Canon Canon G1X III: Finally, a huge step forward for the G X series ...


Hall of Famer
Dec 29, 2013
Canon Powershot G1 X Mark III APS-C Compact Camera

I'm pretty impressed - all decisions are good ones, and if the lens is good enough, it's actually a M5 with a fixed lens - and it's weather-resistant, which is a first for large sensor compacts (bridge cameras have offered this for a while, but none that sported such a big sensor ...).

If it performs well enough, it might finally replace my GR; I love that thing to bits, but the +/- rocker is a nuisance, and the lack of an EVF is a real downer at times. I used the Ricoh a *lot* on my recent trip, but a couple of times I was unable to frame (or judge) a shot because of bright light behind me (mostly sun, thankfully).



Serious Compacts For Life
Dec 15, 2011
I'd rather see it be faster and larger. If it's not "pocketable" I'd rather not make sacrifices just so it can be generally small.


Hall of Famer
Dec 29, 2013
For :mu43:, four stops of I.S. is old news, but as far as I'm aware, it's pretty impressive in a APS-C compact. More precisely, it's a first. But I agree, the camera *is* pretty expensive - if the lens can't keep up with the expectations this entails, the price isn't justified. But if it does, you get a camera the size of the LX100 (slightly taller, but otherwise more or less identical, and that's with the eye-cup in place) with 24MP APS-C sensor and very, very nice tech (Dual Pixel AF is way better than everything we've seen so far on mirrorless, maybe excepting the Sony A6300 and A6500 - and did I mention weather-resistance?). For me, that's moving things into very interesting territory. But it's true that the lens might have been brighter, but they may have chosen to do it the "Leica way": sacrifice speed to keep optical quality high while keeping the size down. So it all hinges on the actual quality of the lens - if it's really very good (a clear step-up from previous G X series lenses), then I'm probably in. Just for comparison's sake, the G1X III is actually cheaper than a A6500 with the 16-50 kit lens - and that lens is quite mediocre ... For the less-than-stellar 16-70, you pay handsomely. If the G1X III performs on that level or better, it's looking like quite a bargain. And that's at the intial pricing, too ...



Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
Lexington, Virginia
It does have the potential to be a really nice camera. The ergs could be good for the right hands and Canon has done a pretty good job with the images coming out of the M series. Really curious to see a review.


Top Veteran
Jul 11, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
I'm of two minds about this camera. On one hand, it's the kind of camera I knew Canon could make way back in 2008 when the Sigma DP1 was created. But Canon had their DSLR range and didn't want to cannibalize it, so they plodded along with DSLR's until the advent of the me-too-have-mirrorless M range. They got in to the 1" sensor game after Sony entered that market, and now they have entered the large sensor compact market which is really quite empty. The 24mp sensor and dual pixel AF will make for really good images, assuming the lens is up to scratch. The swivel screen and compact size make it very flexible in terms of shooting angle and position.

The lens aperture is what bothers me a bit: like they are aiming for a balance between aperture, zoom range and size, but coming up short. They have shortened the range compared with the excellent G1X Mark II by almost half, and aperture is quite narrow at the long end. I can see this working as a high quality everyday camera, and perhaps as a travel camera, but it doesn't extend beyond the capabilities of an entry to mid range DSLR with kit lens. So what you're really buying is a mid range DSLR with a kit lens that you can fit in a pocket, and paying a premium for that miniaturization.


Hall of Famer
Jan 19, 2015
I'm just happy they've released this. Not for the reason that I'm going to buy it (I'm not), but for the reason that if it's successful, others may follow suit, putting APSC in front of 1 inch sensors in these types of cameras.

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
This thread got me to thinking about the elusive (and legendary) "perfect" camera. I always thought the Pany LX100 was really close -- 4/3 sensor, fast lens, small but not so small that it couldn't be handled well with both hands. (I saw a guy at an event with a Sony RX100, and I thought it was just plain too small).

IMHO, the LX100 had three flaws: (1) it wasn't weather resistant, and mine collected a dust spot on its sensor. The Canon G1XIII appears to address that. (2) The telescoping zoom lens looked fragile. I never had a problem with it, but something about the length/width ratio bothered me. Again the Canon looks a little more substantial, but that might be an illusion. (3) You could not "invoke" special modes (like handheld starlight) on the LX100; you had to press the special modes button and let the camera's software decide which special mode it would use. This frustrated me a lot. The Canon apparently doesn't have this problem.

The issue that the new Canon appears to have is a slow lens. My personal preference would be for something below f/2 at the wide end. It struck me that one of my OMD EM5s and the 14-42 EZ delivers just about everything the new Canon does but in a slightly larger package, with a smaller sensor (and prettier, too). Still, the G1X III is an intriguing offering, and I look forward to seeing a review/test.

Cheers, Jock

Latest threads

Top Bottom