Specularist wrote:
I think this camera is quite interesting, though I have no use for it (I'm a Nikon shooter with no money!).
It's interesting because it's evidence of serious investment by Canon in technologies that will be rendered obsolete with the demise of the SLR. That shows Canon believes SLRs will thrive for many years to come.
Watch " target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this slow-motion video of a Nikon D3 shooting at 11 frames per second, showing rippling carbon-fibre, aluminium and Kevlar. To get that to work, all this (and more) had to happen. This is hard. Nikon and Canon make it look easy, because when the technology launches in a product it generally works well. That doesn't mean it was easily achieved.
Other technologies show-cased here are new too: a seemingly all-new full-frame sensor, with a new readout design that I expect to be significantly better than any previous Canon implementation (less shadow noise); a new shutter good for a record 400,000 actuations; a new autofocus system; a new metering system; new video features; a new transparent LCD viewfinder overlay, matched with officially interchangeable focusing screens; Ethernet; GPS integration; etc.
Presumably it also benefits from the best viewfinder on the market, the best build quality on the market, and the best system support, much like the 1Ds Mark III before it.
These features combined do show that Canon made a big effort here. The parallels with Nikon's 2007 launch of the D3 are obvious. The 12-megapixel D3 and D300 are analogous to the 18-megapixel 1D X and 7D, except Nikon is now out of date (they'll be back of course; with Nikon and Canon it's practically a rule that the player with the most to announce lets the other announce first).
The price is also suggestive of a cosy one-two with Nikon. With more than two colluding players, these prices would be history. With 6800 dollars you can buy a new small car, ten enthusiast-class SLR cameras, six MacBook Pro computers, a Gaggia Deco espresso machine, or other things of obviously higher value than a 1D X. But this is a failure of competition law rather than Canon....Show more →
yeah i think it's the drop out of FF from sony, sony had them price scared, without that, they are free to charge what they can try to get away with which i suppose it no surprise
i do wonder a little in this age how many not utterly top tier PJs can afford the new mark ii lenses and 6800 bodies, maybe they baalnce the lesser sales that would occur no matter the price point with the poor econ and print media situation and it all evens out for them
ohsnaphappy wrote:
I've always wanted to make the jump from the 5D to the 1D, but I'm not sure this is the time to do it. If the next 5D has half the specs it would be pretty compelling. You know, half the iso, half the focus points, half the fps. I don't mean literally half, because I doubt the next 5D will be 6fps But just the idea that the next 5D will be nearly half as good as this, and at less than half the price, makes me want to wait.
But I've always wanted to own a 1D. Hmmm. Right now I'm more interested in picking up a 200MM f2 than this new 1D. Tough decisions ahead...Show more →
i'd be stunned if the next 5D can't do 6fps any less would be left in the dust
1. It will have an electronic first curtain shutter (like the 5D2 does, the 1D4 does not).
2. It will have the same kind of translucent LCD overlay in the viewfinder like the 7D does
3. "By way of example, he says that an ISO 51,200 photo from the EOS-1D X shows roughly equivalent noise levels to an ISO 12,800 photo taken with the EOS-1D Mark IV." Where the 'he' is Chuck Westfall
4. AF sensitivity extended down to -2 EV (it was -1 EV for the 1D3, 1Ds3, 1D4)
skibum5 wrote:
one odd thing is they claim 18MP was needed because they can't drive more MP at 12fps and yet 7D already does 18MP and 8fps and 1D4 16MP at 10fps and digic 5+ is supposed to be a huge boost relative to past generation compared to the past and yet the 18*12 they get is only the same increase they had in the past so something doesn't add up, maybe the extra jpg CA, DNR etc. takes a lot of power or it was really other factors like chip read and so on
As far as I understand it, the bottleneck isn't so much the speed of the image processor(s), it is more a question about how fast they can "drain" a big full-frame sensor of image data. Small sensors are apparently faster to deal with. I'm no engineer so please don't ask me to explain
thedigitalbean wrote:
3. "By way of example, he says that an ISO 51,200 photo from the EOS-1D X shows roughly equivalent noise levels to an ISO 12,800 photo taken with the EOS-1D Mark IV." Where the 'he' is Chuck Westfall
Based on DxOMark's data, the IV's ISO 12,800 is equal to the D3s's ISO 25,600. That means the X will have a one-stop improvement over the D3s if Chuck's metrics haven't changed and if we're talking about raw performance rather than Digic-processed performance (ie noise reduction).
skibum5 wrote:
one odd thing is they claim 18MP was needed because they can't drive more MP at 12fps and yet 7D already does 18MP and 8fps and 1D4 16MP at 10fps and digic 5+ is supposed to be a huge boost relative to past generation compared to the past and yet the 18*12 they get is only the same increase they had in the past so something doesn't add up, maybe the extra jpg CA, DNR etc. takes a lot of power or it was really other factors like chip read and so on
They can get the data off the 7D faster because it's smaller. On a FF sensor the data has further to travel, so to move a given quantity of information the traces have to be run at a much (c. 50%) higher frequency, which is not easy (crosstalk, signal integrity, heat are a few of the issues). Coupled with the Canon ADCs being off chip rather than on and not per photosite, 12 fps is pretty impressive.
1. It will have an electronic first curtain shutter (like the 5D2 does, the 1D4 does not).
2. It will have the same kind of translucent LCD overlay in the viewfinder like the 7D does
3. "By way of example, he says that an ISO 51,200 photo from the EOS-1D X shows roughly equivalent noise levels to an ISO 12,800 photo taken with the EOS-1D Mark IV." Where the 'he' is Chuck Westfall
4. AF sensitivity extended down to -2 EV (it was -1 EV for the 1D3, 1Ds3, 1D4)
Looks like Rob and Chuck have retained their long-time special relationship, even after the 1D MkIII issue.
1. It will have an electronic first curtain shutter (like the 5D2 does, the 1D4 does not).
2. It will have the same kind of translucent LCD overlay in the viewfinder like the 7D does
3. "By way of example, he says that an ISO 51,200 photo from the EOS-1D X shows roughly equivalent noise levels to an ISO 12,800 photo taken with the EOS-1D Mark IV." Where the 'he' is Chuck Westfall
4. AF sensitivity extended down to -2 EV (it was -1 EV for the 1D3, 1Ds3, 1D4)
Looks like Rob and Chuck have retained their long-time special relationship, even after the 1D MkIII issue.
ausemmao wrote:
They can get the data off the 7D faster because it's smaller. On a FF sensor the data has further to travel, so to move a given quantity of information the traces have to be run at a much (c. 50%) higher frequency, which is not easy (crosstalk, signal integrity, heat are a few of the issues). Coupled with the Canon ADCs being off chip rather than on and not per photosite, 12 fps is pretty impressive.
Did you embarass the whale this time?
I made im laugh by saying I was bigger. I made him cry by proving it.
Okay, totally inappropriate, but I just watched the tosh.o video of that lady hanlding the whale's weeny.
I honestly think this was designed more for video. As for stills there's really no great improvement. If you want larger pixels you can get that by picking up an older body. Any IQ difference will be negligible especially after the image is printed.
I find it curious that Canon did not incorporate an articulated LCD screen with the 1DX. Sport shooters & journalist in particular could use such a screen for shooting from the over-head position and it's also good in videography to flip/tilt the screen as per your shooting needs.
Someone else agrees! I think that a "motor grip battery thingamajingy" is just stupid.
Not to beat a dead horse (since Canon didn't do this anyway), but this has nothing to do with film or motor drives, it has to do with the power source.
Example: the Nikon D700 shoots at 5fps native, and at 8fps with the MB-D10 using EN-EL4 batteries. You get compact handling most of the time, or faster frame rate when you need it. You may think it's stupid, both Nikon designers apparently don't.
Of course, if you feel better being snarky, go for it.
garyvot wrote:
Not to beat a dead horse (since Canon didn't do this anyway), but this has nothing to do with film or motor drives, it has to do with the power source.
Example: the Nikon D700 shoots at 5fps native, and at 8fps with the MB-D10 using EN-EL4 batteries. You get compact handling most of the time, or faster frame rate when you need it. You may think it's stupid, both Nikon designers apparently don't.
Of course, if you feel better being snarky, go for it.
But just the idea that the next 5D will be nearly half as good as this, and at less than half the price, makes me want to wait.
