Canon EOS-1D X Mark III Summary

[Trankilstef]

Why do 1DX owners need 4K 60fps w/ AF?

Last I've heard, The Hobbit was shown on the silver screen at 48 fps, and the audience didn't like it.

Because as filmmakers we want more fps to achieve better slow motion, it's not always to use it per se. The more fps, the slower and nicer the motion will be. It's not because that we shoot at 60 fps that we will deliver it at 60 fps (it's actually almost never the case it will be edited at 24/30p).

 

[JPB]

Because as filmmakers we want more fps to achieve better slow motion, it's not always to use it per se. The more fps, the slower and nicer the motion will be. It's not because that we shoot at 60 fps that we will deliver it at 60 fps (it's actually almost never the case it will be edited at 24/30p).

I agree. Most of the post produced material is in 24/30p. But be able to take it down to 50-40% is amazing. Especially when filming handheld or with gimbal. I film 99% of material in 4k 60p. But when I know that I´m only going to use the material in its orignal speed, I go for 4k 24/30p, especially in low light situations where the lower fps is doing a lot better. Another thing with the high-res - high-fps is that it many times become a bit to clear. But I rather have it that way and "dirt" it up in post production, than the other way around

 

[scyrene]

I understand a high mega pixel body will be coming out, but it will probably lack either the auto focus abilities of the new 1dx3 or the speed and possibly both. I keep going back to this:

1) Mega Pixels
2) Superb Auto Focus
3) High Frame Rate

Canon says you can have two. There seems to be a real demand on this forum for the resolution of the 5d4 along with the speed and auto focus of the 1dx3. I realize it is just internet noise and represent a small fraction of camera buyers, but buyers of the 1d series are a small fraction of camera buyers. I am just shocked it appear this segment is not going to be addressed by Canon. It seems mostly related to wildlife shooters, some portrait shooters and all rounders. Who is buying 600f4 and 500F4 and 800f5.6 lenses?

'Twas ever thus. I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired, and their AF will probably be good enough in most situations (the 1Dx3 will outperform it but only a bit). The higher the resolution, the lower the fps naturally, where your cutoff is will vary. I never found the 5D3/5Ds too slow, but I find the 90D tempting because it combines high pixel density and higher fps (but doubtless lesser AF capability). But there is akways a compromise. I don't for a second believe Sony or Nikon's bodies offer everything to everyone. Or if they do, that's the solution.

There's certainly good reason to say Canon's lineup has a gap for wildlife shooters, especially discontinuing the 7 series. Perhaps they just aren't a big enough segment for it to be worth targeting? But in any case, there are still options, just with more compromises.

PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.

 

[tron]

...
PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.

Nikon D6 updated/rumored specifications (D6 could be 20MP and not 24MP as previously reported) - Nikon Rumors

Here are the Nikon D6 updated/rumored specifications: 2oMP sensor, not 24MP as previous reported (still not 100% sure) 14 fps in normal shutter mode (the D5 could do 12 fps) Improved/better AF system but probably with the same number of AF points The Nikon D6 AF improvements are crucial and...

nikonrumors.com

 

[tron]

So what are the two surprises that were mentioned in a previous post?

I guess the first was the raw video but the second?

Unless the 20Mpixels count as the second surprise

 

[SecureGSM]

I would be very surprised if still photography was able to AF at the extremes like that - my guess is that they will be more like Nikon in that they will have many more AF points more densely packed within pretty much the same area as currently configured, with the AF point density improving focus tracking as the subject moves within the frame.

However, 1Dx III with AF points spread as per diagram above would sell like hot cakes even at 20Mp.

 

[ToonD]

Can't believe so many complaints about 20MP. How many people on here actually own this sort of rig? Seriously. 20MP is fine for who/what this camera is built for. And in keeping it at 20MP, it looks like they were able to get even more high ISO performance out of it and presumably lower noise in low light.

OK, I own four 1D bodies for shooting sports. better high ISO, lower noise is great but not needed for most pro work. Most pro sport stadiums are well lit these days. (1250, f4 iso 3200-6400). So the new 1DX III has no eye autofocus in the OVF, has no real silent shooting, shoots 16 fps vs 20 fps for the A9 and so on. So if it's still 20 MP I find this disappointing. As a sports photographer I always crop a lot so I could use as many pixels as I can get. So don't tell me that 20 MP is enough for me. Remember we can not get the firmware updates with these dslr bodies that the mirrorless bodies can get.

 

[Travel_Photographer]

I think we're talking past each other.

Going from a 24 mp sensor down to a 20 mp sensor, you lose about 530 pixels on the horizontal axis and 350 on the vertical axis.

That doesn't sound like much, but if I crop a 24 mp image down to 20 mp, it looks like this (24 mp on the left, 20 mp on the right)

View attachment 188049

Losing resolution means that an editor has less room to crop while still maintaining the quality necessary for print (for argument's sake, at 300 DPI). When an editor has a problem using an image because they need to crop it, but there isn't enough resolution to use it at the size they want, in layout, it means they have to use a different image. This could mean the difference between you making the cover of a magazine or not!

All this to say, yeah, it would be better if the 1DX mk. III had a higher resolution sensor, because having one would make the camera more versatile. This is inarguable even if one's own specific usage will not benefit from increased resolution.

We're on the same page and I generally agree with you. This part of the thread began when a question came up regarding how much larger you could print going from a 20mp camera to a 24mp. My response was meant to be one post, and it took on a life of it's own. (The answer to that original question was about 18.5 inches wide print for 20mp, and 20" wide print for 24mp).

I love to crop. If I could shoot every photo I ever took at 16mm focal length, I would be happy. My personal motto as a travel photographer has always been "when I get home, I can always crop to get tighter, but if I'm not wide enough on location, there's nothing I can do to get back what I missed by being too tight". That's why I mentioned in a previous post that I like to crop, and I probably wind up cropping almost every photo I take.

If I had to sum up my position on all if this is, it would be that I too wish with new 1D was going to have more megapixels. I'm actually a little surprised that they didn't bump it up, if not for any other reason than marketing purposes and avoiding all the disappointed potential customers. But that said, I personally don't find the difference between 20mp and 24mp to be that significant. For those that were hoping for 24mp specifically, I don't think it's such a huge let down. If one was looking for 30+mp, then yes, remaining at 20mp would be a more significant disappointment.

 

[tron]

OK, I own four 1D bodies for shooting sports. better high ISO, lower noise is great but not needed for most pro work. Most pro sport stadiums are well lit these days. (1250, f4 iso 3200-6400). So the new 1DX III has no eye autofocus in the OVF, has no real silent shooting, shoots 16 fps vs 20 fps for the A9 and so on. So if it's still 20 MP I find this disappointing. As a sports photographer I always crop a lot so I could use as many pixels as I can get. So don't tell me that 20 MP is enough for me. Remember we can not get the firmware updates with these dslr bodies that the mirrorless bodies can get.

Which DSLR has eye autofocus using OVF?

 

[sanj]

I was hoping for 24/26 mpx. If it is not there, Canon must have technical reasons for it. So will make do with 20. But I whish there was DPAF in RAW.

 

[drama]

Oh dear. Another camera spec semi-confirmed, and another 300+ posts of people who won't buy it loudly arguing with total certainty why it's awful, amazing and everything in between. When will you guys realise Canon probably have done a lot of research on what their existing 1DX2 users want, and what the market is doing before putting it out? If you don't like it, don't buy it! There are many other cameras that do different things. I greatly suspect Canon will also release more cameras. They will have different specs and be targeted differently. If you look at any camera from the position of "why doesn't it do this", you are a) setting yourself up for disappointment, and b) demonstrating a total lack of understanding of how cameras are sold.

 

[ToonD]

this will blow the A9 II out of the water, which is why you will see this dominating the Olympics this year and not the A9 II

Really? 50% of the photographers I know (for my country) that are going to Tokyo are now Sony shooters. Me I don't know yet.

 

[reef58]

Oh dear. Another camera spec semi-confirmed, and another 300+ posts of people who won't buy it loudly arguing with total certainty why it's awful, amazing and everything in between. When will you guys realise Canon probably have done a lot of research on what their existing 1DX2 users want, and what the market is doing before putting it out? If you don't like it, don't buy it! There are many other cameras that do different things. I greatly suspect Canon will also release more cameras. They will have different specs and be targeted differently. If you look at any camera from the position of "why doesn't it do this", you are a) setting yourself up for disappointment, and b) demonstrating a total lack of understanding of how cameras are sold.

This thread is full of existing 1d owners including myself. I probably will buy it, but I am not rushing to get in line. I never said it was awful. The issue is there are no other cameras that offer their best auto focus, more mega pixels and fast frame rates. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about that. There are many in this thread and numerous threads on the internet that own both 1d's and huge white telephotos looking for a top of the line camera body to use for wildlife / sports and other action oriented subjects. Again the 1dx3 will probably be their best camera ever made. It would be better for our segment if it had received a resolution bump. There are quite a few of us.

 

[Warrenl]

I may have missed but it seems that the 1DX 111 is an extra $500. The 1DX 11 was $6000, 1DX 111 $6500 (https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-1dx-ii/canon-1dx-iiA.HTM)

 

[reef58]

'Twas ever thus. I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired, and their AF will probably be good enough in most situations (the 1Dx3 will outperform it but only a bit). The higher the resolution, the lower the fps naturally, where your cutoff is will vary. I never found the 5D3/5Ds too slow, but I find the 90D tempting because it combines high pixel density and higher fps (but doubtless lesser AF capability). But there is akways a compromise. I don't for a second believe Sony or Nikon's bodies offer everything to everyone. Or if they do, that's the solution.

There's certainly good reason to say Canon's lineup has a gap for wildlife shooters, especially discontinuing the 7 series. Perhaps they just aren't a big enough segment for it to be worth targeting? But in any case, there are still options, just with more compromises.

PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.

I have some hopes for the 5d5 and I love my 5d4, but I am not looking for good enough for most situations. I would like their best auto focus. Maybe one day they will offer a higher MP 1d series. Maybe history taught them it was not a good business decision.

 

[ToonD]

When an editor has a problem using an image because they need to crop it, but there isn't enough resolution to use it at the size they want, in layout, it means they have to use a different image. This could mean the difference between you making the cover of a magazine or not!

All this to say, yeah, it would be better if the 1DX mk. III had a higher resolution sensor, because having one would make the camera more versatile. This is inarguable even if one's own specific usage will not benefit from increased resolution.

I am with you about wanting more MP but magazines can use very low mp files for a cover of a mag. I had recently one magazine using a 1562 x 1871 file size.

 

[drama]

This thread is full of existing 1d owners including myself. I probably will buy it, but I am not rushing to get in line. I never said it was awful. The issue is there are no other cameras that offer their best auto focus, more mega pixels and fast frame rates. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about that. There are many in this thread and numerous threads on the internet that own both 1d's and huge white telephotos looking for a top of the line camera body to use for wildlife / sports and other action oriented subjects. Again the 1dx3 will probably be their best camera ever made. It would be better for our segment if it had received a resolution bump. There are quite a few of us.

Yes, I think the existing users should probably wait for full specs to be confirmed. If there's no MP bump, I would expect the development announcement talk of a "more detailed sensor" to be explained. It's likely marketing voodoo, but let's wait for sample shots. Interested to hear from users who have shot with it, which should become clear when it's announced formally (tomorrow?)

 

[criscokkat]

I was about to suggest that same theory, but it feels way too cynical for Canon. Then again, looking at what the 32MP M6II can do with a Digic 8, an 26MP R1 could easily do 20fps.

I’ve been saying this all along. Why are they releasing this a month before the big show? Why are we starting to hear rumors about multiple cameras being unveiled at CP+ at the end of February? Because the 1dxmiii is a sideshow, its just an iterative upgrade to the existing camera line to meet promises made to professionals that need to refresh their lineup and maximize their ef lens investments. I suspect the sensor is new only to the point that they used the same design on a new smaller more efficient die process, like the ‘tock’ in intel‘s tick-tock cycle. If they have done this, that probably accounts for the greatly improved read speeds of the chip.

But the real magic will come at the end of February, with cameras that may meet or exceed the 1dxmiii in certain situations, to entice people to start replacing all of their lenses with better RF optics. Then next year we’ll see the hybrid viewfinder RF/EF 1d series with a higher megapixel count and king of the hill camera at the top of canons performance pyramid.

 

[ToonD]

Which DSLR has eye autofocus using OVF?

No dslr has. A9 has. That's what I was trying to say. (English is not my native language). The 1DX III lacks some features compared to the A9. So in that respect I was expecting some upping on the MP side. But it appears Canon is not thinking like that. Maybe time for a switch.

 

[criscokkat]

No dslr has. A9 has. That's what I was trying to say. (English is not my native language). The 1DX III lacks some features compared to the A9. So in that respect I was expecting some upping on the MP side. But it appears Canon is not thinking like that. Maybe time for a switch.

Give it a month. I suspect you’ll be surprised.