has posted RAW images of the new Canon G1X and they are impressive. Again, the sensor impresses, the lens, notsomuch. It gets very soft at the edges at longer lengths. At less extreme distances, the lens appears to be quite sharp, but all things considered, it disappoints a bit for the price. I don't expect razor-sharp images for the price, but I do expect something usable.
The sensor is very impressive. The JPEG images posted by Focus Numerique line up nicely with the results on DPReview. Basically, the sensor in the Canon outperforms the Panasonic GX1 and GH2 at all ISO's. From ISO800 and up, the difference is nearly a full stop. Lower ISO's reveal that Canon appears to cooking its RAW's, but with even that taken into account, this camera nearly dances toe-to-toe with full APS-C cameras.
DxOMark shows that some of the best elements of the RAW files, such as extended color depth and dynamic range, even with the camera's good noise performance, are where the smaller sensor falls down. The disappointing DxO performance puts this at the top of the 4/3 world, but still behind the larger SLR and NEX pack.
I'm feeling that I can make a decent determination of the camera, and while it's not terrible, it's not good. All of the benefits of owning a Canon are obviously there, workflow will be good, interface and controls will be excellent, and available accessories are unmatched. But even considering that, the price is just way too high. I'm sure that it will sell well. Hell, the Nikon V1/J1 sold well, and it's a ridiculously over-priced camera.
If the lens was faster, the $800 price point would be more reasonable. Combined with some pretty significant softness at the far end of the lens, I just can't see through to such a price premium. If the camera was $100 cheaper, it would be much better positioned. But, again, that's from the perspective of a camera freak, and as Nikon proved with the V1/J1, an overpriced camera, well-marketed, can still sell like gangbusters.