Canon EOS-1D X Review

[Canon Rumors]

Share

A first review
Martin Bailey, a Tokyo based photographer has posted a pretty extensive review of the Canon EOS-1D X. You can read or listen to his podcast as he talks about his initial impressions of Canon’s new flagship.

From the review

OK, so these are the main points that I’ve come across so far. I can live with the resolution for the frame-rate and high ISO performance trade-off . I was expecting a larger leap forward in the AI Servo tracking performance, but I’m very happy with the accuracy of the AI Servo focusing when it locks on. For my cormorant tests I was working in very high contrast conditions, and with flowing water in the background, which has always been very tricky. Considering this, it performed OK, though I had hoped for a little more.

Read The Full Review

cr

[dilbert]

And he's saying 1 stop improvement in noise for higher ISO. If that's true for raw and not just JPEG then that's quite significant as that advantage. Likely this will at least pair it with the D4 in performance.

This isn't the difference 4MP less makes, this is a new sensor design.

[preppyak]

And he's saying 1 stop improvement in noise for higher ISO. If that's true for raw and not just JPEG then that's quite significant as that advantage.

Well, just looking at those flower photos, ISO 12800 on the 1DX looks like ISO800/1600 on any of Canon's APS-C cameras (60D, 7D, etc), which is kind of crazy. Like he mentions, its very useable to 12,800, the 25,600 would probably be where I'd set my Max ISO setting, but you could even use the 51,200 and de-noise and probably be fine. It's kind of crazy how well it handles low light.

I agree about the new sensor design, I don't think an slight MP drop is enough to account for that

[pedro]

And he's saying 1 stop improvement in noise for higher ISO. If that's true for raw and not just JPEG then that's quite significant as that advantage.

Well, just looking at those flower photos, ISO 12800 on the 1DX looks like ISO800/1600 on any of Canon's APS-C cameras (60D, 7D, etc), which is kind of crazy. Like he mentions, its very useable to 12,800, the 25,600 would probably be where I'd set my Max ISO setting, but you could even use the 51,200 and de-noise and probably be fine. It's kind of crazy how well it handles low light.

I agree about the new sensor design, I don't think an slight MP drop is enough to account for that

Great review and highly appreciated comparison with the 5D3 high ISOs. As I the 1Dx is way out of my economic reach, as an enthusiast amateur photographer I will have plenty of camera with the 5D3 covering any type of photography I am aimed at. I really consider it as kind of a mini 1Dx at almost half of the price. Made the day for me, though. Suirely will go for a 5D3 within a year or so. Saving up for a nice WA. Cheers, Pedro

[dilbert]

Great review and highly appreciated comparison with the 5D3 high ISOs. As I the 1Dx is way out of my economic reach, as an enthusiast amateur photographer I will have plenty of camera with the 5D3 covering any type of photography I am aimed at. I really consider it as kind of a mini 1Dx at almost half of the price. Made the day for me, though. Suirely will go for a 5D3 within a year or so. Saving up for a nice WA. Cheers, Pedro

There's another aspect to the sensor performance in the 1DX and that is if the improved picture quality isn't due to just a better JPEG noise elimination algorithm then that quite clearly Canon can deliver a better sensor than what is in the 5D Mark III.

[sweetcancer]

they probably designed the sensor from the bottom up a few times, judging from how long it took them to finally get it released all that pressure from listening to all the complains about 5d mark III sensor...

[Cropper]

Nice high ISO performance. Really impressive !

It's pretty lame though that after all the publicity made by Canon that the new extenders were fantastic on the new superteles, they still don´t have a body that AF at F8.
Really disapointing, particularly when the competition offers this feature on much lower grade bodies.

Nice camera, but not for me. Bring on the high resolution version ! ASAP !!!

[iso79]

People complained about the 5D Mark III sensor? 

[dilbert]

they probably designed the sensor from the bottom up a few times, judging from how long it took them to finally get it released all that pressure from listening to all the complains about 5d mark III sensor...

Yeah, after reading all of the negativity about the 5D Mark III's sensor, they went back in time and fixed it for the 1DX and that's why it was delayed...

No, the 1DX sensor will be a new design and the 5D Mark III has the 5D Mark II sensor with a few tweaks.

Now if Canon were to use the 1DX sensor in a cheaper body, say an entry level (~$2k) full frame camera (18MP) in a 5D sized body, I'd be all over that.

[Drizzt321]

People complained about the 5D Mark III sensor? 

Yea, it's horrible. It's an incremental improvement over the previous 5d2 sensor. We don't get magical ability to use ISO 5 million that let's us see in the dark with hardly any noise that's easily correctable by LR4. It's hardly usable, don't find it any better than the 5d2 sensor. I mean, I can use images up to ISO 12800 for web size pretty easily. Geesh, it's horrible!

[awinphoto]

People complained about the 5D Mark III sensor? 

Yea, it's horrible. It's an incremental improvement over the previous 5d2 sensor. We don't get magical ability to use ISO 5 million that let's us see in the dark with hardly any noise that's easily correctable by LR4. It's hardly usable, don't find it any better than the 5d2 sensor. I mean, I can use images up to ISO 12800 for web size pretty easily. Geesh, it's horrible!

Lest we forget that it barely adds any additional MP or DR...  all that extra workflow just to get my images to pop, I was SO looking forwards to that but NOOOOOOOO canon didn't give that to me, haha. 

[jaduffy007]

People complained about the 5D Mark III sensor? 

Yea, it's horrible. It's an incremental improvement over the previous 5d2 sensor. We don't get magical ability to use ISO 5 million that let's us see in the dark with hardly any noise that's easily correctable by LR4. It's hardly usable, don't find it any better than the 5d2 sensor. I mean, I can use images up to ISO 12800 for web size pretty easily. Geesh, it's horrible!

Guys, I don't recall reading any posts where the 5d3 sensor was called "horrible" or even "bad". This includes the madness of dpreview forums.  What there's been a lot of is, disappointment in the lack of improvement vs 5d2, such as banding, etc  This is an important distinction that seems "lost" on Canon fanboys.  "lack of improvement" does not equate to "bad" or "horrible".  The intensity of comments from those objectively pointing out this lack of improvement (in contrast to the D800) increased dramatically as they encountered fanboys unwilling to acknowledge these facts.  Usually the fanboys would mis-characterize the "critical" comments by using hyperbole such as "So you think the sensor sucks, go away troll!" or give the impression the poster had insane expectations such as "magical ability to use ISO 5 million" or that the poster had written the sensor was "horrible".  Ahem.

Another example: Lloyd Chambers said he found himself "bored" in regard to the 5d3 images and Canon fanboys went ballistic saying the "5D3 images are not boring!!".  Well, that's not what Lloyd said.  It was the lack of improvement that led to him having a lack of enthusiasm.  Lack of enthusiasm does not equal "bad" or "horrible".

This, all in contrast to the simple truth that the 5d3 sensor is not a significant improvement over the 5d2 and after waiting 4 (f'ing) years for the update, that's disappointing or as Lloyd put it, "boring".

[pedro]

Knowing not so much about sensor tech improvements, maybe one can't have it all in body almost half the price of the other. Or did former 1D sensors automatically trickle down into the 5D units? Some of you sure know how that was managed before. Anyway, upgrading from a 30D this will be a huge improvement for me. But I can understand former 5Dii users who have hoped for more...Cheers, Pedro

[Drizzt321]

People complained about the 5D Mark III sensor? 

Yea, it's horrible. It's an incremental improvement over the previous 5d2 sensor. We don't get magical ability to use ISO 5 million that let's us see in the dark with hardly any noise that's easily correctable by LR4. It's hardly usable, don't find it any better than the 5d2 sensor. I mean, I can use images up to ISO 12800 for web size pretty easily. Geesh, it's horrible!

Guys, I don't recall reading any posts where the 5d3 sensor was called "horrible" or even "bad". This includes the madness of dpreview forums.  What there's been a lot of is, disappointment in the lack of improvement vs 5d2, such as banding, etc  This is an important distinction that seems "lost" on Canon fanboys.  "lack of improvement" does not equate to "bad" or "horrible".  The intensity of comments from those objectively pointing out this lack of improvement (in contrast to the D800) increased dramatically as they encountered fanboys unwilling to acknowledge these facts.  Usually the fanboys would mis-characterize the "critical" comments by using hyperbole such as "So you think the sensor sucks, go away troll!" or give the impression the poster had insane expectations such as "magical ability to use ISO 5 million" or that the poster had written the sensor was "horrible".  Ahem.

Another example: Lloyd Chambers said he found himself "bored" in regard to the 5d3 images and Canon fanboys went ballistic saying the "5D3 images are not boring!!".  Well, that's not what Lloyd said.  It was the lack of improvement that led to him having a lack of enthusiasm.  Lack of enthusiasm does not equal "bad" or "horrible".

This, all in contrast to the simple truth that the 5d3 sensor is not a significant improvement over the 5d2 and after waiting 4 (f'ing) years for the update, that's disappointing or as Lloyd put it, "boring".

Ok, well, next time maybe I need to add <sarcasm> tags more often. I guess I wasn't over the top enough.

For me personally, the 5d3 sensor is a decent upgrade, although not phenomenal. I actually do find it to be a pretty big improvement over the 5d2 at high ISOs, especially when shooting for web size images. In terms of banding, I personally see some decent improvement over the 5d2, but it still needs a good bit of work.

[EchoLocation]

People complained about the 5D Mark III sensor? 

Yea, it's horrible. It's an incremental improvement over the previous 5d2 sensor. We don't get magical ability to use ISO 5 million that let's us see in the dark with hardly any noise that's easily correctable by LR4. It's hardly usable, don't find it any better than the 5d2 sensor. I mean, I can use images up to ISO 12800 for web size pretty easily. Geesh, it's horrible!

Guys, I don't recall reading any posts where the 5d3 sensor was called "horrible" or even "bad". This includes the madness of dpreview forums.  What there's been a lot of is, disappointment in the lack of improvement vs 5d2, such as banding, etc  This is an important distinction that seems "lost" on Canon fanboys.  "lack of improvement" does not equate to "bad" or "horrible".  The intensity of comments from those objectively pointing out this lack of improvement (in contrast to the D800) increased dramatically as they encountered fanboys unwilling to acknowledge these facts.  Usually the fanboys would mis-characterize the "critical" comments by using hyperbole such as "So you think the sensor sucks, go away troll!" or give the impression the poster had insane expectations such as "magical ability to use ISO 5 million" or that the poster had written the sensor was "horrible".  Ahem.

Another example: Lloyd Chambers said he found himself "bored" in regard to the 5d3 images and Canon fanboys went ballistic saying the "5D3 images are not boring!!".  Well, that's not what Lloyd said.  It was the lack of improvement that led to him having a lack of enthusiasm.  Lack of enthusiasm does not equal "bad" or "horrible".

This, all in contrast to the simple truth that the 5d3 sensor is not a significant improvement over the 5d2 and after waiting 4 (f'ing) years for the update, that's disappointing or as Lloyd put it, "boring".

I agree. I don't think that anyone thinks the 5DIII is a bad camera. But for the price, it better be mind bogglingly good, and I don't think anyone would say that is the case. I would pay 2500 in a heartbeat for the 5DIII, but at over 3000 it is just not going to happen. The 5DIII is actually just what I expected it would be, except I expected Canon to beat Nikon's price by 500 bucks, instead it's the other way around.
So, yes, for 3500 dollars the camera is a bit underwhelming(boring)