Dragonfire wrote:
No leaks from Photoplus about the megapixel count Maybe tonight we will discover it is 24.
There had been a low-probability rumor that there was a 28 mpx sensor.
It is possible that they're testing 2 or 3 sensors, deciding which one will best fit the needs of the people using the new body. That would explain why they didn't mention it in the teaser announcement.
arbitrage wrote:
Canon Rumors has reported they heard that those two lenses won't come in EF mounts. They will come in RF instead. But of course that is just a rumor so anything could happen. I would have thought Canon would have released 500III and 300III by now if they were going to. The Mk 2 series were released closer together and at that time it was the f/2.8 pair and then the f/4 pair.
Another consideration is that we know the only real difference between the Mk 2 and Mk 3 400 and 600 is the weight. Maybe the weight savings wasn't great enough in the 500 and 300 by using smaller elements and therefore there was no point in making those two? The 300I to 300II hardly shaved any weight and the 500I to 500II was much less than the 400 and 600 lost back then....Show more →
Can't they do both? A 500RF and 500EF can be optically the same I think the only difference would be a built in adapter.
Geert Koning wrote:
Can't they do both? A 500RF and 500EF can be optically the same I think the only difference would be a built in adapter.
Ideally they should use different motors. The linear drive motors seem preferential for mirrorless for ultimate drive speed. So lazy way is to add adapter to EF version.
Increased speed and other enhancements aside, how well will the 1DX3 capture and accurately maintain and track focus when ripping off 16fps? (16fps vs 20fps is largely irrelevant, in my opinion.)
AF seems to be a key differentiator between the 1DX2 and the Sony A9. In other words, how will the new 1DX3 compare to the new A92 in that context? How good will the new AF actually be in practice?
cameron12x wrote:
Increased speed and other enhancements aside, how well will the 1DX3 capture and accurately maintain and track focus when ripping off 16fps? (16fps vs 20fps is largely irrelevant, in my opinion.)
AF seems to be a key differentiator between the 1DX2 and the Sony A9. In other words, how will the new 1DX3 compare to the new A92 in that context? How good will the new AF actually be in practice?
The key differentiator is more like what people are shooting and to what extreme. The history of AF comments we have Sony users shooting portraits, birds, and dragonflies vs Canon shooting football, soccer, and basketball with Sony owners making it sound like Canon AF is behind the times yet for completely different needs. If you shoot primarily with a 1d body all the way back to a 1d4, there solid for action sports. I'll take my 10 year old 1d4 off the shelf and feel 100% confident it will do a great job still today. The argument of who's better vs actual needs comes down to what equipment works for you TODAY. It seems obvious the 1dx3 with more AF points will improve upon the iTR and eye AF, but improvements with action sports will be interesting beyond the existing case settings.
Looks like the incremental improvements we all expected.
The most interesting to me is the improvements in AF. Canon needs some significant improvement to close the gap with Nikon and Sony. It looks like that may happen, but it remains to be seen if they will be able to take the lead. We will have to wait to see the actual performance. One issue is how frequently the AF can be updated. The AF sensors and AF computations will surely be fast but the interruptions due to the mirror flapping up and down will be a limitation.
There is no sign of Canon having BSI or stacked electronics technology, which means they have not shown a viable path forward to an electronic camera (aka mirrorless camera) like the A9. Nikon has access to Sony sensors so they have a path forward.
The IDXIII is probably enough to keep current Canon pros and enthusiasts with them but probably not enough to get those who have moved to Nikon or Sony to return. I hope it's enough to get some energy into the used Canon lens market (my 200-400 and 400 DO II are still for sale).
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Ideally they should use different motors. The linear drive motors seem preferential for mirrorless for ultimate drive speed. So lazy way is to add adapter to EF version.
If I recall, one of the benefits of the RF mount is extra contacts to communicate with newer components in RF lenses (such as AF and IS mechanisms etc) so the RF should be different...
speedmaster20d wrote:
Read what I said above, I never said is is impossible where did you see that? I said it is not useful because of the mirror blackout. the theoretical limit is 1/ backlit time = 22 fps but you won't be able to see anything in the finder
Are you sure? Are you quoting some established fact, or as you mentioned , just theoretical?
At what point is a propeller moving fast enough that it gives us a blackout? I think the faster that a prop moves the more we see.
The only thing that needs to be blacked out is the sensor. what our eye sees has no correlation to the sensor. At some point the mirror is down allowing a glimpse of a view and it will reflect the view. Very possibly the faster that view is strobed the more we will see. The less chopped up it will seem.
Remember our brain has the ability to fill in the blanks when our eyes can not.
At some point that mirror is down, passing an optical view of the scene, no matter how brief!
I'm not talking any kind of science, just what it seems to me and I might be completely wrong but you've not given me any evidence to the contrary!!?
John
I don’t understand how people are reading these specs and seeing it as “incremental.” If Sony released the a9 ii with 20fps via the mechanical shutter it would be “revolutionary” and would be the nail in the coffin for Canon and Nikon. Yes these are specs on a development announcement and how well the camera will perform remains to be seen but everything as indicated seems like a major step forward for both mirrorless and DSLR cameras (and also bodes well for Canon’s inevitable mirrorless flagship). The more that I think about it the more that I see this camera as potentially being a 1DX with pieces of the a9 inside, which for me as a person heavily invested in EF glass seems very promising. Everyone keeps talking about using dot sights for BIF with the a9, I want to see what a dot sight on this thing in live view will do.
adamx12m wrote:
The key differentiator is more like what people are shooting and to what extreme. The history of AF comments we have Sony users shooting portraits, birds, and dragonflies vs Canon shooting football, soccer, and basketball with Sony owners making it sound like Canon AF is behind the times yet for completely different needs. If you shoot primarily with a 1d body all the way back to a 1d4, there solid for action sports. I'll take my 10 year old 1d4 off the shelf and feel 100% confident it will do a great job still today. The argument of who's better vs actual needs comes down to what equipment works for you TODAY. It seems obvious the 1dx3 with more AF points will improve upon the iTR and eye AF, but improvements with action sports will be interesting beyond the existing case settings....Show more →
I agree it depends on what you're shooting. One of the differentiators of mirrorless (a9) vs. DSLR (1DXII) is the 'intelligence' of the AF system at recognizing your desired subject and the ability to track it around the frame. DSLRs have always been adept at focusing on the closest object within the AF sensor and newer versions will recognize and follow it around the frame to some basic degree. With mirrorless it's quite the step up in sophistication by being able to recognize faces, recognize registered faces, eyes, etc.
The AF in the a9 asks for a lot more trust from the photographer that it will do the job correctly. From my experience with the a7/a7R, a7RII and a9, it was never foolproof and depending on the situation, often unreliable/unpredictable, though the a9 was certainly the best of that bunch. Shooting sports, there are situations where I think 'smart' AF systems are still no better than manual focus point placement (like team sports where there might be a lot of players with the same uniform on the field, but you only want to concentrate on one of those players). In terms of sheer speed/responsiveness my experience with the 1DXII and a9 indicated that it was pretty equal. I continue to shoot with the 1DXII and it's no problem to get 20+ frame sports sequences with all of the frames in focus (though of course the camera is not perfect), but I did feel that initial lock-on was faster with the a9. When I shoot events, yes, it would be great to have eye-focus capability - a distinct advantage for mirrorless. But I still get by with the old DSLR tech, for now.
---------------------------------------------
dclark wrote:
There is no sign of Canon having BSI or stacked electronics technology, which means they have not shown a viable path forward to an electronic camera (aka mirrorless camera) like the A9. Nikon has access to Sony sensors so they have a path forward.
Apparently the 1DXIII does live view 20fps with AF. That sounds like a mirrorless camera... Of course it remains to be seen how competent that AF is at tracking action during 20fps sequences. It will be interesting to see what the sensor readout speed will be.
JohnSil wrote:
Are you sure? Are you quoting some established fact, or as you mentioned , just theoretical?
At what point is a propeller moving fast enough that it gives us a blackout? I think the faster that a prop moves the more we see.
The only thing that needs to be blacked out is the sensor. what our eye sees has no correlation to the sensor. At some point the mirror is down allowing a glimpse of a view and it will reflect the view. Very possibly the faster that view is strobed the more we will see. The less chopped up it will seem.
Remember our brain has the ability to fill in the blanks when our eyes can not.
At some point that mirror is down, passing an optical view of the scene, no matter how brief!
I'm not talking any kind of science, just what it seems to me and I might be completely wrong but you've not given me any evidence to the contrary!!?
John ...Show more →
Hi John,
I am not sure what you are asking, the blackout math is simple what part do you not understand?
I have no idea what you mean by "sensor needs to be blacked out". NOTHING needs to be blacked out, but because a mirror is between the sensor and the lens it has to go up so the camera can take a picture. A mirror-less camera has no blackout of this kind.
I think you may not have experience shooting with a 1DXII or a camera like that as much as I have. Your brain (or at least my brain) cannot filter out the blackout periods. I am a bird photographer, when tracking erratic subject such as BIF and hand holding a 600mm-1200mm rig the blackout is visible and becomes very distracting at 14 fps or higher. It makes it difficult to keep the subject centered. As I mentioned when I was shooting with Canon I actually dialed back my 1DXII to 12fps. I saw no benefit in going to 14fps besides more files to delete and the worsened blackout. In live view the high fps may have different applications, I never shoot in LV so I am not familiar with those applications.
rscheffler wrote:
Apparently the 1DXIII does live view 20fps with AF. That sounds like a mirrorless camera... Of course it remains to be seen how competent that AF is at tracking action during 20fps sequences. It will be interesting to see what the sensor readout speed will be.
To move to an electronic camera fast AF readout, fast EVF update, and electronic shutter are required. Just reading the sensor at 20 fps is not so impressive. Need 60 AF updates/sec and at least 60 EVF blackout free updates with minimal lag. The electronic shutter is needed too. It looks like Canon needs to use the mechanical shutter at 20 fps. Without BSI it would seem to be impossible. Also need to add stacked electronics to get the full advantage. Both are difficult time consuming and expensive development efforts. Even assuming Canon has been working frantically for a couple of years, it may be a while.
Doesn’t Canon say in the press release the 20 fps is available in lv with both mechanical AND electronic shutter?
“The camera will support significantly faster frame rates with full AF and AE, using either the optical viewfinder (up to approximately 16fps mechanical shutter) or Live View (up to approximately 20fps mechanical or electronic shutter)”
I don't know what to make of the HEIF images. Never worked with them. Good, I suppose? I shoot almost everything in RAW. The only exception really is when I am on super-short turnaround times.
An extra fps is irrelevant to me. A bump in resolution however would be really nice. But if this really does turn out to be an "incremental" bump in resolution and ISO performance I think I might end up getting myself another steeply-discounted 1DXMK2 because it's compatible with everything I already have.
I have been in the market for a cinema camera though and the C500MK2 has been high on my list since its announcement. The 10bit CLOG of the 1DXMK3 is really intriguing here. I have been missing this from my 1DXMK2s a lot. Let's hope this includes better codecs, i.e. as in C300MK2. Tempting!
dclark wrote:
To move to an electronic camera fast AF readout, fast EVF update, and electronic shutter are required. Just reading the sensor at 20 fps is not so impressive. Need 60 AF updates/sec and at least 60 EVF blackout free updates with minimal lag. The electronic shutter is needed too. It looks like Canon needs to use the mechanical shutter at 20 fps. Without BSI it would seem to be impossible. Also need to add stacked electronics to get the full advantage. Both are difficult time consuming and expensive development efforts. Even assuming Canon has been working frantically for a couple of years, it may be a while.
It's funny Canon bother saying 20fps is available in e-shutter, because that mode will be useless with fast action due to slow sensor read speed. You'll have to use mechanical shutter in LV for action work and what's the point of 20fps in e-shutter mode, if the action needs to be slow enough that rolling shutter won't be an issue? As you say without without some sort of stacked sensor or global shutter it will be hard to get a fast enough read speed. However Fuji has managed to get the X-T3 red speed to around 1/60s sans stacked sensor so you can do a better job even with a non-stacked sensor eg many more column parallel ADC's running at higher clock speed, but you run the risk of lower DR due to more read noise, but that might not be a worry for a sports camera used at higher ISO's anyway.
I am not sure what you are asking, the blackout math is simple what part do you not understand?
I have no idea what you mean by "sensor needs to be blacked out". NOTHING needs to be blacked out, but because a mirror is between the sensor and the lens it has to go up so the camera can take a picture. A mirror-less camera has no blackout of this kind.
I think you may not have experience shooting with a 1DXII or a camera like that as much as I have. Your brain (or at least my brain) cannot filter out the blackout periods. I am a bird photographer, when tracking erratic subject such as BIF and hand holding a 600mm-1200mm rig the blackout is visible and becomes very distracting at 14 fps or higher. It makes it difficult to keep the subject centered. As I mentioned when I was shooting with Canon I actually dialed back my 1DXII to 12fps. I saw no benefit in going to 14fps besides more files to delete and the worsened blackout. In live view the high fps may have different applications, I never shoot in LV so I am not familiar with those applications.
Indeed a way of seeing why blackout is worse as fps increase, note that the blackout time is fixed and for 1DXII at best it is ~40ms. So say you shoot 5fps then if you had no lag each frame would last 1/5s or 200ms. So a sequence of frames would be something like
200ms, 40ms, 200ms, 40ms ....
Blackout occupies 16.7% of the VF time.
Now move to 10fps and the now the frame time is 100ms so our sequence is
100ms, 40ms, 100ms, 100ms, ...
Now blackout occupies 29% of our VF time.
At 20fps frame time is 50ms, so our sequence is
50ms, 40ms, 50ms, 40ms, ...
Now blackout occupies 44% of the VF time, almost half.
Thus while blackout time is fixed, as you go to higher frame rates it affects our VF experience more and more as you spend less time seeing the subject relative to blackout, making it looking much more choppy like those old movies played too slow.
dclark wrote:
Looks like the incremental improvements we all expected.
The most interesting to me is the improvements in AF. Canon needs some significant improvement to close the gap with Nikon and Sony. It looks like that may happen, but it remains to be seen if they will be able to take the lead. We will have to wait to see the actual performance. One issue is how frequently the AF can be updated. The AF sensors and AF computations will surely be fast but the interruptions due to the mirror flapping up and down will be a limitation.
There is no sign of Canon having BSI or stacked electronics technology, which means they have not shown a viable path forward to an electronic camera (aka mirrorless camera) like the A9. Nikon has access to Sony sensors so they have a path forward.
The IDXIII is probably enough to keep current Canon pros and enthusiasts with them but probably not enough to get those who have moved to Nikon or Sony to return. I hope it's enough to get some energy into the used Canon lens market (my 200-400 and 400 DO II are still for sale).
Agree, but make that "keep current Canon pros and wealthy enthusiasts happy", and hope that they don't object to carrying a heavy brick of a camera (which for some applications is not realistic). If you can't spend many thousands on a camera or need a lighter action body with higher pixel density Canon only has an over 5 year old camera for you ...
---------------------------------------------
dclark wrote:
To move to an electronic camera fast AF readout, fast EVF update, and electronic shutter are required. Just reading the sensor at 20 fps is not so impressive. Need 60 AF updates/sec and at least 60 EVF blackout free updates with minimal lag. The electronic shutter is needed too. It looks like Canon needs to use the mechanical shutter at 20 fps. Without BSI it would seem to be impossible. Also need to add stacked electronics to get the full advantage. Both are difficult time consuming and expensive development efforts. Even assuming Canon has been working frantically for a couple of years, it may be a while.
Agree, Canon is silent about shutter mechanism, blackout and AF performance at highest framerate. There are bound to be severe limitations (also compared to A9), just like with the M6II at its highest framerate. Possibly it will work for some users/applications, but for stuff like wildlife - and especially with long lenses - I cannot imagine shooting action using the back LCD ...
I am not sure what you are asking, the blackout math is simple what part do you not understand?
I have no idea what you mean by "sensor needs to be blacked out". NOTHING needs to be blacked out, but because a mirror is between the sensor and the lens it has to go up so the camera can take a picture. A mirror-less camera has no blackout of this kind.
I think you may not have experience shooting with a 1DXII or a camera like that as much as I have. Your brain (or at least my brain) cannot filter out the blackout periods. I am a bird photographer, when tracking erratic subject such as BIF and hand holding a 600mm-1200mm rig the blackout is visible and becomes very distracting at 14 fps or higher. It makes it difficult to keep the subject centered. As I mentioned when I was shooting with Canon I actually dialed back my 1DXII to 12fps. I saw no benefit in going to 14fps besides more files to delete and the worsened blackout. In live view the high fps may have different applications, I never shoot in LV so I am not familiar with those applications.
I use the 1DXII at 600mm+ and 14fps exclusively as I'm sure many other do as well. 14fps is very useful to me as well as for other photographers who need it for the speed. Saying the blackout at 14fps is distracting to you personally is one thing, but saying the only way to make 16fps useful is in LV or a mirrorless body is another.
Here's what you claimed when asked if the 1DXIII could be released with 16fps:
"the only way to go to those high frame rates and still be useful is with the mirror up in LV or in mirror-less cameras... "
It's okay to be wrong, and I'm sure most here are glad you are including myself because I'm looking forward to 16fps. Canon engineering surprised you and a lot of other FM gurus with something you didn't expect and that's a good thing for everyone, putting your ego aside.
So when the 1DXIII is released and it functions as intended at 16fps and is very useful how would you like your crow served?
If it turns out to be a flop and doesn't work at 16fps I'll take my crow prepared 'well done' please.
Maybe tonight we will discover it is 24.