campyone wrote:
If I were a 1DIV owner I think I'd be a little POed. The 1DX seems aimed at replacing it, not so much the 1DsIII. Maybe they'll make the 1DsIII owners drool over the one to be announced next. From what little I know right now I wouldn't be the least bit tempted to replace my 1Ds MarkIII with a 1D X.
Au contraire, I think people who appreciate the advantages of 1DIV are most likely to be happy they own it. In fact, there are/will be photographers who will rush to buy an extra mk4 or two before Canon stops making them just because the X does not really replace the mk4 in some areas (like pixel density and autofocus at f/8), besides being significantly more expensive.
Avgjoe wrote:
Do you guys really think that Canon is going to release a Flagship model that will not AF with apertures smaller than f/8. Come on, that is ridiculous. Or am I simply misunderstanding the issue.
Quote:
"AF is unavailable on the EOS-1D X if the maximum aperture reported to the camera through the electronic lens mount is smaller than f/5.6. This is a lower specification than previous EOS-1 series DSLRs. On the plus side, consider the fact that with most f/4 lenses including the 400 DO, 500/4L IS and IS II, and 600/4L IS and IS II, you now have 41 cross-type AF points plus color and face detection, whereas you had no cross-type points and no color or face detection during AF with previous EOS-1 series DSLRs using the same lenses, not to mention a significantly wider AF coverage area from left to right."
Thanks for the clarification and link. It makes much more sense to me now. Certainly a bit of a bummer for birding! Seems that I may need to spend much $$$ for some longer glass.
chrisdee wrote:
Quote:
"AF is unavailable on the EOS-1D X if the maximum aperture reported to the camera through the electronic lens mount is smaller than f/5.6. This is a lower specification than previous EOS-1 series DSLRs. On the plus side, consider the fact that with most f/4 lenses including the 400 DO, 500/4L IS and IS II, and 600/4L IS and IS II, you now have 41 cross-type AF points plus color and face detection, whereas you had no cross-type points and no color or face detection during AF with previous EOS-1 series DSLRs using the same lenses, not to mention a significantly wider AF coverage area from left to right."
dcmiller wrote:
It may AF at F8 and smaller, just not to spec.
Just like ISO above 51000 are not to spec.
No it won't…it'll be disabled just like in every other camera that does not support f/8 AF. Further, I've NEVER found the 'tape method' to give consistent or satisfactory results for AF.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
There is no plus side if you are @ f/8. I don't need AF points at the edge.
It makes you wonder if Canon completrely ignored all the nature photographers when designing the new camera. I'm sure some people will tape the pins, but that shoud not be necessary when there are $1000 cameras out there that AF at f/8 or thereabouts. How difficult would it have been to design a different center point or area next to that? Who will buy a Canon 2x TC now, only the 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 users?
EB-1 wrote:
It makes you wonder if Canon completrely ignored all the nature photographers when designing the new camera. I'm sure some people will tape the pins, but that shoud not be necessary when there are $1000 cameras out there that AF at f/8 or thereabouts. How difficult would it have been to design a different center point or area next to that? Who will buy a Canon 2x TC now, only the 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 users?
EBH
They took that into account when pricing their new 300 and 400mm lenses
EB-1 wrote:
It makes you wonder if Canon completrely ignored all the nature photographers when designing the new camera. I'm sure some people will tape the pins, but that shoud not be necessary when there are $1000 cameras out there that AF at f/8 or thereabouts. How difficult would it have been to design a different center point or area next to that? Who will buy a Canon 2x TC now, only the 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 users?
EBH
I'll bet they say buy a 7D and use it's pixel density for reach.
The only real option is to use a 500 or 600 f/4 and go back to stacked 1.4x TC's. This works very well on 1D II, 1D III for example but you have to use a third party 1.4x TC, so I'll lose the advantages of the new mk III TC. It certainly makes the 800 less desirable as you can't use a TC on that at all now if you need AF. I won't be playing stupid pin taping games.
RobertLynn wrote:
They took that into account when pricing their new 300 and 400mm lenses
The next generation of 7D cannot be too far behind. Assuming even incremental improvements it will be a more practical match when the reach of the 1D-X runs out.
Avgjoe wrote:
Thanks for the clarification and link. It makes much more sense to me now. Certainly a bit of a bummer for birding! Seems that I may need to spend much $$$ for some longer glass.
Mike
This may have been done by design by Canon...
So that photographers MUST buy expensive fast glass or additional bodies?
Is there much of a technical reason why this important feature was left out of a "flagship" body?
Stoffer wrote:
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
yeah that would make a lot more sense
although i still wonder why they needed two digic 5+, maybe so it can do lots of fancier image processing when desired
or for the video scaling (although if it can only drain 18MP FF sensor at 14 fps max that still seems like there could be some line skipping etc.)
EB-1 wrote:
Who will buy a Canon 2x TC now, only the 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 users?
EBH
I think one shouldn't rule out the possibility that Canon USA got some messages mixed up.
After all, the camera is still "fresh", and the real technical knowhow has always been in Japan, and not in USA, Europe or Canada.
The future will tell soon enough. If the limitation is true, that will be a problem.
However, what I, for one, care about more than anything else is AF performance with f/4 and faster lenses. That's were 1DX should earn its keep in my bag......or not.
snapsy wrote:
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).
all the stuff from canon clearer says the two stops is a combo of better tech AND digic 5+ (i.e. DNR garbage) and they don't really hint how much from each, i'd expect it wouldn't be much better than D3s, these cams are near quantum limit for capture (of course better A/D and such could improve DR if oyu don't mess it up after)
PetKal wrote:
I think one shouldn't rule out the possibility that Canon USA got some messages mixed up.
After all, the camera is still "fresh", and the real technical knowhow has always been in Japan, and not in USA, Europe or Canada.
The future will tell soon enough. If the limitation is true, that will be a problem.
However, what I, for one, care about more than anything else is AF performance with f/4 and faster lenses. That's were 1DX should earn its keep in my bag......or not.
Chuck Westfall is adamant this is a result of the new AF system. Can it be changed in six months?
Need to let them know it's a huge step backward.
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.
yeah that makes sense
actually its perhaps even 14fps not just 12
this implies they still need to do some sort of skipping for video though, if not as much as before, unless there is some sort of on sensor bin or something
The lack of f8 is a serious issue and Chuck's response is really pretty lame. As a company rep or salesperson, anytime you have to say "yes, but..." or "On the plus side...." you have a problem.
Especially when he has to talk about face detection on a 500/4 as if it were a significant advantage. Maybe it can take the picture for me when my heron starts smiling.
I also really wanted an on-camera flash commander (it could even be a popup flash or something at the same time ) and articulated screen. Maybe on the 1DsX.
