Is it too early for the first "The Canon 1DX sucks" posting?

[briansquibb]

The D4 is so much cheaper than the 1DX that Canon was forced to respond by selling it with the 40mm as a kit lens

[Marsu42]

Normally there are 2 groups of people complaining:
1. people who can't afford the camera but want it
2. people who couldn't afford it yet somehow bought the camera and now are looking for any excuse to return it

3. people who own, have tried the gear or did research on it and want to share the knowledge of shortcomings that weren't emphasized enough in the high-gloss advertisement or sponsored reviews. Like "What high-iso improvment of the 5d3?", "The af of the 1dx/5d3 depends on the lens id, not on the max. open aperture" and "Wtf - Canon cut afma from the 60d". I'm interested in reading these posts, because it allows me to make a more educated purchasing decision.

[briansquibb]

4. Those who just dont like Canon products

[Hillsilly]

Thanks, was going to splash some cash on one of these.  You've saved me from a horrendous mistake!

I'll wait for the 1DX2.  Hopefully Canon will have fixed all of the defects.

[Marsu42]

4. Those who just dont like Canon products

You're correct in so far that a "xyz sucks" tends to be just trollish complaining, personally I'd rather prefer a "Share your research or experiences with xyz" thread. But it's like looking at a car wreck, resisting reading while drinking coffee is hard :-p

If people really don't like Canon products at all (and not are just annoyed by some current marketing decisions) they'd be well advised to switch their brand because shooting with gear you essentially hate won't result in good pictures.

[Brymills]

I can't believe how much this camera costs... I mean like... duh....

My 550D cost 1/10th of the price, has just as many megapixels and lets me select what kind of picture I'm taking, landscape, portrait, macro, sport, night scene, there's not even a green square mode for when i don't have time to think about what kind of picture i'm taking!!  I've spent all this money to document my children growing up and now, I can't take pictures of them because every picture I take comes out rubbish, AND I can't afford to feed them either.  What was Canon thinking of??  Did anybody think about the children?  And the cats?  What about the cats??

I mean, every camera manufacturer is a bit dim, obviously, but why do they even bother with landscape AND portrait modes?  I mean... why does it matter which way up I'm holding the camera, surely the picture capture thingy isn't sensitive to which way up you hold the camera?  Are camera designers REALLY that dim?  Whilst we're on about designers being a bit dim, at least Nikon make their lenses the same colour as the bodies.  I mean, just how stupid does my 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM look when I'm in the park taking photo's of Kyle on his skateboard???

Sorry Canon but this camera sucks!

[LikeBreathing]

Only 18MP, just buy a 550D instead. 

[paul13walnut5]

I can't help but wonder what folk shot on before the D800?

It's back to the old camera club bore thing:

"What kind of camera do you use?"

"I use a camera X"

"Oh you can't possibly get decent pictures with camera X"

The 1DX looks lovely, but I can guarantee I'm never going to own one, or a D800.  My camera works for me, when it breaks or something more useful is released that makes my work easier then I may replace.  In descending importance:  Being there.  With a camera. At the right moment. Knowing how to work the camera.

Megapixels, lens resolutions, card speeds, focus screens are on the list, just quite a bit down it.

I have an 18MP camera, which is about 10 more than I reckon I realistically need.  I only sold my 10MP because I wanted video.  I would love a very large photosite 8MP APS-C camera with digic4 or digic 5 and video.

The great thing with the D800 and the 1DX is that hopefully the technology will trickle down.  I don't want an F1 car for using around town, but if my car has better brakes, or uses less fuel because of f1 technology then I'm happy.

The pro's seemed to have coped and got covers with D1's, D2's, D3's, 1Dmk2's, maybe not 1Dmk3's, 1Dmk4's etc.

[aj1575]

The new Nokia phone gets a better score from DxO

This says more about DxO Mark than the quality of a sensor (and even less the quality of a whole camera)...

[Orion]

All these joke posts point to a psychological factor at work here: Canon sensors losing to Nikon's, so they only way we can "beat" Nikon is to exagerate faults so as to hide the truth of the real faults.

(btw, if the ISO of the 1Dx is killer as they say, I'm selling my mkIII. . . . or going in debt for a few months)

[paul13walnut5]

Oh no a nikon sensor on a camera I'll never own out performs a canon sensor on a camera I'll never own.

Just how will I get by?

[V8Beast]

Oh no a nikon sensor on a camera I'll never own out performs a canon sensor on a camera I'll never own.

Just how will I get by?

By complaining on forums

[wickidwombat]

Well the 1Dx is quite a decent chunk of coin cheaper here in oz than the 1Ds3 was...
even if it more than the USA prices
hello silver lining

[briansquibb]

Well the 1Dx is quite a decent chunk of coin cheaper here in oz than the 1Ds3 was...
even if it more than the USA prices
hello silver lining

The 1DX and 1DS3 were in the same region here in the UK

[V8Beast]

The 1Ds3 debuted at $8,000 in the U.S., compared to $6,800 for the 1Dx. I suppose this means that people are running down the street screaming about what a great deal the 1Dx is

On the flip side, the 1Dx seems more like a 1D4 replacement to me, which costs $5,000, so the complainers still have something to complain about