Let me help you with that one poll option as others have mentioned; PRO - no articulating screen. That would have been something giving me serious pause considering it. Keep that stuff in prosumer models. I want as robust a body as possible and you can't cheat the laws of physics; openings are always a risk of downfall for dust/moisture between materials fatigue/mating to operator error. No thanks for that in a 1D boby.
omarlyn wrote:
Which individual feature of the new 1D X do you find to be the most satisfying or disappointing for you?
Omar, I like to believe that the new AF system of 1DX is a big PRO, not a CON of that camera.
Yet, a big sobering thought is that it has to actually perform as described (intended) by Canon, as verified independently in the field.
If the f/5.6 AF limit is true, that will have little to no impact on those who do fast action photography. Those folks need a fast and agile camera of the 1DX type in order to use it with FAST lenses such as f/2.8 and perhaps f/4. Trying to photograph fast action with f/8 combos is not a very productive nor a common pursuit. Therefore, that all sounds very good, and the f/5.6 AF limit would be of little consequence there.
Yet, if Westfall's note on the f/5.6 AF limit is legit, then that would open up another line of questions. Why wouldn't Canon state up front that such change has been made and the rationale for it is such as such ? Did they perhaps think that change was irrelevant so it wouldn't be noticed or worth writing about? They have published ample literature on the 1DX features and capabilities, with a particular emphasis on all changes wrt the previous 1D generation. The f/5.6 AF limit should have been clearly articulated as a change somewhere in there, I think. Well, maybe it was and I had missed it ?
Instead they spend money and effort on such things like a video with that formula one photographer, which video I find painfully devoid of any useful, or even intelligent, 1DX technical/operational contents.
The higher ISO is a feature I want badly, doing a lot of low light photography, but I also have used TC's with my f/4 and f/5.6 lenses, and lack of f/8 AF is a deal breaker. I'll skip it, a 5D MK III will likely have what I need (except for f/8 AF).
Why are so many people complaining about the cost? People need to accept the fact that the US Dollar and Euro is getting so much weaker than the Yen.
It is about 16% cheaper now than when the Mark IV or Nikon D3s was announced. If you apply that to the $6800 price tag, we are actually paying around $5700. If you introduce the rate of inflation for the last couple of years, it's like buying the Mark IV when it was announced.
I would hate it when emerging markets catch up on us. Our dollar would be like pennies now.
Killergoalie wrote:
CON: ULTRA HIGH ISO CAPABILITY! (NO ONE NEEDS ISOs SO FREAKIN' HIGH!!)
You need to get out more...errr, rather INside more.
Try shooting at some venues where flash is not allowed, you're already at ISO3200, using at 200/1.8 prime and still only getting 1/250th shutter speed.
Is ISO-51,200 needed, not necessarily, but it does mean that ISO16,000 is very usable so as to get 1/500th and use a 70-200/2.8 zoom. And yet ISO32,000 is available to me if I want to stop some fast moving action at 1/1000th. Again, these are USABLE ISO ranges with noise levels that are acceptable.
Indeed, in the short term, I do not expect 1DMkIV to drop much in price either.
However, eventually the "pixel-per-duck-I-love-crop" crowd will calm down and start reaching for the latest and greatest. Then, the MkIV price should follow the usual price decline.
(If you remember, the same consumers contined to gobble up 1DMkIII even after it had bacome patently evident that many camera copies were NFG.)
PetKal wrote:
Indeed, in the short term, I do not expect 1DMkIV to drop much in price either.
However, eventually the "pixel-per-duck-I-love-crop" crowd will calm down and start reaching for the latest and greatest. Then, the MkIV price should follow the usual price decline.
(If you remember, the same consumers contined to gobble up 1DMkIII even after it had bacome patently evident that many camera copies were NFG.)
I think with the 1D X we'll have to start talking about something a bit larger: pixels per pelican would become the new standard.
PetKal wrote:
Indeed, in the short term, I do not expect 1DMkIV to drop much in price either.
However, eventually the "pixel-per-duck-I-love-crop" crowd will calm down and start reaching for the latest and greatest. Then, the MkIV price should follow the usual price decline.
(If you remember, the same consumers contined to gobble up 1DMkIII even after it had bacome patently evident that many camera copies were NFG.)
I agree, sort of. I'm a proponent of PPD, but at the same time, I dumped my 7D and 1DIII to get a 1DIV. More PPD than the 1DIII, better AF than the 7D. I think the 1DIV is a sweet spot in the EOS lineup. Sort of like the 5D, but different.
I think this camera is surely marketed at photojournalists and sports shooters or people that want a do-it-all body. People that want something for birding/wildlife will still need a 1D mk4 replacement and people that shoot landscape at low ISO's who want high MP surely will still be wanting 5D mk3 or 1Dsmk4. This has got to be an addition to the line not a replacement right?
I voted for the high iso but I would only use high iso for birding if I had one but I wouldn't get one because of the reduced pixel density.
This is not what a landscape photographer or studio photographer or macro photographer or architecture photographer really needs. The two camera line-up made sense, a single jack-of-all-trades does not. It's a 1D IV replacement at best. Most of the stuff is overkill for the majority of photographers. Some will say the 5D III will fill that role now, but it won't be 1 series or have it's build, longevity, AF etc. Those features are important to many. Unless the 5d III suddenly becomes more like a digital EOS 1V, then they will have a hole in their line-up IMO.
