I was mulling over some gear choices over the last couple of weeks - with somewhat unexpected results. Don't hesitate to skip over my random thoughts - this is just as much about taking stock of my own findings as for providing information to others. I'd better break all that stuff down in a few posts (two at least), too ...
First off, my struggle with what the market is offering in terms of truely compact cameras has led me full circle. TLDR: For now, the Canon G1X III stays.
To reiterate: As much as I've always wanted to love the Canon G1X III, I've often found myself at odds with key aspects of it - mostly, they boil down to general sluggishness (especially on power on as well as when zooming) and incongruent decisions on Canon's part; to list some of the latter ones:
- Non-sensical Auto ISO behaviour with a lack of adjustability (thus rendering a camera that is meant to be straightforward to use decidedly fiddly - precisely when it shouldn't be, like for candids of people indoors). Yes, you can choose from different "profiles" (normal, fast, slow), but only "normal" is predictable enough to be usable in a majority of situations.
- Lack of step-zoom functionality for the zoom rocker (why withhold it if you can assign it to the lens ring - I'd appreciate it the other way round!), fixed zoom ring operation on the lens ring (just let me switch it to the sensible way - it's counter-intuitive now!)
- Nice, but somewhat hampered customisability: If you customise certain aspects, like zoom position, switch on time will suffer *again*!
- Some technical limitations - the sensor performs well enough in good light, but falls short of expectations above ISO 1600; together with the slowish lens that's also not the sharpest to begin with, you're often looking at sub-par files. Both the Ricoh GR III and the Nikon Z APS-C bodies show what's possible - the Z 50 with its rather paltry kit zoom smokes the G1X III in terms of results, especially above ISO 800, and I can easily go to ISO 3200 on those cameras without issues. All those sensors were announced within the same year (2016/2017). For the record, yes, of course you can salvage most files from RAW - but that needs lots of time and the kind of tedious work I'm absolutely not into, especially if it's obviously possible to avoid this by using appropriate technology. Canon should have been able to pull that off in 2017 - heck, in some respects, Olympus' 20MP
sensor from 2016 performs better in low light!
In short, there are quite a few reasons to be less than happy. On the other side, it's a fact that I've captured quite a few nice images with this camera - so it's definitely more a case of a lack of perfection or desirable features than one of complete uselessness. Nevertheless, I was what I called "disenchanted" enough to pit it against another camera, one I have learned to appreciate for what it is (instead of grumbling about what it isn't - we'll have to come back to that), the Nikon 1 V1. With the 10-30mm PD zoom attached, it's quite a close match to the G1X III in terms of size and basic features (minus the sealing - I'll get to that). The Nikon is a minimalist camera with several very idiosyncratic choices when it comes to handling - but once you know how to use it and what issues may arise, it's a pleasant surprise in terms of usage as well as results, even with the optically mediocre zoom attached - specifically because Nikon got the operation aspects of the latter exactly right: After a tiny bit of hesitation, it deploys quickly and positively, and zooming is very, very fast if you rack the zoom ring (it's slow and sufficiently precise if you move it slowly). Results are actually above expectations though of course, if you were to start pixel peeping, the V1 wouldn't be able to keep up with the G1X III - but I knew that going in. Whatever - fact is, I do enjoy using the V1 and don't manage to feel equally pleased with the G1X III. So, I reckoned that in spite of the huge differences, it might be an interesting contest to say the least - with the possible outcome of me moving on the G1X III and use the V1 instead (at least until the market offered something worth considering).
However, it turned out to be a non-contest in the more than one way: Basically, if you know what you're doing and avoid the situations it's bound to struggle with, you can get much, much better results from the Canon. So much better in fact that putting up with its limitations appears to be worth it most of the time. And what's more, the V1, fun though it may be, isn't the more straightforward camera in use - neither is its operation significantly faster (it's actually more complicated in some aspects - like exposure compensation), nor does its apparent simplicty trump the much greater versatility the G1X III offers. And finally, on the last day of the contest, it started raining on and off - so I ended up worrying about the V1, whereas I wouldn't have had to with G1X III which I had left at home for the first time - after all, I wanted to find out if the V1 could "stand in"; well, it can't.
What about other options I actually own? As much as I prefer the Nikon Z 50's or Z fc's results, especially in low light, they're certainly not pocketable and not as well sealed (the Z 16-50mm DX kit zoom isn't protected at all), and while the GR III is much more pocketable, it's way less sturdy and not sealed at all. The V1, while fun to shoot with, can't keep up - in truth, it doesn't even come close, and on top of that, it's not sealed, either. Lastly, while the Olympus E-M5 III ticks all the boxes in terms of weather resistance, together with the 12-45mm, it's way bigger than even the Z 50 with its kit zoom.
To cap it off, the elephant in the room was the existence of the Fujifilm X100V with its modicum of sealing - but truth be told, having to piece together some fiddly kit to achieve what is built into the G1X III seems too much like Fujifilm dropping the ball on purpose, possibly to make you spend more money. I'll not buy into that (pun intended). Even though I might even enjoy shooting with that camera, it certainly doesn't truely address the issues I'm seeing, while adding some of its own. So, it's out (for now - may time and opportunity will change my take on this; at the moment, I actually doubt that).
What I discovered at long last (and maybe not even for the first time) is that it all depends on what you expect from a camera. While the Canon G1X III is *not* a do-all, end-all solution, specifically not for travel due to its lack of low-light prowess, it certainly is a surprisingly rugged outdoor camera - maybe not ideal for extreme conditions, but well suited for trekking, cycling and walkabouts in marginal weather. During the day, none of its limitations show up in any major way once you accept some of its idiosyncrasies and work with or around them. Use it for what it's good for, and you won't be seriously dissappointed. That's what I'm going to do.
M.
