A guy used 1DX yesterday in Germany!!

[simonxu11]

It seems Canon is fixing the F8 issue!!
http://www.nikonuser.info/fotoforum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1481&sid=fc1b93b823dc0fcd687f64f4f2003688

[Picsfor]

That 1DX's are out there being used is not in doubt, just see the thread on sightings of 5D3, which also purportedly included a 1DX, what is different about this is a reason for a possible release date and delivery - that of the much maligned f8 issue.

If that is the case, it shows that Canon really did drop the ball on this issue, or expected it to be resolved with much more ease. Either way, it would be good for Canon to let the potential customers know and not some die hard Nikonian's.   

[JR]

I see this and I think ok this is good news they will fix the F8 thing, but then it also makes me realize it is strange how Canon seem to have been taken completely off guard with the Nikon D4 being able to focus at F8...if they fix this, as Canon users we should Nikon for keeping the pressure on Canon!

[Flake]

Auto focus at f/8, non of the current lens line up is less than f/5.6 and as far as I remember non of the EF range ever has been.  Even the ultra rare 1200mm manages f/5.6, the only lenses which will fit are the old mirror lenses, but they don't autofocus anyway.  Given a camera costing this much what lenses are there which need this feature?

Lenses like the Sigma 50 - 500mm which are f/6.3 work because they tell the body that its f/5.6 it can't be the aperture which is an issue, simply that the software is told only to work at values higher than f/5.6 if it's too dark AF gives up even on very fast primes.

[V8Beast]

I hate to be a pragmatist in a room full of brand loyalists, but I couldn't care less about the f/8 issue. At $6,800, I have no interest in purchasing a 1Dx, so why should I care? I wonder how many people complaining about the f/8 issue, crying about the delay of the 1Dx's release, or whining about why Canon hasn't released any sample pics taken by the 1Dx are actual ready to plop down the cash for a 1Dx?

As a 1DsIII user, the 1Dx isn't the upgrade I was looking for. My next body will be a 5D3 or D800, so the specs of those two bodies are all that I care about. The 5D3 probably won't be released until after the 1Dx, so that's the only reason I care about when the latter hits the market.

[aldvan]

Auto focus at f/8, non of the current lens line up is less than f/5.6 and as far as I remember non of the EF range ever has been.  Even the ultra rare 1200mm manages f/5.6, the only lenses which will fit are the old mirror lenses, but they don't autofocus anyway.  Given a camera costing this much what lenses are there which need this feature?

Lenses like the Sigma 50 - 500mm which are f/6.3 work because they tell the body that its f/5.6 it can't be the aperture which is an issue, simply that the software is told only to work at values higher than f/5.6 if it's too dark AF gives up even on very fast primes.

Lens+Extender...

[TexPhoto]

Auto focus at f/8, non of the current lens line up is less than f/5.6 and as far as I remember non of the EF range ever has been.  Even the ultra rare 1200mm manages f/5.6, the only lenses which will fit are the old mirror lenses, but they don't autofocus anyway.  Given a camera costing this much what lenses are there which need this feature?

Lenses like the Sigma 50 - 500mm which are f/6.3 work because they tell the body that its f/5.6 it can't be the aperture which is an issue, simply that the software is told only to work at values higher than f/5.6 if it's too dark AF gives up even on very fast primes.

Take any f4 lens, like the 300mm, 400mm DO, 500mm, 600mm add a 2X Extender, and you are at f8.  f5.6 lenses + 1.4X extenders are f8.  And of course off brand lenses and extenders can get there as well.  How often do you need this?  I don't know.  But focusing at f8 has long been held as a "pro" feature. Nobody wants to loose it, especially when their long lenses are not so long on FF as there were on 1.3 Crop.

[smirkypants]

As a 1DsIII user, the 1Dx isn't the upgrade I was looking for. My next body will be a 5D3 or D800, so the specs of those two bodies are all that I care about. The 5D3 probably won't be released until after the 1Dx, so that's the only reason I care about when the latter hits the market.

To be sure, it wasn't the camera I was looking for either. I think combining the 1D line was a huge mistake. I mean, isn't one of the main reasons they kept the camera at 18MP was to be able to shoot so quickly? Wouldn't a lot of studio photographers been a lot happier if they could have shot at half the speed but with much bigger images?

I hate it when somebody tells me "you don't need anything more than 18MP." I have heard that a lot. How do they know what I need? When working with a model, I certainly need 27MP much more than double digit frames per second. I was kind of hoping the new 1D would rival medium format. When I'm shooting sports I don't want full frame. It's an impressive camera, but I really think they only people it's perfect for would be like National Geographic photographers and certain kinds of sports on smaller fields/courts. It's just the wrong camera for me and a lot of others, as well, even though it has a lot of really sexy features.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Auto focus at f/8, non of the current lens line up is less than f/5.6 and as far as I remember non of the EF range ever has been.  Even the ultra rare 1200mm manages f/5.6, the only lenses which will fit are the old mirror lenses, but they don't autofocus anyway.  Given a camera costing this much what lenses are there which need this feature?

Lenses like the Sigma 50 - 500mm which are f/6.3 work because they tell the body that its f/5.6 it can't be the aperture which is an issue, simply that the software is told only to work at values higher than f/5.6 if it's too dark AF gives up even on very fast primes.

I used extenders on my telephoto lenses frequently with my 1D MK II.  This ended up being a f/8 combination and autofocus was great.

I also stacked 1.4 and 2X extenders so that I ended up at f/11.  The 1D still autofocused, slowly.  If I manually focused to the approximate correct position, than it instantly snapped to focus.

I'd be missing that f/8 capability, as would many wildlife photographers.  Canon has some high profile wildlife photographers who they sponsor in a television series.  If they jumped to Nikon over the F/8 thing, heads might roll at Canon.

[TexPhoto]

As a 1DsIII user, the 1Dx isn't the upgrade I was looking for. My next body will be a 5D3 or D800, so the specs of those two bodies are all that I care about. The 5D3 probably won't be released until after the 1Dx, so that's the only reason I care about when the latter hits the market.

To be sure, it wasn't the camera I was looking for either. I think combining the 1D line was a huge mistake. I mean, isn't one of the main reasons they kept the camera at 18MP was to be able to shoot so quickly? Wouldn't a lot of studio photographers been a lot happier if they could have shot at half the speed but with much bigger images?

I hate it when somebody tells me "you don't need anything more than 18MP." I have heard that a lot. How do they know what I need? When working with a model, I certainly need 27MP much more than double digit frames per second. I was kind of hoping the new 1D would rival medium format. When I'm shooting sports I don't want full frame. It's an impressive camera, but I really think they only people it's perfect for would be like National Geographic photographers and certain kinds of sports on smaller fields/courts. It's just the wrong camera for me and a lot of others, as well, even though it has a lot of really sexy features.

Are was allowed to admit this?    Will Canon revoke my membership? 
I agree completely.  I want more MP than my 5DII for studio and general photography.  And the crop factor on my 7D is much appreciated when I shoot sports, or nature.

[Picsfor]

As a 1DsIII user, the 1Dx isn't the upgrade I was looking for. My next body will be a 5D3 or D800, so the specs of those two bodies are all that I care about. The 5D3 probably won't be released until after the 1Dx, so that's the only reason I care about when the latter hits the market.

To be sure, it wasn't the camera I was looking for either. I think combining the 1D line was a huge mistake. I mean, isn't one of the main reasons they kept the camera at 18MP was to be able to shoot so quickly? Wouldn't a lot of studio photographers been a lot happier if they could have shot at half the speed but with much bigger images?

I hate it when somebody tells me "you don't need anything more than 18MP." I have heard that a lot. How do they know what I need? When working with a model, I certainly need 27MP much more than double digit frames per second. I was kind of hoping the new 1D would rival medium format. When I'm shooting sports I don't want full frame. It's an impressive camera, but I really think they only people it's perfect for would be like National Geographic photographers and certain kinds of sports on smaller fields/courts. It's just the wrong camera for me and a lot of others, as well, even though it has a lot of really sexy features.

You are quite right to say you want more MP's - if that is what you need. As i've said elsewhere - it strikes me that the MP brigade can never have enough MP's. In that respect, the D800's alledged 36mp will be much more to our liking, as would MF if it weren't so expensive...

[V8Beast]

To be sure, it wasn't the camera I was looking for either. I think combining the 1D line was a huge mistake. I mean, isn't one of the main reasons they kept the camera at 18MP was to be able to shoot so quickly? Wouldn't a lot of studio photographers been a lot happier if they could have shot at half the speed but with much bigger images?

I hate it when somebody tells me "you don't need anything more than 18MP." I have heard that a lot. How do they know what I need? When working with a model, I certainly need 27MP much more than double digit frames per second. I was kind of hoping the new 1D would rival medium format. When I'm shooting sports I don't want full frame. It's an impressive camera, but I really think they only people it's perfect for would be like National Geographic photographers and certain kinds of sports on smaller fields/courts. It's just the wrong camera for me and a lot of others, as well, even though it has a lot of really sexy features.

While I'm painfully aware of all the MP addicts that equate overall image quality to MP count, there are certainly situations where the resolution is a necessity, not a "hey, I can't crop with only only 'x' megapixels" affair. My shooting needs prioritize dynamic range and high ISO performance over ultimate resolution, but that doesn't mean resolution isn't important. For instance, there are instances where I'll shoot shoot material for a brochure or editorial work, and later on down the road, the client wants to re-use some of those images for posters or banners at trade shows or other promotional material.

Additionally, I'm not sure where the 300 dpi standard comes from, but even in a small image, say 3x5, print much better at 450- or 600 dpi vs. 300. Perhaps it has something to do with the poor paper, ink, and print quality my editorial clients use, but I can easily spot the difference between shots taken by my 5DI and 1DsIII when printed at the same size in the same magazine.

In that regard, the 1Dx is an impressive machine, but I see it more as a 1DV than a 1DsIV. I really hope Canon has a high-res body in the works, because I'm not looking forward to selling all my Canon gear for a D800 if it indeed will have a 36 mp sensor.

[Canon-F1]

I hate it when somebody tells me "you don't need anything more than 18MP." I have heard that a lot. How do they know what I need? When working with a model, I certainly need 27MP much more than double digit frames per second. I was kind of hoping the new 1D would rival medium format. When I'm shooting sports I don't want full frame. It's an impressive camera, but I really think they only people it's perfect for would be like National Geographic photographers and certain kinds of sports on smaller fields/courts. It's just the wrong camera for me and a lot of others, as well, even though it has a lot of really sexy features.

switch to nikon and give us some rest.   
you won´t get more MP with a 1D X so why talking about it over and over again?

and why not buying a pentax 645?
it´s not that much more expensive and a great studio camera!

if you need MF .. buy MF... simple as that.

[briansquibb]

you won´t get more MP with a 1D X so why talking about it over and over again?

I already feel the upgrade to my 1D4 will be the 1DX

and why not buying a pentax 645?
it´s not that much more expensive and a great studio camera!

The body isn't too bad - its the new lens that will cost. My 1Ds3 is safe for another year or so unless the 5D3 is a compelling alternative.

My 5D2 will be staying - even if only as a backup body

[funkboy]

Auto focus at f/8, non of the current lens line up is less than f/5.6 and as far as I remember non of the EF range ever has been.  Even the ultra rare 1200mm manages f/5.6, the only lenses which will fit are the old mirror lenses, but they don't autofocus anyway.  Given a camera costing this much what lenses are there which need this feature?

Clearly you've never used a teleconverter before...