# Canon announces an upcoming firmware update for the PowerShot G7 X Mark III



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 6, 2019)

> Canon has announced a firmware upgrade for the Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III after concerns from owners over autofocus performance.
> *From Canon:*
> In response to feedback from customers about the recently launched PowerShot G7 X Mark III, Canon U.S.A. plans to issue a firmware update that can help improve video autofocus speed, accuracy and subject detection performance.
> This update will be free for all customers to download from the Canon U.S.A. website at the end of October 2019.
> *Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III at Adorama*



Continue reading...


----------



## ashmadux (Sep 6, 2019)

The engineers didn't notice during testing? Just...odd.

Still better that it's being addressed...focus sped is not a usual canon complaint.


----------



## J9canon (Sep 6, 2019)

This sounds very calculated. They wanted to sell loads of the M6 II. It worked. I returned the G7X3 and pre-ordered the M6 II. By the time I see the updated firmware reviews on YouTube, the 30 day return window will have passed on the M6 II. Maybe I'll buy both. These guys know what they're doing.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Sep 6, 2019)

J9canon said:


> This sounds very calculated. They wanted to sell loads of the M6 II. It worked. I returned the G7X3 and pre-ordered the M6 II. By the time I see the updated firmware reviews on YouTube, the 30 day return window will have passed on the M6 II. Maybe I'll buy both. These guys know what they're doing.


Now you're catching on to the marketing strategy.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 7, 2019)

Maybe they'll do a firmware upgrade for the G5X II also. My results shooting video last week gave mixed results on the autofocus, but generally not as fast as my G7X II. Considering I was in the end zone shooting mostly toward the other end of the field, and it was bright and sunny, I could have just manually focused on something far away, and it would have done fine. That's what I'd probably do when not in learning/testing mode.


----------



## Phil995511 (Sep 8, 2019)

The Canon PowerShot G5X II has the same basis as the G7 X Mark III, I hope they will also update his firmware !!


----------



## dirtyvu (Sep 8, 2019)

J9canon said:


> This sounds very calculated. They wanted to sell loads of the M6 II. It worked. I returned the G7X3 and pre-ordered the M6 II. By the time I see the updated firmware reviews on YouTube, the 30 day return window will have passed on the M6 II. Maybe I'll buy both. These guys know what they're doing.



That would be the most idiotic strategy if true. Like the EOS R has improved significantly through firmware. But if a new person was to search for EOS R reviews, they would get all the old reviews covering problems that have since been removed as problems through firmware.


----------



## OneSnark (Sep 8, 2019)

Yes. Not a great strategy..

Either
A) There was a relatively easy to find and easy to fix problem that they didn't find prior to release 

or

B) The AF was meant to be that way, but Canon didn't expect everyone to keep comparing this $750 camera unfavorably to a $1200 Sony 1" camera - and the sales are hurting as a result - so they decided to change it.

Neither choice is encouraging.

PS: I am hoping they can make simple improvents to the G5 as well, but my understanding is that the G5 AF performance is already superior to the G7. Hmmmm.


----------



## GregJ (Sep 9, 2019)

OneSnark said:


> Yes. Not a great strategy..
> 
> Either
> A) There was a relatively easy to find and easy to fix problem that they didn't find prior to release
> ...


You forgot a third option: They knowingly released a camera with an incredibly faulty autofocus (when considering the clear potential). Why? I don’t know. But this was never about the Mk III being compared to the Sony. It was about the autofocus sucking really, really badly. I owned one for 13 days before returning it. I don’t vlog and even being behind the camera with the ability to tap for focus continuously it still sucked. 

It’s pretty messed up to realize Canon intentionally put a faulty camera on the shelves. There is no way they were not aware before release.

Cheers


----------



## OneSnark (Sep 9, 2019)

The one thing I don't get: Does the G7-II have worse AF than the G7-II?

I have the G7-II. The AF on the camera isn't all that bad. I don't use it like a 7D-II; I don't photograph charging rhinos, but I do use the camera regularly for "happy shots". It seems ok


----------



## stevelee (Sep 9, 2019)

OneSnark said:


> The one thing I don't get: Does the G7-II have worse AF than the G7-II?
> 
> I have the G7-II. The AF on the camera isn't all that bad. I don't use it like a 7D-II; I don't photograph charging rhinos, but I do use the camera regularly for "happy shots". It seems ok


I have taken thousands of shots with the G7X II. I have never had a problem with the autofocus. It has always seemed very snappy and accurate. I have not shot a lot of video with it, but have noticed no problems. I recently bought the G5X Mark II. I shot some video at a football game recently to get acquainted with the camera and settings. It was sometimes sluggish in refocusing from near to far, but not always. I haven’t shot a lot of stills with it. But so far haven’t noticed a delay in focusing.

One peculiarity is that you can’t shoot 4K video in some autofocus modes. That could be true of the G7X III as well. I was just testing and learning with the football video. If I were shooting it for real with that camera, I’d use manual focus and focus near the middle of the action and let the depth of field take care of it. The real focal length of the lens even zoomed in is short enough to keep all distant objects in focus, especially in bright light.


----------



## shutterlag (Sep 9, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> Now you're catching on to the marketing strategy.



Except that several youtube people appear to have turned right around and bought Sony...


----------



## OneSnark (Sep 9, 2019)

shutterlag said:


> Except that several youtube people appear to have turned right around and bought Sony...



"bought"

--------------------------------------

I am amazed about all the angst over 24p video in the two canons and lack of a mic input on the G5 - - -> and the complete glossing over the rather non-trivial price difference between the Canon and Sony offerings


----------



## kirispupis (Sep 10, 2019)

Too late, Canon. I had a preorder for the G7x III, but cancelled it based on the AF reviews (its primary purpose was video). I then purchased an Rx100 VII.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 10, 2019)

I looked at that camera before the Canon cameras came out. The longer zoom comes at a price, and I don't mean just money. For my travel purposes, I wouldn't want the slower lens, so I decided to stick with my G7X II and then consider an upgrade when one was released.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Sep 10, 2019)

I still think it's absolute bonkers that people are spending $1200 on a 1-inch sensor camera when you can buy an M50 kit, 22mm f/2 and 11-22 for the same price and have a much better camera. I understand the value of a small, pocketable camera like this....but not for over $1,000! But that's just me. There's a camera for everyone.


----------



## dirtyvu (Sep 10, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> I still think it's absolute bonkers that people are spending $1200 on a 1-inch sensor camera when you can buy an M50 kit, 22mm f/2 and 11-22 for the same price and have a much better camera. I understand the value of a small, pocketable camera like this....but not for over $1,000! But that's just me. There's a camera for everyone.



I bought into the RX100 hype (mark IV). Big mistake. It cost so much and I was expecting a lot due to the glowing reviews. But the EVR was awful. The pictures weren't anything special to mention. The raw images might as well have been JPEGs because you couldn't push them much. the reason I got it was I wanted a camera I could take into concerts. Places that my "pro" cameras weren't allowed.


----------



## OneSnark (Sep 11, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> I still think it's absolute bonkers that people are spending $1200 on a 1-inch sensor camera when you can buy an M50 kit, 22mm f/2 and 11-22 for the same price and have a much better camera. I understand the value of a small, pocketable camera like this....but not for over $1,000! But that's just me. There's a camera for everyone.




. . . and the next post captures why in a nutshell. The 1" cameras can often go where the ILC's cannot. Be it a concert or a pocket. 

. . . but $1200 is simply . . . not right for P&S. In fact; I am thinking $750 for the G7-III is a bit steep for what it is.


----------



## BillB (Sep 11, 2019)

OneSnark said:


> "bought"
> 
> --------------------------------------
> 
> I am amazed about all the angst over 24p video in the two canons and lack of a mic input on the G5 - - -> and the complete glossing over the rather non-trivial price difference between the Canon and Sony offerings


Well the price only makes a difference if you are actually going to buy something.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 11, 2019)

I bought the biggest point-and-shoot I could find that would fit in my shirt pocket AND had a viewfinder...and that wasn't a Canon since Canon puts a big bump on top for the viewfinder. (I would have, if not for that. I'm fairly loyal, but if they don't fit my use case...)

Edit--Never mind...I just saw that the viewfinders are popups. So I don't remember what I was thinking unless the size even as a "box" was too much for my pocket--or I shied away at the price.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 11, 2019)

SteveC said:


> I bought the biggest point-and-shoot I could find that would fit in my shirt pocket AND had a viewfinder...and that wasn't a Canon since Canon puts a big bump on top for the viewfinder. (I would have, if not for that. I'm fairly loyal, but if they don't fit my use case...)
> 
> Edit--Never mind...I just saw that the viewfinders are popups. So I don't remember what I was thinking unless the size even as a "box" was too much for my pocket--or I shied away at the price.


If the G5X II still had the viewfinder bump, I would have bought the G7X III instead. I had an S95 and then an S120. If I took my phone out of my shirt pocket, I could fit the S120 in there. The G7X II would not fit in the shirt pocket, but does fine in pants pockets or jacket pockets even easier. The G5X II is very slightly larger. It still fits in pants pockets, and I haven't had a jacket on during these 90º+ days. I hadn't really noticed the size difference until I was asked to post pictures of the 5 and the 7 together in a different thread here.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Sep 14, 2019)

For those suggesting that releasing a product with underperforming auto-focus, just to be able to fix it after 30 days later as some sort of sales strategy, I'm not convinced you really understand how business works at the global level. 

One of the recurring themes by many on this forum is that Canon keeps resting on its laurels / reputation - I don't subscribe to that personally, as I'm in the camp of "making art is the result of a whole system, and photographer, and subject" , rather than it all depending on a fraction extra DR in the sensor, but still.... However, Canon does have a formidable and hard-won reputation, and that reputation will be a key part to survival in a market place that is currently heading south. To suggest that they would intentionally risk destroying that reputation is not sensible. 

A mistake, something missed in QC, etc? .....well, no-one is perfect..... but to do it intentionally, when experienced business people (as well as most others) know a reputation is hard won and easily lost? It is just not something you do as part of a 'strategy'.


----------



## OneSnark (Sep 15, 2019)

stevelee said:


> If the G5X II still had the viewfinder bump, I would have bought the G7X III instead. I had an S95 and then an S120. If I took my phone out of my shirt pocket, I could fit the S120 in there. The G7X II would not fit in the shirt pocket, but does fine in pants pockets or jacket pockets even easier. The G5X II is very slightly larger. It still fits in pants pockets, and I haven't had a jacket on during these 90º+ days. I hadn't really noticed the size difference until I was asked to post pictures of the 5 and the 7 together in a different thread here.



I am in the same camp.

The only reason I would consider a G5 is *because* is can fit in a pocket while offering premium still photograph quality.

I have a G7-II; and I find it barely tolerable in terms of "Pockitability". It was a bit of a shock coming from a S120; but I have been really pleased with the G7-II photos. 

Now, the G5-II is beginning to push the "Cost not to exceed" cap. . . .but that is a different issue. I really am tempted by the expanded zoom range on the camera (the Sony RX100 VII is defintatly over the Cap)


----------



## stevelee (Sep 15, 2019)

OneSnark said:


> I have a G7-II; and I find it barely tolerable in terms of "Pockitability". It was a bit of a shock coming from a S120; but I have been really pleased with the G7-II photos.
> 
> Now, the G5-II is beginning to push the "Cost not to exceed" cap. . . .but that is a different issue. I really am tempted by the expanded zoom range on the camera (the Sony RX100 VII is defintatly over the Cap)


I may have mentioned earlier that when I left on a long trip soon after getting the G7X2, I took the S120 along also, partly as a backup and partly in case I found the larger size unhandy. I decided to get the 5 this time because of the new features of the 7-III were of no interest to me, and the 5-II has a slightly longer and slightly better lens. As for money, it came down to a matter that if I'm already spending that much, another $200 is no big deal for something I will almost surely use for 3 or 4 years, maybe more. The best economic argument would have been for me to buy neither camera, since I was happy with the 7-II, and don't shoot enough video for 4K to matter.

I had looked at the Sony before these cameras came out. The slower lens was the main reason I didn't consider it, based on my travel experiences. Zooming to 200mm equivalent wouldn't make up for the loss of a stop or more in speed, given what I shoot when traveling. So it never even got to the point of my considering the price. I do have about a $1,000 limit in my head where I reach a level of sales resistance.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 4, 2019)

shutterlag said:


> Except that several youtube people appear to have turned right around and bought Sony...


To quote Colonel Kurtz, "The horror."


----------



## Davidarmenphoto (Oct 11, 2019)

So the autofocus could have been better all along but it wasn’t until people complained and then Canon improves it?? I’m a canon user but that’s messed up. Did they hope no one would notice that their “upgrade” has worse AF than its predecessor? Just wow Canon, seems like your recent executives are plain bonkers.


----------



## CANNOT (Oct 13, 2019)

Well, luckily there's tons of YT videos complaining about the C-AF and returning their cameras left and right.
They have now even announced they will add 24p to select cameras that have come without the option (where the Canon cripple hammer struck).
Guess they're slowly starting to realize they aren't fooling anyone anymore with their strategies.
Everbody is bringing their A game. It's time for Canon to stop holding back and follow along with giving their cameras their best effort if they want to survive in a day and age where everyone else is doing IBIS, putting focus on hybrid capabilities with good video modes, etc.
Canon and Nikon might've been the household names for decades... but if they're not careful Panasonic, Sony, Fujifilm and Olympus will dominate and they're too far back to make ammends. Nikon isn't even doing that bad with their Z series (although the APS-C Z50 is disappointing, with it's tilt-down screen and no IBIS). They gotta keep bringing it. I hope they realize this.


----------



## CANNOT (Oct 26, 2019)




----------

