Canon Canon G7X shooters impressions

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
Ah ha! Nearly 400 shots. Excellent.

Yeah, good enough at least. Keep in mind that's with ZERO flash and a LOT taken with manual focus without changing focus. But a fair number of transitions from street to general shooting, many of which requires adjustment of the zoom and manual focus.

-Ray
 

wojconner

Regular
Real Name
Woj
Ray, how's the shutter lag compared to the Ricoh GR? I'm assuming it's different but I'm curious how well it works for street photography.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
Ray, how's the shutter lag compared to the Ricoh GR? I'm assuming it's different but I'm curious how well it works for street photography.

There's zero shutter lag. I remember having a Canon S90 almost five years ago and THAT camera had some serious lag. I moved to an LX5 largely because of that. But I haven't seen a new camera in a while now that's really had shutter lag that I'd really notice. I remember being kind of surprised when I briefly had a Fuji XT1 that it felt like it did. But I think it sort of had a two step shutter sound that made if seem like lag, but I don't think it was because I was still able to shoot on the street with it without any issues at all.

When I refer to "shutter lag" though, I'm not talking about AF speed. Sometimes people confuse the two. With the G7X, AF speed ranges from incredibly quick at the wide end in good light to somewhat slow in low light at the long end. It feels very good to me for a compact camera, but it's not DSLR or m43 like. But with the camera set for manual focus and focus set up for zone focus, then the only delay would truly be "shutter" lag, not AF speed. And with the camera pre-focused, shutter response is instant.

I find the camera to be quite good for street photography - MUCH better than I expected. The Coolpix A is still my favorite street camera, but the G7X does a really good job. I'd still take the Coolpix A for a dedicated street shooting session, but for mixed shooting that may involve a fair amount of street, but other stuff too, I'm really happy with the G7X. I've posted these elsewhere, but if you haven't seen them, here are a few street shots done with the G7X in the last few days since I got it. For how I shoot, it's the best compact zoom camera for street shooting I've used.


15283163858_a04888a442_b.jpg
Philly G7X-341-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

15469469152_9425b1eb7e_h.jpg
Philly G7X-173-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

15283238607_c832b3427a_h.jpg
Philly G7X-499-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

View attachment 100586Philly G7X-674-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

-Ray
 

Rhino123

Veteran
Location
Singapore
Real Name
Tiew Chong Yi
Was it just my G7X or was it a generic issue. I find my G7X having quite a bad Chromatic Aberration issue. Have I gotten a lemon?
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
Was it just my G7X or was it a generic issue. I find my G7X having quite a bad Chromatic Aberration issue. Have I gotten a lemon?
No, it's real. I've had a few shots with pretty bad CA. Some that I've processed from raw with DPP cleaned up really well though, so I'm hoping that once Adobe adds LightRoom support, it will also do a good job on it. Haven't played with the JPEGs enough to know how they handle it.

-Ray
 

Rhino123

Veteran
Location
Singapore
Real Name
Tiew Chong Yi
One of my frustration with the G7X was that I have big hand and the lack of grip seemed to get on my nerves. And I get to ebay to search for a custom grip. Nothing at all. So I decided to DIY my own grip.

I went to the nearest 2 dollar shop near my office and bought myself some wood and foam tape. The result is pretty good... although my workmanship sucks big time. Now my G7X felt more comfortable in my hand :)

WP_20141014_15_49_55_Raw.jpg


WP_20141014_15_52_06_Raw.jpg


WP_20141014_15_52_22_Raw.jpg
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
I've read that Richard Franiac is working on a grip for the G7X. I had a Flipbac grip still in the package that I guess I've had since the S90 days and I stuck it on mine. It's fine but I'm sure I'll replace it with one of Richard's once his are available. His grips for the S90 and RX100 look and feel like they were part of the original design.

-Ray
 

demiro

Serious Compacts For Life
I've read that Richard Franiac is working on a grip for the G7X. I had a Flipbac grip still in the package that I guess I've had since the S90 days and I stuck it on mine. It's fine but I'm sure I'll replace it with one of Richard's once his are available. His grips for the S90 and RX100 look and feel like they were part of the original design.

-Ray

I was quick to install an old Flipbac on the G7X as well. Not so good without it for me. Only $10. Well worth it, though I will watch for a Franiec option as well. Can't beat what Richard does. Per his website availability towards the end of November.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
I think any of these little cameras are better with a grip. Richard made great ones for the S90-S???? series and for the RX100. Sony figured out that these cameras were better with a grip and started selling one for the RX100 series. The flipbac works well enough on the G7X but even pushed all the way to the right, it still traps my fingers against the lens a little bit. Based on past experience, I'm pretty sure Richard's wont. But yeah, not much to hold onto without SOME sort of grip on 'em...

-Ray
 

Rhino123

Veteran
Location
Singapore
Real Name
Tiew Chong Yi
Agreed. As I am a very impatient bugger. I cannot wait for the custom grips to appear in the market :) so I fashion my own grip. And yeah... My finger touched the end of the lens a little bit but it seemed okay to me. :biggrin: Plus, being a cheapskate, a look at the price of the flipbac inclusive of shipping, it would set me back easily at USD15 plus, the mod I did to my camera, doesn't cost me anywhere near USD7... and I can even have enough for lunch :biggrin: after installing my grip to the G7X.
 

Archiver

Top Veteran
I may or may not eat my initial words about the G7X, as I am becoming intrigued with it, perhaps beyond the LX100. It could conceivably be a good step up from the Panasonic LX7 and be a good companion for the Ricoh GR. But I do have a concern or two about its haptics and handling.

In 2009, I bought the Ricoh GRD III and the Canon S90. The S90 seemed to have it all over the GRD III: faster startup, faster focus, more quiet, much better movie mode, useful zoom range, image stabilization, etc etc. By comparison the GRD III was slower, noisier, had terrible video, and was larger. But the GRD III won on two very important counts. The image quality and 'look', and the ergonomics of the camera.

The GRD III produces files with a base look that is not like the 'standard Canon', the lens was noticeably better than the S90, and the way it felt and handled was utterly superb. The build quality, the buttons, the textured finish, the feeling of the rubber grip, everything felt so much better with the GRD III. The S90 was a fiddly and hollow bar of soap by comparison. So much so, I carried the GRD III for years while the S90 only came out on occasion.

I'm concerned that I might experience something similar with the G7X. On paper, it looks better than many other cameras, and these user experiences seem promising. It's shorter than the Ricoh GR and would therefore fit in a jacket pocket or the palm of my hand easily. But I'm wondering if I'll be disappointed with the handling and feel, and end up leaving it in a drawer while I shoot with something else.
 

tennjed

Regular
I had a chance to examine and shoot the G7X at the local camera shop today; was able to do a side by side with the RX100II.

a. While small, it is not truly pocket-able. At least not in the sense that my S90 is pocket-able. It appears larger than the RX100II in every dimension.
b. The lens ring, at least for manual focus purposes, is annoying. Aside from the fact that it does, ultimately, work for that purpose, it could almost be considered worthless for manual focus.
c. The auto-focus speed is comparable with the RX100II.
d. The build quality seemed excellent. It felt more solid than the RX100II.

For $499.00 I would have purchased the G7X. I would have purchased it for that price even if it had the same sensor as the S90. In fact, the G7X left me wishing Canon had simply added the tilt screen and the exposure compensation dial to the s110, maintained the small size, and offered it at the latest version of that line of cameras. The G7X is going to live or die competing in the point and shoot market. with a smaller sensor, smaller size, and significantly lower price, it could have been the absolute king of that market. It is an obvious choice over the Fuji X30. Against the RX100 line, not so much.

They had an LX100 available as well. The LX100, while not a camera I am in the market for, priced at $899 illustrated the "value" deficit created by the G7X's $699 tag.

OBTW, I own a GX7, and I found the EVF of the LX100 to be better than that of the GX7.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
I had a chance to examine and shoot the G7X at the local camera shop today; was able to do a side by side with the RX100II.

a. While small, it is not truly pocket-able. At least not in the sense that my S90 is pocket-able. It appears larger than the RX100II in every dimension.

According to Camera Size, the G7X is about a millimeter and a half wider, about two millimeters taller, and about half a millimeter thinner than the RX100 III - the I and II are a bit thinner. The G7X is only about 14 grams heavier than the RX100 III, both right around 300 grams, but the II is lighter and the I is a LOT lighter. More or less the same size, with only the height difference arguably meaningful, but I don't doubt the Canon can create the feeling of a larger camera, not having handled them side by side. I've had that experience with lots of gear that appeared about the same on paper but one seemed notably larger.

b. The lens ring, at least for manual focus purposes, is annoying. Aside from the fact that it does, ultimately, work for that purpose, it could almost be considered worthless for manual focus.

I prefer using the rear four-way controller for critical focus tasks, although I pretty much never use manual focus for critical focus. For zone focus, which is how I use MF on this camera, both are fine, but it's largely a set and forget thing anyway the way I use it. I agree that the Sony is easier for manual focus if its's something you
use a lot, either for critical focus on stills or for video. Seems to be a consensus.

I really wonder how many people are using these cameras with manual focus extensively? Because while that clicking ring is clearly a disadvantage for manual focus, I find it to be a real advantage for the several other tasks it's set for. I use it for aperture and step zoom almost always, but sometimes for WB and ISO, and in all of those roles, I much prefer the clicking ring to the stepless ring on the RX100. MF is the ONLY place I find the ring on the RX100 better and it's something I rarely use. And yet it seems to be what most reviews focus on and call this a win for the RX100 family. Are most people buying these cameras really using MF all that much?


c. The auto-focus speed is comparable with the RX100II.

Seems to be a consensus among actual user reports I've read, although the Camera Store and DPR found the RX100 III faster, and Cameralabs found the G7X faster, but my experience is also that there's not enough difference in either direction to worry about.

d. The build quality seemed excellent. It felt more solid than the RX100II.

I found both to be fine - I wonder if you're mostly reacting to the weight, which is notably different with the RX100 I than II, with the III the heaviest of the bunch and just barely lighter than the G7X - I wonder if the III would feel more solid because of that?

For $499.00 I would have purchased the G7X. I would have purchased it for that price even if it had the same sensor as the S90. In fact, the G7X left me wishing Canon had simply added the tilt screen and the exposure compensation dial to the s110, maintained the small size, and offered it at the latest version of that line of cameras. The G7X is going to live or die competing in the point and shoot market. with a smaller sensor, smaller size, and significantly lower price, it could have been the absolute king of that market. It is an obvious choice over the Fuji X30. Against the RX100 line, not so much.

I don't know if Canon see's much of a market left in the smaller size, smaller sensor market, but if they do, that's clearly NOT what they had in mind for this camera, which is clearly aimed at the RX100 line. If size is your primary criteria, then these are clearly not as small or light as the S series cams, but in every respect other than size/weight, these are significantly more capable cameras. I wouldn't have bought it with a smaller size and sensor - I'd still probably get an XZ2 or LX7 in that market, but with the 1" sensor available now, I'm out of the smaller sensor market for good. Vs the RX100 line, I think it just comes down to features. If you don't care about the wider wide end or the faster long end, the RX100 I and II are clearly the best values among these cameras now, heavily discounted as they are with the III now available. If you're OK with the RX100 III zoom range and want an EVF and slightly sharper corners at the wide end, then the III is worth considering, although at a price, and I'd probably be looking at the LX100 instead if I was OK with that zoom range. But for a 24 wide end, a workable portrait range with a faster aperture, touch screen, and with controls that I personally much prefer to the Sony, the G7X is very competitive with the RX100 family. I wouldn't say it's better or worse - that's down to individual user preferences, but I absolutely think they're directly competitive.

-Ray
 

serhan

Hall of Famer
Location
NYC
All I can say is all these compacts has pushing the lens limits with better sensors and manufacturers are bending the physical laws with digital corrections esp at wide end of the lenses. GX7 has similar distortion correction to GX1 M2 at 15.4% and LX100 is similar to GX1 M1 at 9%. RX100 is in the middle eg at 12.4% distortion correction. GX7 lens has to be stopped down esp at close-up shots and back focused for the smaller objects. LX100 is much better camera, better af (same as m43), etc and also bigger. LX100 close ups has much better center sharpness then gx7, but still the lens is maybe too much compromised at the borders esp it is made for 4K video, and you use even the 12MP of the sensor for photos and 4K is less, not resolving the foliage details, etc. None of them will match to your GR, so maybe try in a store before you buy it if you have the chance... I think LX100 uses same GX7 evf but my memory thinks GX7 is better, so try it before you buy:)
 

grjoshi

New Member
Tough to decide

All I can say is all these compacts has pushing the lens limits with better sensors and manufacturers are bending the physical laws with digital corrections esp at wide end of the lenses. GX7 has similar distortion correction to GX1 M2 at 15.4% and LX100 is similar to GX1 M1 at 9%. RX100 is in the middle eg at 12.4% distortion correction. GX7 lens has to be stopped down esp at close-up shots and back focused for the smaller objects. LX100 is much better camera, better af (same as m43), etc and also bigger. LX100 close ups has much better center sharpness then gx7, but still the lens is maybe too much compromised at the borders esp it is made for 4K video, and you use even the 12MP of the sensor for photos and 4K is less, not resolving the foliage details, etc. None of them will match to your GR, so maybe try in a store before you buy it if you have the chance... I think LX100 uses same GX7 evf but my memory thinks GX7 is better, so try it before you buy:)

Hope someone can help me here. I was considering buying RX100 M3 though have just stumbled upon G7X. I like the touch focus and shoot option of the G7X and I am not in to using the EVF. I will be using the camera as an everyday/holiday camera. Take it on holidays, take snaps of my kids (4 yrs and 2 yrs) and on nature hikes.

Reason for considering the RX100 M3 and now the G7X and not LX100 is the 180 degree selfie screen. The only deciding factor between the two is which one has the edge on a more natural/better image quality and better bokeh.
Looking at different reviews its difficult to make out which one is better at giving a more natural looking image and better bokeh at wide open. I usually take 80% of my images wide open.

Any advice or insight appreciated!
 

demiro

Serious Compacts For Life
Hope someone can help me here. I was considering buying RX100 M3 though have just stumbled upon G7X. I like the touch focus and shoot option of the G7X and I am not in to using the EVF. I will be using the camera as an everyday/holiday camera. Take it on holidays, take snaps of my kids (4 yrs and 2 yrs) and on nature hikes.

Reason for considering the RX100 M3 and now the G7X and not LX100 is the 180 degree selfie screen. The only deciding factor between the two is which one has the edge on a more natural/better image quality and better bokeh.
Looking at different reviews its difficult to make out which one is better at giving a more natural looking image and better bokeh at wide open. I usually take 80% of my images wide open.

Any advice or insight appreciated!

Flip a coin. Seriously. It's difficult to tell because the cameras are so close. Some people have a preference (I'd slightly favor the skin tones of the Canon), but that is a subjective thing. If you don't care about EVF and you like touch to focus & shoot I think the Canon is a no-brainer, especially with the longer zoom and the savings vs the Sony.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
Hope someone can help me here. I was considering buying RX100 M3 though have just stumbled upon G7X. I like the touch focus and shoot option of the G7X and I am not in to using the EVF. I will be using the camera as an everyday/holiday camera. Take it on holidays, take snaps of my kids (4 yrs and 2 yrs) and on nature hikes.

Reason for considering the RX100 M3 and now the G7X and not LX100 is the 180 degree selfie screen. The only deciding factor between the two is which one has the edge on a more natural/better image quality and better bokeh.
Looking at different reviews its difficult to make out which one is better at giving a more natural looking image and better bokeh at wide open. I usually take 80% of my images wide open.

Any advice or insight appreciated!

Natural looking image is a tough one to judge. We all like what we like. I'd say that for jpegs, Canon's tend to be more popular than Sony's, but I don't know if they're more natural or not. And any individual may prefer the Sony jpegs... If you shoot raw, you can do what you want with either. In terms of bokeh, the "quality" of the OOF areas wouldn't be terribly different, but the Canon has more in the portrait range just by virtue of having a LONGER long end that's still as fast as the Sony at f2.8. I think the biggest benefits of the Sony are the EVF and a slightly sharper wide end. If you don't think you'd use the EVF, I'd go for the Canon just for the longer zoom range. But they're both really fine little cameras, so I don't think it's down to "quality" so much as the features you prefer.

-Ray
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom