# Camera Store Trashes New G7X



## distant.star (Oct 18, 2014)

.
Not much good to say...

http://youtu.be/_E6Mxxe_kG4


----------



## drjlo (Oct 19, 2014)

distant.star said:


> .
> Not much good to say...
> 
> http://youtu.be/_E6Mxxe_kG4



"Canonitis"? That was kind of funny. 

Personally, I am not interested in any 1" sensor cameras, but that camerastore video was shot with Sony A7S, and I must say those night movie scenes were CLEEAANN!


----------



## candc (Oct 19, 2014)

I was looking forward to possibly buying one of these but not now. Everything I have seen on it so far is a big letdown.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 19, 2014)

I did not watch the whole thing. Whatever video camera used to film it was horrible, they need to fix that. it was changing apertures and the video kept getting bright and dark. This is the first hint that someone does not know what they are doing. After the flickering video, I lost interest.
I would be interested in a serious comparison at every focal length at 24mm, 35mm,50mm, 85mm, and 100mm. Wait, the RX100 does not do 85mm or 100mm, the most common portrait focal lengths. I settled on a G1X, so a G7X is not in my future in any event.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Oct 19, 2014)

distant.star said:


> .
> Not much good to say...
> 
> http://youtu.be/_E6Mxxe_kG4


Tired of waiting for a good compact camera to join my Canon gear, I finally purchased the Sony a6000 for situations when I don't want to carry my 5D3 and couple of lenses.
EOS-M never lived up my expectations, specially at the auto focus sector. I wanted the EOS-M so I could use some of my EF lenses.


----------



## ejenner (Oct 19, 2014)

I pretty much came to the same conclusions looking at sample images and reading reviews.

basically for me it comes down to extra length (70-100mm is important to me) vs. sharpness.


----------



## hawkigrad (Oct 19, 2014)

Cameralabs has their full review up and the camera compared quite sell to the Sony RX100 MIII. The Canon focuses faster, has more blur in the photos, enjoys the ability to pull focus in videos and compares closely in optical quality beating out the Sony at 50mm, 70mm. He scores both 89 points. I'm looking forward to mine.


----------



## ihendy (Oct 19, 2014)

I love the CameraStore's reviews - though being a local Calgarian - I am biased. I also think that the guys down at the store may be a bit biased too, based on Canon's latest treatment towards retail stores. Canon's latest price drops supposedly cut more into the brick and mortar stores margins than their own i.e. canon makes the same money and distributors take the hit. 

Canon has also opened a demo store locally in Calgary. Kinda like an Applestore - except you can't buy product. I'm wondering if Canon is kicking around the idea of moving into retail market so they can grab the retail markup too so that's why they are not too concerned about ruffling some feathers with their distributors.

None the less, owning the MKIII I was initially disappointed that two months after I bought it, canon finally announced a smaller 1 inch compact. I went down to the local store to check out canon's new offering and was well - underwhelmed. I think the guys are right on Mark in the video - this was the camera Canon needed to respond to the RX 100 mk II. It seems Canon are lagging behind. Canonitis is a perfect characterization. The Review may have been a bit biased, but I feel the RX III is a much better camera even factoring the additional cost.


----------



## infared (Oct 19, 2014)

I am not in the market for one of these cameras but I think that the Panasonic LX100 may be the best option in that arena for an experienced photograper. It doesn't reach to 100mm but it has the Sony and definitely the Canon beat pretty much everywhere else...
I am an MFT fan along with my FF Canon, so perhaps I am a little biased. I use Oly's not Panny's...but the spec sheet on the LX100 is impressive all the way around, truly. Maybe someday canon will make a mirrorless camera, too?! 
With the phones the camera market is so turned on its head theses days.
I went outside yesterday (I live at the beach) with my 5DIII to shoot som clouds for backgrounds, and I was sitting on a bench with my camera next to me and a woman said "oh look, he has a "real" camera! (We had a hurricane going by off the coast and the waves were spectacular and we had a lot of day trippers ALL of whom were taking pics with their phones...I REALLY a stood out with The Beast! LOL! )
That is where this whole thing is headed. Me..I have a crappy little "dumb" phone and have never insulted my art by creating a photograph with it. :-X


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 19, 2014)

infared said:


> I have a crappy little "dumb" phone and have never insulted my art by creating a photograph with it. :-X



But... but... but... but then you can't take selfies and post them online with captions that read, "Hey it’s me infrared... LOL... (little picture of a flippin’ whale) #YOLO".

_[yes I've been watching We're The Millers]_


----------



## tcmatthews (Oct 19, 2014)

The last time I even considered buying a Canon P&S was in 2009. I was seriously considering buying a G11. I ended up going to a bunch of camera stores and trying all of the High end P&S. I came to the conclusion that Sony, Olympus and Fuji-film all built more feature pact and compelling cameras. This was mostly because the Canon was more expensive and lacking features the other cameras had. In my mind the only thing that the G11 had going for it was that it was a Canon and it had raw image support. 

In the end I decided that none of the current P&S really me my needs. So I bought a Rebel and the lens I needed. 

The video really just echos my perception of Canon P&S developed at that time. 

If I was in the market for a P&S I would not even consider a Canon. Unless it was blowing away the competition in reviews.


----------



## tayassu (Oct 19, 2014)

Yeah, watched it, too...
Tragic, I really thought Canon would bring it here! But AF seems slow(er), lens worse, handling worse etc.
I don't like the Sony's feel though, so I will pull the trigger on the Panasonic LX100! It's amazing what this little beast can do! 4/3, 4K, EVF, manual controls, DFD AF etc.
Should serve for 95% of my purposes (although my DSLR is still better  )


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 19, 2014)

Forget this thing, I want to see their big sensor compact superzoom.


----------



## raptor3x (Oct 19, 2014)

tayassu said:


> But AF seems slow(er), lens worse, handling worse etc.



Not quite so simple to say the lens is worse. Based on the results that are coming in over at DPReview it looks like the Canon is sharper on the long end while the Sony is sharper at the wide end.


----------



## hawkigrad (Oct 19, 2014)

Not quite so simple to say the lens is worse. Based on the results that are coming in over at DPReview it looks like the Canon is sharper on the long end while the Sony is sharper at the wide end.


Agreed, read the review at CameraLabs which states the same. It also states the G7X focuses faster than the Sony as well. The LX100 doesn't seem too amazing to me for $200 extra when it doesn't fit in my pocket and has to have a lens cap and it, like the Sony, has around 70mm reach which makes it less than ideal for portrait shots.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 20, 2014)

I have used the camera since friday. It is inconsistent in af accuracy. Most pictures are soft. When all hits then the pics are great but for a $700 convience camera it shoukd work better than that. I would like to consider the rx100 but do not like the short focal range and handling. I think the extra bulk and IQ would be better invested in the sony a6000 for the money. At least your carrying apsc sized sensor and hopefully the af can keep up.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 20, 2014)

I like their reviews


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 20, 2014)

KKCFamilyman said:


> I have used the camera since friday. It is inconsistent in af accuracy. Most pictures are soft. When all hits then the pics are great but for a $700 convience camera it shoukd work better than that. I would like to consider the rx100 but do not like the short focal range and handling. I think the extra bulk and IQ would be better invested in the sony a6000 for the money. At least your carrying apsc sized sensor and hopefully the af can keep up.



I got my eyes locked on RX100 III as well


----------



## xps (Oct 20, 2014)

I bought the Camera on Friday too in Munich for my grandson. But the quality of the images are awful for 650€. If you raise the Iso >250 the images are not sharp and grainy. And the AF hunts for sharpness without using the flash if the thing you want to photograph is not very bright.
I was very disappointed and returned the Camera on the same day. Another G7X we tried out in the store one did not work better. 
The shop assistent told me to buy an Sony 6000. 

Added: The shop assistant told me that they got instructions for advertising the 7DII. One of these is to shoot outside, if a customer wants to try out the 7DII...


----------



## Jon_D (Oct 20, 2014)

having tried both cameras myself i can say they are spot on with this review.

the only thing that speaks for the canon is the longer tele range.


----------



## MintChocs (Oct 20, 2014)

It's a camera aimed at non-professionals, hobbyists with a bit of money, people who recognise the brand. They probably crippled it to stop it competing with their basic DSLRs. The majority of buyers aren't going to try different brands, watch YouTube videos. They will still sell more than Sony especially when they drop the price.


----------



## Maiaibing (Oct 20, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Wait, the RX100 does not do 85mm or 100mm, the most common portrait focal lengths.



RX100 focal length actually covers both 85mm and 100mm (as 35mm "equivalent")


----------



## rs (Oct 20, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Wait, the RX100 does not do 85mm or 100mm, the most common portrait focal lengths.
> ...


?? The X100 only covers the 35mm focal length equivalent. 

If you're on about the RX100 range, then the mk I and mk II do go all the way up to 100mm equiv., at the expense of the wide end. However, the mk III gains the wide end and loses the long end.


----------



## Maiaibing (Oct 20, 2014)

rs said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



I was but dropped the "R". How unfortunate that there is a "X"-model to confuse on top.


----------



## TeT (Oct 20, 2014)

From the images I have seen, not Canon's best effort. IT does look soft compared to the G1X II for one. Also who knows if those are apple to apple shots... (same sharpness settings etc...)

The review could have picked a better camera to pair it against though. Not same focal ranges...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 20, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Wait, the RX100 does not do 85mm or 100mm, the most common portrait focal lengths.
> ...


 
And which did they compare with the G7X, the MK I or the MK II? There are plenty of other cameras with a wide Zoom range, but the video is specifically about comparing the RX100 MK III. It Does not include portrait ranges.

Its just a situation where you can't really compare the two because they are not equivalent. If you want to take portraits, forget the RX100 MK III. You can compare common focal lengths, but the RX100 MK III is crippled.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 20, 2014)

I'm confused; how can Canon fark up a point-and-shoot.

Is this actually shooting worse than the S1xx pocket cameras?


----------



## golizw (Oct 20, 2014)

hi
I own the G7X since a week and I am excited. The comparison in Camera Store Trashes is not professional!
Sure the Sony is sharper in lowlight because of agressiv working sharpness. If you want (like me) you can go to P-mode and correct sharpness as well es shadows or kontrast even colour finetuning global. 
I dont think anyone buys this camera as a P&S , shooting only in FullAuto-mode. If this "tester" of the G7X doesn´t know the knobs and menu-functions, he should give up his job. I have read the whole manual and have most of features prooved with 100% crops. Best results (to me) icontrast auto, shadow no, F 4.0 Sharp +1 or +2 and the focus with touch works immediatly.
Astonishing: the digiconverter works great especially with lowlight > crop of 100% (eq. 100mm opt) to crop of 50% (from eq. 100 mm opt + 2* dgital > 200mm) gives more details to the digital combination:
http://szene.digitalkamera.de/forums/t/240621.aspx

sorry, the post is in german. And i apologize for my bad english.
goli


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 20, 2014)

I assume it's better than my S95 at least?


----------



## SoullessPolack (Oct 20, 2014)

Canonitis isn't even the right term, nor is it funny, nor does it even sound right even if the word's creater's assumption was correct.

-itis is a suffix denoting inflammation of [the whatever the root word is]. For example, hepatitis being inflammation of the liver or stomatitis being inflammation of the mouth. A much better suffix, that makes more sense, would be Canonosis, which would denote a condition or disease.

If you're going to use words you don't know, look them up. You look like a fool when intelligent people read what you've written. The worst part was, it was completely unnecessary as it wasn't even funny, and this is coming from a guy that laughs at almost anything!


----------



## SoullessPolack (Oct 20, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Wait, the RX100 does not do 85mm or 100mm, the most common portrait focal lengths.



They've done studies of photographers to find the most common portrait focal lengths?! That's crazy hah! Who funded it? Do you happen to have a link to the source, I'd love to peruse it.


----------



## weixing (Oct 20, 2014)

Hi,
Err... is it me or is the video keep rocking slightly?? I only manage to watch a bit as I start to feel a bit giddy after awhile... may be I was tired... 

Have a nice day.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Oct 20, 2014)

Mitch.Conner said:


> I assume it's better than my S95 at least?



...my thoughts exactly.

The trouble is--the price will have to drop significantly for me to consider it in a serious way.


----------



## fragilesi (Oct 20, 2014)

golizw said:


> hi
> I own the G7X since a week and I am excited. The comparison in Camera Store Trashes is not professional!
> Sure the Sony is sharper in lowlight because of agressiv working sharpness. If you want (like me) you can go to P-mode and correct sharpness as well es shadows or kontrast even colour finetuning global.
> I dont think anyone buys this camera as a P&S , shooting only in FullAuto-mode. If this "tester" of the G7X doesn´t know the knobs and menu-functions, he should give up his job. I have read the whole manual and have most of features prooved with 100% crops. Best results (to me) icontrast auto, shadow no, F 4.0 Sharp +1 or +2 and the focus with touch works immediatly.
> ...



Goli, thanks for bringing some well though out balance to the discussion! And please don't worry about your English which is good . . . I am willing to bet it is better than the German of 99%+ of the people on this forum .


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 20, 2014)

SoullessPolack said:


> -itis is a suffix denoting inflammation of [the whatever the root word is]. For example, hepatitis being inflammation of the liver or stomatitis being inflammation of the mouth. A much better suffix, that makes more sense, would be Canonosis, which would denote a condition or disease.



Yes, you're correct about the proper suffixes, however I suspect others like myself knew this and still found it funny.


----------



## hawkigrad (Oct 20, 2014)

I think a couple of things are going on. DP Review has this camera in their studio comparison tool and in looking at JPG's it's fairly easy to see the sharpening on the G7X is not as aggressive as the Sony. Comparing RAW the cameras look nearly identical. 

As far as focusing the G7X comes set for Face AiAf focusing which looks for people first before switching to point autofocus. Cameralabs reviewed the camera with this turned off for a direct comparison to the Sony and found the Canon "proved quicker and more confident under almost all conditions" in regards to focusing. In continuous autofocusing they also noted "it was above average - and noticeably more successful than the Sony RX100 MIII. For video there is no matching the two since Canon can pull focus with touch screen.


----------



## cliffwang (Oct 20, 2014)

I actually is more interested in a review of Sony RX100M3 vs Panasonic LX100. I would like to pick one of them for my wife. The LX100 has really good specs. However, I cannot tell which one is better from just specs.


----------



## hawkigrad (Oct 20, 2014)

cliffwang said:


> I actually is more interested in a review of Sony RX100M3 vs Panasonic LX100. I would like to pick one of them for my wife. The LX100 has really good specs. However, I cannot tell which one is better from just specs.



Better for what? Cameralabs scored the Sony and the Canon at 89 points each. The Canon is better for portraits with the longer lens whereas the Sony has electronic viewfinder but no touchscreen. The Panasonic will have better IQ and 4K video recording but won't fit in a normal pocket and has an external flash which must also be carried along with the lens cap. If you are going to get a camera that won't fit into a pocket for $900 why not just go APS-C and get the Sony A6000?


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 20, 2014)

"Canon needs to step up their release cycle." From a video spec perspective btwn these two cams, this is certainly true.


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 20, 2014)

CameraLabs???? :-\ :-\ :-\

The post is about the CameraStore. LOL

I guess you didn't like the part about:
*
Canonitis
Noun/Latin Origin
- To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.
*
quote author=hawkigrad link=topic=23290.msg454276#msg454276 date=1413693526]
Cameralabs has their full review up and the camera compared quite sell to the Sony RX100 MIII. The Canon focuses faster, has more blur in the photos, enjoys the ability to pull focus in videos and compares closely in optical quality beating out the Sony at 50mm, 70mm. He scores both 89 points. I'm looking forward to mine.
[/quote]


----------



## hawkigrad (Oct 20, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> CameraLabs???? :-\ :-\ :-\
> 
> The post is about the CameraStore. LOL
> 
> ...


[/quote]


I thought this site is about Canon cameras and this post is about an early review on the G7X so relax. I've never heard of Camera Store and after reading the post about those guys being biased I didn't bother to watch it. Cameralabs is well respected for doing non biased in-depth reviews and he does a straight up comparison between the Canon and the Sony (and LX100 for that matter). It's comical that people on here can be so persuaded by one video review of this camera from out in left field. Time will tell once DP Review finishes their comprehensive review but I own this camera and it's doing everything as expected for me which is inline with the review on Cameralabs. If you don't find another viewpoint relevant to discussing merits of this camera then why are you on here? Just stop at the first post and move on.


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 20, 2014)

They are biased or do you share that view towards anyone who goes against your own views?

The CameraStore is right on with the comments about both cameras and consistent with other reviews. The G7X looks good on paper, but Canon was only able to get a longer focal length by cropping the sensor...result ~ distorted WA and 100mm shots.

BTW, welcome to the Canon Rumor Forum. 


hawkigrad said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > CameraLabs???? :-\ :-\ :-\
> ...



[/quote]


----------



## cliffwang (Oct 21, 2014)

hawkigrad said:


> Better for what? Cameralabs scored the Sony and the Canon at 89 points each. The Canon is better for portraits with the longer lens whereas the Sony has electronic viewfinder but no touchscreen. The Panasonic will have better IQ and 4K video recording but won't fit in a normal pocket and has an external flash which must also be carried along with the lens cap. If you are going to get a camera that won't fit into a pocket for $900 why not just go APS-C and get the Sony A6000?



For me LX100 and A6000 is still very portable and can put to my pocket and my wife's bag without any problem. However, I prefer LX100 because of the 4K video. Of cause I need to see some reviews of LX100 before I make a decision. Again, I am interested in only Sony RX100MK3 and Panasonic LX100. For you LX100 and A6000 might be too big, but for me that's still a good size. If A6000 had 4K video, surely I might not consider LX100.


----------



## starship (Oct 21, 2014)

*"Canonitis" -> To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take ov*

"Canonitis" -> To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.

i love the term "Canonitis".

it´s so perfect on the spot.

look at the 7d mkii 
- an 1.800 bucks dslr with a crop sensor of a 70d-quality-stage. not really much better than the old 2009 7d mk1. 
- a dynamic range that´s 2ev less than the apsc-dslrs from sony or nikon.
- no wifi. come on canon. it´s 2014. most cheap point&shot cameras have wifi. why shold i buy a sperate 600bucks-device and mount that thing onto my 7d just to get a wifi connection. a wifi chip costs 1$...

"Canonitis" -> we could. but we won´t.


----------



## hawkigrad (Oct 21, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> They are biased or do you share that view towards anyone who goes against your own views?
> 
> The CameraStore is right on with the comments about both cameras and consistent with other reviews. The G7X looks good on paper, but Canon was only able to get a longer focal length by cropping the sensor...result ~ distorted WA and 100mm shots.
> 
> ...



Yep, you belong to Canon Rumors forums. You're an expert. That's what's so ironic about this post. Everybody is jumping to conclusions with few if any reviews or discussion in yet so welcome to the club. Btw, what reviews are you referring as you didn't mention which I'm sure was unintentional. I have been coming to CR for years since before I bought my first 30d through my 7D, 5D Mark III, G15, G1X and now the G7x which I own. Do you own one or do you just like to show off what you think you know? I also own Sony's, Panasonics and was set to buy the LX100 so I really don't care which camera is better but trashing the G7x based on one subjective review that only compared JPGs is naïve at best.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Oct 21, 2014)

candc said:


> I was looking forward to possibly buying one of these but not now. Everything I have seen on it so far is a big letdown.


+1, I fully agree. Canon is letting us down in many aspects when catching latest advaces in technology. The manual focus of the GX7 will be a nightmare.
I have been waiting for a decent EOS-M to arrive (Mark 3) so, I can travel light and use (via adaptor) all my EF lenses. At the moment I have decided to go for the Sony a6000 because of the APS-C sensor, high ISO and fast and accurate AF.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Oct 21, 2014)

I haven't commented on this forum for a while (even though I read it regularly) because the attitude of most people here. The notion that you have to be a total Canon fanboy to have legitimacy to post here, is absurd at best and does nothing to help the end user nor Canon.


I am not the casual photographer like many here, I make my living from photography and my work is published in magazines like Vogue so it might be possible that I know a few things.


That being said, NO I don't own a G7X, but I do agree with the Camera Store's assessment of Canon as a company lately. They seem to put just enough features on their cameras to stay above water, but never go that extra mile to make a ground-breakingly outstanding product. When compared to other products on the market, Canon always seems to be following not leading, which is a shame. I absolutely loath their "play it safe" attitude toward product development.


I own and shoot with all Canon gear (except for my recently purchased Phase One) and I'm generally happy with it, but it does not mean it's all perfect. For example, the rubber zoom ring on my new 24-70 MkII dislodged itself from the lens barrel and is now warped and in need of repair. Are you kidding me?!!! Unacceptable for a lens I paid over $2,000 for.


It should also be noted that I am regularly an early adopter of all Canon gear and usually own one while most people are still sitting on forums discussing specs. I was one of the first people in the world to own the original 7D, the 5D Mark III and the 1DX as well as various lenses. Again, I am happy with most of my Canon gear and the 1DX's low light performance continues to astonish me, but in no way do I think all Canon gear is perfect and I think the people on this forum should have a more open minded attitude toward possible flaws and imperfections and not just write anyone who brings them up as unknowledgeable and just a trolling. You are not helping Canon make better products by defending their flaws and/or shortcomings.


----------



## Maiaibing (Oct 21, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Have no clue what you are commenting on. I posted to correct the misinfo from your side that the RX does not do 85 or 100mm. I trust you agree that your original claim was an error.


----------



## Nelu (Oct 21, 2014)

candc said:


> I was looking forward to possibly buying one of these but not now. Everything I have seen on it so far is a big letdown.


Hi there,
Well, I`m the happy owner of a 5D Mark III for more than two years now after I used Canon Rebel XT, Canon 40D, Canon 5D and Canon 5D Mark II. Currently along with my 5D Mark III I also use the 7D.
A few days ago I bought a Sony RX 100 M3 and it took me a long time to make my mind because I`m really picky about image quality. I did it because I can`t have the DSLR always with me and a pocket camera is better than no camera at all.
I have to say that for its small size, the Sony delivers a lot. I posted a raw file on my Microsoft OneDrive if you wish to have a look:
http://1drv.ms/1yTQXDH
I took the photo last Sunday at Elbow Lake in Kananaskis Country, Alberta, Canada which is like my backyard in Canadian distances 
The weather was superb and it was easy to take photos but this little camera impressed me even in low light. Yes, it`s expensive but in my opinion is one of the best pocket cameras. Is it the best? I don`t know and frankly I don`t care.
What I care is that now I always have a good camera with me and when the right moment comes I`ll take that picture.
All the best,

Nelu


----------



## rukes (Oct 21, 2014)

Still wondering why they didn't compare this to the MkII, which it's obviously competing against. It seems like the store forgot that the Mk 1, 2 and 3 are all considered different cameras by SONY which is why all three are sold at the same time.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 21, 2014)

DarkKnightNine said:


> I haven't commented on this forum for a while (even though I read it regularly) because the attitude of most people here. The notion that you have to be a total Canon fanboy to have legitimacy to post here, is absurd at best and does nothing to help the end user nor Canon.
> 
> 
> I am not the casual photographer like many here, I make my living from photography and my work is published in magazines like Vogue so it might be possible that I know a few things.
> ...



I agree with the only Canon love but nothing wrong with being a Canon lover if your on a Canon Rumor forum. I also have the 5d3 and 1dx. I have the G7x and it is kind of a let down. I was hoping to have that small always with you camera with a decent sensor and control. It has inconsistent focusing no matter what setting I choose. The touch shutter seems like it would be faster but is worse. I had the Sony Nex 6 that I sold to downgrade to the Canon but it was just a faster camera to focus. I know they are different but that is what I am leaving behind and the G7x was supposed to replace it in a smaller body.

Also the ergonomics of where you place your thumb to hold the camera is much better than the Sony RX100 M3 and the touch screen for selecting focus points is better but it does not work. I am left to look at other options again. The sony EVF is not all that by the way since you have to eject it and pull it out which is time consuming for a quick candid. If an evf is a must I think the Canon G1x II or Sony A6000 are better options. Also it is hard to know the true quality since all I have is dpp to process the images so do not really know how much I can pull out of the raw files.


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Oct 21, 2014)

As it was never a question, using a Canon- System (in my case 1D4; 5D3; several LLenses) I was never tempted with a small Canon.
As someone wrote before- Canon is solid, but not the leader.

I am very happy with my (Boooh!!!) Sony RX 100 M3 as I was with the Mk I (where was Canon?), and if Fuji goes onwards with their lovely X- System I think of changing.

Look at a file from an X- Trans II file (XT1, XE2, X100s, X100t) and you can see, what a APS-C sensor is able to deliver.

Nuff said.


----------



## xps (Oct 21, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> CameraLabs???? :-\ :-\ :-\
> 
> The post is about the CameraStore. LOL
> 
> ...


[/quote]

Seem to be more an Canonose / Canonnosis, a degenerative process.....


----------



## xps (Oct 21, 2014)

SoullessPolack said:


> Canonitis isn't even the right term, nor is it funny, nor does it even sound right even if the word's creater's assumption was correct.
> 
> -itis is a suffix denoting inflammation of [the whatever the root word is]. For example, hepatitis being inflammation of the liver or stomatitis being inflammation of the mouth. A much better suffix, that makes more sense, would be Canonosis, which would denote a condition or disease.
> 
> If you're going to use words you don't know, look them up. You look like a fool when intelligent people read what you've written. The worst part was, it was completely unnecessary as it wasn't even funny, and this is coming from a guy that laughs at almost anything!



In my opinion, canonitis could be something positive too... Maybe the fever as long as you wait for the new products, maybe the rubor on your cheeks, if you have bought it. The calor in your hands if you hold it in your hand for the first time, and the dolor if you look into the emptyness of your purse....


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 21, 2014)

Now that DPR has upgraded their review, some of the things are falling into place. 

One of the strong points is the much better lens on the G7X, sharper with fewer CA's. For jpeg images, Sony has a lot more sharpening, and apparently does some in camera CA removal as well.

Check out the DPR test image setup, and compare raw images, they are very close except for the Sony CA at the edges.

AF speed is a weak point for the G7X. It would be enough for me to drop it from consideration. I'd already dropped the RX100 MK III due to its short zoom range. 

It does appear that someone wanting a tiny camera will have to determine which features he values most, because no camera has them all.

With all things being relatively close, I'd go for the faster AF speed, but there are just too many features that may appeal to users on one camera or the other.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 21, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Now that DPR has upgraded their review, some of the things are falling into place.
> 
> One of the strong points is the much better lens on the G7X, sharper with fewer CA's. For jpeg images, Sony has a lot more sharpening, and apparently does some in camera CA removal as well.
> 
> ...


+1...In addition to AF speed, I like the idea of having EVF for afternoon shooting. 

I still like my 5D III + 40pancake. Still, it's nice to have a pocketable camera for an afternoon walk sometimes.


----------



## candc (Oct 22, 2014)

well it seems the camera might be alright after all. i will have to see if i can find one in store to see how it feels. i want a nice small camera but the rx100 just doesn't feel right to me.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 22, 2014)

ToDo list for next Firmware Update: (Please Forward to the Sony RX100M3 development team)
=========================================================
These wishes, lacks of functionality, problems and bugs are related to Firmware V1.10. I will mark the appropriate entries as DONE/FIXED/SOLVED if Sony indeed did solve them. Additionally I will increase the rating to 4 or 5 stars, depending on wich and how many issues are solved.

Anyone is highly encouraged to copy & paste this list or parts of it and publish it, ideally in a way Sony will take notice of it.

Legend:
BUG = Real software bug or malfunction (also if malfunction is with intent)
LOF = lack of self-evident feature that nearly anyone expects in this class
WISH = wish

1.) [LOF] : Enable separate power-save delay durations for "LCD off" and "turning off completely". So LCD could be turned of e.g. already after 5...10 seconds if no key is pressed. Cam then could fall into sleep mode (wake-up by e.g. slight pressing of shutter key)

2.) [LOF] : During LCD off (respective during OLED-Finder off) ensure to set all components to sleep mode (energy consumption nearly 0). This would save a huge amount of energy by a) no need to drive lens motor when user manually turns cam off/on to try to save energy, PLUS it would save energy already after a few seconds if the cam does no operation. Since battery is VERY small (3,9Wh, means ~30 minutes of video if not recording continously) this is absolutely needed. I guess this could increase recording time also if stopping video near to the 55 minutes that can be achieved if recording nonstop.

3.) [LOF] : enhance list of video modes to have ALWAYS available *all* framerates, independent if cam is set to PAL or NTSC. Maybe warn user, but do NOT prevent him to use 60fps if he wants to use 60fps/NTSC framerate in PAL mode. (If this is done, there's no more need to implement bugfix/wish #4)

4.) [LOF] : do not force user to re-format SD-Card when changing from PAL to NTSC or vice versa. What the hell should this be good for? Why this absolute insane artificial restriction? Even better solution: put all NTSC framerates into the Video Menu if in PAL mode and vice versa. (see previous entry, #3.) )

5.) [WISH] : Maybe put all video modes in one list instead having to switch between AVCHD and XAVC-S, add (AVCHD) and (XAVC-S) in brackets in the appropriate menu entries

6.) [LOF] : enable start/stop of video recording if dial is set to video mode also by pressing shutter key

7.) [LOF] : enable capturing of still images while recording video (at least in modes when CPU has enough capacity left). Remember: the cam has enough power to simulataneosly record a low-quality MP4 stream to be sent to a smartphone. Since is NOT really needed, it would be totally OK if capturing still images only can be done if dial video recording is diabled.

8.) [LOF] : If #7. is done, do not forget to also enable FIFO buffering for multiple still images while recording video (2 or 3 images, the more, the better) to prevent that user has to wait up to 10 seconds to be able to take next picture (as it is the case with RX100M1).

9.) [BUG] : It is not possible to enable the "water level bubble" meter additionally to other status displays. Please fix this bug.

10.) [WISH] : Add a pre-shot option (shoot but not store stills before pressing shutter)

11.) [WISH] : Add a pre-record option for video (e.g. save the 3 seconds that have happened BEFORE movie button has been pressed)

12.) [WISH] : Add a short-sequence high-speed recording function with optional pre-shot. e.g. Save 3 seconds at 100..200 fps and play back at 25..50 fps), identical to that in Sony HDR-CX116 (Camcorder), if cam is capable of 200 fps for a short period, then also additional recording at 200 fps with playback at 25 would be adequate.

13.) [BUG] : review the german translation of several menu entries. (least important, but I would have expected better translations). Hint: the following strings are named very misleading/un-understandable: "Taste DISP", "Anzeigequalität", "Dateiformat", "Für Sucher", "Key-Benutzereinstlg.", "Bew.interv.-Einstlg", "Spur-Intv. im Beweg. aufn.-Video einstellen.", "Energiesp.-Startzeit"
At certain points one gets the impression that this translations are from a company that's absolutely new to the german market. :-(

14.) [LOF] : Improve preview quality of video still images. The camera could easily and in virtually no time decode the 1st frame (or several frames and take e.g frame #10) in case video container specifications do not allow higher preview stills. This high-quality decoding may be done with a delay of ~200...300 ms in case it would otherwise slow down stepping through the images/recordings

15.) [LOF] : Add display of remaining recording space (in minutes) while recording video (currently remaining rec time is only visible if dial is set to video and no video is recorded).
Additionally maybe add also remaining time of artificial size limit for the current video sequence (I guess the reason to not show the remaining time is to hide this restriction/or to prevent to have to display 2 different remaining times)

16.) [BUG] : If you take a picture, and after having pressed the shutter, you IMMEDIATELY press the movie button, the camera complains "Operation not possible, writing to SD-Card". WTF?!?!?!
This is not a computer science school project, this is a top-class camera from a world class manufacturer. So it's no question that there's a FIFO buffering and write operations not yet completed are processed seemlessly in the background. (At least this SHOULD be the case!) Indeed this *is* done if shooting multiple pictures, but obviously currently there's a bug that prevents this background FIFO buffering from being used when user starts recording a video while a picture still is being written.
EVEN WORSE: if you shoot a series of pictures, then you have to wait until all pics are written to SD-Card before video recording can be started. (approx. 1 second per picture, means >60 seconds if whole FIFO buffer is full with pictures.
FIFO Buffer should either also be used for video or, maybe much simpler/safer to implement: write video immedately to card if movie button is pressed and simultaneoulsy continue emptying FIFO full with pictures to card. (it's no problem for the pictures if they can not be written to card at full speed because video is recorded)

17.) [WISH] : If running on external supply: Since camera stops charging battery and cam consumes less power during operation than when charging battery, cam should simply ignore if spower supply does not identify as suited for "USB power". (Otherwise the cam also would have to refuse charging because the supplied power supply is not suited for that, too...). But it's great that the cam can be turned on with external power connected! Keep this!!!

18.) [WISH] : While preview image is shown, all buttons (Fn, Zoom, etc.) behave as if the picute view mode is active. This is annoying if you operate fast and e.g. want to change some setting or change zoom. You are forced to slight-press the shutter before to close preview image or to disable preview completely. An option that keeps the cam in photo mode while preview image is display would be great.

--- end of ToDo list for Sony RX100M3 development team ---


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 22, 2014)

Sorry to hear, but seems consistent with what others are experiencing with the soft images and AF issues



KKCFamilyman said:


> I have used the camera since friday. It is inconsistent in af accuracy. Most pictures are soft. When all hits then the pics are great but for a $700 convience camera it shoukd work better than that. I would like to consider the rx100 but do not like the short focal range and handling. I think the extra bulk and IQ would be better invested in the sony a6000 for the money. At least your carrying apsc sized sensor and hopefully the af can keep up.


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 22, 2014)

Now thats even better than:

*Canonitis (Noun/Latin Origin)
- To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.*



xps said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > CameraLabs???? :-\ :-\ :-\
> ...



Seem to be more an Canonose / Canonnosis, a degenerative process.....
[/quote]


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 22, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> I guess you didn't like the part about:
> *
> Canonitis
> Noun/Latin Origin
> ...



Take over the market from whom? Who is the market leader for digital still cameras and dSLRs?


----------



## 2n10 (Oct 22, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > I guess you didn't like the part about:
> ...



Some never let data get in the way of their beliefs. They much prefer there own anecdotal acquisitions.


----------



## Old Sarge (Oct 22, 2014)

2n10 said:


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


It seems that neuroanatomist asked a legitimate question, one which should have had a verifiable answer backed by data but you chose to brush it off. Doesn't speak well for your position.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 22, 2014)

Old Sarge said:


> 2n10 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


I hope you're wrong . . . but I read it as backing up neruo's point. It's easy enough to search for a simple answer to the question:
http://www.canon.com/news/2014/mar27e.html


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 22, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> +1...In addition to AF speed, I like the idea of having EVF for afternoon shooting.
> 
> I still like my 5D III + 40pancake. Still, it's nice to have a pocketable camera for an afternoon walk sometimes.


 
Agreed, even a evf is better than none at all, and the built-in evf of the RXIII is very appealing. I really miss one on my G1X MK II, but have no plans to buy the evf as of yet.


----------



## Old Sarge (Oct 22, 2014)

dstppy said:


> Old Sarge said:
> 
> 
> > 2n10 said:
> ...


You are probably right. I probably misread it. Thanks for the link, it says exactly what I thought all along. Canon may have some faults but they are still an industry leader. Apologies for my lack of understanding.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 22, 2014)

Old Sarge said:


> You are probably right. I probably misread it. Thanks for the link, it says exactly what I thought all along. Canon may have some faults but they are still an industry leader. Apologies for my lack of understanding.


The board has gotten weird and unfriendly lately. It's understandable.

I'm still curious to see how this stacks up against the S1xx cameras and other "G" class cameras. I literally only have an iPhone and a 5Dmk3 now for cameras, having sold the other stuff or given the P&S stuff to my ex.


----------



## tayassu (Oct 22, 2014)

DarkKnightNine said:


> I haven't commented on this forum for a while (even though I read it regularly) because the attitude of most people here. The notion that you have to be a total Canon fanboy to have legitimacy to post here, is absurd at best and does nothing to help the end user nor Canon.
> 
> 
> I am not the casual photographer like many here, I make my living from photography and my work is published in magazines like Vogue so it might be possible that I know a few things.
> ...



Thank you very much for sharing your practical and experience-based opinion!
The best I've read on this forum for a long time!


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 25, 2014)

Just wanted to post a few more shots of the G7X today. They were pretty good but for me the AF just is too slow when I am used to a dslr. Wanted to post a few anyway.







My Dog Molly






My son and his dog Molly






See the AF Disappoints again.


----------



## Aglet (Oct 26, 2014)

Looks like it's sensor is doing pretty well in DxOmark's testing

_www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-PowerShot-G7-X-review-Has-it-got-that-X-tra-something/Canon-PowerShot-G7-X-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-Competitive-performance_

too bad about the other little foibles


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 26, 2014)

Aglet said:


> Looks like it's sensor is doing pretty well in DxOmark's testing
> 
> _www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-PowerShot-G7-X-review-Has-it-got-that-X-tra-something/Canon-PowerShot-G7-X-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-Competitive-performance_
> 
> too bad about the other little foibles



Yeah the sensor seems great except the af performance of the camera. Really its a nice camera but it just is not for me. I need pictures that are consistantly in focus.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 28, 2014)

KKCFamilyman said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like it's sensor is doing pretty well in DxOmark's testing
> ...



That's just weird. Never saw any issue like that with the S100.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 28, 2014)

KKCFamilyman said:


> Just wanted to post a few more shots of the G7X today.



You can't fool me. That is not a picture of the G7X. That's a dog. ;D


----------

