News Reviews Features Buying Guide Sample Images Videos Cameras LensesPhonesPrinters Forums Galleries Challenges

Canon PowerShot G7 X Review

November 2014 | By Jeff Keller, Richard Butler

Buy on Amazon.com From $699.00

Preview based on a production Canon PowerShot G7 X

This is where things get interesting! It's over two years since Sony shook up the compact camera market by putting a 1"-type sensor into a genuinely pocketable compact. The Cyber-shot RX100 looked a lot like one of Canon's S-series of high-end compacts but used a sensor 2.8 times larger to offer a substantial increase in image quality.

Amazingly, Sony has remained unchallenged in this field for over two years, in which time it's managed to introduce two more generations of RX100. The RX100 III brought an electronic viewfinder and a more consistently bright (albeit shorter) zoom, helping it climb even further beyond the competition. That essentially unchallenged supremacy ends with the arrival of Canon's PowerShot G7 X.

Like the RX100 III, the G7 X offers a 1"-type, 20MP BSI sensor mated to an F1.8-2.8 zoom starting at 24mm equivalent. The two cameras are also similar in size and offer broadly similar feature sets. Which is great for photographers, because it means the Sony finally has some proper competition.

PowerShot G7 X key features

20MP 1"-type BSI CMOS sensor (13.2 x 8.8mm)
24-100mm equiv. F1.8-2.8 lens
Clicking control dial around lens
Flip-up rear touchscreen
Dedicated exposure compensation dial
3.0" 1.04m dot LCD (720 x 480 pixels)
Built-in ND filter
Wi-Fi with NFC

Canon is one of the only manufacturers to have consistently offered a dedicated enthusiast compact camera in its lineup, and the arrival of the G7 X means it now offers four: the S120, G16, G7 X and G1 X Mark II, each offering a different balance of size, price and capability. The styling and size of the G7 X make it look like an S-series, but the degree of direct control justifies its G-series moniker.

The camera's combination of touch screen, dedicated exposure compensation dial and clicking control dial around the lens give a high degree of direct control for such a small camera and Canon's iterative, evolutionary approach to camera interfaces, along with a little time spend playing with the camera suggests it should work pretty well.

Meanwhile, the details of the sensor strongly suggest it uses Sony's IMX183CQJ sensor, so could well be able to match the latest RX100 series in terms of image quality. That alone would make it a significant addition to the market. The G7 X is just as small as the Sony but offers much more in terns of direct control.

Then, of course, there's the lens:

The Lens

Given that image quality is all about light capture, the best way of making the most of a large sensor is to mate it with a bright lens. One of the things that helped the RX100 III earn its Gold award was the inclusion of an F1.8-2.8 zoom which meant the camera maintained much more of its large sensor advantage as you zoomed in (rather than stifling it with the F4.9 maximum aperture at telephoto on the first two RX100s). However, this speed boost came at the cost of the lens' range, with Sony restricting the zoom to a 24-70mm equivalent range to keep the camera small.

Consequently, it's interesting to see Canon fit a 24-100mm equivalent lens into the G7 X while also offering a F1.8-2.8 maximum aperture range. And, to paraphrase some hateful web phrasing: we looked at the aperture progression of the G7 X and you won't believe what happened next:

Taking sensor size and aperture into account allows cameras to be compared on a similar basis. This graph shows the focal lengths and aperture ranges offered by each camera, normalized in terms of the 35mm format. This shows how much control over depth of field each camera can offer and gives a rough idea of low-light performance (lower is better).

Clearly Canon has found some weird trick that has let it combine a fast maximum aperture range with a usefully broad zoom range, while keeping the camera size down. Note, on the graph above, how the G7 X's maximum aperture stays bright for much longer than the RX100 III's. They may offer the same range on paper, but at any point from 24-50mm equivalent, the Canon's lens can be kept wider-open than the Sony's, with the difference reaching over 2/3EV at 30mm equiv.

What the above graph should make clear is that the G7 X is amongst the most consistently bright compacts on the market, once sensor size has been taken into account, which should give excellent control over depth-of-field (including at focal lengths useful for classic portraiture) and low light performance. Given the very high likelihood that both cameras use the same (excellent) sensor, it's reasonable to expect the Canon's image quality to be pretty competitive, if its lens is any good.

Only Panasonic's DMC-LX100 is able to offer more light capturing ability and that's a bigger camera with a more restrictive zoom range (though we also think that's hugely appealing, depending on your exact needs and tastes).

Specs compared

The size, sensor, lens spec, and price make Sony's RX100 series the most obvious rivals for the G7 X, but we think the G1 X II should have reason to be worried, too. The big G offers a slightly longer zoom and the ability to add an electronic viewfinder, but the G7 X is considerably smaller, slightly cheaper and can match it in terms of direct access to controls. In aiming for the RX100's crown, the G7 X risks overshadowing Canon's existing champion.

	Canon PowerShot G7X	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II	Canon PowerShot G1 X II
Effective resolution	20MP	20MP	20MP	12.9MP
Sensor type (Size 3:2 crop)	1" (116mm²)	1" (116 mm²)	1" (116 mm²)	1.5" (233 mm²)
Focal length (35mm equiv).	24-100mm	24-70mm	28-100mm	24-120mm
Max aperture	F1.8 - F2.8	F1.8 - F2.8	F1.8 - F4.9	F2.0 - F3.9
Minimum focus distance	5cm - 40cm	5cm - 30cm	5cm - 55cm	5cm - 40cm
ISO range	125 - 12800	125 - 12800	160 - 12800	100 - 12800
Viewfinder	None	Built-in 1.44m dot EVF	Optional 2.76M dot EVF	Optional 2.76M dot EVF
Display	3" LCD (1.04m dot) touchscreen	3" LCD (1.23m dot)	3" LCD (1.23m dot)	3" LCD (1.04m dot) touchscreen
Max burst rate (JPEG)	6.5 fps	10 fps	10 fps	5.2 fps
Video formats	MOV / MP4	XAVC S / AVCHD MP4	AVCHD / MP4	MP4
Top video frame rate	1080p/60 (34Mbps)	1080p/60 (50Mbps)	1080p/60 (28Mbps)	1080p/30 (24Mbps)
24p support	No	Yes	Yes	No
External controls	Lens, exposure, rear dials; touchscreen	Lens, rear dials	Lens, rear dials	Lens, rear dials; touchscreen
Built-in flash	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Wi-Fi	Yes (with NFC)	Yes (with NFC)	Yes (with NFC)	Yes (with NFC)
Battery life (CIPA)	210 shots	320 shots	350 shots	240 shots

As should be clear, the G7 X doesn't get everything its own way. The Sony RX100 III's video shooting is excellent and there's nothing in the G7 X's specifications or Canon's recent history of compacts to suggest it's going to be able to match the Sony in this respect. The love-it-or-hate-it click-less control dial on the Sony is undeniably useful when it comes to shooting video footage. The Canon's battery life is also pretty disastrous.

The G7 X also has no option for including a viewfinder, whereas the RX100 III has one built-in. This is likely to be a decisive factor for some photographers. But the brighter, longer lens of the Canon, along with its better range of external controls could be a convincing counter-argument.

Updates to review:

September 15, 2014: Introduction, Specs, Body, Features and First Impressions published.
October 21, 2014: Controls, Performance, Shooting Experience & Studio pages added. First Impressions deprecated.
November 11, 2014: Image Quality, Dynamic Range, Studio analysis and Conclusion added.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

Gear in this story

Canon PowerShot G7 X

104

I own it

149

I want it

I had it

Discuss in the forums

Shop now

45 customer reviews

Base In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	$699.00 »
w/ Memory Card In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	$699.00 »

Comments

Total comments: 445

I have compared the usual suspects (RXIII, LX100 and the G7X) and for the first time probably, I did no go for the best image quality, but instead size and usability.
Being a 1DIII and 5dIII shooter, things like touch screen were new to me, but boy, do I like them. It is superfast and I am very happy with the focus. Be sure, to take the small AF window in the settings and be sure to touch the right spot on the screen. If you touch on the border between face and background, there is a good chance that the camera will focus on the background. But is all user error.
Image quality is better then my previous xz-1 and sufficient for 20 cm x30 cm prints, but is not a 5D. The noise is interesting, it shows well in 100%, but almost not, when viewed at normal size.
Best compact I ever had.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Been using the PS G7X for 2 months. Probably the best compact camera I've used. Touch screen focusing is a dream, quick even in low light. The control ring is what I love most as the images are what I'd expect, being able to control what I want to do so easily. Entered 3 shots into local camera club competition to see how they went against larger format cameras. Came 2nd in 2 classes, no one would believe the Pics came from a compact camera.
Think I've converted the whole club to this camera. But as always it's each to there own, pound for pound this has got to be one of the best compact cameras on the market for the price.

0 upvotes

Is AF really that good, this review seems to contradict what you're saying. They said the AF is really sluggish and slow, was their a huge bump in firmware?

0 upvotes

I still can't believe that I can hand-hold the G7x at night and shoot steady video with digital zoom and it's stable at concerts.
Phenomenal!
cb

1 upvote

Haven't seen any mention of the body, in terms of grip. Was inspired enough to go to a shop today to see how it felt in my hand, and I was quite disappointed. Feels like it could easily slip out of my hand. Also found I had to bend my thumb in an odd angle to move the thumb wheel, due to the dual wheels--though I do like having the exp compensation handy like that. A bit of grippy material on the front would go a long way to making this a better camera.

0 upvotes

nice camera, but the price is similar to sony a6000, whaaat?.... dear canon, for next generation, g8X?, g7XX?, please add some automatic panorama feature, evf viewfinder, slow motion mode, better battery life and digital level gauge... I know, you can do it ;)

0 upvotes

I had the Sony RX100m3 for a few days and returned that camera. Now i've got de G7X. For me the biggest advantage of the G7X is the far better image stabilitation. Maybe my hands are a little bit shakey, but with the Sony i often could not get sharp results at 1/20'th or 1/30th. Also i find the focus accuracy better in the Canon. But, oh boy, i will miss the electronic viewfinder of the RX100. But, you can't have them all!

3 upvotes

thanks, that is good, pertinent feedback

1 upvote

DPR did good job on Canon G7X's very POOR AF performance:

>>Looking for the keywords about AF:
"disappointing, unable to lock focus, unreliable AF system"

>>Here is the copy:
"Autofocus

Autofocus speeds on this premium compact are disappointing compared to its peers. The G7 X lags behind its closest competitor - the Sony Cyber-shot RX100 III - and Panasonic's new Lumix DMC-LX100 is also noticeably quicker. Low light performance isn't great, either. Another surprise was how often the G7 X display the 'yellow box of doom', which means that it was unable to lock focus. While more common in low light, it occurred more than one would expect in good light.

Unfortunately the unreliable AF system will send many users to manual focus. Unfortunately, the MF system needs work, as you'll see on our Shooting Experience page."

>>Here is the link:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g7-x

>>>>What people do for unacceptable poor AF?
People return the G7X as seem from Amazon.

Enjoy.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

This really concerned me, so I read all the negative reviews on Amazon. There are very few non-5 star reviews. I only found one comment that focus was poor, and one user error understanding how to set focus points. I'm not really finding very POOR AF performance making a mention in people's assessments of this camera.

Interestingly, the user review scores are reversed on B&H where the Canon scores a few points higher than the Sony. I trust those reviewers a little more than Amazon. Especially when you read what people are complaining about.

3 upvotes

goblover, if Canon IS gives you problems better lay off the coffee. never heard a complaint about Canon in camera IS before

1 upvote

Ok, maybe I missed it, but is there anywhere in the review that mentioned about image stabilization? That is an important factor for me to know, since my experience with Canon image Stabilization is.. not satisfying. I have to shoot with a minimum shutter speed of 1/30 (that is using touch capture) to have acceptable image. Sometimes has to be faster. Using other compact, with shutter press, I can do with 1/15, sometimes 1/8.

0 upvotes

"The image stabilization is excellent, most notably for video."
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g7-x/8

1 upvote

As a new owner some thoughts and review questions:
-Autofocus in P/S/AV Mode is pretty fast, faster than my RX100m3 and more reliable in low light. Why is dpreview saying AF is slow?. Yes it is slow in Auto Mode...nobody will use Automode on a high end camera but also why is it slow in auto mode and not in normal mode?
- Exposure is one stop faster than my RX, so one stop better high Iso..on the other side one stop worser in showing noise so at last the same.
-in ECO Mode I got 450 to 550 shots with a lot of playing around and some short Videos...not as bad as stated.
-not mentioned in the review: you can zoom in in macro mode what gives quite good macro capabilities.
- at 24mm it seems so that there is a bug in autofocus or the AF ist not very reliable.....some shots are unsharp some pretty sharp...especially at 1.8, may be Canon can fix this with a firmware update......dpreview please test in WW and report this to Canon thanks

Please apologize my bad englisch and typos

Jürgen

4 upvotes

I use auto mode when I am in situations where I don't have time to mess around with the settings. The main idea here is not 'high end'. It's 'compact'.
But, after using Pana TZ7 and S120, I can say that S120 auto is stupid if not idiot compared to my 6 year old TZ7. With S120, I have to use manual all the time to get the picture I wanted. Even when I use shutter or aperture priority, the camera will sometimes make weird decisions, such as picking high ISO and high aperture number. I suspect even until today Canon never bothered to change that.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

jst13

For "at 24mm it seems so that there is a bug in autofocus or the AF ist not very reliable", the only way is to point AF to a "highest contrast" area in your subject, and lock the AF...

I do not own Canon P&Ss, but Canon's P&S are well known for poor AF performance such as this G7X, and G1X-M2.

People return the cameras for the reasons above.

I would not buy any camera if I know it have AF issue b/c I shot in low-light often.

If a camera missed AF in normal light some time, it will miss most of the AF, if not all, in low-light especially we use larger aperture in low-light. "Larger aperture" + "not too small sensor" does not give you too much room for AF error.

0 upvotes

Mike FL

Hmm.. My S120 nails focus quickly, but not sharp. I don't know if that's the IS and lens combo thing. I have to use 1/30 shutter speed to get usable shots, but still not too sharp (and I stopped down the aperture, so it's not wide open). Where as my Panasonic TZ7 is comfortably sharp at 1/16 shutter speed. Anyone can tell me, if I can improve the sharpness in some way?

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

goblover;

I like to share with you some Photo 101 which you may already know:

>>> "stopped down the aperture" too much will hurt Sharpness b/c it is limited by DIFFRACTION:

You can calculator your cameras "Diffraction Limit" by using tool below:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

>>> "Nails focus quickly" =/= AF Accuracy.

>>> I do not know S120, but Panasonic P&S's OIS is very respectable.

2 upvotes

One more thing, people may be not easy to see AF Accuracy on smaller sensor cameras b/c of DOF, and here is the tool for how to calculate DOF:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

Thanks Mike! Actually, I usually steps down t f2.2 or f2.8, so I guess that is safe. If I have to stop down further, then it is a really crappy lens =P

0 upvotes

i own the G7X since last year .. and enjoy it despite some reviews.
But i agree: the Automode is far from making good pictures.
I use 90% the P-mode with Autoiso up to 4000 and sharp+1. Indoor sports with T-mode from 1/160. AutoWB is good , but not in energysaving light, so i use a custommade balance (manual).
If AF fails in Macro, point the object with touch! Hint:
You should use the zoomwip and get the Info of possible mini-maxi distance.
axgoli (german)
p.s. former P&S, i owned: Sony, Panasonic and canon PS100

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

New G7x owner here. Here are my hates:

1) JPEG seems very aggressive, giving "soft shots". "auto" mode can't be run in RAW mode, or in superfine (less JPEG). There are moments with a pocket camera where I really want to "shoot from the hip" (the point of a pocket camera!) thus I care about the quality of AUTO mode.

But something seems "wrong" with image quality. I'm forced to dive into RAW, and I will, by gum. I hope the shots look OK in RAW.

2) Wifi mode. There's a long list of obvious improvements that should be made in Canon's app (which applies to all wifi canons). I'd like to view-on-camera with zoom. I'd like to delete from camera. Someone in this forum said "two clicks to sync new shots with Drive" --- I haven't found the recipe yet.

3) Battery life. What I really want is a way to charge the little canon lithium pack from a USB battery (or USB wall charger). I have a second battery on order, which solves the immediate problem.

0 upvotes

Hi! I just want to clarify your point 1. Do you mean you can't shoot in RAW when you select auto mode?
I owned S120 & I'd like to upgrade on this one. But same thing in S120 no RAW in auto mode.

0 upvotes

New G7x owner here. Here are my likes:

1) I did not experience slow menu or UI. Comments saying the UI is faster or slower than the RX100, I don't really care about the comparison. Some comments say it's unusably laggy. I found no noticable lag at all. I can't explain that, but it's true. Tried the store model: it was fine.

2) 1fps RAW shooting. Not an issue. I'm not a pro photographer, and I take a picture, line up my next picture, and shoot it. 1 fps is fine.

3) EVF. I have glasses. I tried the Sony EVF. It was a blurry mess with and without my glasses. I suppose "people who don't care about EVF" includes everyone wearing glasses, then that's me.

4) Tiltable viewfinder. I heard all this "massive fail: does not rotate beyond 180 degrees". It's a massive win that the thing rotates at all. I have refound the joy of my very first nikon swing-digital, where I can shoot from my lap - great candids. Cat & baby level easily.

5) Touchscreen. Love, especially with swung viewfinder.

0 upvotes

@bbulkow
Sony Evf: you need to pull the eyecup after you eject the EVF before you can use it, if not, it will be blurry. Have you done that?

0 upvotes

@diopter;

If EVF is still blurry after pull out the eyecup. adjust the "diopter".

BTW: I like SONY-M3's "diopter" adjust ARM better than DIAL which being found in most of the cameras.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I'm new to list. Just got a G7X to replace my Powershot SX20IS. Only an amateur. I tried a few sample pics today and pleased with macro & various indoor pics; but so far disappointed in SNOW and ACTION stills of animals in motion....which are the primary reasons I wanted a new camera. Never shoot videos. Read in-box & on-line manuals; lots of info on taking pics of "sleeping/smiling babies" (how difficult are those, truly??!) but saw nothing about action stills. Took a few snow shots in AUTO vs. SNOWMAN mode and didn't really see any improvement. Previous XS20 had an auto setting for action stills in auto setting; nothing similar that I can find on this camera. Is there a "G7X for Dummies" or something I can read up on how to take action shots of critters ( clients like to see pics of their pets playing/running while at my place). Any advice about manual settings??? I'm totally an automatic mode amateur--but maybe I can upgrade my skills with expert's advice. Thanks!

1 upvote

Barbara Ludt;

For "how to take action shots of ... pets playing/running"

You can use/set to Tv (Shutter priority) mode, then use the "Lens dial" to adjust and use faster Shutter speed while shot "pets playing/running".

Here is a short article for how to using Tv mode, I hope it will help you.

http://www.photoplusmag.com/2013/08/09/canon-dslr-tutorial-when-should-you-use-tv-mode/

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Deleted; wrong room

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Lot of features on RX100 III as well as Powershot G7 x has been discussed but I want to know if there is any digital zoom on those cameras and how are the results of those digital zooms as far as movie and photos are concerned indoors for school and church programs. I may be shooting from a distance of 30 to 50 feet and the optic zoom may not be sufficient. Does any one know the quality of digital zoom on each camera?

0 upvotes

Hi - I have the G7X & the RX100 Mk1. I took some pics at a concert recently with the Canon & it fared better than previous efforts with the Sony - mainly I think for 2 reasons:
i) The lens is brighter at the long end - f2.8 (bit soft but overall better)
ii) Autofocus worked better - probably because of the brighter image from a wider aperture.
In terms of image quality using digital zoom - I would still pick the Canon because of my comments above, plus the Canon retains ability to use autofocus points, whereas the Sony only has 1 focus point (the whole frame !).
Reportdely the RX100Mk3 has better IQ & video functions, but imo the max tele of 70mm on the Sony vs the Canon's 100mm will make a big difference for the use you describe - so I would choose the Canon.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

1 upvote

@ the-bunker : I'm considering either the Canon or Sony MII to replace my Mark I Sony. I tried the Canon today and it seemed noticeably slower on shot to shot speeds (using the same class 10 card). Can I ask your feelings on this ... I love the look of the canon (spec wise) over the MII sony but the ability to focus quickly and take repeated shots is important to me. Can I ask your thoughts on this?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

Sorry to take so long to reply. I did some comparison against the Sony RX100 MkIII at an Airport recently & the Sony did better than the Canon. However, the Canon has touch to focus/shoot - which is great for fast shooting, just the cycle time before the next shot can be taken is not as fast as the Sony. Hope this helps

0 upvotes

Thanks for coming back. After testing myself I agree, but I still have the Canon pegged as my next purchase!

0 upvotes

Just suggested that my friend buys this for his wife for Christmas. The brief was an easily portable camera that can be used for a variety of purposes, but with a focus on portraits / action shots of their young daughter. Oh, and around 400 GBP maximum (so a little over budget). I went for this one because (1) it will produce a much better quality of image that the mobile phone she is currently using; (2) ability to take excellent portraits at all focal lengths with the large apertures; (3) a useful zoom length that gives some proper telephoto without over-reaching, but really useful wide angles; (4) she doesn't need a viewfinder. I think the start-up time issue sounds of minimal importance and the only concern is the AF issue in low light. Anyway, should I have suggested something else for the price? I couldn't see anything better ...

0 upvotes

When my Sony RX100 v. I broke, I thought about getting the Sony RX100 vIII, but I was taken aback by the downsize to the 24-70 lens. I really would not use the pop up eye piece, although that sounds very good for many I know.

I really liked the shooting experience of the RX100 vI. The camera was fast and the pictures in RAW were excellent. I had never had a better pocket camera.

I went with the Canon G7x because of the 24-100, f 1.8 - 2.8 lens specs. At first the shooting experience seemed awkward, but after a month with this camera, I feel very comfortable. RAW output is exceptional. I take a lot of portrait and the lens specs were the only option compared to the Sony. A $700 pocket camera is quite a luxury - I feel that the most important feature, the lens and image quality outweigh the better shooting experience of the Sony. If the Sony had a 24 - 100, f 1.8 - 2.8 lens, I would have bought it.

0 upvotes

IMAGE STABILIZATION. IMAGE STABILIZATION. IMAGE STABILIZATION. One of the key useful features on a compact (or in fact any camera) in low light situations. I know for a fact that image stabilization on RX100 does not exist. Not sure if it's still the case for RX100 III although I suspect it is.

Review should have included the measurement of effectiveness of image stabilization on R7 X, and comparison to direct competition (RX100 III).

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

The Sony RX100 has an optical stabilization system. RX II and RX III have similar systems. The best comparison for me is the shooting experience.

0 upvotes

Someone tested RX100 III, which has improved IS vs. I and II:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3690539

@Carouge: image stabilization in I exists on paper only. Read comments in the above thread.

Can anybody try G7 X IS using the pdf template provided?

0 upvotes

removed

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I have a G12 and have refused to get a newer Canon pocketable because of Canon's apparent decision to confine fully articulating screens to its DSLRs. (I don't consider the G1 X pocketable.) I might settle for a flip-up screen in exchange for a larger sensor and faster lens, however.

My question is about the criticism of the G7 X for slow operation, how does it compare in this respect with the G12?

Isn't there a setup option to disable animations entirely? If not, it should be added in a firmware upgrade - particularly if Canon gets a lot of flack about them.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Vs the only real competition, Sony RX100 III, for me for portraits the 100mm max zoom is key. Despite complaints, the auto-focus doesn't feel slow to me; it focuses in light so low I can hardly see myself. Yes, sometimes it fails to focus, but touch a spot on the screen to focus on and you're on your way (a great reason to choose the G7x over the Sony). The touch screen is undervalued by reviewers. Image quality is magnificent. Key to me is low-light photography without flash. The 1" sensor and the bright lens combine to allow incredible low-light photos that turn out brighter than I see with my eyes. Build quality is great: try to wiggle the lens barrel, the G7x is nicely machined. Battery life is sad; you won't make it a day with heavy use, so carry a spare. WiFi connection was a major consideration. Two clicks I am backing up to Google Drive , sending only pix that were not sent before. Two clicks and a photo is posted on Facebook. Connect directly to smartphone just as easily.

1 upvote

I wanted to buy a good compact and quickly ended up in the discussion Sony vs Canon. I am not a photo expert, but I do like to fiddle with commands and wanted to learn more about the technicalities of taking pictures. And, it had to be a pocketable machine. I agonized at it and ended up buying the Canon. The picture quality is amazing. It shoots really well under low-light conditions. The commands are easy to change. It reacts fast to auto-focus. I thought the touch screen wasn't that relevant but now I just love it, especially to select focus area and chose settings quick. That feature would make me today prefer the Canon over the Sony. The titlable screen is also great. Minus: It is difficult to manually focus on the manual settings (which I won't use that much anyway). The battery time is very bad. I checked the viewfinder on the Sony (the biggest selling point) and wouldn't see myself using it, as it is small in such a small camera and it felt uncomfortable.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I do love this camera, but. Buy an extra battery and the vast majorty of simple users will love it. It does movies and most of all gives nice pictures. The price of this camera in a few months will be under $600.00. High priced for the simple user, but low when compared to Sony and Pansonic. For these people nice pictures, with movies vs cost and maybe size. All else, who cares EVF, camera lay out. These simple users use there phones for pics.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

It is $524 USD from amazon.jp regarding to "The price of this camera in a few months will be under $600.00.".

http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/offer-listing/B00NM0W8HS/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1416814947&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+g7x&condition=new

Base on exchange rate:
http://www.x-rates.com/calculator/?from=JPY

0 upvotes

Best pocket camera hands down. Period. The biased pundits are out to lunch. Amateurs pretending to know irrelevant stuff. None of the critics know how to make images of quality that sell in the marketplace but think they know ? Gimme a break. Get some coffee.

3 upvotes

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Nice review, thanks. I wrote also a review for the G7 X:
http://j.mp/1qMTL3i

0 upvotes

What's the point of your rating system?

None of you would buy this camera. It falls apart in "performance, usability, and battery life," and excels at things any large-sensor camera can do. And yet, somehow it's worth 77% and a Silver award?

Here's a thought exercise for you. Take the same camera and cement the lens cap to it. What rating then? Would you still give it 50% for the build quality and screen UI, despite an utter inability to fulfill its intended purpose? Do all features rate the same in importance?

That's what this review looks like: we hate it, but here's some points for what it could have been. Oh, and the bottom of our scale is actually 75.

4 upvotes

Is Canon ever going to produce a camera that can do panorama sweep? I really enjoy this feature, especially in a compact camera. So many other cameras have this feature, but not Canon. I guess when it comes to panorama sweep, Canon sees it as impossible.

3 upvotes

I have an A99. Panorama is available. Panorama is the hands down most worthless feature of this camera.

0 upvotes

And Canon bashers are on the loose.
Bla bla bla.......

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

5 upvotes

Reviewers have shot 370+ images on a charge. Other reviewers were able to shoot 70 min 1080p60 on a single charge. The rest of the negatives are mostly nitpicks in comparison to the positives. The exposure comp dial is hard to turn? Come on... Be serious.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

CIPA rating has been a industrial standards. If a camera with CIPA rating of 210 shots can go to 370 shots, then a camera with better CIPA rating can go even further.

Is 1fps RAW shooting a nitpicks? That's the dealbreak for a lotta people.

3 upvotes

I can get roughly 2,000 shots using my G1 X, LCD switched off, AF set on manual, and paired with a timer remote. Handy for time lapse photography.
The CIPA standard might imply that if one camera can beat it, so can another, but in actual usage if someone gets 500 images on a charge and that fills their threshold and goal, then that makes the CIPA standard and how others may perform a waste of a statistic.
And I'd imagine that those of us shooting RAW are well away of the speed and don't care because we don't need anything faster. Play up this feature or that feature of another camera, but what it comes down to is the individual usage case.
If you're going to blow $700 on a camera, then buy a second battery and when you put your camera away at some point during the day go ahead and switch the battery. Who is taking this thing to the football game in the hopes of getting high frame rater captures of the action? Only people who don't know how to read, that's who.

0 upvotes

You have to keep in mind that some of consider exposure compensation an important control parameter (which is probably why Canon dedicated such a prominent control ring to this feature!), and so if the interface for this important control parameter makes it less easy to use, that's not just a "nitpick". If a company puts physical controls on a camera, they should at least operate well. It's attention to these kinds of details that can make the difference between a truly enjoyable camera to use, and one that you wish you hadn't bought. So basically, how well the controls operate is not a "nitpick".

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

When the G1 X was released, everyone complained about the video record button being poorly placed and the shutter release being too soft. Personally it took me about a week to get used to the controls of the camera because every camera is different. People will either get used to or the won't.....or they'll refuse to acknowledge one of the greatest human traits is the ability to adapt and they'll find something that requires the least adaptation possible no matter what they have to give up in order to get it while using a little cognitive dissonance in the place of any real reasons.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting

1 upvote

lx100 thank u

2 upvotes

Have dpreview contacted Canon about the slow 1fps RAW performance? It is 2014, such slow performance is no way by design, it is a bug, a defect, that Canon need to address.

2 upvotes

It's not a bug, Canon's compact division has not gotten the memo that 1 fps shooting is a bit behind acceptable. Just a bit. It's the number one reason I won't buy this camera.

1 upvote

It's not just the Raw performance that's slow, it's the general operational speed of the camera. The menus themselves are so slow it's a pain to change any settings (presumably b/c of the animations). You literally can't even dismiss the menu sometimes (e.g. if it's in the middle of an animation, or the camera's 'catching up' to your fast button presses), which you can see in our video of Jeff having to press the Func. button multiple times to dismiss it here. This is a large part of why we say the performance of the camera is slow.

So, given the overall sluggishness of the camera, I don't think any of us felt the 1fps Raw performance was a 'bug'. It's just the overall feel and nature of the camera: it's just not snappy. Especially in comparison to the RX100 III.

I wanted to love this camera, even initially thought of replacing my RX100 III w/ it (b/c of the touch screen). But after using it, it actually made me like the RX100 III even more.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

11 upvotes

That's a lot of money for a camera with poor performance and hopeless focusing :(

5 upvotes

Hi. I have this camera and I have no idea what it means hopeless focus. Maybe for some very specialized things? On the day to day operation I see no hopeless focus at all.

0 upvotes

Phhhtt right I'll put my panasonic LX5 up against it any day... I had a canon G9 or 10 also the 15 megapixel model............... compare to the panny it was a pathetic camera .... terrible image quality

0 upvotes

another half built camera with no view finder; and a swivel screen like the G12 is so much more versatile imo. Sounds so close to another a great camera from Canon but this one hasn't got my name on it :(.

2 upvotes

Great to see Canon have a competitor to the RX100 II...now here is hoping they come out with a G7X III or G9X to rival the RX100 III. For many, no viewfinder means no-go and lack of XAVC-S videos.

4 upvotes

There is no rival to the latest Canon. The G7X is far ahead of Sony....not serious competition.
Maybe Sony can come up with something new to try to rival the G7X. It might make it interesting.
But maybe they are not able to match the lens range nor the touchscreen at this time.

2 upvotes

@jonrobertp: I think you've got it backwards. It's Canon that tried to come up with something new to rival the excellent RX100-series.

For some - particularly those that absolutely require the extra reach of 70-100mm and/or love a touchscreen - Canon's G7 X offers a nice competitor to the RX100 III.

But in most other respects, it unfortunately fails to meet the performance of the RX100 III. No EVF, worse lens sharpness across the field at 24-50mm, lack of bounce flash, worse movie specs, less control over dynamic range compensation options, unusable manual focus, worse overall shooting speed & performance (the menus are a bear to work with b/c of operational speed), etc.

Ergonomics are highly subjective, but I personally still prefer the RX100 III here as I can easily use it w/ one hand. I can't do that with the G7 X b/c the lens & EC dials are too difficult to turn.

To say the RX100 III is 'not serious competition' when it was arguably the inspiration for the G7 X is just silly.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

6 upvotes

Rishi, nicely explained, but you're not going to talk any sense into this troll. Just check what bull* he's been talking about in RX100III review and the forum and you'll know more lol

4 upvotes

Jennyhappy2, I am very curious about the need for a viewfinder. I am not a serious photographer, but I think I am the exact customer for these type of machines. I did try the Sony viewfinder and tried to understand whether I would get anything from it. And my answer after some minutes dealing with it was that I would not use it at all on the daily basis, so didn't quite see it as an advantage. Very curious why people are so keen on this, for the sort of customer that would buy this machine. (I might be missing something, maybe).

0 upvotes

This cam is better than the latest Sony. Pop up VF vs touch screen is no contest. optical VF is not a big deal any longer...passé. Lens ---Canon wins easily.
The Sony got 2% higher score because it came out first. Had this cam come out ahead of the Sony it would be the Gold recipient and the Sony the silver. Just a matter of a few months timing.

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

This is the very best camera for any pocket on the market today.

1 upvote

Great to have choices and each individual decide what best serves their needs. Whats good for one is bad for another and vice versa. 😀 Some love reviews while others avoid them. Everyone should do what works best for them and not judge someone else simply because of a different view.

Life is all about choices...👣👣👣👣

1 upvote

"Lens - Canon wins easily"

It's better at 71-100mm, apparently

2 upvotes

Yup, no contest indeed, the pop-up VF is BY FAR a better choice than a touch screen. Optical VF? The sony is a full EVF. Lens? The Sony is sharper. Battery life? Sony. Focus speed and accuracy (far more important than a touch screen)? Sony. Performance? Sony.

Sorry, there's no way the Canon is better than the Sony.

11 upvotes

lol

0 upvotes

Actually, the Sony RX100 III got a 5% higher score, not 2%.

Sony RX100 III's lens is significantly better than the G7 X on the wide end (actually, from 24-50mm), in terms of sharpness across most of the field. We'll throw up some lens comparisons soon to back this up.

The RX100 III's video is also better, b/c of its XAVC S 50Mbps mode (not to mention the option for 24p). Then there's the EVF, the bounce flash, the lens dial that's actually easy to turn, etc.

The G7 X did appear to have better still image (optical) stabilization. And the touchscreen is great for quick AF on your subject of interest. And the extra reach of the lens is nice for those who deem it important. The faster aperture for 25-50mm focal lengths would've been nice if the lens were actually as sharp as the RX100 III's over those focal lengths, hence it's hard to count this as much of an advantage.

So it's great to have options. But let's not be unrealistic as to claiming which camera is 'better' or 'best'.

2 upvotes

Rashkae, the touchscreen is absolutely great on the daily basis. I bought the Canon not so sure it was the right choice. Since I don't have the Sony I don't know which is better. But, the touchsreen is absolutely great. I don't see myself take pictures, change settings, and choosing focus points without that feature. As for the viewfinder, I tried it at ta shopt and didn't see the great advantage at it.

0 upvotes

Too expensive!

3 upvotes

Just notice that besides the ON/OFF bottom, there are two other bottoms that can turn On the camera, the Playback and the Mobile Device Connection (MDC) bottoms. The Playback takes about 3 min before automatically turning off again. The MDC lights the LCD indefinitely if nothing is done...

If there's no way to prevent this (so far I haven't found the way in the camera menus), for me it's quite an issue, cause it can happen quite easily when the camera is packed inside a tight bag and will drive your battery to zero. Hope Canon can fix this via Firmware update.

0 upvotes

Kind of funny no one has really mentioned or dare post the link for this review in the Canon forum LOL. Guess because DPReview indicated the G7X is:

The Final Word

The PowerShot G7 X has stirred up a lot of excitement in the camera world, with Canon opening up the category that has been dominated by Sony. Canon went with the excellent Sony 20MP BSI-CMOS sensor and added a longer (yet still fast) lens that is great for portraiture. Sadly, where the G7 X falls apart is performance, usability, and battery life, as discussed above.

While the G7 X earns a silver award for its ambitious lens and image quality, Canon has a lot of work to do in the performance department in order to earn our top reward. "

There is always the GX7 II, though Canon seems to be on a continued pattern here that started with the G1X II.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

But what's your personal experience with the camera?

7 upvotes

One can discuss a review without posting a link, especially when (brace yourself for this) you're discussing the review in the forums that belong to the exact same site. Fortunately there are some people savvy enough about this interwebs google machine to know that the front page has several direct links to the review or one with the intelligence of a kindergartener can get to the review with maybe two or three clicks in a few months when the newness wears off.
LOL
We're not all link posting, review quoting, DxO worshipping automatons like those who needlessly spend their time attacking cameras they dislike rather than using cameras they already own. We're also not all constantly posting about every new camera release like it's the first camera we've ever seen in our entire lives while, at the same time, relating those new cameras to previously released cameras in an effort to bash something we've made clear we have no intention of buying and really intensely dislike (see: mirror).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

And now for the part you will choose to call a personal attack despite it's obvious truth: you are one of the egregious abusers of these forums, or any forum, I have ever seen. Whether you are a man or a woman you have chosen a female user name that sounds sweet and silly to garner sympathy when you claim to have been attacked (which is always although your innocently worded posts are meant to pester, irritate....or maybe they are innocently and genuinely a result of someone who simply lacks consideration for others and has an extreme inferiority complex requiring constant validation, not to mention a painful case of confirmation bias). You are the very definition of a forum troll; that's not an opinion, that is an objective, empirical observation that can be confirmed with a very small amount of research.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

ive pointed out many times in the past jhappy is nothing but a troll and knows nothing jumping from forum to forum stirring up trolliness

3 upvotes

Did not see an "image stabilizer" test. I have two versions of the RX100 and their I.S. is terrible. I expect the GX7 to be much better.

0 upvotes

It's not, sadly.

3 upvotes

Why still no panorama mode?

4 upvotes

The problem with pocketable cameras like this is that they are only really pocketable without a case and cameras with motorized lenses sometimes see those lenses jam due to what might be in a pocket, like lint or other particulate matter.

0 upvotes

Who uses a case with these cameras? Old men? lol And when was the last time your lens jammed due to your old man pocket being to full of lint?

I mean who comes on here and complains because their camera is going to jam due to pocket lint? LOL Are you kidding?

There are some serious clowns on this forum. lol HERES A TIP, CLEAN YOUR POCKET WHEN PUTTING A $700 INSTUMENT IN IT>>>>>>>>>>>

1 upvote

A case mainly helps with grip but can also prevent accidents like mistakenly switching on the camera when it's in your pocket, thereby damaging the lens when it extends. And no pocket is clean - dust can easily collect around the lens. Also, many people sell their cameras after a year or so to get the updated version. A case protects the camera against scratches and knocks, thereby maintaining its resell value.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Always with the depth of field you people.

0 upvotes

Glad more 1" sensor cameras are coming out, the the price will drop on older/other models. Now the nikon 1 system looks afforable(used to laugh at those prices), g7x is too much of a premium priced now. Waiting on sony price drop.

0 upvotes

Different strokes for different folks, so the saying goes. If you like it, buy it. No appeal to me for several reasons. Price, no external flash attachment, no EVF. Yup, I am one of those old folks with variable glasses who don't find using an LCD to be a pleasant way to take pics except the occasional grab shot, and for that I use the S110 or G15. For a bit more $$, I bought the SL1 with the 2 stm lenses and just added the 10-18mm. Of course, it won't fit in your pocket, but it still a light weight, very versatile kit.

1 upvote

Can't you at least make the flash bounce with the finger? Does one have to blind all?

1 upvote

That is a great point. The only time you should use direct flash is when you're trying to use it as fill flash on someone who is lit from behind or overhead by the blazing sun. Otherwise you should be bouncing, or at least feathering. Why don't more reviewers go there.

0 upvotes

On page 4, we've said:

"Sadly, for those hoping to pull the flash back so it can 'bounce', to give a less harsh result, it's not possible on the G7 X."

I agree with you, by the way. I only use direct flash when it's off-camera. It's a shame that you can't bounce it on this camera, while you can with the RX100-series cameras, as well as with Canon's own G1X II.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

Reviews here do make me smile. The G7X fits in your jeans pocket but is so small that your thumb covers the rear dial. Other P&S cameras are too big! The exposure dial is too far back and difficult to use - others are extended and so often moved by mistake. And it goes on and on. A constant source of entertainment.

6 upvotes

We point out potential irritations, it's up to you to decide how significant they are to you.

If the small size of the G7 X is important to you then you'll probably accept a couple of handling compromises. By highlighting the potential concerns, you can decide how much of a compromise it is.

13 upvotes

Handling and shooting experiences with particular camera are just personal opinions in any review. Using G7 X for awhile now, I must agree with the reviewers. One have the right to differ and see the criticism as nitpicking which is fine with me.

3 upvotes

In the absence of a viewfinder, I cannot quite see the point of this camera. Yesterday's formula, it seems to me, despite the good image quality. It looks pretty enough, in the nice clean way of the pioneering Canon compacts of old.

2 upvotes

Yesterday's formula....had no screen, film, and a viewfinder. I don't get the obsession with viewfinders. I love them and use them constantly, but holding a tiny point and shoot up to my face holds no appeal. The screen is a perfectly good way to compose a shot. Fortunately cameras still exist that have viewfinders, so go buy one.

6 upvotes

@JB

So you love them and use them constantly but you don't get the obsession with viewfinders? Hmm, more controversy in 2 sentences is almost impossible.
Why is having a viewfinder on a "tiny point and shoot" not appealing? I can take much more stable pictures with it and framing in sunlight is a lot easier. Maybe because... it's a Sony?

12 upvotes

Nice to have a viewfinder as an optional framing tool, especially on a sunny day.

Even so, I've been using screens for so long that the lack of one isn't necessarily a deal breaker.

My real essential is a rotating screen for those high-low shots.

1 upvote

@ Joseph Black

So maybe stability and visibility in bright conditions are of little concern to you. And I assume you're not affected by the fact that many (I dare say most) people over 45-50 have to either put on or take off glasses when using a screen for framing ...

4 upvotes

Not at all. When it makes sense to use them on my DSLRs I use them. I enjoy them. But a point and shoot is a casual camera, or at the very least one that puts size and convenience over performance. What? One can't use both methods, a viewfinder and an LCD, in different situations and enjoy them both? A large camera, a heavy camera, can benefit from a little stabilizing against one's face and a large, bright, 100% optical viewfinder is a joy to use. A small camera works perfectly fine with an LCD (unless you're old and shaky, in which case there are plenty of options so move on with your life). Oh, now I see the problem: there's only one right way. My bad.
Timo....so go.....buy.....another......camera. 2+2=4 -- can life be any simpler? Why does every camera have to take every single human circumstance into consideration?

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

@timo is the kind of person that would like to operate a smartphone through a viewfinder because super amoled touchscreens are things of the past

0 upvotes

Actually it's the viewfinder that is yesterday's formula.

0 upvotes

i disagree, i'd rather have a nice giant touchscreen vs. an optical or OLED viewfinder... i haven't had trouble shooting in bright sunlight either..

it's too bad the RX100M3 has a viewfinder, unnecessarily raising the price

we all have an opinion... and we can all vote with our wallet

0 upvotes

@lacikuss I tried to use a phone cam but gave up when I couldn't see how to wind the film on.

1 upvote

Joseph Black, I have not used viewfinders, and I am very curious of why they are so needed in a compact camera like this one. I was agonizing between the Sony and the Canon, trying to understand the value of viewfinder. Went to the shop, tried the Sony, and it felt small, on a small camera and didn't see any use for it. Very curious of why this is so relevant for so many people and reviewers in this type of camera (for an extra $200!)

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

How about DPreview focus on some of the cameras people want to see reviewed like the GM5, a5100, EPL7, d750?
Why would anyone want to get this thing when the rx100III is out there?
I don't know what's up with Canon but I gave up on it since 2010.

1 upvote

Our site traffic suggests those aren't necessarily the cameras 'people' want to see reviewed (first).

On paper, the G7 X looked like it might be at least as good as the RX100 III. It's only by reviewing it that we found that the Canon doesn't fully live up to its spec.

Some of the cameras you mention are in the process of being reviewed.

7 upvotes

The G7X is the most exciting compact from Canon in a long time.
People wanted to know whether it was as good in the real world as it was on paper.

After all it had a great Sony sensor and a ambitious lens. After all most compacts Canon launched with no significant upgrades (s90/120) and some even got worse. The elph 330hs is a better camera then the 340hs. this G7X truly was a sight for sore eyes.

Now the performance issues are a problem and it's great that Dpr went in detail on this camera quickly. Letting the consumers make the right decission. Let's be honest 0.8 Fps continous in raw with autofocus is simply not enough in this price range.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

5 upvotes

Barn, your expertise on all cameras in "this price range" seems to contradict what actual owners think about this camera. If it wasn't enough then you must be implying that they are either dumb, simply not as smart as you, or have their priorities out of whack. Many people also think an $800 in this day and age should have a touch screen.

0 upvotes

touchscreen,
i agree it's a very handy feature. especially on a small body with limited physical control. doesn't make the performance right though.

3 upvotes

@Joseph Black
How many owners of the G7X have used many other cameras for comparison. Do not forget that a large percentage of Western buyers are not aware that anyone but Canon make cameras. Probably this is why Canon cameras are so unrefined as the market is there whatever so why would they need to bother.

0 upvotes

A trip to Best Buy would very quickly disabuse you of that absurd notion.

0 upvotes

Good point Greynerd, lots of canon-istas out there that would buy anything canon dumps on the market just because canon can't do no wrong. I used to be one of those.
@Joeblack...I don't know what bestbuy you go to but here it's mostly middle of the road canon and sony. There is hardly anything but a few compacts from oly, pana or fuji.

0 upvotes

@Joseph Black
It would not be quick as a transatlantic flight would be necessary :) I have never seen a Best Buy this side of the pond. In the UK they would have to call it the 'Least Worst Buy'. Over here Canon always tends to be shown as the camera on any general Christmas promotion, ironically the the total power failure if you video zoom SX280 is often pictured. This is why I get the overall feeling that they are just not under the same pressure as the competition to perform. At an air show virtually every camera is a Canon SLR with the odd Nikon.

0 upvotes

I must say canon has done an amazing job branding. Particularly in EU, all these white canon "bazookas" on ponopods at the stadium really burned in people's mind that 'real' photographers use canon when in fact, if you take those 600mm lenses away there in not much left about canon for the everyday photographer.
Greynerd bb is the same in US! First law of franchising!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

My local Best Buys, independent camera stores, etc. don't lean heavily in the Canon direction. Nikon 1's are pushed on the end-caps, and there are plenty of Sony's, Oly, and Pany, etc.
It doesn't matter what brand the uninformed purchase because that does not imply those who do their research are somehow equivalent in their ease of manipulation by advertising or branding or whatever. The same argument can be made for any brand that is the market leader because it's very convenient to take the huge chunk of people who don't know any better and hold them up as the typical consumer of that brand. By the same token, just because someone is a market leader doesn't mean they are the best around: Android doesn't do anything for me but the phones running it are numerous and mostly free of charge.
Think whatever you will. Show me one camera brand that doesn't make a few models that have had issues and I'll show you a magical land called Fantasia where dragons and unicorns frolic together.

0 upvotes

barnet. 0.8 Fps continous in raw with autofocus is not a problem at all for me in this debate. I agonized quite a bit between these two cameras, but I won't shoot any raws, let alone continuous. And I think I am actually a very target market for this type of cameras.

0 upvotes

So it's between a quickly rushed out but late on the market "me too" product and a prototype. This attempt is worse than the RX100mkI and you had 2 years time and even help from Sony with their sensors.

Way to go Canon...

4 upvotes

Yeah, why not put a viewfinder on it that has to pop up, extend, and then if you decide to use the LCD instead the camera has to shut down completely for no apparent reason. Thanks for leaving this revolutionary feature out, Canon!

2 upvotes

At least the Sony reboots faster for the next shot than it takes the G7X to snap another raw picture ;)

But by the way, that's also really my only point of criticism after using the RX100III for about half a year now. There is a workaround though, pressing the ON button when your'e pushing down the EVF keeps the camera alive.

8 upvotes

@Zeisschen - really? That's cool. Do you keep the ON button held down while pushing down the EVF? Left my RX100 III at work today else I'd test it myself. That's a nice workaround, assuming it works - thanks for sharing.

0 upvotes

@Rishi

yeah, I have the camera with me now and just tried it. Just do both things at the same time, maybe holding the ON button for half a second or so. The display switches of for a very short moment but the camera stays on. Worked every single time for me since months! I think I've read it here in the forum somewhere but I guess most people don't know it.

2 upvotes

I guess if I was heavily invested in Sony gear as you were, I would do everything in my power to rationalize my purchases and disparage other camera brands to make it look like Sony's cameras are free of flaws.

0 upvotes

@pacnwhatever
Well they aren't and I admitted that this is a flaw, didn't I? I can give you a list of flaws of all me camera but I guess you'd just make fun of it like many here do about Sony cameras due to sensor envy or other syndroms.
I'm actually just obsessed with Zeiss lenses since many years (manual, film) and it happens to be that "today" Sony is the company. Which os not a bad thing because they make good sensors and I've also been obsessed with good film ;)
So what's not to like? That Sony also makes mobile phones, TVs and Playstations? I heard those are all good products as well...

2 upvotes

No I actually respect Sony as a camera company and think they put out some great stuff these days. They've come a long way. The RX100 series in particular is something they deserve a ton of credit for in terms of being way out ahead of everybody else. And the lens on the M3 is truly stunning. They shouldn't have waited two years, but Canon has released a truly worthy contender which isn't an overall better camera but does outshine it in a few areas. And I take issue with people just dismissing as some piece of junk because it's an extremely good camera. But I am not so blinded by Canon's greatness to not realize that they have released a couple of flaw-ridden cameras in recent years. But I don't think the G7X is one of them.

0 upvotes

@Zeisschen - Cool! It totally works! We should update our review with this information.

One point of clarification: first you push the EVF in, then you simultaneously hold down the ON button while pushing the EVF down. In other words, don't push the ON button when you push the EVF in; rather, push it when you push the EVF down (after you 1st push it in).

Thanks for the tip.

1 upvote

you're welcome Rishi :)

I forward your thanks go to the unknown person who discovered it!

1 upvote

I've been read many reviews of Canon G7X at http://bonomax.com and I decided buy it 12 days ago, and this camera's everything I wanted it to be - a small, but very high quality compact that fits in a pocket, and takes excellent images. The G7X fits into the same niche as the Sony RX100 cameras - a 1 inch sensor in a small body that you can carry around everywhere. The G7X has a very solid and substantial feel - the build quality seems very good.

2 upvotes

After reading the final review, it seems some of the rough edges/bias of the First Impressions were further explained or softened a bit. But, in any case the key issue I keep tripping up on is the "slow AF" comment from a number of reviewers, and a "fast, speedy AF" type comment from other reviewers. One went so far as to say it was better than the Sony RX100 III. I don't recall that much inconsistency in the past across reviewers. Is it possible Canon two versions in the field?
I don't know enough about the "guts", of these cameras, but is it possible something such as this can be fixed/updated by a firmware update?

1 upvote

It's not better than the Sony RX100 III in terms of AF. I would rate the AF performance as satisfactory or "reasonably quick". I don't think it's as bad as it's portrayed in this or CNET's review, based on my experiences with it. But there is room for improvement. They probably could fix it with a firmware update but they are more than likely going to improve it for the replacement model for this camera.

0 upvotes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E6Mxxe_kG4&list=UUqpOf_Nl5F4tjwlxOVS6h8A

switch to 6:00min

2 upvotes

those guys are jokers not reviewers! waste of time. but if you want to see a real review check out the link below before DP removes it!!
http://www.mobile01.com/newsdetail.php?id=15679

0 upvotes

The mobile01 review shows the RX100m3 clearly better at higher ISOs, but the colors on the Canon look better.

1 upvote

If you read the Sony RX100 III DP review you do not see the words " excellent image quality" in conclusion section but for Canon G7X you do. For all the Cons that G7X have, it produces great images and skin tones. I do not think image samples in this review does justice to image quality of this camera.

0 upvotes

"If you just want the 'executive summary': the RX100 III offers the best image quality of any pocketable camera we've ever seen."

To be fair, there was equal praise over the image quality from both cameras. They are both really awesome cameras, but my personal preference was towards the Canon due to the color reproduction and overall better shooting design. If I was more heavily into video I probably would choose the RX100 III. You really can't go wrong with either of them, to tell you the truth.

3 upvotes

I just quote from DPR:

Our review:
The RX100 III is the most capable compact camera we've ever seen. With its built-in viewfinder and consistently fast lens, there's nothing that can provide better image quality in such a small package. It's not the perfect camera to take shot-to-shot control over, but its capability means it justifies its high price tag.

Good for: Getting excellent quality images and video, on the go.

Not so good for: Users wanting to engage with the camera's every setting.

3 upvotes

Yeah the rx100mk3 is still the better camera.
the raw shooting performance of the canon should be a dealbreaker for everyone. come on 1 fps?!

now if you want to engage the camera settings. these small compacts or just not what you want.
Panasonic now makes the lx100 to answer those needs.

1 upvote

Barn, you really think everyone buying this camera cares about RAW? If you've ever been involved in a discussion about the RAW format on a point and shoot camera in one of these forums you'd know better. Among the more informed and more ambitious amateurs, I'd guess maybe 50% care about RAW (that population probably being 10% of all users of point and shoots, which makes for a grand total of about 5% of people who have ever even tried shooting RAW on a p&s and that's probably way too high since very few people who own cameras ever come to an online forum because they really only want to take snapshots of their cats). Usually people who care enough to buy a DSLR or ILC have a slightly higher interest in RAW. Also, this is a point and shoot, which means the primary concerns is probably size and then image quality and then performance. Get real, dude. Your constant beating of the dead horse is baffling. We get it, you hate Canon.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

it's 700 dollars.
You think average Joe is going to spent that much on a compact.
Why do you keep defending Canon's lacklustre performance?

1 upvote

What's to defend? It's a camera. Also, by the same token, what's to attack? It's a camera. It either works for you or it doesn't. This isn't a politician you need to campaign against, it's a camera that you are in no way connected to or obligated to buy.
As for $700, I've personally seen someone who has never taken pictures with anything more than a film point and shoot decide to go digital and blow five grand on a full frame body and a couple of lenses. Suddenly my advice for a lesson went from a dumb idea to his saving grace. People don't spend money based on what's best for them, they spend it based on completely arbitrary opinions and ideas and desires without research or thought. Most people listen to whatever the teenager at Best Buy tells them. There are plenty of people who own very expensive gear and are great photographers who still shoot jpeg because they don't know a terabyte hd is almost free now. Or they still buy nonsense people here said ten years ago and still say.

1 upvote

Total comments: 445

Editorial content

Product database

Community

About us Work for us Advertise with us FAQ Feedback Interest-Based Ads Privacy Legal

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2015 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site