This topic is in the 2011 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2011EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
p.35 #1EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
ausemmao wrote:
Whiteknight time
The buffer is horrible, yes. But it's not as horrible as initially thought. you get a second and a half of shooting in RAW/RAW+JPEG Fine, versus just over a second on a 60D and 2 seconds on a 7D. And it clears faster than the 60D with UHS-I cards. In other words, it's actually better than its direct competition and competitive with the class above.
It does track well. I shoot wakeboarding and capoeira quite often, and my in focus rate is nice and high, often higher than a couple of the 7D shooters at the lake (though...Show more →
I highly doubt you'll see your desired bodies from canon ( the ones you list). How many product lines would that be?
Rebel, xxd, 5 series, 3 series, 1 series, 7 series.
and yet nikon keeps putting better and better AF into all their models, i see say the D7000 even tracks better than the 7D
come on, 5D needs serious best effort AF
anyway:
1DX 18MP, super speed 12-14fps, FF, giant brick
5D3 34MP, 6.3fps, prior 1 series level AF at the worst, FF, compact with optional grip
or maybe the latter split to
5D3 38MP4-6fps, prior 1 series level AF, FF, video with a bit of line skipping but a little better than on current models
3D 26-28MP, 6.3fps, prior 1 series AF at worst, FF, flawlessly sampled video
5 and 3 series small bodies with optional grips
the truly serious sports shooters need 8fps min so they have to get 1DX so 1Dx is protected for it's main target market (although the way canon talks they make it sound like they want the 1Ds crowd to all get 1DX instead of D800/5D3/3D but I don't see how that will hold up)
Hmm, I don't know what to say.
I shoot MMA in dog crap for lighting areas, and the 7D doesn't let me down. different strokes for different folks. I certainly outperform nikon d300/s shooters.
Whiteknight time
The buffer is horrible, yes. But it's not as horrible as initially thought. you get a second and a half of shooting in RAW/RAW+JPEG Fine, versus just over a second on a 60D and 2 seconds on a 7D. And it clears faster than the 60D with UHS-I cards. In other words, it's actually better than its direct competition and competitive with the class above.
It does track well. I shoot wakeboarding and capoeira quite often, and my in focus rate is nice and high, often higher than a couple of the 7D shooters at the lake (though...Show more →
RobertLynn wrote
After working with the d7000 and the 7d I find your findings to be wrong. Also the buffer on the d7000 is crap.I highly doubt you'll see your desired bodies from canon ( the ones you list). How many product lines would that be?
Rebel, xxd, 5 series, 3 series, 1 series, 7 series.
skibum5 wrote
justruss wrote
I expect the 5D follow-up to get better AF-- but not 1-series quality. There's plenty of complaining about the 5Dmk2 here in terms of AF... but for the vast, vast majority of uses, even those professional ones-- and notably those this camera is designed for (not sports)-- the AF is great.come on, 5D needs serious best effort AF
anyway:
1DX 18MP, super speed 12-14fps, FF, giant brick
5D3 34MP, 6.3fps, prior 1 series level AF at the worst, FF, compact with optional grip
or maybe the latter split to
5D3 38MP4-6fps, prior 1 series level AF, FF, video with a bit of line skipping but a little better than on current models
3D 26-28MP, 6.3fps, prior 1 series AF at worst, FF, flawlessly sampled video
5 and 3 series small bodies with optional grips
the truly serious sports shooters need 8fps min so they have to get 1DX so 1Dx is protected for it's main target market (although the way canon talks they make it sound like they want the 1Ds crowd to all get 1DX instead of D800/5D3/3D but I don't see how that will hold up)
Hmm, I don't know what to say.
I shoot MMA in dog crap for lighting areas, and the 7D doesn't let me down. different strokes for different folks. I certainly outperform nikon d300/s shooters.
Oct 19, 2011 at 02:54 PM
p.35 #2EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
alundeb wrote:
Nope.
Well, not supported officially. They will still attempt to focus though the reliability of it is questionable at best.The choice of attempting to focus or not with f/8 aperture is a decision implemented in firmware. Canon have the possibility to change this before the 1D X hits the shelves. They have probably tested focus with f/8 and found it problematic. Instead of receiving critical tests and bad reputation when the camera comes out, they have gone the safe route.
Maybe Canon could distribute an unlock patch if you sign a written agreement that you will use it at your own risk and never complain about the performance of it, publicly or directly....What evidence do you have of this? There are hardware changes in the setup of the actual AF sensor that determine ability to AF with different apertures.The evidence is very simple, you can trick an f/5.6 AF system on any Canon camera to attempt focus with f/8 optics just by fooling the camera with the reported aperture. The taping pins on a TC trick is an example of that.
That's not really evidence. AF at F/8 is inconsistent and very slow on any non-1D bodies. The sensors themselves are designed to detect phase differences at a given degree of convergence on the sensor. F/2.8 sensors are not sensitive to F/1.4 levels of OoP.
Anyhow, the only downsize to increased megapixel count, *ever* is increased filesize and reduced framerate that comes from the computational limits that come with that. You get less noise with increased MP assuming you're actually comparing them correctly.
Sp12 wrote
alundeb wrote
ausemmao wrote
wickerprints wrote
Are any Nikon bodies capable of AF @ f/8?Well, not supported officially. They will still attempt to focus though the reliability of it is questionable at best.
Maybe Canon could distribute an unlock patch if you sign a written agreement that you will use it at your own risk and never complain about the performance of it, publicly or directly....
That's not really evidence. AF at F/8 is inconsistent and very slow on any non-1D bodies. The sensors themselves are designed to detect phase differences at a given degree of convergence on the sensor. F/2.8 sensors are not sensitive to F/1.4 levels of OoP.
Anyhow, the only downsize to increased megapixel count, *ever* is increased filesize and reduced framerate that comes from the computational limits that come with that. You get less noise with increased MP assuming you're actually comparing them correctly.
Oct 19, 2011 at 02:54 PM
p.35 #3EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Sp12 wrote:
That's not really evidence. AF at F/8 is inconsistent and very slow on any non-1D bodies. The sensors themselves are designed to detect phase differences at a given degree of convergence on the sensor. F/2.8 sensors are not sensitive to F/1.4 levels of OoP.
But even if it is inconsistent and slow, it very often works. That proves that f/5.6 sensitive AF sensors react to light from an f/8 lens.
That's not really evidence. AF at F/8 is inconsistent and very slow on any non-1D bodies. The sensors themselves are designed to detect phase differences at a given degree of convergence on the sensor. F/2.8 sensors are not sensitive to F/1.4 levels of OoP.
But even if it is inconsistent and slow, it very often works. That proves that f/5.6 sensitive AF sensors react to light from an f/8 lens.
Oct 19, 2011 at 03:03 PM
p.35 #4EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Yes, in fact they will react with an F16 lens as well. That does not mean they are designed or capable of producing even adequate performance at that light convergence.
Oct 19, 2011 at 03:41 PM
p.35 #5EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Sp12 wrote:
Yes, in fact they will react with an F16 lens as well. That does not mean they are designed or capable of producing even adequate performance at that light convergence.
...I'm not sure I'm understanding your point here. I've made plenty of fine images using what you claim is inadequate/incapable, and there are countless others who have done the same. Slightly slower, less responsive AF is still better than none at all.
Yes, in fact they will react with an F16 lens as well. That does not mean they are designed or capable of producing even adequate performance at that light convergence.
...I'm not sure I'm understanding your point here. I've made plenty of fine images using what you claim is inadequate/incapable, and there are countless others who have done the same. Slightly slower, less responsive AF is still better than none at all.
Oct 19, 2011 at 03:51 PM
p.35 #6EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
alundeb wrote:
But even if it is inconsistent and slow, it very often works. That proves that f/5.6 sensitive AF sensors react to light from an f/8 lens.
but as he says, maybe it wouldn't do it well and the standard to which it would work would be far worse than on the old 1 series so even if they unlock it, it might not really be the same at all
Sp12 wrote
That's not really evidence. AF at F/8 is inconsistent and very slow on any non-1D bodies. The sensors themselves are designed to detect phase differences at a given degree of convergence on the sensor. F/2.8 sensors are not sensitive to F/1.4 levels of OoP.but as he says, maybe it wouldn't do it well and the standard to which it would work would be far worse than on the old 1 series so even if they unlock it, it might not really be the same at all
Oct 19, 2011 at 04:03 PM
p.35 #7EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
M Vers wrote:
...I'm not sure I'm understanding your point here. I've made plenty of fine images using what you claim is inadequate/incapable, and there are countless others who have done the same. Slightly slower, less responsive AF is still better than none at all.
1D III + 100-400L + 1.4x actually has decent AF speed in normal light at least. I wouldn't be shooting barn swallows with it, but I've used it for dragons in flight, larger birds and normal wildlife activities.
Well if they could make a 100-400 f/4 that was under 2kg and $2K, maybe I wouldn't care so much about losing AF @ f/8.
Edited on Oct 19, 2011 at 07:13 PM · View previous versions
Sp12 wrote
Yes, in fact they will react with an F16 lens as well. That does not mean they are designed or capable of producing even adequate performance at that light convergence.1D III + 100-400L + 1.4x actually has decent AF speed in normal light at least. I wouldn't be shooting barn swallows with it, but I've used it for dragons in flight, larger birds and normal wildlife activities.
Well if they could make a 100-400 f/4 that was under 2kg and $2K, maybe I wouldn't care so much about losing AF @ f/8.
Edited on Oct 19, 2011 at 07:13 PM · View previous versions
Oct 19, 2011 at 04:29 PM
p.35 #8EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
On full frame v. 1.3 crop:
skibum5 wrote:
with wider FOV it's easier to see where the bird or player is and should the bird or more likely player happen to come in close an din can come in much closer without getting clipped off (the latter much more common in sports than for birding though)
of course in this case the desnity is lower so cropping from FF 1D X is not the same as shooting with a 1D4, however the composing is easier and better
You make a good point, but different photographers like to work in different ways. I think for a lot of people the keeper rate will be lower composing in the finder, but the compositions will be stronger. It's very similar to the rangefinder/SLR preference. And therefore Canon may be making a mistake in not offering different types of cameras for different people, when they did before.
It's a shame, given they put the LCD overlay in the finder, that there isn't a mode to mask the image to 1.3 in the finder and crop it in the file. Nikon offer this (to 1.5 and 5:4). Maybe Nikon have a patent.
And JPEG shooters on tight deadlines will definitely want to crop in camera and therefore the 1.3 cameras.
skibum5 wrote:
with wider FOV it's easier to see where the bird or player is and should the bird or more likely player happen to come in close an din can come in much closer without getting clipped off (the latter much more common in sports than for birding though)
of course in this case the desnity is lower so cropping from FF 1D X is not the same as shooting with a 1D4, however the composing is easier and better
You make a good point, but different photographers like to work in different ways. I think for a lot of people the keeper rate will be lower composing in the finder, but the compositions will be stronger. It's very similar to the rangefinder/SLR preference. And therefore Canon may be making a mistake in not offering different types of cameras for different people, when they did before.
It's a shame, given they put the LCD overlay in the finder, that there isn't a mode to mask the image to 1.3 in the finder and crop it in the file. Nikon offer this (to 1.5 and 5:4). Maybe Nikon have a patent.
And JPEG shooters on tight deadlines will definitely want to crop in camera and therefore the 1.3 cameras.
Oct 19, 2011 at 06:17 PM
p.35 #9EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
skibum5 wrote:
well lacking EC in m+auto is a kinda of big thing
It is annoying that you can't do it, but for sports, I don't find it a huge difference from shooting in Av + Auto ISO + setting my min shutter-speed. EC does work in that configuration.
rolette wrote
What is missing from the 1D4 to make Auto-ISO "real" for you? The only shortcoming I know of on it is not being able to set EC when in M+Auto-ISO.It is annoying that you can't do it, but for sports, I don't find it a huge difference from shooting in Av + Auto ISO + setting my min shutter-speed. EC does work in that configuration.
Oct 19, 2011 at 06:29 PM
p.35 #10EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Pixel Perfect wrote:
1D III + 100-400L + 1.4x actually has decent AF speed in normal light at least. I would be shooting barn swallows with it, but I've used it for dragons in flight, larger birds and normal wildlife activities.
Yep, it's decent enough. Where it really struggles is finding the initial point of focus from one end of the focus scale to the next and in low contrast situations. Once it locks focus it tracks pretty well.
1D III + 100-400L + 1.4x actually has decent AF speed in normal light at least. I would be shooting barn swallows with it, but I've used it for dragons in flight, larger birds and normal wildlife activities.
Yep, it's decent enough. Where it really struggles is finding the initial point of focus from one end of the focus scale to the next and in low contrast situations. Once it locks focus it tracks pretty well.
Oct 19, 2011 at 07:05 PM
p.35 #12EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
rolette wrote:
well lacking EC in m+auto is a kinda of big thingIt is annoying that you can't do it, but for sports, I don't find it a huge difference from shooting in Av + Auto ISO + setting my min shutter-speed. EC does work in that configuration.
yeah i guess, i don't have a 1 D4 and that is the only one that allow that I think though
skibum5 wrote
rolette wrote
What is missing from the 1D4 to make Auto-ISO "real" for you? The only shortcoming I know of on it is not being able to set EC when in M+Auto-ISO.yeah i guess, i don't have a 1 D4 and that is the only one that allow that I think though
Oct 19, 2011 at 08:08 PM
p.35 #13EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
I think canon should just start offering bodies like dell offers computers. Build your own. I`d choose a 5D body, the sensor fromthe 1D X, a 6fps rate, and 7D auto focus. :-
Seriously, would love this 1D X but cant afford it. I would love to see this sensor in another body , like the 7D Ii or 6D or whatever brian
Seriously, would love this 1D X but cant afford it. I would love to see this sensor in another body , like the 7D Ii or 6D or whatever brian
Oct 19, 2011 at 09:18 PM
p.35 #14EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Does the f/5.6 limit on the 1D-X mean that if I wanted to use my 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4x III it would not AF at f/8........Rich
Edited on Oct 20, 2011 at 07:33 AM · View previous versions
Edited on Oct 20, 2011 at 07:33 AM · View previous versions
Oct 19, 2011 at 10:04 PM
p.35 #15EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Rich Swanner wrote:
Does the f/5.6 limit on the 1D-X mean that if I wanted to use my 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4x III it would not AF at f/8........Rich
Yes.
Does the f/5.6 limit on the 1D-X mean that if I wanted to use my 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4x III it would not AF at f/8........Rich
Yes.
Oct 19, 2011 at 10:11 PM
p.35 #16EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
I think the 1DX will be a great camera, however I also think there are a lot of people that either have different shooting needs or not the budget for this price range. So it will be interesting to see what the demand will be.
As a professional photographer, I have used most of Canon's bodies and prefer most of my shooting with the 5dmkII, strictly on image quality and body size. I would love to see a smaller body like the 5dMKII fully weather sealed, around the same megapixel range, shoot 8 frames per second, and better autofocus.
As a professional photographer, I have used most of Canon's bodies and prefer most of my shooting with the 5dmkII, strictly on image quality and body size. I would love to see a smaller body like the 5dMKII fully weather sealed, around the same megapixel range, shoot 8 frames per second, and better autofocus.
Oct 19, 2011 at 10:14 PM
p.35 #17EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
Didn't dig through the 28 pages... if this has been shared... sorry.... if not... here you go.
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dx/
Hatch
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dx/
Hatch
Oct 19, 2011 at 10:29 PM
p.35 #20EOS 1D-X! March 2012!
jerrykur wrote:
I must have this body!
Hmmm, that's the same phrase I hear muttered whenever an attractive woman looks my way
I must have this body!
Hmmm, that's the same phrase I hear muttered whenever an attractive woman looks my way
Oct 19, 2011 at 10:54 PM