And it's not like the camera is particularly svelte, so why the skimpy grip? Canon offers an optional grip, the GR-DC1A ($30, £n/a, AU$65), but seriously - the camera is already $800. Most notably, my thumb drags over the AF-frame button followed by the dial, and the next thing I know the AF frame has scooted across the screen. While it's not that big a problem if you shoot "properly" - bracing it under the lens with your left hand - I do a lot of impromptu single-handed shooting, and it doesn't feel very secure.Įven if you always use two hands, I find I fumble a little more than usual, and accidentally change settings. It's heavier than its predecessor, but the bigger problem is the small, rubberized grip is simply insufficient for holding it. The camera's design is more streamlined and conventional than the G1 X, and if it weren't for the slight grip I probably wouldn't have any problem with it. The two rings on the lens are one of the high points of the G1XM2's design. The touch screen feels responsive, and you can use it for navigating though your quick-access settings - though you still have to pull them up via the Func button - navigating and zooming during playback, and touch focus and touch shutter. Though I vastly prefer using an eye-level viewfinder, the G1 X Mark II's LCD performs well in sunlight, so if you don't want to add another $300 or so to the price of the camera, you don't really have to. The continuous autofocus does a pretty good job with subjects moving toward you, but the tracking autofocus, which you need for subjects passing through the frame, only works with touch AF.
Frequently, though, it behaves like most full-auto AF, and focuses on whatever's nearest. The auto-autofocus system - Canon's AiAF - generally works OK, mostly because it errs on the side of picking tons of focus areas and doesn't really grab faces unless they're more-or-less facing you. While that isn't particularly fast, it is better than its predecessor.Īs for continuous shooting, it maintains 3fps JPEG and 0.8fps raw for more than 20 frames with autofocus enabled. (I hate leaving a camera in C-AF mode since it eats up battery life, and the lens makes noise as it constantly moves.) It takes about 1 second for two consecutive JPEGs and 1.3 seconds for consecutive raws - that jumps to about 2 seconds with flash enabled. On the upside, the focusing system doesn't hunt a lot from shot to shot, even if you turn off the default continuous autofocus setting. Much of the time in low-contrast conditions I'd get the "can't focus" icon, sometimes for reasons that I couldn't figure out. And occasionally, even in good light, the lens would ratchet a little before locking, which would result in missed shots.įocusing and shooting in dim light is exceptionally slow, at 1.3 seconds. Time to focus and shoot in good light runs just under 0.8-second that's really slow, given that most of the competition is at 0.4-second or better. It takes almost 1.6 seconds to power on, focus, and shoot, which is actually on the fast side for enthusiast-compact cameras - they tend to be a sluggish bunch overall. I don't have direct comparison numbers for the G1 X (that was tested using older methodology), but I can say generally that it's slower in some aspects - notably shot lag - but faster at shot-to-shot and continuous-shooting performance. The lens may have a fast aperture, but it doesn't move that quickly, and I occasionally missed shots waiting for the autofocus to lock. (ISO 800) Lori Grunin/CNETīy the time I got to the lab testing, I knew the G1XM2 was slow - and the testing confirmed my gut feeling.
#Canon powershot g1 x mark ii or g7 x iso
Canon's noise processing leaves yellow splotches in patterned areas like these in midrange ISO sensitivity images.
0 kommentar(er)
