Opinions on Olympus TG-6 vs Canon G9X vs Canon G7X

Thanks very much to those who replied to my previous thread asking about Olympus TG-6 vs. TG-5. The comments got me thinking and I have a new question...

First - basically I'm a Canon camera person since forever (well, the mid-1970's anyway). From film to digital I've used Canon. My underwater rigs include a Canon A570IS (Ikelite housing), then Canon G16(Ikelite TTL housing) and now a Canon 7D (Nauticam housing).

I love them all but only dive the G16 and 7D now.

However, both are quite bulky. There's no way I'm scootering with the 7D. Even the G16 is very bulky and has considerable drag when scootering.

Which is why I asked about the new TG-6. Except... the pixels & sensor size is pretty small for 2019. In my prior thread I was advised to look at the G7X.

I've looked at the G7X, and that led to the G9X. Both are almost identical cameras, though the G7X has better zoom, aperature and costs more, especially in $CDN. The G9X is smaller.

I can get the G9X with a Fantasea housing for essentially the same price as the TG-6 and Olympus housing. It looks like the G9X is superior in most ways except the microscope mode and lack of 4K video. Though I do a lot of video, in the murky pacific northwest 4K is almost lost. I have a 4K gopro and it's hard to tell the video from my older 1080P gopro video.

But - for $400 more I can get the G7X in a Fantasea housing.

So - question: which would you choose for very compact camera - G7X (Fantasea), G9X (Fantasea) or TG-6 with Olympus housing?

Again, thanks in advance.

One of the Canons, for sure, if only because you can't shoot manual with the TG-6.

You will not be dissapointed with the G7X. You might be with the G9X. It is very easy for me to spend YOUR money....

Be aware that G9X is primarily touchscreen-driven, which makes using it inside a housing very cumbersome. Read the Fantasea manual for more details.

If you're diving with a DSLR, then TG-series camera controls may also feel limited - there is no aperture, and you can't set shutter speed.

Among these three, G7X (II) is probably the best choice. You may also want to reach across the aisle for Sony RX100 series.

Edit: Back in Canon-land, you may also want to consider M-series mirrorless. EOS M100 is about the same size as G7X, and you gain APS-C sensor with PDAF over 1" with CDAF. Housings for M-series are scarce, but it looks like there is a company in Italy making a surprisingly affordable aluminium housing for M100.

One of the Canons, for sure, if only because you can't shoot manual with the TG-6.

You will not be dissapointed with the G7X. You might be with the G9X. It is very easy for me to spend YOUR money....

Yea... The funny thing is looking at both Fantasea housings, I like the one for the G9X much better than the one for the G7X. Really minor things, but a definite impression nonetheless.

The G7X is definitely the superior camera, but it's a bit larger, and a lot of the features I won't be using.

For PNW, I need very good to excellent low-light focus, macro close-up focussing and 1080p video. I do have a wet lens for super macro, but I prefer simple close focus most of the time. You don't have to get all that close to a wolf eel to have it fill the frame. :-)

I would also consider a EM5 II or EM1 II from Olympus. You can get a good deal now and these are both amazing options (and the EM5 not so bulky with Olympus housing)...

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Very good to excellent low-light focus is... difficult to achieve with CDAF, which depends on good light much more than PDAF. To the best of my knowledge though, the only fixed-lens compacts that offer PDAF are Sony RX100V, Sony RX100VA, Sony RX100VI, Fujifilm XF10 and Ricoh GR III. There is also Sony RX1R II, but that stretches the definition of a 'compact'. On the other hand, there are multiple APS-C sensor mirrorless cameras that are barely, if any, larger than most compacts with on-sensor PDAF that comes pretty close to DSLRs' dedicated PDAF arrays.

The G7X is clearly ahead of the TG-6, you can make the TG-6 work but controls are quite limited for example you can put in Av at f2.8 (or f2) and set flash to forced and it will shoot TTL flash at 1/30 f2.8 unless it's particularly bright, so suppressing natural light can be a challenge you can set flash exp comp to max -ve and shoot manual flash to try and force it to do what you want, but can't directly reduce shutter speed. For the list of pros and cons there is a review of best compacts on backscatter to look through: https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Backscatter-Best-Underwater-Compact-Cameras just scroll down to best advanced compact.

The G9x II will capture 74 x 41 mm frame at closest focus at 28mm equiv, while the G7X -II will achieve 83 x 55 at the wide setting. Max magnification for G7X II is about 0.25x at 42mm equivalent. Data is not easy to find and relies on post in places like DPReview where people have posted their own tests. The min focus distance gets longer as you zoom in so max magnification is not at max zoom. Depending on what you are shooting you might find a wet macro lens gives you better working distance?? It might be worth playing with the cameras at a store to see which one gets to the size you want the easiest?

ChrisRoss,

Thanks. Sadly I'm nowhere near a camera store, and land use is not the goal. Typically my UW cameras almost never get land use - I have dedicated land cameras for that. :-)

Here's where I'm at at the moment: The G7X is arguably the much better camera (lens, focus/F-stop/zoom) than the Gx9, but all the pictures and videos of the Fantasea housings show the G7X housing is honkin' large compared to the G9X housing and the Olympus + housing.

While the G7X is arguably superior to the G16, I have a complete G16/Ikelite TTL rig with dual handle trays, DS51 and Sola1200 for video. It's perfectly good for when I'm scootering adn can't/won't take the Canon 7D / Nauticam rig.

The problem is that scootering with the G16 is still a pain - the camera is clipped off to a chest d-ring and even moving it out of the slipstream, it bangs about and slows me down compared to my buddy with similar gear but a Canon S95 /Ikelite housing. That thing is much smaller and easier to carry.

I've used the G16 rig with scooter for three years now (more before the scooter) and it's ... OK. I managed to prop-foul the sync cord twice when I was getting used to the scooter, but not in a long time now. Again, it works - it's just really bulky.

I've also taken go-pro clones either mounted on the scooter (from awful to acceptable depending on mount location) and also on a video tray I have (with the SOLA on a short loc-line). That was better for slipstream, but the gopro is a terrible photo camera, IMO. Fine video, but even there I'd rather use the G16 HD than gopro HD, just for the lens quality.

I run the G16 (and the 7D) in macro mode all the time. Our water is so... mucky that I only get a couple of wider-angle shots per year. I've also got a close-up lens for the G16 but that makes it even MORE bulky, so I don't take it... pretty much ever.

I like the size of the Olympus housing, and the overall price of the kit. But the camera performance isn't really "there" for 2019, and the housing is not as deep rated (I do take things to 150ft+ on occasion). I like the size of the G9X housing MUCH better than the G7X housing (it's really close to "big" territory) but acknowledge the G7X is the superior camera.

Fortunately, as I do have a decent scootering camera now (just not 'optimal'), I can always simply wait for the next generation "best thing".

ChrisRoss,

Thanks. Sadly I'm nowhere near a camera store, and land use is not the goal. Typically my UW cameras almost never get land use - I have dedicated land cameras for that. :-)

 

Here's where I'm at at the moment: The G7X is arguably the much better camera (lens, focus/F-stop/zoom) than the Gx9, but all the pictures and videos of the Fantasea housings show the G7X housing is honkin' large compared to the G9X housing and the Olympus + housing.

 

While the G7X is arguably superior to the G16, I have a complete G16/Ikelite TTL rig with dual handle trays, DS51 and Sola1200 for video. It's perfectly good for when I'm scootering adn can't/won't take the Canon 7D / Nauticam rig.

 

The problem is that scootering with the G16 is still a pain - the camera is clipped off to a chest d-ring and even moving it out of the slipstream, it bangs about and slows me down compared to my buddy with similar gear but a Canon S95 /Ikelite housing. That thing is much smaller and easier to carry.

 

I've used the G16 rig with scooter for three years now (more before the scooter) and it's ... OK. I managed to prop-foul the sync cord twice when I was getting used to the scooter, but not in a long time now. Again, it works - it's just really bulky.

 

I've also taken go-pro clones either mounted on the scooter (from awful to acceptable depending on mount location) and also on a video tray I have (with the SOLA on a short loc-line). That was better for slipstream, but the gopro is a terrible photo camera, IMO. Fine video, but even there I'd rather use the G16 HD than gopro HD, just for the lens quality.

 

I run the G16 (and the 7D) in macro mode all the time. Our water is so... mucky that I only get a couple of wider-angle shots per year. I've also got a close-up lens for the G16 but that makes it even MORE bulky, so I don't take it... pretty much ever.

 

I like the size of the Olympus housing, and the overall price of the kit. But the camera performance isn't really "there" for 2019, and the housing is not as deep rated (I do take things to 150ft+ on occasion). I like the size of the G9X housing MUCH better than the G7X housing (it's really close to "big" territory) but acknowledge the G7X is the superior camera.

 

Fortunately, as I do have a decent scootering camera now (just not 'optimal'), I can always simply wait for the next generation "best thing".

Stop looking at pictures and look at the specs. The G7XII Fantasea housing is about 1mm larger than the G9XII housing.

1mm... In what universe?

Fantasea FG9X: 6.18 x 4.57 x 4.1” 157 x 116 x 103 mm

Fantasea FG7X: 6.3 x 4.33 x 4.92” 160 x 110 x 125 mm

FG7X is therefore 3mm longer, 6mm shorter, 22mm thinner. (almost an inch thinner)

Thinner does make a difference to me.

This is in the comparison specs found on Fantasea's site:

http://www.fantasea.com/downloads/UW_Compacts_Cameras_Housings_ComparisonHighlight.pdf

 

1mm... In what universe?

Fantasea FG9X: 6.18 x 4.57 x 4.1” 157 x 116 x 103 mm

Fantasea FG7X: 6.3 x 4.33 x 4.92” 160 x 110 x 125 mm

 

FG7X is therefore 3mm longer, 6mm shorter, 22mm thinner. (almost an inch thinner)

 

Thinner does make a difference to me.

 

This is in the comparison specs found on Fantasea's site:

http://www.fantasea.com/downloads/UW_Compacts_Cameras_Housings_ComparisonHighlight.pdf

Sorry, I do not know what I was looking at to give that info. If 22mm thinner is really important, I guess you want the TG-6, which is yet another 22mm thinner.

Yea. Turns out the TG-6 & housing is substantially less expensive as well if I buy it from the right place.

Yea. Turns out the TG-6 & housing is substantially less expensive as well if I buy it from the right place.

You've moved the goalposts enough that it is hard to beat the TG-6 and Olympus housing.....the prime criteria now seem to be price and size.

I hope you can be satisfied with the picture quality and operating limitations of that system.

Every camera or system has limitations. For a compact camera, I’ve been very happy with the TG series.