the aperture on the lens. ALL cameras required the user to set the ASA (ISO). What made a Nikon F a pro camera was RELIABILITY.

BTW2 If you set your Canon 1D X to P (for Pro) it becomes an expensive P&S camera. Many of the Doctors, Lawyers, etc who buy cameras for their bling, always use P.


----------



## SoullessPolack (Sep 7, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Consumer Reports didn't like the Nikon F because they thought *IT WAS UNRELIABLE*. That it broke-down too often ???
> 
> BTW a Nikon F, at the time it was a NEW camera, was no different than many other cameras. It had manual focusing, a shutter speed dial on the camera and the aperture on the lens. ALL cameras required the user to set the ASA (ISO). What made a Nikon F a pro camera was RELIABILITY.



For what it's worth, I went through two Nikon F's that failed before I got one that lasted a long time, for what it's worth. For my sample size, that's 33% reliability.

Think about how many reviews the magazine does, and how many products are in each review. They simply aren't going to get a huge sample size, like 100 of each item, just to test in case one doesn't work out. They do it the same way consumers do, they buy one and report on that. As a consumer, it doesn't matter if the brand you buy has a stellar reputation for reliability if YOUR product does not work. Acer is a great brand for laptops and is frequently ranked near the top in terms of reliability. I had the same hardware issue occur on two new ones. Even though they are supposedly reliable, to me they were not, and I ended up switching to a Toshiba which has worked since.

So please remember, when thinking of Consumer Reports, how they perform their reviews. It is not a NDA to be approved by the FDA, for instance, where thousands of patients undergo clinical trials to make sure the drug is safe/effective/etc. Their sample size for each item is small, but it's the same way a consumer would buy an item.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 7, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Consumer Reports didn't like the Nikon F because they thought *IT WAS UNRELIABLE*. That it broke-down too often ???
> 
> BTW a Nikon F, at the time it was a NEW camera, was no different than many other cameras. It had manual focusing, a shutter speed dial on the camera and the aperture on the lens.



I have a Nikon F, and the finder mechanism was designed by Rube Goldberg  All those little levers and moving parts jam and bend whenever a bearing gets a little stiff. I've spent hours working on it straightening out bent parts to get it working again. I'd Give Consumer Reports a A++ for that call. That mechanism is like no other camera, and is horrible.


----------

