G1X Mark II vs m43

kkx

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
13
I have two question.

First question, that's the real life difference in IQ and usability of the Canon G1X M2 and the current m43 cameras? For the big pro would be a fast, a versatile lens, but would lack a viewfinder. Also, the sensor quality is not top notch, being beaten by the smaller RX100 sensor.

My main issue is seeing the price of the G1X and some pretty good picture out of it, it's hard to justify the price difference of a body and multiple lens. m43 only remains more flexible.

How in the world Canon can make such a versatile and fast lens for so cheap? I assume it's closer to the sensor, which would help.

I simplify of course, what's your take on that?
 

Serhan

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
575
Location
NYC
By increasing the digital auto distortion correction from 9% in Mark I to 14.4% in Mark II. Here is the review at lenstip's polish site:
Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II - camera test: Optics

In comparison m43 auto lens corrections are usually btw 4-6% range on the wide end of the zoom lenses/primes...

How in the world Canon can make such a versatile and fast lens for so cheap? I assume it's closer to the sensor, which would help.

I simplify of course, what's your take on that?
 

kkx

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
13
What would be the IQ impact of the digital correction? It's a fairly non-destructive process IMO, so any downside of applying a huge distortion correction?
 

Serhan

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
575
Location
NYC
The corner sharpness drop, but for me it is people/head shots on the edges or full body shots stretches and do not look right. I shoot jpg and raw and windows preview for both shows the difference esp with m43 and RX100. I don't correct that if I have the choice, but 14.4% is high...

What would be the IQ impact of the digital correction? It's a fairly non-destructive process IMO, so any downside of applying a huge distortion correction?
 

Lunatique

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
133
Location
Lincoln, CA
I actually tested the G1X Mark II, RX100 II, and the E-M1 with the 12-40 Pro, and I wrote reviews comparing the three of them, and explained why I ended up choosing the E-M1 over the other two cameras. Here are the reviews:

G1X Mark II
http://www.amazon.com/review/R1H83DLB5CIXDE/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

RX100 II
http://www.amazon.com/review/RNHYJZ01MYVU1/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

E-M1
http://www.amazon.com/review/R2KADWQS2KXJU2/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

The tl;dr version is basically that in terms of AF speed, accuracy, response time, and overall performance, the E-M1 is simply in a different league, and much closer to a professional camera than the other two cameras in terms of performance and feature set. In terms of image quality, they're close enough that it really doesn't matter too much, except that the smaller sensor of the RX100 II will not give as much DOF control, and the lens on the G1X Mark II gets a bit slower at the long end compared to a constant f/2.8 or fast primes.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom