Canon Showcase Canon G7X Image Thread

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Some help here (I hope it is not the wrong place to ask):

As far as I understand, the main difference between the G7X and the RX100 "Mx" in terms of IQ are:

- zooming or in 100% (pixel peeping), the corners of the G7X in 24mm (or close to that) and in 100mm WITH aperture completely open are less sharp, more upscaled. Or differences are more apparent than this (doesn't look like for the photos here)? (24mm G7X vs M3; 100mm G7X vs M1 or M2)

- if you shoot 24mm or 100mm (or around it) stopping down a little bit, sharpness is pretty much the same.

- other parts of the focal range, say between 27-90 are pretty much the same IQ.

I believe I understand the other differences (AF in the RX is faster, EVF...), don't want to start a debate, just to clarify this. I already have an RX100 M2, like it a lot, but I am a sucker for tilting LCD, and wouldn't mind having a different camera maker to try it out as I already have 3 Sonys. But want to understand this point above.

Appreciate any help. Thanks!

PS: The Canon does not have Time Lapse, right?
I think you have it mostly right except for a couple of points.

First, the G7X is somewhat soft at 100mm at f2.8, but NOT JUST IN THE CORNERS. It's not terrible and can be worked with, but it's soft everywhere wide open. That said, it seems to be more of an issue for close subjects than more removed subject. This issue is mostly resolved at 3.2 and fully resolved by f3.5. I think that's kind of the same at the wide end, as Serhan's quote describes. It's not at it's best real close at 24mm, but I find this to be limited to wide open and at the corners. I've done fine with macros at 24mm by around f3.5 or f4.

Second, a couple of the reviews said that AF was actually faster on the G7X, not on the RX100. I can't say, but both are pretty good for AF speed. I remember thinking the RX100 (1st gen) was about as good as any compact I'd shot with and I feel the same with the G7X. It's really fast toward the wide end in good light, and slows progressively as the light drops and the focal length increases. But even in pretty low light at 100mm it's better than I'd expect...

-Ray
 

serhan

All-Pro
May 7, 2011
124
NYC
Slrclub Canon g7x review

I couldn't open the images, but usually they have very good photos with their reviews... They change the format, so we can read the translation that has a similar conclusion:

The maximum brightness of G7X lens is F1.8 at 24mm. It is soft in the close-up feature vs very sharp image shows at F1.8 when shooting at a quite a distance.

The 100mm lens showed a maximum brightness of F2.8, soft at close-up & the better sharpness with the farther subject, same as in 24mm. It tends to be soft in overall. For a small object like a flower or an insect, it tends to be soft when shooting at a distance that is closer to macro shooting. This is irrelevant to portraits as it is useful enough for the upper body shots.

Close-up: You can shoot at the telephoto close-up of up to 40cm up to about 5cm, in G7 X is wide. When the close-up in soft wide open, we recommend because it is over tighten as F4 aperture.
 

emptysensor

Regular
Nov 11, 2014
18
Joe
I just got the G7X today and took some shots inside, all at ISO 1600 -

Fruit by emptysensor, on Flickr

Mini Strat by emptysensor, on Flickr

Leaf by emptysensor, on Flickr

The sensor is definitely better than the LF1, but lags behind the EM5, which is to be expected. I'm not crazy about the ergonomics of the G7X, but I may warm up to it.

Tonight I took this one at the mall - ISO 640, 1/25s handheld. The focus is definitely not ideal, but mostly workable. Hopefully they'll tweak it a bit with future firmware.

Light Fountain by emptysensor, on Flickr
 

swandy

Regular
Nov 16, 2013
33
Hi Empty,
Great selection showing what the little guy can do. (And I really love the last one of the "fountain".)
Agree that the AF is not perfect - not bad for a P&S camera, but still could use some tweaking.
Question about the ISO 1600 shots - were these OOC JPEGs or RAW. And how did you process them (assuming you did).
Thanks,
Steve
 

emptysensor

Regular
Nov 11, 2014
18
Joe
Hi Empty,
Great selection showing what the little guy can do. (And I really love the last one of the "fountain".)
Agree that the AF is not perfect - not bad for a P&S camera, but still could use some tweaking.
Question about the ISO 1600 shots - were these OOC JPEGs or RAW. And how did you process them (assuming you did).
Thanks,
Steve
Thanks Steve. Everything was OOC JPEGs as Lightroom can't read the RAWs yet and I haven't put any effort into a workaround. I did some some processing in Nik, but not too extreme (at least to me). The main thing that I can't do much with is that the noise reduction with the jpegs seems a little too much and I can't find a way to reduce that. The odd thing with the focusing is that it seems pretty good in brighter conditions and even pretty dark, with some lights around to get some contrast. The worst time seemed to be in between, around dusk. Overall I'm pretty happy and plan to keep the camera as I like the niche it fills with the decent zoom range and quality between my LF1 and EM5.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
The main thing that I can't do much with is that the noise reduction with the jpegs seems a little too much and I can't find a way to reduce that. The odd thing with the focusing is that it seems pretty good in brighter conditions and even pretty dark, with some lights around to get some contrast. The worst time seemed to be in between, around dusk. Overall I'm pretty happy and plan to keep the camera as I like the niche it fills with the decent zoom range and quality between my LF1 and EM5.
Have you turned High ISO NR to low in the first menu? I find it pretty bad at medium (the default) and I'm sure it would be terrible on high, but low isn't too bad at all IMHO. You've probably already done it, but if you haven't give that a shot. I'm also looking forward to LR support, but I've been pleasantly surprised with the jpegs in the meantime...

I really haven't had any trouble with focus so far, but maybe I'm just not pushing it as hard as some folks are. Most action or movement I tend to use zone focus anyway, so the toughest jobs don't go to AF with me...

-Ray
 

emptysensor

Regular
Nov 11, 2014
18
Joe
Have you turned High ISO NR to low in the first menu? I find it pretty bad at medium (the default) and I'm sure it would be terrible on high, but low isn't too bad at all IMHO. You've probably already done it, but if you haven't give that a shot. I'm also looking forward to LR support, but I've been pleasantly surprised with the jpegs in the meantime...

I really haven't had any trouble with focus so far, but maybe I'm just not pushing it as hard as some folks are. Most action or movement I tend to use zone focus anyway, so the toughest jobs don't go to AF with me...

-Ray
Thanks for the info Ray. I guess I missed the high ISO NR selection, so I just did that. I would think that would be better. I guess with the focus I'm used to the EM5. which I've pretty much never had a problem with, so I notice any minor hesitation. I tend to be a "forgiving perfectionist", so I do notice something less than ideal going on (with the focus), but it hasn't been a major issue for me. I really do like having a camera that can take really nice pictures that I can carry in my jacket. I didn't check but I'd think the dxomark numbers for the G7X may be comparable to something like a "big" DSLR from just a few years ago, like the D90. To me that is really cool.

Joe
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Thanks for the info Ray. I guess I missed the high ISO NR selection, so I just did that. I would think that would be better. I guess with the focus I'm used to the EM5. which I've pretty much never had a problem with, so I notice any minor hesitation. I tend to be a "forgiving perfectionist", so I do notice something less than ideal going on (with the focus), but it hasn't been a major issue for me. I really do like having a camera that can take really nice pictures that I can carry in my jacket. I didn't check but I'd think the dxomark numbers for the G7X may be comparable to something like a "big" DSLR from just a few years ago, like the D90. To me that is really cool.

Joe
Glad you found that NR menu - I think you'll see a pretty notable difference. As for focus, no, it won't compare well with the EM5 (or any of the newer m43 bodies with the right lenses), but it's still on par with the best I've ever gotten from a fixed lens compact of the sort. Which is quite good but the m43 stuff is about as fast and reliable as it gets for single shot AF. I mostly shoot with my Df when I'm out specifically for a day of shooting, but it's really nice to be able to grab a little camera like this when shooting isn't the main priority. And it's up for more than that - I took only the G7X for a weekend in NYC with my wife a few weeks ago and it handled everything I threw at it and I threw a lot at it! If I'd had a camera like this three years ago I might never have wanted anything else. But of course, standards change and gear improves, but pretty remarkable little camera. As are the RX100 models - they're just not to my taste, but plenty capable...

-Ray
 

swandy

Regular
Nov 16, 2013
33
Thanks for the info Ray. I guess I missed the high ISO NR selection, so I just did that. I would think that would be better. I guess with the focus I'm used to the EM5. which I've pretty much never had a problem with, so I notice any minor hesitation. I tend to be a "forgiving perfectionist", so I do notice something less than ideal going on (with the focus), but it hasn't been a major issue for me. I really do like having a camera that can take really nice pictures that I can carry in my jacket. I didn't check but I'd think the dxomark numbers for the G7X may be comparable to something like a "big" DSLR from just a few years ago, like the D90. To me that is really cool.

Joe
Joe - agree about the AF (I am comparing it to the EM10, which I found even better than the EM5 that I had before that) but I never expected the G7X to be in that league. But like you said, for me as my little P&S camera, I am very satisfied.
And yes, as Ray suggested, switching the NR to LOW does make an improvement - though I do wish that Canon would have an OFF selection like Olympus gives you.
 

wolfie

Veteran
Sep 19, 2010
68
Didn't know you were gonna go for it. So are you going to keep it? I actually am fine with the macros - just have to stop down a little bit. I find that I'm really happy with the IQ throughout the range but at the extremes of the focal range, it helps to stop down to f3.5 or so. Which is OK with me, I'd rather have the range and the speed and get the shot, but understand the limits so I can dial in the best IQ when possible. I think I posted these previously - they're both at f4 which I find to be a sweet spot pretty much throughout the focal range:

-Ray
Doesn't stopping down like that rather defeat the extra expense of the fast lens?
Do you have any wide open examples that demonstrate the problems of shooting wide open?
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Doesn't stopping down like that rather defeat the extra expense of the fast lens?
Do you have any wide open examples that demonstrate the problems of shooting wide open?
What's the extra "expense" of the fast lens? I'd still much rather have it than not, even if it's less than perfect at the extremes. It's still very useful and provides opportunities a slower lens wouldn't. At the long end, I took some test shots of my wife and other objects at various portrait distances. And I found the results perfectly usable at f2.8, but REALLY sharp at f3.5, but this was for pretty close subject distances. So if you need the speed, you've got it, and if you don't, you know your sweet spot is more like f3.5 or f4. Here are a couple of shots taken at f 2.8 at the long end of the lens with more distant subjects and they're just fine. For these shots I needed the widest aperture and it delivered quite well:

NYC - G7X-100-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

NYC - G7X-101-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

I honestly can't find anything I've shot at the wide end wide open at f1.8 - I have a couple of files I never did anything with because they're nothing as photographs, but if they were, the quality wouldn't hold me back from using them. I've shot a fair amount at f2 and 2.2 and those files are just fine. Here's a low light street shot at f2.0 - it's zone focussed so the subject may not be the very sharpest part of the shot, but it's certainly adequate to me.

Philly G7X-498-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

Really the issues at either end are only really issues at very close focus. That's not a big downside to me. I'd personally rather have the G7X with a 100mm option that's good at f2.8 and great at f3.5 than an RX100 I or II that STARTS at f4.9 at the same focal length and isn't as good at f4.9 as the G7X is at f3.5. And I'd rather have 100mm at all than a zoom that stops at 70mm like the RX100 III. At the wide end, I'd rather have 24 than the 28 in the RX100 I or II. I'd rather have the sharper wide end of the RX100 III, all other things being equal, but NOT at the expense of not having the longer end at all or some of the other features I just personally prefer with the G7X.

It's all tradeoffs - I don't find the lens limitations at the extremes of focal length and aperture to "defeat" the extra "advantage" (still not sure where you got "expense" - it's not like it's more expensive than it's competition) of the wider zoom range and faster lens.

Your mileage, of course, may vary...

-Ray
 

Kustom48

Regular
Aug 12, 2012
8
Wimbotsham, Norfolk, UK.
ian drury
Hi Ray,
Thanks for your honest views on this camera. it is one I've personally been waiting for to arrive on the market as the RX100 seems to have dominated this group but from all the reviews I've read about it from owners & users it seems to lack 'soul' and was not as well thought out as it could have been, maybe that's why there is a mark III version.
I'm seriously considering a G7X especially as here in the UK there is currently a 'cashback' offer of £50.00 off the purchase price of £579.00, making it just about affordable ( £ 529.00 ) to me if I sell some of my other camera gear.
I hope you can keep us all updated on how this Canon performs over the next weeks of your ownership as it provides us potential adopters with a better informed idea of whether this particular camera will suit my personal photography style & needs.
Your images look great to me, especially as I'm not a pixel peeper, but do require good quality in the photos I print out and the ability to shoot in RAW.
Lastly for now, have you used the ND filter facility yet and also is it possible to mount an accessory filter to the lens, say using a MagFilter or similar system, if so what size works.
Thanks for your comments in advance !

PS- the other camera on my current 'would like' list is the Fuji X30.......any thoughts on this one ?

Kind regards,

Ian Drury, Norfolk, UK.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Hi Ray,
Thanks for your honest views on this camera. it is one I've personally been waiting for to arrive on the market as the RX100 seems to have dominated this group but from all the reviews I've read about it from owners & users it seems to lack 'soul' and was not as well thought out as it could have been, maybe that's why there is a mark III version.
I'm seriously considering a G7X especially as here in the UK there is currently a 'cashback' offer of £50.00 off the purchase price of £579.00, making it just about affordable ( £ 529.00 ) to me if I sell some of my other camera gear.
I hope you can keep us all updated on how this Canon performs over the next weeks of your ownership as it provides us potential adopters with a better informed idea of whether this particular camera will suit my personal photography style & needs.
Your images look great to me, especially as I'm not a pixel peeper, but do require good quality in the photos I print out and the ability to shoot in RAW.
Lastly for now, have you used the ND filter facility yet and also is it possible to mount an accessory filter to the lens, say using a MagFilter or similar system, if so what size works.
Thanks for your comments in advance !

PS- the other camera on my current 'would like' list is the Fuji X30.......any thoughts on this one ?

Kind regards,

Ian Drury, Norfolk, UK.
Hi Ian,

I'm sorry but I don't think I'm gonna be much help at the moment. I've shot with the G7X a lot in the first month or so I've had it, but have been using my Df much more lately, and with the holidays and lot's of low light indoor shooting in the coming month or so, will probably lean heavily on the Df for most of that shooting as well. Now that Lightroom supports G7X raw files, I'd like to do some more extensive shooting with it just to get a feel for how the raw files are to deal with, but it's probably gonna be a little while until I end up doing very much more with it.

As for the ND filter, yeah, I've used it a couple of times, mostly just to check it out - it's not automatic so you have to pull it up. If you use it a lot, you can assign it to a function button for immediate access. I don't so I stuck it on my "func set" button (the middle of the rear controller) with a few other commands that I use, but not a huge amount, so it's a couple of clicks away. I haven't looked into the whole filtration situation - I'm not enough of a filter user to want to set up this little compact for filters.

If I do manage some raw shooting in the coming weeks, I'll post some samples here, but I'm not sure how much I'll get to do in the near term...

-Ray
 

Kustom48

Regular
Aug 12, 2012
8
Wimbotsham, Norfolk, UK.
ian drury
Hi Ian,

I'm sorry but I don't think I'm gonna be much help at the moment. I've shot with the G7X a lot in the first month or so I've had it, but have been using my Df much more lately, and with the holidays and lot's of low light indoor shooting in the coming month or so, will probably lean heavily on the Df for most of that shooting as well. Now that Lightroom supports G7X raw files, I'd like to do some more extensive shooting with it just to get a feel for how the raw files are to deal with, but it's probably gonna be a little while until I end up doing very much more with it.

As for the ND filter, yeah, I've used it a couple of times, mostly just to check it out - it's not automatic so you have to pull it up. If you use it a lot, you can assign it to a function button for immediate access. I don't so I stuck it on my "func set" button (the middle of the rear controller) with a few other commands that I use, but not a huge amount, so it's a couple of clicks away. I haven't looked into the whole filtration situation - I'm not enough of a filter user to want to set up this little compact for filters.

If I do manage some raw shooting in the coming weeks, I'll post some samples here, but I'm not sure how much I'll get to do in the near term...

-Ray
Hi Ray,
Thanks for this update, I can wait a while as i hope the cost of a G7X will drop again and become more affordable. I'd like to see / read a comparison test between the Canon and the Fuji X30 . Has anyone done this on any websites you know of ?
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Hi Ray,
Thanks for this update, I can wait a while as i hope the cost of a G7X will drop again and become more affordable. I'd like to see / read a comparison test between the Canon and the Fuji X30 . Has anyone done this on any websites you know of ?
I haven't seen a direct comparison Ian. I lost interest in the X30 when I saw that Fuji was using the same sensor as the X20. It's not bad, and has it's charms in good light, but the Sony 1" sensor in the G7X is just a much more capable sensor for DR and low light shooting, which both matter to me.

I had an X10 though, so I know that lens pretty well. I'm sure it will be a bit sharper than the G7X at the wide end because it's a good size and a smaller sensor, so the digital corrections are probably not as severe. I was always happy with the lens in the X10 except that it only went as wide as 28mm and I really like having 24mm available at the wide end. OTOH, it's got a bit more reach at the long end, so it's down to whether you're more concerned with the range at the wide end or long end. The X10 was a nice camera to shoot with and I'm sure the X30 is that much better, with a full EVF and probably better controls and faster performance. For me, the sensor and the less wide angle lens put it out of the running, but if you're not too concerned with low light and the zoom range works for you, I'd say it should be a solid contender. Also assuming you're not looking for a really small pocketable camera. That didn't matter to me - I'd have been just as happy with the LX100 or X30 if I'd liked their set of features as much, but to some people the small size is a big issue...

-Ray
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom