i've had a m10, but it fell over with a tripod
yes they are easyer to get and cheaper than most g1x at this moment, lens creates much less distortion and so on, but too much MB's per picture and i doubt the lasting quality of the build and stabilty of the software....it's just not (yet) there for real long runs. (100.000 clicks is about a month with me, 12 cams a year?)
it's only that the g1x has higher compression than the s95, s100 and s110 that it still is within my reach for an SD card setup....alas not in superfine, and absolutely not in RAw, but the best i can do.
but for my purpose and application actually those s100/s110 type cams are the better choice, love to get my hands on a batch of those (because they last a lot shorter than the s95 all s100/s110 die by lens error with me) but becoming even more rare than the g1x.
using an M10 or g7x (my preferred choice for upgrading without calling it sony) would involve developing the idea of downloading while running the interval shooting from the camera or a remote shoot setup.
the first is out of my capabilities, the second is something i'm looking into (multicam/rawopint) but has it's own limitations that i'm not sure about.
But you are right if i can't solve this focus issue i won't use the g1x for this and it will end up in the drawer. and i'd trade it in a heartbeat for one or more s cams
rather solve it though
so i'll be rewriting my test once again to try to pin down the MF some more.
in MF i can't do better than within 3 CFP at the far end of focus with the available data, but that's good enough for my purpose.
and it's probably as close as the g1x can do.
since i'm down to my last S95 i've at least secured a replacement when my current cam fails.