p.3 #1 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the fact that you can't use an Eye-Fi card with a 1Dx, because Eye-Fi cards only come in SD. And, I've heard the CD to SD adapter doesn't really work with this combination.
I have a 1DIV still, and although I love it, I'm tempted by the 1DX (except for the price). But, I just got an Eye-Fi card a few months ago, and I love it. I love the ability to quickly show someone a photo on my camera, and then e-mail it to them instantly. For this reason, along with price, I'm hesitating getting the 1DX. I was tempted when I saw a new 1DX for $6300, but not being able to use my Eye-Fi made be stop.
p.3 #2 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
dorian wrote:
so wait a minute. here's what i'm thinking. i only shoot wildlife (95% birds) and normally only in great light so high iso does not mean a thing to me; its about as useful as a camera with a built in radio as far as i am concerned. i currently have both 1d4 and 7d which i use with my 500/1.4x.
the 5d3 has the same autofocus upgrades as the 1dx, right? so, since i am ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS in a focal length limited situation, and i don't care about high iso since i'm shooting in bright sunlight, why would i, if i were to hypothetically purchase another camera (which i am not looking to do), not go with the 5d3 and its 22.3mp for half of price of the 1dx and its 18mp?
No you are not way off base IMO. Let's not forget the 5D III is also excellent at high ISO, so you aren't giving up much compared to the 1D X in that area. Even the 1D IV has great IQ at least to ISO 3200, so you are hardly losing out there either especially if FL limited in which case the 1D X loses a lot of it's advantage in IQ when you crop hard. A 5D III + 1D IV combo is about same price as 1D X and both give you more reach when FL limited (12% and 26% respectively) and don't give up too much to the 1D X.
IMO if you are stuck with the 500mm and are always FL limited, the 1D X is not the best choice. If you can afford a 600 or 800 then the 1D X will shine if you don't have to crop.
Oct 31, 2012 at 05:56 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
lite25e wrote:
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the fact that you can't use an Eye-Fi card with a 1Dx, because Eye-Fi cards only come in SD. And, I've heard the CD to SD adapter doesn't really work with this combination.
I have a 1DIV still, and although I love it, I'm tempted by the 1DX (except for the price). But, I just got an Eye-Fi card a few months ago, and I love it. I love the ability to quickly show someone a photo on my camera, and then e-mail it to them instantly. For this reason, along with price, I'm hesitating getting the 1DX. I was tempted when I saw a new 1DX for $6300, but not being able to use my Eye-Fi made be stop....Show more →
But how many people buy a super-fast camera, and then like to use super-slow cards in it ?
p.3 #4 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
[
But how many people buy a super-fast camera, and then like to use super-slow cards in it ?
Not sure what you mean. My old eye-fi is class 6 and the new ones are class 10. Mine has no problem shooting at 10fps on my 1dIV. I haven't used it with video, nor would I, as I have bigger cards for that. At least for my shooting, mostly baseball, I take 20 to 25 shots at a clip, and I then wait a while for the next batter, play, etc. do others really find that a class 6 card limits their ability to shoot as quickly as they want to?
p.3 #5 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
jcolwell wrote:
My 1DIV couldn't do this. EF 85/1.2L II on 1DX, handheld, f/2, 1/60 sec, ISO 12800. It was realy, really dark. The light bulb in the distant background was probably 200W.
P.S. I have tons more, but I don't like to post people shots...
and your point about this particular shot is... what ? Excuse me for missing the urgency or immediate value of this image and it's salvation by the 1DX high-iso performance. Just because we "can" doesn't mean it actually adds value, does it ? If we are all suddenly given "x-ray" vision, does it really matter? I do not mean to come across as hostile with this comment... just trying to find a realistic application for our technology advancements going forward. As someone who appreciates a camera that performs well in low-light sport environments, I hold the 1DX in high regard... but I also realize that my particular interests reflect a very low percentage of photographers overall. If the camera adds to your ability to create what you're trying to do capture artistically, great. Otherwise, we're just finding ways to justify the technology and expense we may not need...
p.3 #6 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
D Hall wrote:
and your point about this particular shot is... what ? Excuse me for missing the urgency or immediate value of this image and it's salvation by the 1DX high-iso performance. Just because we "can" doesn't mean it actually adds value, does it ? If we are all suddenly given "x-ray" vision, does it really matter? I do not mean to come across as hostile with this comment... just trying to find a realistic application for our technology advancements going forward. As someone who appreciates a camera that performs well in low-light sport environments, I hold the 1DX in high regard... but I also realize that my particular interests reflect a very low percentage of photographers overall. If the camera adds to your ability to create what you're trying to do capture artistically, great. Otherwise, we're just finding ways to justify the technology and expense we may not need...
The value of these images is for the viewers to judge. You included. Most viewers are close to me - it's a family wedding. You have just justified my normal hesitation to post images like these.
As always, I welcome thoughtful and respectful comments on my posted photos and thoughts. In this case, I really don't know what's eating you. Your psueudo-respectful comment "I do not mean to come across as hostile with this comment... " is a waste of breath. [deleted]
I do not mean to come across as hostile with this comment... YMMV.
p.3 #8 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
jcolwell wrote:
Where did that come from?
The value of these images is for the viewers to judge. You included. Most viewers are close to me - it's a family wedding. You have just justified my normal hesitation to post images like these.
As always, I welcome thoughtful and respectful comments on my posted photos and thoughts. In this case, I really don't know what's eating you. Your psueudo-respectful comment is a waste of breath. KMAMF!
I do not mean to come across as hostile with this comment... YMMV.
My point is simple. You are clearly a very talented photographer. With your skill I am confident you could have made an image comparable, or better, with nearly any camera. Your photo highlights the ability of the 1DX, not you. This is intended as a compliment to you... and acknowledgement that many other less qualified photographers (me included) merely use the newest technology as a crutch to achieve good imaging. BTW, your creative use of acronyms was probably appropriate based on the lack of clarity in my post. I do apologize for any perceived hostility, as none was intended.
p.3 #9 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
D Hall wrote:
..I do apologize for any perceived hostility, as none was intended.
Me too. I apologize for my 'hot' response.
It's often difficult to tell intent from words - although it really shouldn't be. After all, our written words will last much longer than our ability to make up new ones - words that is.
Thanks, Jim
Oct 31, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
Not sure what you mean. My old eye-fi is class 6 and the new ones are class 10. Mine has no problem shooting at 10fps on my 1dIV. I haven't used it with video, nor would I, as I have bigger cards for that. At least for my shooting, mostly baseball, I take 20 to 25 shots at a clip, and I then wait a while for the next batter, play, etc. do others really find that a class 6 card limits their ability to shoot as quickly as they want to?
Class 6 or class 10 SD cards like yours are very slow. Of course you can shoot 10 fps. But only a few seconds until the buffer is full in the camera. Then it will be very very slow after that.
Look at Rob G test and compare the different cards. Even an old and very slow CF card will be much faster. http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_wb_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-10549
p.3 #11 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
Pixel Perfect wrote:
No you are not way off base IMO. Let's not forget the 5D III is also excellent at high ISO, so you aren't giving up much compared to the 1D X in that area. Even the 1D IV has great IQ at least to ISO 3200, so you are hardly losing out there either especially if FL limited in which case the 1D X loses a lot of it's advantage in IQ when you crop hard. A 5D III + 1D IV combo is about same price as 1D X and both give you more reach when FL limited (12% and 26% respectively) and don't give up too much to the 1D X.
IMO if you are stuck with the 500mm and are always FL limited, the 1D X is not the best choice. If you can afford a 600 or 800 then the 1D X will shine if you don't have to crop....Show more →
I agree that 5DMkIII could be a more cost effective camera for wildlife, because the top dog 1DX is so pricey, although it does deliver more features and performance than 5DMkIII. However, I continue to disagree with such narrow definition of "reach" which many "birders" profess.
I prefer to think of camera effectiveness instead, and I am fairly convinced that 1DX is the most effective wildlife (and probably sports, PJ etc.) Canon camera to date. In that sense, it has the best "reach" of all.
As far as being FL limited, my suggestion is to try to unlimit yourself whenever possible at all......that would do much more good for the quality of your images than any fancy cameras or lenses.
p.3 #12 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
PetKal wrote:
As far as being FL limited, my suggestion is to try to unlimit yourself whenever possible at all......that would do much more good for the quality of your images than any fancy cameras or lenses.
Peter I'm not sure I've seen you post images of some of the more skittish birds such as small waders for example. I can assure you they have small tolerance for you getting close no matter how stealthy you may be. If you can get within 30m you have done well. Even with a 7D + 500 + 1.4x you'll be cropping very heavily. 1D X would be a paper weight in this situation.
But let's take a look at less extreme example. Here are some shots of a honey eater and sparrow taken from about 3m away using a 7D and 100-400 @ 400. Even at almost point plank range the shot needed some cropping. With the 1D X I would need a 600 + extension tubes to get similar framing and magnification.
p.3 #15 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
When 1DIV just came out it was selling for close to $5,000.
That was 6x more than what I got for my used 1DMkIIN at that time.
You think that 1DMkIV was that much better than 1DMkIIN ?
Heck, if I thought 1DMkIV was even 50% better I would have sunk my money into it.
p.3 #16 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
PetKal wrote:
When 1DIV just came out it was selling for close to $5,000.
That was 6x more than what I got for my used 1DMkIIN at that time.
You think that 1DMkIV was that much better than 1DMkIIN ?
Heck, if I thought 1DMkIV was even 50% better I would have sunk my money into it.
Yep, I certainly feel that the 1div is 6x the camera that the 1diin is.
p.3 #17 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
RobertLynn wrote:
Yep, I certainly feel that the 1div is 6x the camera that the 1diin is.
I agree 100%. The difference in capabilities of a 1D Mark II or 1D Mark IIN and a 1D Mark IV is significant. The 1D Mark II was a remarkable camera in 2004, but its technology was already getting quite long in the tooth by the time the 1D Mark IV was introduced 5 1/2 years later, and, with regard to AF, ability to resolve detail, high ISO noise, ergonomics, etc., actually using a 1D Mark IV after having used a 1D Mark II made those differences quite clear.
p.3 #18 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Peter I'm not sure I've seen you post images of some of the more skittish birds such as small waders for example. I can assure you they have small tolerance for you getting close no matter how stealthy you may be. If you can get within 30m you have done well. Even with a 7D + 500 + 1.4x you'll be cropping very heavily. 1D X would be a paper weight in this situation.
But let's take a look at less extreme example. Here are some shots of a honey eater and sparrow taken from about 3m away using a 7D and 100-400 @ 400. Even at almost point plank range the shot needed some cropping. With the 1D X I would need a 600 + extension tubes to get similar framing and magnification....Show more →
Whayne, I think you can do much better than 7D when it comes to pixels-per-duck.
The answer is Coolpix P510. Its sensor pixel density is almost eight times the 7D pixel density. Now, how is that for "reach" ? In addition, you get a superzoom 24-1000mm (equiv.) with it which augments your reach even further.
In a nutshel, compared to the longest Canon dSLR option, Coolpix P510 will let you increase your reach by one order of magnitude, as well as reduce your purchase costs and equipment bulk/weight by one order of magnitude as well. Sounds like a win-win-win option to me.
p.3 #19 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
Excellent post, Peter! :-) Some people are so preoccupied with pixel density / counting PPD that they totally forget about the *quality* (and size) of those pixels...
p.3 #20 · Whats the point of the 1DIV now the 1Dx has F8 focusing
PetKal wrote:
Whayne, I think you can do much better than 7D when it comes to pixels-per-duck.
The answer is Coolpix P510. Its sensor pixel density is almost eight times the 7D pixel density. Now, how is that for "reach" ? In addition, you get a superzoom 24-1000mm (equiv.) with it which augments your reach even further.
In a nutshel, compared to the longest Canon dSLR option, Coolpix P510 will let you increase your reach by one order of magnitude, as well as reduce your purchase costs and equipment bulk/weight by one order of magnitude as well. Sounds like a win-win-win option to me. ...Show more →
That might actually be true if you could find a way to attach an L quality 500 mm lens to the Coolpix. As it is, you are using a much lower quality lens that is actually about a 3-100 mm zoom, and you are, thus, making a meaningless apples to oranges comparison.
Eyvind Ness wrote:
Excellent post, Peter! :-) Some people are so preoccupied with pixel density / counting PPD that they totally forget about the *quality* (and size) of those pixels...
I'm guessing that your photography does not often involve shooting in focal length-limited situations. If it did, you would be likely to think quite differently.
