# Review: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 20, 2016)

```
I’ll lead by saying that I absolutely love my Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II, I replaced a Sony RX100 III with it and couldn’t be happier. DPReview has now completed their review of the latest G series PowerShot and came away impressed, as it’s a significant improvement over the original PowerShot G7 X.</p>
<p><strong>From DPReview:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the PowerShot G7 X Mark II is that Canon listened to its customers (and maybe some camera reviewers) and dealt with a large number of the problems that people had with its predecessor. Whether it’s something cosmetic like the new grip or noticeably better burst shooting, the G7 X II is what the original should’ve been back in 2014. <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g7-x-mark-ii-review">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II: <a href="http://amzn.to/2a0pz0p">Amazon</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1223211-REG/canon_1066c001_powershot_g7_x_mark.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296">B&H Photo</a></strong></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 20, 2016)

One point more for me to justify this one as my next P&S. Only the price is not fitting yet.

But isn't it great that the DPR folks are always able to put something negative into something good coming from Canon?

Instead of "this is a really good camera" they need to say 



> ... the most remarkable thing ... is ... [that it finally is] what the original should’ve been back in 2014.



And I thought we Germans are always talking negative and pesimistic. DPR can do better :


----------



## pedro (Jul 20, 2016)

read the review yesterday and decided definitely to use my original G7x in RAW mode only. It's a nice pocket traveler...


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 21, 2016)

thetechhimself said:


> Something we've noticed while testing all of the 1"-type ...
> 
> ... Of our four Sony RX100s (III/IV), three have so-so lenses and one is stellar.


May I ask where you're working? Rental shop?


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 21, 2016)

I was wondering why it's compared to the RX100 III when the RX100 IV exists?
Is the RX100 IV considered to be a great improvement on the RX100 III.
It almost looks like an old review or a review way too late.

Would users recommend the G7X II?


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 21, 2016)

Hector1970 said:


> I was wondering why it's compared to the RX100 III when the RX100 IV exists?
> ...


I thought about that, too. But when you look at the recent street prices, I think you've got the answer.
Here in Germany its:


970,- € for the RX100 IV
670,- € for the RX100 III 
600,- € for the G7 X II

So comparing it with a camera 60% more expensive is comparing two different market segments.


----------



## bholliman (Jul 21, 2016)

thetechhimself said:


> ... there seems to be some serious copy variance with the G series. Was going back and forth about my former G1X II, and it would appear I had a sub-par copy, not surprising to me in hindsight, but this is of interest.
> 
> Any suggestions for a good benchmark app for detecting better/worse powershot copies for us mere mortals that want a good copy, but don't want to pull hairs out doing so?



I've been reading the reviews and am seriously considering picking up a G7X II for my wife (which I would certainly borrow...), but I have the same concerns about copy variation. How do I know if I have a "good" copy?


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 21, 2016)

thetechhimself said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > thetechhimself said:
> ...


Thanks for your reply. I'll keep that information in mind when I am about to get one.
Will take some time because 600,- € are still some way above my (personally set) limits.


----------

