artsupreme wrote:
Not sure if there's any truth to this but I read on here somewhere that someone was having a conversation with a Canon rep about possibly making the switch to Sony.....and supposedly the Canon rep said something along the lines of "Just wait a bit for the 1DXIII, it's going to knock your socks off". If this is true, would a Canon rep really say this if the 1DXIII was a couple more MP and fps? I hope whomever typed this was telling a true story because the message I take away is it must be a significantly higher MP body for it to really "knock the socks off".
Canon increased MP quite a bit from the 5D to 5DII, so let's hope they do the same with the 1DXIII. Based on all the math discussed above, it sounds like the electronics could handle 28MP.
But then again it's Canon, and the last time my socks were anywhere close to being knocked off was the 5D>5DII upgrade....Show more →
Reps often talk crap, but at least this time, it already looks like 1DXIII will be a significant update so maybe for once.....
I'm prepared to be surprised on resolution. Anything less than 24MP would be hugely disappointing, 24MP would be ok, 28MP+ would be great news. As I said in the other thread, journo's should be allowed to put media cards and take photos within 2 weeks, so we'll know soon what the resolution is.
Please note if people think 20MP -> 24MP isn't much, when you're cropping heavily for birding every pixel is precious. 10% more linear res is still worthwhile upgrade and if you skipped 1DXII and were coming from 1DX it's ~15% increase in res. But 28MP would be a lot more worthwhile.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Please note if people think 20MP -> 24MP isn't much, when you're cropping heavily for birding every pixel is precious. 10% more linear res is still worthwhile upgrade and if you skipped 1DXII and were coming from 1DX it's ~15% increase in res. But 28MP would be a lot more worthwhile.
The 5D IV is as low res as I like to go nowadays. The balance between 30 MP and high ISO performance is quite good for certain subjects. The improved AF and framing rate of 28 MP in a pro body would be nice.
Interesting statement from Canon in the interview with dpreview, Mr Matsumoto mentioned weight has been raised by users as an area of concern and they have listened. Hopefully we can expect a lighter 1DXIII. If they could get it back to the weight of the 1DIII that would be great, it's appreciably lighter than the 1DX(II).
Perhaps Canon has more surprises for us, 30 or even 32mp may be possible.
I am sure sensor technology would allow it.
We have had some very clever calculations here already, certainly it is not going
to be less than 24mp.
Manfred W. fEU wrote:
Perhaps Canon has more surprises for us, 30 or even 32mp may be possible.
I am sure sensor technology would allow it.
We have had some very clever calculations here already, certainly it is not going
to be less than 24mp.
Manfred
The sports journos would squeal like stuck pigs with those “enormous” files to transfer.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
The sports journos would squeal like stuck pigs with those “enormous” files to transfer.
One doesn’t have to always shoot at full file size. I don’t know how many file size configurations it would have!
If Canon made a 30 mp 1D I would get rid of my 5Ds and shoot everything from portraits to birds to sports with just one camera!!!
John
JohnSil wrote:
One doesn’t have to always shoot at full file size. I don’t know how many file size configurations it would have!
If Canon made a 30 mp 1D I would get rid of my 5Ds and shoot everything from portraits to birds to sports with just one camera!!!
John
You don't have to tell me, I think it's ridiculous in almost 2020 we are quibbling over several MP's being too taxing for them, but even Sony listened to the doom and gloomers.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
The sports journos would squeal like stuck pigs with those “enormous” files to transfer.
I don't have an issue while shooting 500-700 a game with the 5d4. That camera is so good with final results out of camera, I only use the jpgs anyways, with the raw being backup in case of a rare exposure issue. We sports shooters won't have an issue at all because we know what we need for a game and can set it all up as needed. We shoot jpg also because some of us are transmitting files during the game, and that is the only time really large files would be an issue, thus we would sized these down if needed in the settings.
TeamSpeed wrote:
I don't have an issue while shooting 500-700 a game with the 5d4. That camera is so good with final results out of camera, I only use the jpgs anyways, with the raw being backup in case of a rare exposure issue. We sports shooters won't have an issue at all because we know what we need for a game and can set it all up as needed. We shoot jpg also because some of us are transmitting files during the game, and that is the only time really large files would be an issue, thus we would sized these down if needed in the settings.
...Show more →
Also we need to keep in mind, the 1DX II will be able to implement HEIF. Apple advise is the 16bid will vastly
improve not just transfer speed but also IQ. Perhaps jpg is about to become redundant?
No, companies like Sony and Apple always try to push new formats, it doesn't mean it will stick. The Sony memory stick, betamax, and some Apple standards for cords, adapters, etc just haven't made it so just because there is a new file type for images, the standards for JPG and TIFF will be around for a very long time. No worries on the HEIF type at all...
Not that it is even relevant for discussion, because file sizes are file sizes, there will always be a camera that pushes files that are large, however sports shooters will be able to generate and process the sizes needed for sports, which have different needs than landscape, or portraiture, etc. So if we talk about large resolution sensor spitting out large raw or large heif or large jpg, my point still stands and matters little on file format itself. Sports shooters are not afraid of large files, provided there are available controls to generate smaller files for transmission to others, or process later, if file sizes are an issue.
EB-1 wrote:
I'd really want 2x CFExpress, but would not be surprised at one CFExpress and one CFast.
EBH
2x CFexpress maybe would be the consequent solution and I guess the 1DX3 will have that because CFast could be dead in the foreseeable future. However, those who heavily invested in CFast after the transition from the 1DX to the 1DX2 would be screwed again if they drop that format. CFast has not been cheep at all. Of course you can argue, that technology moves on and those who can invest $ 6000 or more in the 1Dx3 should be ready to forget the investments of some $$$ in their CFast cards and just need to add another few $$$ to the camera to buy CFexpress instead ;-) . I'm not in that league and therefore would be glad if they keep CFast at one slot though 2x CFexpress maybe is the more probable route .
Canon touts all these amazing AF changes coupled with 100% coverage, eye AF, new dual pixel tech etc etc. I assume all these features require live view which means they cannot be used through the OVF but only on the rear screen? I'd buy an SLR with these AF abilities through an optical finder in an instant.
Sorry if it's been answered its a lot of thread to trawl through.
