EOS-1D X Canon USA Press Release

[neuroanatomist]

Earlier yesterday I read through the materials a bit more carefully and saw that indeed they are planning to discontinue the 1D / 1Ds differentiation.  While Canon doubtless has mostly pleased the 1D Mark IV market by upping resolution and shooting speed yet further while at the same time finally increasing to full frame, current 1Ds owners might reasonably be tempted to ignore this camera.

Interesting.  I had rather the opposite reaction, thinking that 1D IV owners would be tempted to ignore this camera, while 1Ds owners might be more interested.  I am in the camp that most people do not need even the full 21 MP, and hopefully 1-series owners are savvy enough to know that beyond a certain point, more MP aren't necessary for most applications.  Granted, that's not true for all applications, and sometimes you need a lot of resolution - but I suspect most people in that situation already use medium format. 

OTOH, 1D IV owners would be getting a modest 2 fps bump, and better ISO performance on top of the already-excellent 1D IV.  While technically the new FF sensor delivers a very modest 2 MP resolution increase, they are losing the 1.3x crop factor - many applications for which a 1D IV is best suited (sports/wildlife) involve shooting where focal length is limited.  Under those conditions, loss of the crop factor means the equivalent of 10 MP on target, a big drop from the 16 MP of the 1D IV.  Alternatively, 1D IV users who change to the 1D X could use supertele lenses that are 100mm longer - e.g. exchanging their 300/2.8's for 400/2.8's, and even with the 'lighter' MkII version of the 400/2.8, it's still 50% heavier than the 300/2.8 and 64% heavier than the 300/2.8 II.  Not to mention the cost.  To me, that sounds like a reason for 1D IV owners to be tempted to ignore the 1D X.

18 megapixels is quite a bit but not enough to post billboard style images with.

Not to worry - Chuck Westfall has positively assured us that the images from a 1D X can be freely upsampled to whatever resolution we desire.      

[thepancakeman]

With this camera I think Canon will push more people like me toward the Leica S2 for their studio needs and the 1DX will serve as an on location, editorial, sports and events camera. I was hoping Canon would fill that high resolution gap with this camera because buying into the Leica system is ridiculously expensive, not to mention I'm not all that crazy about their overly simplistic interface. I've been on the fence about whether to take the financial plunge into the Leica world hoping Canon would introduce something in the 25-35MP range to compete with the S2, but it seems now I don't have a choice. 

I'm still new to this whole photography thing, so excuse the ignorance.  What does the Leica give you in the studio that the Canon does not?  Thanks!

[Gothmoth]

The devil is in the details.  What NOT has been said is usually just as important as what IS said.  When they are competing with another powerful company like Nikon, they are not going to leave out important details such as color profiles and dynamic range.  Also, bigger micron pixels means a more likely bigger AA filter

well maybe.. maybe not.

as other people, who have close ties to canon have said, there is more new then you can read in the press release.

maybe canon is going the adobe way.
there are alway more new features in adobe software then you read in the press release.

and canon HAS said they increased DR.. they gave no concrete numbers... sure.

[cbphoto]

One thing's for sure: this camera has created quite a buzz.

[ronderick]

Just got my hands on the November 2011 issue of Asahi camera, and surprise! They already have a feature article on the EOS 1DX (p. 97-105).

A quick pickup of the Canon staff interview about the 1DX I find interesting (p.102-103):

Q: Why merge the 1D and 1Ds lines?
A: The original goal in the start was to make a camera that has both high res. and high speed, but not possible in the earlier period due to tech limitation. That's why there's 2 lines (1D, 1Ds). Now, with the tech. problem solved, the two have been merged.

Q: Why call it 1DX?
A: 3 reasons - 1. a "crossover" of 1D and 1Ds; 2. the top model, therfore "Extreme"; and 3. 10th generation counting from F-1.

Q: Why an increase in shutterlife?
A: A boost in FPS means there's a need to increase the endurance of the shutter. Changes in the drive mechanism makes it possible to boost shutter durability from 300,000 t0 400,000 cycles.   

There's also mentioning that while there's a drop to 18 MP from 1Ds3's higher MP, the 12 FPS means that there's more load to process; that's where the muscles of Digic 5+ comes in handy. (The guy goes on talking about the new mechanism and how it improves noise reduction, but it's too technical for my limited knowledge).

As for the timing of the news release, the staff explains that it's a balance between the date when the camera becomes available and giving pro photographers enough information ahead of the London Olympics.

[Mark D5 TEAM II]

Also, bigger micron pixels means a more likely bigger AA filter.

That's the first time I read something like that. Not trying to start an argument with you, but this is inaccurate. The original 5D had comparatively huge 8.2µm photosites and it had one of the (relatively) lightest AA filters of any Canon DSLR, which contributed to its great IQ that still kicks the crap out of any cropper to-date. Also, the 1Ds3 & 5D2 shared the same 21MP sensor but the former had a lighter AA filter, so the size of a sensor's photosites doesn't determine the relative strength of its AA filter.

[GeorgeMaciver]

Well, I've had a wee think about it and I'm going to start saving for this thing. Never mind anything else, the in-camera multi exposure attracts me. I have the G12 and it works superbly on that little thing, so I can only guess what it's like on this new camera. I'd love to see some sample photographs.

[DarkKnightNine]

With this camera I think Canon will push more people like me toward the Leica S2 for their studio needs and the 1DX will serve as an on location, editorial, sports and events camera. I was hoping Canon would fill that high resolution gap with this camera because buying into the Leica system is ridiculously expensive, not to mention I'm not all that crazy about their overly simplistic interface. I've been on the fence about whether to take the financial plunge into the Leica world hoping Canon would introduce something in the 25-35MP range to compete with the S2, but it seems now I don't have a choice. 

I'm still new to this whole photography thing, so excuse the ignorance.  What does the Leica give you in the studio that the Canon does not?  Thanks!

No problem, The Leica S2 is a borderline Medium Format camera that has a huge 37MP sensor in lightweight camera no bigger than a Pro body DSLR. Not to mention that sensor is about 60% larger than a FF 35mm camera. It's great for fashion or studio photographers who need extreme detail in their shots and/or know their images will be blown up to billboard sized advertisements. You can read more about it here: http://s.leica-camera.com/

[DarkKnightNine]

It would be a clever marketing ploy on Canon's part to put out a 5DII successor with 30+MP.  That would see a lot of professionals needing a 1D X and 5DIII - OK a lot have one or more 1DsIIIs or 1DIVs plus a 5DII already anyhow.
That way, Canon could put a very clear line between the intended purpose of the 1D X and the 5D line, and create more of a reason for people to have both!

Writing out 30+MP at 10fps is probably more than current storage and bus architectures can do, which may be one reason for sticking at 18MP for the 1D X.  A large section of the market will be happy with a 30+MP camera that can do 3-5fps.  - Of course that will not make everyone happy, but it will probably make Canon a lot of money!

If Canon did indeed pull out a 30+ MP 5D Mark III, that would certainly make me ecstatic. As I've stated before, I am now seriously considering buying a Leica S2 (a 37MP beast that's ridiculously expensive compared to what a 5D Mark III would cost) for studio and fashion shoots, and replacing my two 1D4s with two of the new 1DXs for everything else. The problem is the Leica S2 (including various lenses) could easily cost me upwards of $50,000 or more. And it only shoots about 2fps. So if the 5DIII is a 30+MP camera that shoots at 3-5fps and has a great AF system, it would be perfect for my needs. I can use the same lenses for both systems and save a huge amount money.

[DarkKnightNine]

My professional supplier here in Japan already has a list price for the new 1DX:
http://www.nationalphoto.co.jp/2F/digital_slr_canon.htm
They are listing it at ¥583,200 Japanese yen which is about $7,600 at today's exchange rate. I expect it will come down a little as we get closer to the actual release date.

[thepancakeman]

No problem, The Leica S2 is a borderline Medium Format camera that has a huge 37MP sensor in lightweight camera no bigger than a Pro body DSLR. Not to mention that sensor is about 60% larger than a FF 35mm camera. It's great for fashion or studio photographers who need extreme detail in their shots and/or know their images will be blown up to billboard sized advertisements. You can read more about it here: http://s.leica-camera.com/

So basically it really is just the MP because you're blowing stuff up to such huge "print" dimensions?  Makes sense.

Honestly I believe that Canon will also be releashing a high MP body as well, but wanted to kick off the new lines focusing on IQ.  That's just my completely uninformed opinion, but for $50k I'd definitely hold out a little longer and see what they come up with.   (Unless of course you're going to lose $50k of business in the next 3 months by not having the higher MP in which case it's a no brainer.  )

[HurtinMinorKey]

Honestly, you might as well get a hasselblad H4D-200 if you are gonna spend that much. That's the ultimate billboard camera.

[GeorgeMaciver]

Billboard sized photographs were being produced when 3 and 5 megapixel cameras were considered huge. How come 18 megapixels isn't enough? I'm not being sarky here, I'm genuinely curious   

[Gothmoth]

Billboard sized photographs were being produced when 3 and 5 megapixel cameras were considered huge. How come 18 megapixels isn't enough? I'm not being sarky here, I'm genuinely curious   

maybe today people tend to press their nose against billboards? i don´t know.

but viewing distance seems not to matter.
in fact i have seen companys who offer 16 feet wide billboards printed with 600 DPI.

for the billboards i know that makes no sense.. i never come close enough.
but hey if you can.... maybe some think they have too...

[HurtinMinorKey]

Billboard sized photographs were being produced when 3 and 5 megapixel cameras were considered huge. How come 18 megapixels isn't enough? I'm not being sarky here, I'm genuinely curious   

Because it is now cost-effective to print really high resolution billboards.  But its still only noticeable at close distance.