# UPDATED: Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 29, 2017)

```
We’ve received some new specifications for the upcoming Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III, which is scheduled to be announced in mid October. We’ve been told to think EOS M5 with a fixed lens.</p>
<p><strong>Updated Specifications & Corrections: </strong>(Update in bold)</p>

<ul>
<li>24.2mp APS-C Sensor</li>
<li>DIGIC 7</li>
<li>24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em></li>
<li>Dynamic IS</li>
<li>Touch AF</li>
<li>Dust & water resistant</li>
<li><strong>Lens hood LH-DC 110</strong></li>
<li><strong>Water proof case WP-DC56 </strong>(<a href="http://www.nokishita-camera.com/2017/10/powershot-g1-x-mark-iii.html">via Nokishita)</a></li>
</ul>
<p><del>We still don’t know if the PowerShot G1 X Mark III will come with an built-in EVF or not.</del></p>
<p>We’ll update this post if we hear anything else.</p>
<p><strong>*Update*

</strong>We’ve confirmed that the PowerShot G1 X Mark III will come with a built-in OLED EVF.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 29, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

"Dust & water resistant" 

That's the best news. Could be a great travel camera if they manage to keep the size down.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 29, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

hehehe. There are no miracles in physics and optics. ;D
A 15-44/2.8 - 5.6 lens [with f/2.8 from 15-18mm] is much more feasible in G1X form factor than a 15-75 ...


----------



## gmon750 (Sep 29, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

I was really really hoping for a better lens range that 24-70mm. My Powershot S100 has as 24-120mm which I was hoping the first iteration of rumors about this camera having the same lens was accurate.

Still... It's looking like a great camera and I'm excited to see it in person when it comes out!


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 29, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

EOS M5 with a bolted-on EF-M 15-45.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Very disappointing focal lengths and long-end aperture. No thanks if these specs are true.


----------



## minaz (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Well almost certainly better sensor than the II, but interesting trade-off in the lens:
24-120mm f/2-3.9 vs 24-70 f/2.8-5.6
In the first instance, a very versatile do-everything range going from wide to mid-telephoto good for landscapes, interiors, portraits, and in the second instance, the standard "wedding zoom" meaning good wide angle to decent short telephoto for portraiture as long as not too tight in (not the best for head shots). I guess if one did not need the telephoto end of things, this isn't too bad. I can see missing a few shots during travel where you might have wanted to zoom further in. As for the aperture, f/5.6 by 70mm certainly is a tad disappointing.
Other factors: what is dynamic IS? Is this the video-only IS again?
Better (DP)AF is nice though I must admit - the old model's big Achilles heel was the slow AF.
Still, considering I already have the waterproofing kit and EVF for the II, I'm not sure this is enough to make me want to switch. After all, if the APS-C sensor was that important, I'd still use the M5 and a faster lens. If not, then the II makes more sense. Bad trade-off, IMHO.


----------



## Proscribo (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Canon Rumors said:


> 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>


Maybe the aperture is 35mm equiv. too. ???

So it'd be 15-44mm f/1.8-3.5... I mean, otherwise it's a bit sad IMO. I'd rather go with M5 and a couple of lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Proscribo said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>
> ...



Wishful thinking...


----------



## IOS46 (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Proscribo said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>
> ...



I think you're correct and this will be the 15-43mm f2 to f4 patent that some have suggested would be the new G1X iii lens. If it really is f2.8 to f5.6 that is just sad.


----------



## okaro (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

2.9x zoom would be the worst zoom range on any Canon compact camera since 2006. The f/2.8 wide angle aperture is effectively 0.4 fstops worse than with Mark II. On the tele end it is 0.5 fstops worse and this does not even count the much reduced zoom range. I fact the maximum aperture would be just 7.8 mm, much less than with G7 X (13 mm). Sure one gets twice the megapixels but they are not everything. There has to be some extra bonus like reduced size. EOS M100 with the 15-45 mm is 430 grams, G1 X Mark II is 550 grams. This has to be in the 400-450 gram range to have a chance.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

MAJOR disappointment: 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Eh, it was pretty clear that a bigger sensor and a bigger lens would bring lower f numbers. An APS-C 15-45 f/2.8, not to mention something ridiculous like f/1.8-3.5, would be huge and hilariously expensive.


----------



## Proscribo (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Sharlin said:



> Eh, it was pretty clear that a bigger sensor and a bigger lens would bring lower f numbers. An APS-C 15-45 f/2.8, not to mention something ridiculous like f/1.8-3.5, would be huge and hilariously expensive.


Sure, but if it's a 15-45mm f/2.8-5.6... it's effectively worse than what G1X II has, hell it's actually worse than G7X II!


----------



## HaroldC3 (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

The only questions left are will it have 4K and how large will it be? I'd love to see Panasonic come out with an lx100 ii with a 20mp sensor.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Not seeing the point of this camera now given the lens speed and the price Canon will be charging.

Sony a6000 with kit lens will be smaller, lighter, cheaper, and better all around.

Canonitis


----------



## michi (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

70mm at 5.6 is just terrible. I wouldn't buy this camera just for that fact.


----------



## sanj (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Sony 6500 with Sigma 30mm 1.8. Heaven.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

would be rather unexpected, but quite funny, if a Powershot would be the first APS-C sensored Canon camera with 4k video ... luckily I don't care at all about video recording. ;D


----------



## Act444 (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Interesting move, but I'd have to say that personally, for me, 5.6 at 70mm is too slow to be stuck with on a fixed-lens camera. That would be the equivalent of the 15-45mm which is f6.3 at the long end, which, in my shooting experience, is quite restrictive (but serves its purpose in the right scenarios). But the key difference is that the lens is removable! One redeeming feature might be if the IQ is superior to the M + 15-45mm, though.

A FF Powershot with a fixed 35 or 50mm would be something I'd look into. Basically the Canon equivalent of Sony's RX1R.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 30, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

This was always going to be the danger of going to a full aps-c sensor in the G1X series. I've always been a fan of this camera, but much of its ability in providing "dslr" quality in a power shot came from the fact the sensor is slightly smaller. If you look at the capabilities of a camera such as the G3X, they come from the small sensor. 

I don't see the point of the G1XIII being a fixed lens M5 unless that fixed lens is stellar and significantly faster than the M series kit lens. The trouble is that means it's likely to grow in size.


----------



## danfaz (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



powershot2012 said:


> MAJOR disappointment: 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6


yep, my thoughts exactly


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*


3 1/2 years in the making for this....could almost see if the lens was still 24-120mm.

With the II having (f/2.0-3.9), Canon simply went for sensor size and a slower lens, wow! Brilliant Canon!




danfaz said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > MAJOR disappointment: 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6
> ...


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

You mean Sigma 30mm 2.8?



sanj said:


> Sony 6500 with Sigma 30mm 1.8. Heaven.


----------



## stevelee (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Proscribo said:


> Sure, but if it's a 15-45mm f/2.8-5.6... it's effectively worse than what G1X II has, hell it's actually worse than G7X II!



For me the G7X II hits just the right balances of size, speed, zoom, resolution, IQ. Mine will still get a lot of use even now that I have a 6D2, and I am really happy with the latter, after one day of trying it out. Different strokes for different folks, I realize.


----------



## -1 (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Canon Rumors said:


> *Update*
> We’ve confirmed that the PowerShot G1 X Mark III will come with a built-in OLED EVF.



Let's hope that this means that a M7 with popup EVF, (behind the flash?) is afoot... Could be interesting, at least if the hot shoe stays.


----------



## 1kind (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

I can bet that there is no 4k and it's going to look like the G5x/M5 with the little hump for the EVF.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



-1 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > *Update*
> ...



while a left-top-corner positioned Pop-Up EVF like on some Sony cameras [e.g. RX1R II and some RX100 versions] would be absolutely fantastic, I don't think we will get such an implementation from Canon. I rather expect an equally ugly and dysfunctional central EVF hump on top of the camera. "To make it look more like a Mini-DSLR", which Canon seems to believe would be favored by n00b buyers. :


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



AvTvM said:


> while a left-top-corner positioned Pop-Up EVF like on some Sony cameras [e.g. RX1R II and some RX100 versions] would be absolutely fantastic, I don't think we will get such an implementation from Canon. I rather expect an equally ugly and dysfunctional central EVF hump on top of the camera. "To make it look more like a Mini-DSLR", which Canon seems to believe would be *favored by n00b buyers*. :


You know, I don't have troubles believing this to be the case. ;D


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 1, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

24-70mm is way too short for a camera like this.
A waste of an APS-C sensor.
Something like a 24-120mm would be a better seller


----------



## Jopa (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



blackcoffee17 said:


> "Dust & water resistant"
> 
> That's the best news. Could be a great travel camera if they manage to keep the size down.



That's the reason why I came here to comment, but seems like no need to 

I remember when I got my first RX100 it collected so much dust!

This one definitely goes to my GAS list.


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

So disappointing. They would had been better to stuck with the 1.5" sensor and given it a decent sensor. That was the real problem with the II.

Sony keeps leading and poor Canon keeps spinning to Canonitis....To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.






1kind said:


> I can bet that there is no 4k and it's going to look like the G5x/M5 with the little hump for the EVF.


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



HaroldC3 said:


> The only questions left are will it have 4K and how large will it be? I'd love to see Panasonic come out with an lx100 ii with a 20mp sensor.



WTF is Dynamic IS? Is that just marketing bull#% for electronic stabilization?


----------



## DigiAngel (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

With such a slow lens i dont see why i should buy it over an RX100IV/V.


----------



## Sharlin (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



powershot2012 said:


> Sony keeps leading and poor Canon keeps spinning to Canonitis....To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.



How does one take over the market when one is already the market leader?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Sharlin said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > Sony keeps leading and poor Canon keeps spinning to Canonitis....To never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.
> ...



well, had Canon Launched a "really right" EOS MILC system with both APS-C sensor (instead of a totally underpowered and overpriced EOS M Mk. I) and with FF-sensor at the time Sony came out with the A7 (16. oct 2013 !) then today
* Sony would likely have followed Samsung and not be selling stills cameras any longer
* Nikon would likely be bust
* Fujifilm would have less than 1% market share
* Olympis would be bust (maybe they are anyways)

and Canon would have owned the market and ruled supreme. but ... stupid Canon!


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



AvTvM said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > powershot2012 said:
> ...



except Sony is still at 14% marketshare and completely lost their A-Mount marketshare which was at one as high as 18%.

no one company will rule supreme, and thinking that canon would take Fuji's marketshare is idiotic, people buy Fuji because of the unique characteristics of the cameras.

I'm not sure why you think that a) canon has unlimited resources to work on lenses b) unlimited resources to work on camera bodies.

Canon has increased it's marketshare without hurting it's brand and EF mount marketshare. that's something Sony hasn't done.

I suggest you go to dpreview and look up canon's lens interview / tour that dpreview staff did. there's only so many engineers that canon has that develops lenses. most of them have been working with canon for 20+ years before they get to that point.


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Proscribo said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>
> ...



this got lost in the overwhelming sniveling over a rumor.

15-44mm f/1.8-3.5 - is pretty good given the fact it's a compact and APS-C.

I would love to see this lens really on an M5 versus the ordinary kit lenses we have, or a little bigger and go with a 2.8-4.0 24-70mm lens.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

i dont think it will be 15-44/1.8-3.5. i expect it to be 15-44 / 2.8-5.6. only fov equivalence to 24-70 on Ff. ;-)

1.8-3.5 would not fit into a G1 size package with APS-C sensor ... EF-M 15-45 is 3.5-5.6 ... on G1X III lens can be stuck a bit closer to sensor, they can possibly use a lens formula for f/2.8 instead of 3.5 on the wide end. but never 1.8 ...


----------



## CosminD (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



danfaz said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > MAJOR disappointment: 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6
> ...



+1 . A camera with 24-70 f2.8-5.6 lens is DOA ! If it was apsc with a 24-70 f2.0-4.0 i would buy it instanly. Or if it was 24-120 f2.8-5.6 i would really,really thinq about buying it ,but 24-70 f2.8-5.6 hell no ! Better just wait for Panasonic LX 200


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

*+10* 



CosminD said:


> danfaz said:
> 
> 
> > powershot2012 said:
> ...


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

you guys have no clue what size what aperture/image circle lenses are. Totally irreal expectations. And that from me!


----------



## bludragon (Oct 2, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

Well I am most interested to see what this camera looks like now... With confirmation on the EVF, it does seem like it will basically be the guts of an M5 with a 15-45mm lens attached.

15-45 f/2.8-5.6 is already an improvement over the EF-M 15-45 f/3.5-f/6.3 in aperture.
I'd love to see a 15-45 f/2.0-4.0, but realistically I think that will end up too big, heavy and expensive for this camera.


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 :'( :'( :'(




AvTvM said:


> you guys have no clue what size what aperture/image circle lenses are. Totally irreal expectations. And that from me!


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



AvTvM said:


> i dont think it will be 15-44/1.8-3.5.



the patent involved (most likely) was 15-43 1.8-3.74

from the actual patent:

Focal distance 15.65 28.94 42.90 
F number 1.85 2.77 3.74 
a half field angle (degree) -- 41.12 25.27 17.66 
Image height 13.66 13.66 13.66 
Whole length of the lens 82.68 82.95 93.26 
BF 9.13 8.40 7.30


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



powershot2012 said:


> 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 :'( :'( :'(



if you can't handle a 2.8-5.6 on a 1.6 crop camera, you have a problem.


----------



## Quirkz (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



rrcphoto said:


> powershot2012 said:
> 
> 
> > 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 :'( :'( :'(
> ...



They kind of have a point. Someone correct me if my math is wrong, but aps c vs 1" type sensor is about 3 times as much light, or vaguely around 1 and a half stops. The Sony rx 100 v is a 24-70mm equivalent, 1.8-2.8. 2.8 is two stops larger than the 5.6 of the new canon, while the larger apps-c sensor only claws back 1.5 of those stops of lost light. 

Is there much of a benefit to the larger sensor in this case? Can anyone explain why a larger sensor might still be better here?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



rrcphoto said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > i dont think it will be 15-44/1.8-3.5.
> ...



thanks rrc, missed that one. Interesting. So a 15-43 /1.8-3.7 lens may be possible, but looks to be protruding quite a bit from a G1X size camera body. i missed out on the specs of that patent. looking into it i found reference to another Canon patent http://www.*********.com/does-this-canon-patent-for-a-15-43mm-f2-4-lens-for-aps-c-sensors-refer-to-the-powershot-g1-x-mark-iii/ for a 15-43mm f/2-4 lens with different, but similar specs:

Zoom ratio: 2.74
Focal length: 15.65 29.18 42.90
F No.: 2.06 2.99 4.00
Half angle: 41.12 25.09 17.66
Image height: 13.66 13.66 13.66
Back focus: 8.52 8.01 7.20

i guess we have to wait and see what comes about. if the lens is faster and IQ still decent enough, the better.


----------



## Woody (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

From http://hi-lows-note.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2017-08-24:

Focal length: 15.65 29.18 42.90
F No.: 2.06 2.99 4.00

The 35mm equivalent is ~ 24-70 mm f/3.2-6.4.


----------



## PureClassA (Oct 3, 2017)

I'm actually pretty jazzed about this one. I have an original EOS M and have been considering upgrading. This might be my purchase right here since they are going to an APSC sensor with what appears to be (as of now) a good bit of bells and whistles. Perfect compact camera. Wondering if price will remain around $700 like the current model.


----------



## powershot2012 (Oct 3, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*

f/3.2-6.4? :-\ :-[



Woody said:


> From http://hi-lows-note.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2017-08-24:
> 
> Focal length: 15.65 29.18 42.90
> F No.: 2.06 2.99 4.00
> ...


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Woody said:


> From http://hi-lows-note.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2017-08-24:
> 
> Focal length: 15.65 29.18 42.90
> F No.: 2.06 2.99 4.00
> ...



wrong embodiment that's why it's always better to look at the actual patent 

http://tinyurl.com/y8sfx2k6


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2017)

PureClassA said:


> I'm actually pretty jazzed about this one. I have an original EOS M and have been considering upgrading. This might be my purchase right here since they are going to an APSC sensor with what appears to be (as of now) a good bit of bells and whistles. Perfect compact camera. Wondering if price will remain around $700 like the current model.



i'll be jazzed if they make a 15-45 1.8-3.5 for my M's.


----------



## 1kind (Oct 4, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



powershot2012 said:


> 1kind said:
> 
> 
> > I can bet that there is no 4k and it's going to look like the G5x/M5 with the little hump for the EVF.
> ...


From a Sony point of view, they innovate because they have no other products that would compete against their own. Where as with Canon and Nikon, they release a full frame mirrorless, now that competes with their DSLRs. Same goes for DSLRs...include 4K, now you're competing with their Cinema EOS cameras


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 4, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



1kind said:


> From a Sony point of view, they innovate because they have no other products that would compete against their own. Where as with Canon and Nikon, they release a full frame mirrorless, now that competes with their DSLRs. Same goes for DSLRs...include 4K, now you're competing with their Cinema EOS cameras



yes. 
but. 
wouldn't it be better for Canon (or Nikon) if customers buy Canon (or Nikon) mirrorless cameras and lenses or 4k enabled cameras instead of switching brand to Sony and Fuji and Panasonic (4k video)? 
"cannibalization" by own products is no problem - especially if the newproducts have better margins. mirrorless cams can be made at significantly lower cost and sold at higher prices than mirrorslappers - look at EOS M5/M6 vs. any "Rebel class" DSLR. or look at Fujifilm's pricing for their crop sensor MILCs ... 

summary: not offering compelling mirrorless systems for both APS-C and FF sensor size and not offering SOME cameras with 4k video capture is ultimately stupid of Canon (and Nikon) and has cost them a lot of money already. in case of Nikon it seriously jeopardizes that companys future.


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



AvTvM said:


> 1kind said:
> 
> 
> > From a Sony point of view, they innovate because they have no other products that would compete against their own. Where as with Canon and Nikon, they release a full frame mirrorless, now that competes with their DSLRs. Same goes for DSLRs...include 4K, now you're competing with their Cinema EOS cameras
> ...



in the real world, you always have conflicting priorities between resource allocation and what you'd like to get done.

it's not a simple matter to make 4k cameras, because those resources then can't work on something else.


----------



## Fatherof5ive (Oct 4, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Quirkz said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > powershot2012 said:
> ...



I believe the aperture referenced for the G1X M3 has already been converted to a 35mm equivalent. 

The Sony RX100 V has a 35mm equivalent 24-70mm f/4.9-7.6 lens.

The G1X Mark III may have a 35mm equivalent 24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 lens.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 4, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



rrcphoto said:


> it's not a simple matter to make 4k cameras, because those resources then can't work on something else.



it is really simple. Anyone from GoPro to Sony can do it. And if Canon would not SQUANDER precious resources on "yet another series of mirrorslappers" in late 2017, they could have come out with a KILLER FF MILC system 1 month AHEAD of Sony A7 [Oct 2013!]


----------



## merefield (Oct 7, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Hector1970 said:


> 24-70mm is way too short for a camera like this.
> A waste of an APS-C sensor.
> Something like a 24-120mm would be a better seller



How so? Can you not IMAGINE the size of this thing if it were to have a 24-120mm lens? This is APS-C now, and with those focal lengths and to keep the lens speed to any practical level it would surely no longer be a 'compact pro travel camera'.

I suspect the desire to retain the roughly same overall size and the decision to move to APS-C is driving the decision to limit the range to 24-70mm.

The question remains does this neuter the flexibility of the camera? - i've certainly found the G1x MkII quite flexible. It has quite a good wide angle as well as a workable portrait focal length (if nowhere near the level you'd like to have if physics was no issue). Bokeh is barely there.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 9, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



1kind said:


> From a Sony point of view, they innovate because they have no other products that would compete against their own. Where as with Canon and Nikon, they release a full frame mirrorless, now that competes with their DSLRs. Same goes for DSLRs...include 4K, now you're competing with their Cinema EOS cameras



Sony (as the E mount) had to compete with the A-mount also. The A-mount is still not dead (kind of  ).


----------



## Shellbo6901 (Oct 12, 2017)

PureClassA said:


> I'm actually pretty jazzed about this one. I have an original EOS M and have been considering upgrading. This might be my purchase right here since they are going to an APSC sensor with what appears to be (as of now) a good bit of bells and whistles. Perfect compact camera. Wondering if price will remain around $700 like the current model.



from 700 to 1200, dang!


----------



## Twiseldorf (Oct 12, 2017)

Too much! Wait for it to drop in price, as it likely will after no one bites at the $1200 price tag.


----------



## Hackness (Oct 13, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



Fatherof5ive said:


> Quirkz said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



I believe that was never the case for canon if you were saying from DoF's point of view, at least on canon's EF-S line up.

For example,

F2.8 is equivalent to F4.5 for DoF, but on EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM it's written as F2.8 and for the DoF effect you get is equivalent to F4.5 on 35mm format.

Therefore, if this logic applies, the G1X Mark III should be equivalent to F4.5-F9 on the 35mm format, speaking from DoF's point of view.

Even the Sony RX100 V shows F1.8-2.8 in its spec.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 13, 2017)

*Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications*



neuroanatomist said:


> Proscribo said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



Me ol' da had something to say about wishing..."Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first."


----------

