kezeka wrote:
I am thinking that this will likely end up being regarded as the pinnacle of DSLRs before the final push to an all MILC lineup from canon. That said, this appears to be an incredible impressive camera for the crowd it is designed for. It is also interesting that it is essentially a hybrid between old school optical focusing and newer on sensor focusing.
I look forward to hearing more about it and I suspect we will be seeing quite a few of these at the Olympics.
But in all honesty, putting a picture from a 1DX III to a A9 II, you couldn't tell the slightest difference. Camera's are so good today, it doesn't even matter. The hype of mirrorless is hilarious honestly, as it's vastly over exaggerated. Its a different system, but not everyone cares for EVF just like not everyone cares for OVF. Most people who went mirrorless were ones who needed video. Otherwise, 1DX or D5 performs just as good or better than A9. Mirrorless aren't better at focusing or high ISO or battery life or weather sealing.. it's just a mirrorless camera. The greatest advantage is IBIS and video focus. Thats it.
SouthwestS2K wrote:
But in all honesty, putting a picture from a 1DX III to a A9 II, you couldn't tell the slightest difference. Camera's are so good today, it doesn't even matter. The hype of mirrorless is hilarious honestly, as it's vastly over exaggerated. Its a different system, but not everyone cares for EVF just like not everyone cares for OVF. Most people who went mirrorless were ones who needed video. Otherwise, 1DX or D5 performs just as good or better than A9. Mirrorless aren't better at focusing or high ISO or battery life or weather sealing.. it's just a mirrorless camera. The greatest advantage is IBIS and video focus. Thats it....Show more →
I do agree with most of that. But IME, there is an advantage to MILC AF compared to the 1DX and D5 systems. For continuous focus of faster moving subjects it is really only the A9/A9II that can track better and gets a higher % hit rate. But for slower moving subjects (like say a swimming duck) or perched subjects just moving their head side to side, all MILCs that I've used recently including A7RIV, Z50 and Z7 have more consistent AF than the 1DXII and D850/500. The Z50 and Z7 don't touch a D5 or 1DXII for fast subjects but they can best it for more static ones.
The other advantages I've found with the MILCs is full sensor coverage AF support, silent shooting and fully functional AF via the rear screen.
arbitrage wrote:
I do agree with most of that. But IME, there is an advantage to MILC AF compared to the 1DX and D5 systems. For continuous focus of faster moving subjects it is really only the A9/A9II that can track better and gets a higher % hit rate. But for slower moving subjects (like say a swimming duck) or perched subjects just moving their head side to side, all MILCs that I've used recently including A7RIV, Z50 and Z7 have more consistent AF than the 1DXII and D850/500. The Z50 and Z7 don't touch a D5 or 1DXII for fast subjects but they can best it for more static ones.
The other advantages I've found with the MILCs is full sensor coverage AF support, silent shooting and fully functional AF via the rear screen....Show more →
make sure you get your hands on a 1DXIII and post your experience using it.
arbitrage wrote:
I do agree with most of that. But IME, there is an advantage to MILC AF compared to the 1DX and D5 systems. For continuous focus of faster moving subjects it is really only the A9/A9II that can track better and gets a higher % hit rate. But for slower moving subjects (like say a swimming duck) or perched subjects just moving their head side to side, all MILCs that I've used recently including A7RIV, Z50 and Z7 have more consistent AF than the 1DXII and D850/500. The Z50 and Z7 don't touch a D5 or 1DXII for fast subjects but they can best it for more static ones.
The other advantages I've found with the MILCs is full sensor coverage AF support, silent shooting and fully functional AF via the rear screen....Show more →
But then again, lots of reviewers who tried out say a Sony A9 all said they wished it had Nikon's 3D Tracking.
SouthwestS2K wrote:
But then again, lots of reviewers who tried out say a Sony A9 all said they wished it had Nikon's 3D Tracking.
That's interesting. Nikon's 3D mode is borderline useless in my testing. I do like their Auto AF but 3D jumps to other objects of similar color and/or more contrast too easily after selecting your subject. Auto seems to prioritize movement which works well for moving animals and birds. But as far as subject recognition and staying on the intended subject the A9 is far ahead. Unfortunately that is a double edged sword and if the A9 starts tracking the wrong thing you are hooped for that burst.
The reviews you mention may have been comparing the A9’s Lock-on AF modes to Nikon 3D. Those modes were useless and I’d probably agree that 3D was better. Although I’d never rely on ether system. Where the A9 made huge leaps was with FW 5 and the new Real time tracking modes that replaced the Lock on modes. The new tracking modes are where I really saw the large discrepancy between the A9 and all my Nikon cameras.
arbitrage wrote:
That's interesting. Nikon's 3D mode is borderline useless in my testing. I do like their Auto AF but 3D jumps to other objects of similar color and/or more contrast too easily after selecting your subject. Auto seems to prioritize movement which works well for moving animals and birds. But as far as subject recognition and staying on the intended subject the A9 is far ahead. Unfortunately that is a double edged sword and if the A9 starts tracking the wrong thing you are hooped for that burst.
The reviews you mention may have been comparing the A9’s Lock-on AF modes to Nikon 3D. Those modes were useless and I’d probably agree that 3D was better. Although I’d never rely on ether system. Where the A9 made huge leaps was with FW 5 and the new Real time tracking modes that replaced the Lock on modes. The new tracking modes are where I really saw the large discrepancy between the A9 and all my Nikon cameras. ...Show more →
That's honestly a first I heard that 3D Tracking is useless. Honestly.
Rishi over at DPReview just posted that he measured the sensor readout speed of the 1DXiii at ~1/60s, even in full 14-bit readout mode. Pretty good and makes it the fastest non-stacked FF sensor on the market although still behind the 1/160s readout of the A9/A9ii. At 1/60s it should be useful for most outdoor sports or even indoor sports if there isn't LED lighting. Bodes quite well for the future EOS R bodies.
SouthwestS2K wrote:
That's honestly a first I heard that 3D Tracking is useless. Honestly.
I've yet to meet a Nikon wildlife/bird shooter in the wild nor on these forums that uses it but maybe it works better for tracking people which I don't do. A lot of us use Auto AF and Group AF is by far the preferred mode on the newer cameras for the type of photography I do.
But hey, it is surely better than Canon's All-pt AF mode but that isn't saying much
Seems like the video went away, they had some audio issues with Marina. I watched it live and even my question was asked, it gave some info but nothing we did not already hear.
It can be had on preorder for A$9,999, which suggests the "official" price is around $10,500 (canon.com.au doesn't say).
For comparison, the Mk II RRP was between $7900 and $8000 (I forget exactly) but was available from multiple retailers for $7,100.
I suppose they're going to point at the A$ fall against the US$, but it's only fallen 6% from its typical value of ¥80. The camera was made in Japan; it has no business being priced in USD. Probably even most of the materials by weight were made in Japan.
I'm afraid I don't see 40% more value here. No doubt it has more capable AF, but when it still doesn't catch up to the competition, and has the fundamental flaw of only working in the centre, how many will care? Other major changes like the new card format, faster processor, Gb ethernet, HEIC support, while of genuine benefit, are things that should be expected with the passage of time. You don't see even the likes of Apple increasing the price on a new model when it gets Gb, do you?
senna4ever wrote:
I have a pre-production 1DXmkIII on loan for a week, and it's a beast - this thing is fast! The Smart Controller integrated into the AF-ON button takes a little getting used to, I find.
I seen a few BIF's on Flickr. How are you finding the AF improvements? Would love a details you can provide.
SouthwestS2K wrote:
But in all honesty, putting a picture from a 1DX III to a A9 II, you couldn't tell the slightest difference. Camera's are so good today, it doesn't even matter. The hype of mirrorless is hilarious honestly, as it's vastly over exaggerated. Its a different system, but not everyone cares for EVF just like not everyone cares for OVF. Most people who went mirrorless were ones who needed video. Otherwise, 1DX or D5 performs just as good or better than A9. Mirrorless aren't better at focusing or high ISO or battery life or weather sealing.. it's just a mirrorless camera. The greatest advantage is IBIS and video focus. Thats it....Show more →
Yeah, such mirrorless hype, having IBIS, that adds stabilization to every lens out there. Worthless technology I tell you.
RobAmy wrote:
I seen a few BIF's on Flickr. How are you finding the AF improvements? Would love a details you can provide.
I can't go into details, as I haven't used a 1DXmkII for a while, as I prefer the higher resolution full frame bodies over speed. What I can say is: HOLY CRAP!
senna4ever wrote:
I can't go into details, as I haven't used a 1DXmkII for a while, as I prefer the higher resolution full frame bodies over speed. What I can say is: HOLY CRAP!
I'm not going to beta test a $9K camera when the longest Canon lens I own is a 100L.
