Canon Canon G1 X Mk II Video Review

Sep 8, 2010
London UK
Andy
Yup, Good video. I really thought that Canon had sorted this one but there are quite a few people who don't like it. With a big sensor it should be a great small package but from what I have seen/heard it's not great. Such a shame.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Canon just doesn't seem to want to either move on with better sensors or just give up and buy them from Sony like everyone else. If this sensor was using current Sony technology, it would rock. Oh well, still a pretty nice little package worth checking out, but it doesn't appear to be the class leader it could be with a few more tweaks...

-Ray
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
The comments made regarding the size and handling of the G1X MkII relative to the MkI seem a bit strange to me, particularly when you look at he two cameras side-by-side.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#257,534
When you look at the measurements, you realize they're almost the same width and depth and the new one is just a bit shorter due to the lack of the OVF. But I've gotta say, the new one just LOOKS a lot smaller than the first generation. I'm not sure why, but it does. I've had other situations where cameras (or lenses) that weren't all that different when you saw the numbers on a page really did look a lot different when you held them side by side. I haven't seen the new version of this camera, so I'm just going on photographs of the two, but I have that same strong impression. And I wouldn't be surprised if that's what's going on here... Perception and reality aren't always the same thing, but perception may be at least as important in some respects...

-Ray
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
I think that the apparent visual difference between the two is almost all in the lens. When I first saw the MkII I thought that they'd shrunk the camera down because of the proportions of the body relative to the lens diameter, when in fact it was the lens diameter that had increased to accommodate the larger maximum aperture of the MkII.
 

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
When you look at the measurements, you realize they're almost the same width and depth and the new one is just a bit shorter due to the lack of the OVF. But I've gotta say, the new one just LOOKS a lot smaller than the first generation. I'm not sure why, but it does. I've had other situations where cameras (or lenses) that weren't all that different when you saw the numbers on a page really did look a lot different when you held them side by side. I haven't seen the new version of this camera, so I'm just going on photographs of the two, but I have that same strong impression. And I wouldn't be surprised if that's what's going on here... Perception and reality aren't always the same thing, but perception may be at least as important in some respects...

-Ray
The body is basically the same size as the G12, but that's not counting the lens assembly. The EVF would add more bulk.

Cheers, Jock
 

carlb

All-Pro
Feb 6, 2013
I just wish it was sharp. I can forgive a lot for what I shoot if I get a sharp, well colored image. What I saw for the first G1X seems sharper than the MKII ... ?

Jordan, you guys do great videos. Kudos!
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom