CR post says they got a possible spec sheet although the source is new and therefore they aren't putting much faith in it.
Here is the list....
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II:
20mp CMOS
61pt AF (all crosstype & f/8)
16fps with AF/20fps in liveview
4K 60P
FullHD to 240fps
CFast + CF
Touchscreen LCD (can be turned off)
More customization options for the menus and buttons
GPS & WiFi
Things I like and don't like on that list....
20MP still is a bit low...would like more like 24 if I had the choice
16FPS is pretty fast...like that
All 61 x type and F/8....holy moly...seriously...that would sell me the camera on its own no matter what else it has....
C-Fast and CF...Please oh please Canon...don't go this route....please do dual C-Fast and no CF....I know the CF will cripple the C-Fast (won't it??)....why would we want a crippled slot like we have to deal with in the 7D2 and 5D3 etc....
The rest doesn't affect me one way or the other....
20 mp CMOS images at 16 clicks a second is a huge amount of data moving. I agree with alundeb, we'll have "stutter sound" like an Uzi going full blast. Of course it's all talk, but Canon will have to do something fairly amazing to move folks off the 1Dx which is expensive but throughly competent.
Tareq wrote:
I want a watch that is not digital and has 24-hour system rather than just 12-hour, this will make a statement, or no problem to go with this 12-hour but with am/pm corner too, i am so lazy to check if it is am or pm outdoors or out of my room and windows.
Here's a watch for you. Originally issued to Swiss Air pilots in 60s or 70s, but this re-edition looks much better:
arbitrage wrote:
What do others think of this theoretical list??
Really only interested in high ISO performance. If I get 1.5+ stops then I'm in. The rest of the stuff like video, gps, wifi, touchscreen is just fluff to me. Surprised the list didn't include a flip screen and a pop up flash. Might as well go all the way into turning the 1D series into a Rebel.
Agree with you about the storage cards. Pick a format and use it for both slots. I hate different formats in dual slot cameras. The 7D2 should have been CF/CF. SD cards are the flimsiest things on the planet.
ggreene wrote:
Really only interested in high ISO performance. If I get 1.5+ stops then I'm in. The rest of the stuff like video, gps, wifi, touchscreen is just fluff to me. Surprised the list didn't include a flip screen and a pop up flash. Might as well go all the way into turning the 1D series into a Rebel.
Agree with you about the storage cards. Pick a format and use it for both slots. I hate different formats in dual slot cameras. The 7D2 should have been CF/CF. SD cards are the flimsiest things on the planet.
Honestly, I think high ISO noise is probably just about as good as it is going to get. High ISO Dr may get get better but SNR of cameras coming out the last 4 years have all been pretty similar when viewing at the same size.
I do hope for some high-ISO improvements in noise and DR...we shall see if that is even possible...
My biggest gripe will be if they only go half-assed into C-Fast and leave a crippled CF slot.....HOWEVER...if they really do make all 61 points f/8 capable....I won't give a care to what else they do or don't do....I'm sold with that one feature alone if it happens....YMMV...
Thinking some more this morning....what I would really like to see is the 61 points we have now go to all f/8 and then a whole bunch more points added to expand the coverage area to something like the 7D2 with points that would work not at f/8...now that would be an awesome improvement....but I'm not holding my breath for that one
Getting a bit OT, but I'm looking to update my ancient 1DsII. It still has the best AF I've ever used.
What I can't figure out from forum and review reading is the practical difference between 1Dx and 5D (III or S) AF. I know the 1Dx has the FPS advantage, but I seldom shoot bursts and just want the picture to be in focus and captured the instant I press the shutter release. Think amateur football. The 10 year old 1DsII does that so easily that I'm outraged when modern cameras that claim "pro" level AF can't. Yes, poor craftsman blaming tools - that's me.
Anyway, I have no objection to more pixels, but a high resolution shot that's out of focus or misses the moment is worthless. So, any disadvantage to a 5D(III or S) vs. 1Dx for single shot success rate?
Thanks,
Matt
Sigh - Just noticed a thread dedicated to this exact question.
Schlotkins wrote:
Honestly, I think high ISO noise is probably just about as good as it is going to get. High ISO Dr may get get better but SNR of cameras coming out the last 4 years have all been pretty similar when viewing at the same size.
Chris,
I think you've missed the boat on this prediction. Noise at any ISO is a function of the sensor (including size and number of photo sites), how the photo sites make light into electrical impulses (A/D conversion), and the algorithms used by the CPUs to interpret the digital data resulting from the sensor's A/D transformation.
There is nothing to suggest that sensors can't improve or develop greater resolution. Unlike the silicon wall Intel and others are approaching in CPU production where the smaller the dies, i.e. the ability to etch "gates," the greater the heat and therefore functionally limiting how fast and how many paths CPUs can have. Each "gate" is a transistor and an electrical current passing thru it encounters resistance which in turn produces heat. As far as I know, sensors are nowhere near that barrier nor are the on-board CPU(s).
The ability to interpret the mass of electrical data being pounded thru the CPU is a mathematical and algorithmic challenge. The math is waaaaay over my head since my pursuit of the discipline stopped at Calculus 103. I can say that new, different, better ways of employing things like Fast Fourier Transformations in programming excite mathematicians and programs while leaving the rest of us going "Huh!?" and just wanting better pix.
I currently shoot sports with the 1Dx at ISO 6400 with useful results for the media and for smaller prints. Cropping is the challenge as I can only narrow things so much. In the days when I was shooting a 1DIIn such a thing would have been unthinkable. I would not be surprised to see useable images at 12800 or perhaps 2X that in the near future. Given what is being done with experimental and multi-million dollar "cameras" - think NASA - I'd hesitate to guess where the limit is.
Robert
Arbitrage, with you on fewer gadgets, better performance. Higher ISO and better shutter speed is a yes. So is a single format for cards. So stupid to make them different.
WOW, a piece of ART, what an amazing beautiful watch, but i am sure it isn't a beautiful price at all, even if i can afford it one day i don't think i want to spend that amount on a watch only regardless how nice it is., i may buy it only to take photos of it, .
OntheRez wrote:
I think you've missed the boat on this prediction. Noise at any ISO is a function of the sensor (including size and number of photo sites), how the photo sites make light into electrical impulses (A/D conversion), and the algorithms used by the CPUs to interpret the digital data resulting from the sensor's A/D transformation.
There is nothing to suggest that sensors can't improve or develop greater resolution. Unlike the silicon wall Intel and others are approaching in CPU production where the smaller the dies, i.e. the ability to etch "gates," the greater the heat and therefore functionally limiting how fast and how many paths CPUs can have. Each "gate" is a transistor and an electrical current passing thru it encounters resistance which in turn produces heat. As far as I know, sensors are nowhere near that barrier nor are the on-board CPU(s).
Chris is right here. Noise does not only origin in the sensor and electronics, but is actually mainly a function of natural statistical variations in the light itself (photon shot noise). Modern sensors capture about 60% of the incoming light and converts it into electrical signals. There is only room for improvement up to 100% efficiency. At that point we are at the theorethical maximum for a given sensor size and exposure. The 60 % efficiency we have now is nothing new. It has been on that level in CCD sensors for about 40 years. With the start of CMOS sensors, the efficiency went back to 20-30%, and has now caught up again. If you like, I can elaborate further on these matters.
Tareq wrote:
WOW, a piece of ART, what an amazing beautiful watch, but i am sure it isn't a beautiful price at all, even if i can afford it one day i don't think i want to spend that amount on a watch only regardless how nice it is., i may buy it only to take photos of it, .
Thank you very much!
Yes, unfortunately, the price is around 3000 USD if I remember correctly. A few years ago, Longines had much more *reasonable* prices. Then the Swatch group, who owns both Longines and Omega (and Breguet and some other famous watch houses) decided to move the Omegas into Rolex price range and Longines into former Omega price range. Personally I own Longines Hydroconquest Automatic with dark blue dial, which is a fantastic every day watch (diver style) and Longines Master Collection Moonphases, which is somewhat tiny and complicated watch, but fits my thin wrist very well. The price was considerably lower than for the Swiss Air reissue when I purchased it, but now I guess the two watches are pretty close price-wise.
arbitrage wrote:
CR post says they got a possible spec sheet although the source is new and therefore they aren't putting much faith in it.
Here is the list....
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II:
20mp CMOS
61pt AF (all crosstype & f/8)
16fps with AF/20fps in liveview
4K 60P
FullHD to 240fps
CFast + CF
Touchscreen LCD (can be turned off)
More customization options for the menus and buttons
GPS & WiFi
Things I like and don't like on that list....
20MP still is a bit low...would like more like 24 if I had the choice
16FPS is pretty fast...like that
All 61 x type and F/8....holy moly...seriously...that would sell me the camera on its own no matter what else it has....
C-Fast and CF...Please oh please Canon...don't go this route....please do dual C-Fast and no CF....I know the CF will cripple the C-Fast (won't it??)....why would we want a crippled slot like we have to deal with in the 7D2 and 5D3 etc....
The rest doesn't affect me one way or the other....
What do others think of this theoretical list??...Show more →
sounds like CR copied my post of what I expected the specs to be, but 20MP would be terrible news. Don't need 16fps, give me 12 at 24MP any day. Can't see how physics will allow x-type AF points at f/8 especially the outer points unless they've come up with some radically improved AF sensor tech (unlikely). f/5.6 I believe for all points since 7D2 has that, and hopefully for f/8 max lenses we can have similar to Nikon's D4, with up to 15 selectable points around the centre point.
Given the improvements in SD cards with the release of 2000x cards and 128GB capacity, CFast + SDXC would be my preference.
Tareq wrote:
With 1DX II, i would like it to have almost similar specifications of Samsung NX1 with slight improvement, better DR and better AF than 1DX/5D3/7DII, NX1 has 15fps and 28mp, if this new 1DX has not more than 24mp and no more than 14fps even if it has incredible AF and nice DR i wouldn't get it, my 1DX is really amazing now, the only thing that i want improvement with my 1DX is more mp for crops, i crop a lot so more mp is always a welcome over better high ISO or DR, for me in sports more mp serving me more than high ISO which is already amazing or better DR....Show more →
It sounds like you need a longer lens, not a new camera. Why not put that money in on a longer lens; a much better investment than a camera body? Just think, every 3 years you will be saying I need more MP so I can crop deeper and deeper and then spending around $8k each time for a camera body, when you could've purchase a longer lens one time for far less.
Methodical wrote:
It sounds like you need a longer lens, not a new camera. Why not put that money in on a longer lens; a much better investment than a camera body? Just think, every 3 years you will be saying I need more MP so I can crop deeper and deeper and then spending around $8k each time for a camera body, when you could've purchase a longer lens one time for far less.
I buy only new, so the longer lenses i want to get is 400 f2.8, and you know what is the price of this new lens, much more than 1DX itself, i couldn't afford 1DX when it was at range of $7000-8000, so definitely i can't afford a lens that is $10k-12k.
Also, comparing my 1DX results after cropping to my 1D2n and 1D3, my 1DX is a slaughter to both of them, i have those cameras and i see the the results, no comparison, even my older lenses are shining with 1DX over older 1D series.
Tareq wrote:
I buy only new, so the longer lenses i want to get is 400 f2.8, and you know what is the price of this new lens, much more than 1DX itself, i couldn't afford 1DX when it was at range of $7000-8000, so definitely i can't afford a lens that is $10k-12k.
Also, comparing my 1DX results after cropping to my 1D2n and 1D3, my 1DX is a slaughter to both of them, i have those cameras and i see the the results, no comparison, even my older lenses are shining with 1DX over older 1D series.
Yeah, I can understand that about the price of the big whites. I take it none of the non-Canon long lenses interest you.
...that would sell me the camera on its own no matter what else it has....
I agree with alundeb, we'll have "stutter sound" like an Uzi going full blast. 
and just wanting better pix. 
.