Canon G1X Mark II

I'm wondering what peoples thoughts on this are:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0528662139/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii-a-quick-summary

I've been using smaller-sensor G series cameras for a while. It looks like this camera will fix the earlier G1X macro issue. And they are constantly comparing it to an SLR, so if it manages to fix the no TTL in manual problem, then this may be my next camera. That's my biggest complain with the current G series.

This seems like a nice step between the G series and the u4/3 cameras in terms of functionality.

It would be a direct competition to Sony's RX100 series. It may be attractive enough that some M3/4 would switch over.

I have not looked into the Sony cameras. I probably should. I've always thought I would upgrade to an Oly 4/3 system. But with 120mm equivalent and 40cm minimum focus, this seems like an adequate macro capability out of the box. The big question that's not answered yet is the flash flexibility. For me, manually adjusting the output power of both Inons slows me down quite a bit.

... But with 120mm equivalent and 40cm minimum focus, this seems like an adequate macro capability out of the box. ...

There was also mention of a special macro mode going down to 5cm focus distance. A lot of the changes, including aperture and AF speed, seemed promising for UW use but I am curious if housing makers will find it tricky to support the dual control rings around the lens barrel.

Bart

 

There was also mention of a special macro mode going down to 5cm focus distance. A lot of the changes, including aperture and AF speed, seemed promising for UW use but I am curious if housing makers will find it tricky to support the dual control rings around the lens barrel.

 

Bart

If you look at the specs on the Canon USA site, you'll see the close focus distance is 5cm at the wide end and 40cm at the telephoto end. You'll also see that the Macro mode doesn't change these #'s, but limits the focus distance to 50cm. I presume to increase focusing speed/reduce hunting. My G12 and G15 behave the same way and I basically just leave Macro mode off. That limit is just not usually worth it.

On the dials, I hope it's OK. Canon is making a housing so if they can turn the dials, I would hope one of the aluminum manufacturers could figure out how to do the same.

Definitely look at the Sony RX100. Takes amazing shots if you are willing to go through the learning curve and deal with its idiosyncrasies. I was a long time G11 user and the lack of WA wet lenses drove me to the Sony.

Not seen the G1X II in the flesh but the big zoom range could be a problem for housing makers. When the lenses extend/retract "long" distances finding wet WA lenses can also be a issue. Pure speculation without seeing in.

Yeah, I would hope 24mm is long enough for a start and then that something like the Inon's built for Gxx cameras would work. But yes, at some point will have to make a decision which would include OM-D or a large sensor compact.

Well, I have the Panasonic LX-7 and it too suffer from the limitation of WA lens choices. The Nauticam Wet Mate helped a bit but is not truly wide angle.

I'm in the process of trying something: Using a land wide angle for underwater use. This is what I just purchased for about $90:

http://www.nofrillscameras.com.au/opteka-67mm-large-element-fish-eye-lens

If it works, it will be applicable to the Canon G series. It has 140 degree view on land, I expect it to get narrow under water, but still should be wider than the Nauticam Wet mate. The Opteka rear element is big at almost 67mm. This thing is quite heavy. The only question is how is its image/sharpness quality, and how it will hold up under water. For less than $100, I pulled the plug and went for it. I won't be able to go to the pool to try the Opteka lens until mid-March. I'm in the cold Midwest Kansas here getting in and out of pool and car ride is not fun!

BTW, I did consider the Opteka 0.3x lens just in case if the angle get more narrow once it's in the water, and it's cheaper, but the biggest they make is 58mm, so I avoided that.

The main problem on the Canon G or S series can be the rather slow autofocus under water, BUT

they are excellent small cameras above water makeing them a good choice for all uses.
I used the G11 and G12 and i think that the G1X MKII could be a great camera to build a ultrasmall rig like the G12 in a FIX Fisheye housing.
If a intelligent manufacturer make a small housing with a bajonet attachment for the INON wet wide angle and it's dome port the G1X should arrive

at 140-160° fov, but this depend of the design of the housing.
Ryan from Reef Photo and Video should be informed if FIX or RecSea are planning a housing for the G1X MKII as he ist the specialist for their housings

I think that i will get a G1X MKII as replacement for my G12 in a Patima housing as this camer has all details to become a real winner above water and i need

a camera for both worlds.

Chris

Fix doesn't do any housing anymore they are all nauticam. There was already some attempt to attach a wet lens to generation I of this camera and results were poor not only the focus but the zoom issue and distance to port that is unchanged. Fix at the time aborted the development of the housing in public on their Facebook page so am not sure anyone will bother. Right now the sony rx100 is the high end compact to have and everyone is selling many housing for it and focussing their energy on few other models of canon G or a series.

I'm wondering what peoples thoughts on this are:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0528662139/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii-a-quick-summary

 

I've been using smaller-sensor G series cameras for a while. It looks like this camera will fix the earlier G1X macro issue. And they are constantly comparing it to an SLR, so if it manages to fix the no TTL in manual problem, then this may be my next camera. That's my biggest complain with the current G series.

 

This seems like a nice step between the G series and the u4/3 cameras in terms of functionality.

The manual is now posted on Canon USA's site. The manual flash is again limited to 3 steps, so operationally this is not an improvement.