December 10, 2016, 04:08:05 AM

Author Topic: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]  (Read 57609 times)

Wrathwilde

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
    • Anarchy Photography
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #75 on: August 21, 2012, 02:12:41 PM »
What if it is called 2D or 4D instead?
 

Ah yes, the famed 35: Double D. Looks great, feels good in your hand... a flash would make this extremely popular.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #75 on: August 21, 2012, 02:12:41 PM »

Wrathwilde

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
    • Anarchy Photography
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #76 on: August 21, 2012, 02:27:21 PM »
Its a new type of body,looks like a mini 1DX

I would love it if it had the same body size as the Canon T90, that camera was the perfect size! Bigger than the 5D3, but smaller than a 1D X.

art_d

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #77 on: August 21, 2012, 02:29:45 PM »
I think the lack of people talking about bit depth is surprising, I think it should be the main thing to consider, more so than mp. I'd much rather have 16bit version of 5dmkiii than a 14bit higher mp camera. It's the main aspect I'm considering investing in medium format.
There is much debate about the "16-bit myth." From what I've read on the matter, I don't believe that a 16-bit camera would produce any tangible improvement over a 14-bit camera, because those extra bits are not actually doing anything useful, just quantizing noise.

JR

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1229
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #78 on: August 21, 2012, 02:38:02 PM »
However this camera turns out, 5D3 owners will be burned.

For what reason? Unless you plan to buy another super computer for 46MP - raw file  ;D
I bought a D800, and my fairly powerful PC could not handle editing of the raw files without taking excessive time to render the images.  NR or other enhancements were painful.  I edited a 500 image shoot, and that was enough for me.  I've looked into the latest computers, but there is no major processing power improvements from my first generation i7 to the third one.  I need 5X or 10X better for a 40mp raw file that opens to a 200+ MB file once in a editor.

Sorry to ear that!  I have the latest Intel i7 six core processor and works fine with the D800 files.  They are a bit longer to process then the 1DX file, but not noticably.  If you use Lighroom, did you optimze its settings to leverage the full power of your computer (like your RAM, etc...).  I know Adobe have some article on that on their website...

1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, and a whole bunch of Nikon lenses

bkorcel

  • Guest
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #79 on: August 21, 2012, 02:53:51 PM »
However this camera turns out, 5D3 owners will be burned.

For what reason? Unless you plan to buy another super computer for 46MP - raw file  ;D
I bought a D800, and my fairly powerful PC could not handle editing of the raw files without taking excessive time to render the images.  NR or other enhancements were painful.  I edited a 500 image shoot, and that was enough for me.  I've looked into the latest computers, but there is no major processing power improvements from my first generation i7 to the third one.  I need 5X or 10X better for a 40mp raw file that opens to a 200+ MB file once in a editor.

I agree there comes a practical level of data that most people can work with and 40MP is too much for post...for most people.  It better have good in camera processing....and what's this?  Still a CF and SD combo???  Going to take time to write that image to an SD card!

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3789
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • My Portfolio
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #80 on: August 21, 2012, 02:59:04 PM »
However this camera turns out, 5D3 owners will be burned.

For what reason? Unless you plan to buy another super computer for 46MP - raw file  ;D

I feel canon should have waited a bit longer on releasing the 5D3 with a better sensor, speaking for the 3500$ price its placed for.

tg

  • Guest
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #81 on: August 21, 2012, 03:23:08 PM »
I think the lack of people talking about bit depth is surprising, I think it should be the main thing to consider, more so than mp. I'd much rather have 16bit version of 5dmkiii than a 14bit higher mp camera. It's the main aspect I'm considering investing in medium format.
There is much debate about the "16-bit myth." From what I've read on the matter, I don't believe that a 16-bit camera would produce any tangible improvement over a 14-bit camera, because those extra bits are not actually doing anything useful, just quantizing noise.


I don't mean to say the difference is enormous, and it comes down to it being a small/modest development, but I have seen many examples of medium format 16 bit sensors delivering beautiful, more natural skin tone renditions due to the ability to capture more colors; I've noticed for a while dslrs often have a somewhat, and sorry for maybe not describing this appropriately, but, plastic tonal renditions from light to dark especially over skin tones (the range of tone seems flatter, local, less subtle variations).
Much like every iteration of cameras today, once you have that little bit more/better/broader range of information/techinik, you are happy to have it and will notice the difference the more you use it.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #81 on: August 21, 2012, 03:23:08 PM »

Fishnose

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #82 on: August 21, 2012, 03:30:47 PM »
Will this shoot 3D?


 ;D


Of course!!

If it's called the 3D, it has to.....
Can you imagine all the returned cameras, and all the struggles sales people will have every day trying to explain to customers that it's NOT 3D.

Chuck Alaimo

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1051
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #83 on: August 21, 2012, 03:32:06 PM »
The 5DIII was targeted to event and wedding photographers who need clean images at higher ISOs. They won't be upset when this surfaces.

... but still many will because they shelled out $3500 to get the latest gimmick on the block, and the arguably the "clean images at high iso" advantage compared to the 5d2 is minor and the 3d shows a real step forward.


I doubt this.  For me at least, it is a clear difference between wants and needs vs benefits (IE Income potential).  For me right now, the mk3 kicks major wedding ass.  This new megapixel beast would be nice to have for shooting wedding formals, outdoors in bright light.  But necessary?  No.  If your a studio guy, yeah, this camera makes sense.  Landscape guys, you bet this makes sense.  But for the kind of work I'm doing, its more of a want than a need.

Oh, and btw...the mk2 would never pull down usable images at ISO 12,800 ...and thats more than just a gimmick!
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

Fishnose

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #84 on: August 21, 2012, 03:42:05 PM »
Nikon fanboys dislike this news  ;D

This camera will cost twice as much as a D800, so I doubt it.

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3111
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #85 on: August 21, 2012, 03:46:04 PM »
The 5DIII was targeted to event and wedding photographers who need clean images at higher ISOs. They won't be upset when this surfaces.

... but still many will because they shelled out $3500 to get the latest gimmick on the block, and the arguably the "clean images at high iso" advantage compared to the 5d2 is minor and the 3d shows a real step forward.


I doubt this.  For me at least, it is a clear difference between wants and needs vs benefits (IE Income potential).  For me right now, the mk3 kicks major wedding ass.  This new megapixel beast would be nice to have for shooting wedding formals, outdoors in bright light.  But necessary?  No.  If your a studio guy, yeah, this camera makes sense.  Landscape guys, you bet this makes sense.  But for the kind of work I'm doing, its more of a want than a need.

Oh, and btw...the mk2 would never pull down usable images at ISO 12,800 ...and thats more than just a gimmick!

Post of the day right here.  Finally someone with some good sense.
2 x 1DX
B1G, MAC, GLIAC

RGomezPhotos

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 328
    • Ricardo Gomez Photography
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #86 on: August 21, 2012, 04:02:38 PM »
This is a total studio camera. From what I see, Canon did everything right. Dual Digic 5 to handle that massive data. Top end ISO limited to 6400 to improve dynamic range. I also think the SD/CF combo is smart too. Shooting tethered is a pain and Eye-Fi cards is a cheap way to transfer data off. Yes it would be relatively slow, but if you're in the studio you aren't shooting rapid-fire style. Data transfers should be fine.  I think it will be called the 1DXs personally.

Editing these files...  You will definitely need the fastest machine you can get X2. People already complain about the D800 files. But again, you shouldn't need to edit many files if you're in the studio.

Price I think will be $5000 - $5500 and for the designated user, I think is very reasonable.  I think it's going to dust the Nikon D800, but should NOT be direct competition due to the price difference.

For the full-time pro, I think this camera is a huge home-run.  I'd consider picking up this camera in a couple of years unless Canon comes out with a medium format camera....
EOS 5D MKII & 50D, Zeiss 50mm f1.4
www.ricardogomezphotography.com

preppyak

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 885
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #87 on: August 21, 2012, 04:33:11 PM »
Is this just a defensive rumor started by Canon to stop people from defecting to Nikon and buying the D800?
I doubt that. Anyone who wanted to defect would have already, since they've had several months to consider it. The D800 is real, a Canon variant isn't, for someone who needs the MP, they've moved already. Especially since there was no indication Canon was gonna match the D800 in price.

Price I think will be $5000 - $5500 and for the designated user, I think is very reasonable.  I think it's going to dust the Nikon D800, but should NOT be direct competition due to the price difference.

For the full-time pro, I think this camera is a huge home-run.  I'd consider picking up this camera in a couple of years unless Canon comes out with a medium format camera....
Yep, these I can see being about right. And I think Nikon actually made a mistake pricing the D800 so low. There are quite a few people that switched because it was affordable to do so, only to realize they didn't need or want 36MP, and now they are changing back. I've seen it a bunch for wedding/pj types, where the hassle of the extra storage and extra processing isn't worth it

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #87 on: August 21, 2012, 04:33:11 PM »

traveller

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #88 on: August 21, 2012, 05:04:10 PM »
However this camera turns out, 5D3 owners will be burned.

For what reason? Unless you plan to buy another super computer for 46MP - raw file  ;D

I feel canon should have waited a bit longer on releasing the 5D3 with a better sensor, speaking for the 3500$ price its placed for.

They had three and a half years, how much longer did they need?  ;D

Besides, these high megapixel camera rumours must be false - Canon has stopped developing new sensors as with the current generation, they have attained perfection!   ;)

art_d

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #89 on: August 21, 2012, 05:06:40 PM »
I think the lack of people talking about bit depth is surprising, I think it should be the main thing to consider, more so than mp. I'd much rather have 16bit version of 5dmkiii than a 14bit higher mp camera. It's the main aspect I'm considering investing in medium format.
There is much debate about the "16-bit myth." From what I've read on the matter, I don't believe that a 16-bit camera would produce any tangible improvement over a 14-bit camera, because those extra bits are not actually doing anything useful, just quantizing noise.


I don't mean to say the difference is enormous, and it comes down to it being a small/modest development, but I have seen many examples of medium format 16 bit sensors delivering beautiful, more natural skin tone renditions due to the ability to capture more colors; I've noticed for a while dslrs often have a somewhat, and sorry for maybe not describing this appropriately, but, plastic tonal renditions from light to dark especially over skin tones (the range of tone seems flatter, local, less subtle variations).
Much like every iteration of cameras today, once you have that little bit more/better/broader range of information/techinik, you are happy to have it and will notice the difference the more you use it.
I think you've misinterpreted. I'm not saying medium format sensors don't deliver better images. But they don't do so because of a 16 bit data pipe.

Sure MF sensors produce smoother color transitions, because of the quality of the sensor itself. MF cameras can't make use of the full 16 bits anymore than DSLRs....those 2 extra bits, even in MF sensors, are not doing anything useful. Those bits are not really delivering actual information, all the data in those 2 bits is just noise. (The only tangible thing that happens is the size of the raw files increases.)

The upshot of this is that it doesn't matter if you change a DSLR sensor from 14 bit to 16 bit. That change will not make a DSLR-sized sensor behave like a MF sensor.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« Reply #89 on: August 21, 2012, 05:06:40 PM »