1D X "Limitations" Fixable?

[Michael7]

It's a $6000 camera, not a Mars Rover. Make the damn thing focus at F8 and quit with the baby games.

[rlp]

Why have a camera that does not auto focus with the new 2x EF Extender III and the new 500 & 600 f/4?  As a life long Canon user I am extremely disappointed.  I don't need or want video in my SLR, give me a GREAT SLR not some hybrid that does nothing well.

[Ryusui]

Why do people keep griping about the video features of the DSLRs as if they retard the photo abilities?

[K3nt]

Why do people keep griping about the video features of the DSLRs as if they retard the photo abilities?

I don't think that's the issue. The issue is more of a trade-off nature. How much did they inhibit the photo abilities to make 'room' for the video features?
For me, I'd get along with really basic video feature as long as the stills features are top-notch. If I want to make video, I'll get myself a dedicated videocamera.
But I guess it's a matter of personal preference in the end, some people still gripe about the demise of film, even though the latest DSLRs outshine anything film could ever do, quality-wise. Oh  boy, I just opened up a whole other can of works didn't I? 

[dolina]

How about AF at f/8? The Nikon D4 has eleven f/8 compatible points.

The layout is shown below. Orange square is cross type while the black square is non-cross type.

[Ryusui]

Why do people keep griping about the video features of the DSLRs as if they retard the photo abilities?

I don't think that's the issue. The issue is more of a trade-off nature. How much did they inhibit the photo abilities to make 'room' for the video features?

But that's what I mean.  What trade off?  As far as I know (and someone please correct me if this is not the case) the video aspect of the DSLRs does nothing to retard the photo taking abilities.  In otherwords, there is no trade-off.
I'm not a huge video user.  I've only used it a couple of times so far, and plan to use it a few more times.  But over the life of my 5D my use will probably end up being 90% photos 10% videos.  So I don't have a major attachment or stake in it.  I just feel like video has become the scapegoat for many.  "Low-light auto focus sucks...the video is responsible."  "Why isn't this a 36 megapixel camera?  Must be the video."

[K3nt]

Why do people keep griping about the video features of the DSLRs as if they retard the photo abilities?

I don't think that's the issue. The issue is more of a trade-off nature. How much did they inhibit the photo abilities to make 'room' for the video features?

But that's what I mean.  What trade off?  As far as I know (and someone please correct me if this is not the case) the video aspect of the DSLRs does nothing to retard the photo taking abilities.  In otherwords, there is no trade-off.
I'm not a huge video user.  I've only used it a couple of times so far, and plan to use it a few more times.  But over the life of my 5D my use will probably end up being 90% photos 10% videos.  So I don't have a major attachment or stake in it.  I just feel like video has become the scapegoat for many.  "Low-light auto focus sucks...the video is responsible."  "Why isn't this a 36 megapixel camera?  Must be the video."

Your use seems to be the same as me. I'm not saying that there necessarily _has_ to be a trade-off, but if you took out all the video-features, it would make sense that there would be more 'room' in the firmware for cool stills features. Video-features do use part of the space available for firmware.
I don't think they technically inhibit the stills features, like you mention the low-light etc gripes. Those capabilities would probably be the same, with or without video features.
What I'm looking at, if you remove the video-features, could I then have 7 bracket shots and HDR preview instead? Thos would require some serious bytes out of the firmware. 

[wickidwombat]

Why do people keep griping about the video features of the DSLRs as if they retard the photo abilities?

I don't think that's the issue. The issue is more of a trade-off nature. How much did they inhibit the photo abilities to make 'room' for the video features?

But that's what I mean.  What trade off?  As far as I know (and someone please correct me if this is not the case) the video aspect of the DSLRs does nothing to retard the photo taking abilities.  In otherwords, there is no trade-off.
I'm not a huge video user.  I've only used it a couple of times so far, and plan to use it a few more times.  But over the life of my 5D my use will probably end up being 90% photos 10% videos.  So I don't have a major attachment or stake in it.  I just feel like video has become the scapegoat for many.  "Low-light auto focus sucks...the video is responsible."  "Why isn't this a 36 megapixel camera?  Must be the video."

Your use seems to be the same as me. I'm not saying that there necessarily _has_ to be a trade-off, but if you took out all the video-features, it would make sense that there would be more 'room' in the firmware for cool stills features. Video-features do use part of the space available for firmware.
I don't think they technically inhibit the stills features, like you mention the low-light etc gripes. Those capabilities would probably be the same, with or without video features.
What I'm looking at, if you remove the video-features, could I then have 7 bracket shots and HDR preview instead? Thos would require some serious bytes out of the firmware. 

7 bracket AEB has been in the 1D line since forever i think only the mk1 didnt have it so the 1Dx will have it... and i definately wouldnt trust an in camera rendition of an HDR
just saying

[neuroanatomist]

i definately wouldnt trust an in camera rendition of an HDR
just saying

Keep in mind that the multi-exposure function isn't just for HDR. For example, you can drop -5 EV then add 5 exposures of a bat being swung. Just sayin'...   

[Ryusui]

What I'm looking at, if you remove the video-features, could I then have 7 bracket shots and HDR preview instead? Thos would require some serious bytes out of the firmware. 

7 bracket AEB has been in the 1D line since forever i think only the mk1 didnt have it so the 1Dx will have it... and i definately wouldnt trust an in camera rendition of an HDR
just saying

Like wickidwombat says, 7 bracket AEB is there, and will be there for the 1D X.  I think what trips up most people is they don't realize that they need to go to the custom functions to change it from 3 shots to 2, 5 or 7.

[K3nt]

What I'm looking at, if you remove the video-features, could I then have 7 bracket shots and HDR preview instead? Thos would require some serious bytes out of the firmware. 

7 bracket AEB has been in the 1D line since forever i think only the mk1 didnt have it so the 1Dx will have it... and i definately wouldnt trust an in camera rendition of an HDR
just saying

Like wickidwombat says, 7 bracket AEB is there, and will be there for the 1D X.  I think what trips up most people is they don't realize that they need to go to the custom functions to change it from 3 shots to 2, 5 or 7.

Yep, I admit, I didn't know the 1D-line already supported 7 shot bracketing. (I only have a 7D and that one doesn't). But my point here is: What features could I potentially have by not having video control take a chunk out of the available firmware?  Your imagination is the limit here.
I wouldn't trust the camera preview for much of anything, but, a quick HDR preview could give you an idea if you quickly need to change anything.
One shouldn't take these too literally, speculation is what it is, let your imagination soar!

[PeterJ]

But my point here is: What features could I potentially have by not having video control take a chunk out of the available firmware?  Your imagination is the limit here.

According to the Margic Lantern page http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/7D_internals one processor has 1.7MB of firmware and the other 5.1MB giving a total of 6.8MB. I doubt dual ARM processors share the same program area so it's likely they are at a minimum of 8MB each. I'm not sure NAND FLASH that small is even widely available any more, so more likely they have 16MB+ considering they cost well under $2 in moderate volumes.

Either way I'd expect the extra still features like extra bracketing would take well under 1K of additional code space, so really just a marketing thing plus not having too many confusing options in the lower-level cameras. It's easy to forget in today's PC world how small things can be, I just took a look at a Linux kernel + filesystem + application I built for an embedded system recently and it's 3.8MB, so it's a 100% given a Canon camera which no doubt would have plenty of RAM could run Linux.

Anyway not to move too far OT I don't think you miss any still features because of video, it's just what they want to put in there. Not that I'm arguing too much, I hardly ever user video either just treat it as a bonus that's there for no significant cost

[Ryusui]

I didn't see it mentioned, but I wonder if a firmware change could add something like the D4's HTTP Mode.  For that function, I would gladly buy the WFT-E6A at their $600 asking price.  Although I would prefer if Canon came out with a dedicated iOS app version of their EOS Utility.