Canon Superzoom G3X 1" sensor

Discussion in 'Superzoom Salon' started by kyteflyer, Feb 6, 2015.

  1. emptysensor

    emptysensor SC Regular

    30
    Nov 11, 2014
    Joe
    I thought I might be interested in this, but I'd rather have a zoom range/aperture similar to the RX10 and an EVF. The Sony and Panasonic versions don't really appeal to me. I guess the Canon won't either. 600mm just seems kind of silly.
     
  2. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    I've lost interest because of the apparent lack of EVF. Back to the Panny. 200mm is a bit short for me, and the cost is too darned rich. The sony is good, but its not that good.
     
  3. pictogramax

    pictogramax SC Top Veteran

    979
    Aug 18, 2011
    Belgrade, Serbia
    I believe it will accept a clip-on EVF from G1XmII, just as new M3 can. Not cheap, though.
     
  4. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    Not interested in clipons. I have the VF2 for my olympus and I am constantly nervy that it might pop off.
     
  5. SnapDawg

    SnapDawg Rorschach Test Pilot

    651
    Apr 18, 2014
    Canary Islands
    Ken
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Biro

    Biro SC All-Pro

    Aug 7, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Steve
    I'm another one who decided that clip-on EVFs just aren't happening for me. They make a given camera larger than it would be with an integrated viewfinder and when it's not mounted, they're a fiddly accessory that's prone to being lost. I felt that way with both the Olympus VF2 and VF3, and the small clip-on flash units that came with the E-PM1 and E-PM2.
     
  7. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    I think if you don't care about an EVF, its a good buy. (Though I'd wait til the price dropped). I want a built in EVF and thats kinda where I'm at. I didnt realise until reading Michael's review, that it was weather sealed. Nice touch. And to my eyes, it outstripped the A7 in terms of IQ, at least on screen.
     
  8. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    Michael says he bought it and intends to use it. The performance is amazing at 600 mm.
     
  9. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    It might run counter to what a lot you superzoom .cam fans think, but I could get behind the idea of this replacing my long zoom lenses and just being part of a 2 cam solution. I'll need to wait until the release the next one though and they're blowing these out for $500. Because I would want the EVF, and I don't value this camera at $1,300
     
  10. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    Doesnt run counter to anything that I think. I'm still in the market for a larger sensor superzoom and the Panasonic is still top of that list. If Canon ever get with the program and include the EVF as part of the build, and do that before I get the FZ1000 (or FZ2000 as it likely to be by then) then its likely to be there at the top, instead.
     
  11. nippa

    nippa SC Top Veteran

    561
    Aug 7, 2010
    Cheshire UK
    Dennis
    It's interesting that looking at the DPReview studio test shots the actual image quality isn't much to write home about compared to my existing ageing Sony RX100 and Canon G1X.
    The old Canon G1X remains a king of the compact club at all ISOs up to 3200 even with it's limited Dynamic Range of about 11 stops.
    From the AP review , the DR of the new camera appears no better , high ISO noise is worse and lens resolution a less than the G1X which might be OK if I needed the focal length range.

    Strange how progress isn't automatic these days.
     
  12. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    Those results are way different from Reichmann's. I'd tend to go with Luminous Landscape.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Jul 3, 2010
    I'd be very tempted by this camera if it had an integrated EVF.
     
  14. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    I watch the arms-length shooters with amusement, because I'm nearsighted and I hold the LCD screen about 4-5 inches from my eyes. I have to wonder, since I've been doing this for 40-plus years, why people who aren't nearsighted can't have a bifocal or whatever that lets them see the LCD. And I've seen LCD shades for sunlight too.
     
  15. serhan

    serhan SC All-Pro

    May 7, 2011
    NYC
    The G3X range goes with Michael's photography, 2 articles from Lula:
    A Preference for Long Lenses
    https://luminous-landscape.com/make-it-long/
    A New Perspective On Landscape Photography
    https://luminous-landscape.com/a-new-perspective-on-landscape-photography/
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer

    Jul 13, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    Thank heavens we have a superzooms subforum.:dance2:
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer

    Jul 13, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    My eyes concur. That's really impressive. Iso 1600 looked pretty good as well. The clip-on EVF is a problem. You almost need to buy it to use the camera at telephoto FLs.
     
  18. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    Interesting how just as Reichmann discovers his love for the ~600 mm G3x, another landscape photographer is featured who discovered his own neglected need for a long or longer lens for landscapes. I'd guess that this is no coincidence, i.e. that this photographer's essay is intended to buttress Reichmann's. I have to wonder about the longer focal lengths for landscapes though, since the sheer distances involved usually mean much more air between camera and subject than with bird photography etc., and that air isn't always sparkly clean.