The follow-up to the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II may come in 2019 [CR2]

[Larsskv]

I looked at the quality of the image for the pictures I take - regardless of lens, ISO and speed the 1DX2 is better than the 5D 4. The 1DX2 has other benefits as well, such as battery live. I am talking here about stills …

The only time the 5d4 was better was when the picture needed a big crop which was not that often as I use a 600mm + 2x for birding. - and then I use my 7D2 which outruns the 5D4 for that ...

We all have our preferences - I can see that the weight and size of the 1DX is an issue for some people - this might be where a lighter camera such as for forthcoming mirrorless bodies will help. The recent lightweight lens such as the new 400/500 and 600 are a big bones for handheld photos - it is hard to wave a 600 mk1 around after birds..

I own the 5DIV and sold my 1DXII after getting the EOS R. I never had the need for the high fps, and the EOS R has much better AF with large aperture lenses and low light, especially with moving subjects.

In terms of IQ, I find it hard to tell a difference between the 1DXII and 5DIV, when you look away from the difference in resolution. However, I admit that I sometimes have the impression that the 1DXII files have a more organic/less digital look to them, which I like, but it could very well be my imagination playing me a trick.

It is sort of a ridiculous side reason for me to sell the 1DXII instead of the 5DIV, but it was partly because I mostly view my pictures on a thirteen inch iPad Pro. When zooming in, the 1DXII files comes short in resolution, while the 30 megapixel files still has a lot left. This silly reason is part of my motivation behind preferring the 5DIV files.

 

[AlanF]

I wouldn't argue with anyone who uses a 1DXII and a 600/4 Mk1 for birds in flight because he must the strength of Tarzan. I'll stick with the 400mm DO II and a 5D series without a tripod.

 

[privatebydesign]

Yes, with electronic shutter and a whole bunch of if’s and but’s.

The scenarios where you can’t use electronic shutter, and I’ve found a few already, you’re stuck with the same speed as the EOS R at 5 fps with the mechanical shutter. While the 1dx2 shoots away at 14 fps not matter what.

Difference between Sony, Nikon and Canon is that the first two are much about spec sheets and can’t really deliver on them, and Canon who seems under spec’d, but deliver so incredibly solid...

It's funny how everybody thought 'the answer' was going to be electronic shutters, mainly driven by tech hungry 'reviewers' like those at DPR, yet now we have them they have more compromises than the boring regular shutters we have had for decades.

 

[Hector1970]

It will be interesting what the specs are for the 1DX III.
It will also be interesting if it marks the last great DSLR.
Is it feasible to improve the FPS on a mechanical shutter.
The shutter needs not only to be able to hit high FPS but do it over a number of years without failing.
The 1 DX II is loud even on "Silent Shutter".
How good the focusing will be is critical. BIF can still be a frustrating subject.
Autofocus could be more intelligent.
A 1 DR could have much higher FPS and Silent shutter.
To do 20+FPS it would need an upgrade in processor power.
This mirrorless business must be tricky enough.
I thought Canon could move to this seamlessly any time they wanted to but they still seem very cautious.
The EOS-R while it seems good is a conservative first attempt.
The lens with it seem to be very good but the camera is "good enough" as opposed to innovative.
It wasn't enough for me to consider moving.
A 1 DX III is more tempting but it depends on what it is.
It may not be until a 1 DR that Canon will showcase what they can do with mirrorless

 

[Antono Refa]

The length of the release cycles is a function of customer's willingness to fork over cash for a new model.

The digital revolution raise photographers' willingness to upgrade cameras. Now that its over, I expect the release cycles to return to what they used to be back in the film days, ~5 years. The high end lines (1DX, 5D, 7D) are almost there, and the lower lines have slowed to half the pace.

Mirrorless is a new mini-revolution, so EOS-R cycle will be shorter, but the twenty-twenties aren't going to be as exciting as the first decade of the 20th century.

 

[GoldWing]

There is also the fact that the general users of the 1d series are sports and wildlife shooters who in general would be telling canon that EVFs are not as good as OVFs for that niche. I can't see canon dumping OVF cameras untill those photographers are happy with EVFs

As a pro sports shooter always in bright sun and over reflective water for kitesurfing. Following acrobatics in the air the only option is OVF. It takes years to hone these shooting techniques.

 

[AlanF]

The length of the release cycles is a function of customer's willingness to fork over cash for a new model.

The digital revolution raise photographers' willingness to upgrade cameras. Now that its over, I expect the release cycles to return to what they used to be back in the film days, ~5 years. The high end lines (1DX, 5D, 7D) are almost there, and the lower lines have slowed to half the pace.

Mirrorless is a new mini-revolution, so EOS-R cycle will be shorter, but the twenty-twenties aren't going to be as exciting as the first decade of the 20th century.

Long cycle times just like the iPhone, laptops etc?

 

[GoldWing]

I don't believe this. I doubt there will be any more DSLR leave alone 1dx. Really doubt. It is mirrorless now and all for good reasons.

I could not disagree more. As a sports photographer for pro and Olympic sports, there is no technology today from Sony, Nikon or Canon that can replace the OVF when following very fast moving athletes especially in bright sun. I don't miss critical shots with OVF. I've been asked by another company to compare my 1DXMKII and full kit to theirs for the 2020 games. I will not be doing it.

 

[3kramd5]

The length of the release cycles is a function of customer's willingness to fork over cash for a new model.

The digital revolution raise photographers' willingness to upgrade cameras. Now that its over, I expect the release cycles to return to what they used to be back in the film days, ~5 years. The high end lines (1DX, 5D, 7D) are almost there, and the lower lines have slowed to half the pace.

Mirrorless is a new mini-revolution, so EOS-R cycle will be shorter, but the twenty-twenties aren't going to be as exciting as the first decade of the 20th century.

Mirrorless isn’t revolutionary, it’s at best evolutionary. However, it is very processor-limited. Since processors show no sign of slowing their advancements, I wouldn’t expect mirrorless cameras to slow theirs.

 

[GoldWing]

For me it's a question of how much control you want to cede to the AF system. When making a solo portrait obviously you want to focus on the closest eye most of the time so eye AF is fine. But there are many situations where the AF is not going to be intelligent enough to make that decision which is why I prefer to control that myself. AI and computational photography are progressing rapidly but I don't think we are at a place yet where I'm going to turn control of something as important as autofocus selection entirely over to the camera. YMMV.

I agree, I prefer telling my camera what to do. As opposed to the other way around

 

[Jack Douglas]

I'm not in the same class as those in the know here but I often find myself having to wait anticipating a moment for long times and staring at a screen is not something I enjoy, being headache prone. And being active during those wait periods represents battery drain but the alternative is to miss the shot. I sure wish the focus points could be spread further but that's something I accept.

It's enlightening to hear the comments of pros!

Jack

 

[deleteme]

Yes, with electronic shutter and a whole bunch of if’s and but’s.

The scenarios where you can’t use electronic shutter, and I’ve found a few already, you’re stuck with the same speed as the EOS R at 5 fps with the mechanical shutter. While the 1dx2 shoots away at 14 fps not matter what.

Difference between Sony, Nikon and Canon is that the first two are much about spec sheets and can’t really deliver on them, and Canon who seems under spec’d, but deliver so incredibly solid...

I was unaware of the A9's mechanical shutter speed (or lack of it). Good to know. Of course we still have the model of the original Pellix (or more recently the A99) to offer speed with a mechanical shutter.

 

[GoldWing]

Hi Jack, on one day of shooting I've exceeded 10,000 shot for international sporting events. Staring at a screen for everything I don't want to shoot would be INSANITY. To anyone who has not shot Freestyle kitesurfing, sat under the hoops for the NBA or shot in the end zone for the NFL, an EVF can't hack it. Ever wonder why TV networks have 4-5 $250K cameras all focused on the SAME areas? You're one man covering a fast moving sport with a hand held camera. You need skill, experience and an OVF

 

[3kramd5]

I was unaware of the A9's mechanical shutter speed (or lack of it). Good to know. Of course we still have the model of the original Pellix (or more recently the A99) to offer speed with a mechanical shutter.

I presume the next iteration of a9 will have at least the 10fps a7riii shutter; possibly more, unless they stuff in a global shutter and do away with the mechanism entirely.

Hi Jack, on one day of shooting I've exceeded 10,000 shot for international sporting events. Staring at a screen for everything I don't want to shoot would be INSANITY. To anyone who has not shot Freestyle kitesurfing, sat under the hoops for the NBA or shot in the end zone for the NFL, an EVF can't hack it. Ever wonder why TV networks have 4-5 $250K cameras all focused on the SAME areas? You're one man covering a fast moving sport with a hand held camera. You need skill, experience and an OVF

Agreed. People often assume I’m being facetious, but I’m not when I say that someone should make an SLR with an EVF. For birding, sports, otherwise extended viewing scenarios, and very bright environments, use OVF. For others, use EVF. One could easily package an EVF into an SLR form factor; top left (shooter’s POV) is prime territory.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hi Jack, on one day of shooting I've exceeded 10,000 shot for international sporting events. Staring at a screen for everything I don't want to shoot would be INSANITY. To anyone who has not shot Freestyle kitesurfing, sat under the hoops for the NBA or shot in the end zone for the NFL, an EVF can't hack it. Ever wonder why TV networks have 4-5 $250K cameras all focused on the SAME areas? You're one man covering a fast moving sport with a hand held camera. You need skill, experience and an OVF

I believe you, trust me. That's why we need to be careful before accepting many of the uneducated comments that appear on CR. Sure all opinions are welcome but not all are equally useful.

Jack

 

[GoldWing]

I believe you, trust me. That's why we need to be careful before accepting many of the uneducated comments that appear on CR. Sure all opinions are welcome but not all are equally useful.

Jack

Best to you and eveyone who has pro sports exp and has had enough of the marketing BS about EVF for pro sports shooting. The world has gone nuts!!

 

[dak723]

Best to you and eveyone who has pro sports exp and has had enough of the marketing BS about EVF for pro sports shooting. The world has gone nuts!!

I don't think it is marketing BS so much as forum BS. As Jack said, there are far too many uneducated comments. If people don't have actual experience with a camera, they really should say so - and admit that they don't actually know much about it. But, unfortunately, forums aren't about discussion and sharing information. They are about people pushing their agendas, trying to one-up others, and often just making up crap in order to support their arguments.

 

[AlanF]

I don't think it is marketing BS so much as forum BS. As Jack said, there are far too many uneducated comments. If people don't have actual experience with a camera, they really should say so - and admit that they don't actually know much about it. But, unfortunately, forums aren't about discussion and sharing information. They are about people pushing their agendas, trying to one-up others, and often just making up crap in order to support their arguments.

There is enough proper discussion and sharing of infoprmation to make CR worthwhile, and the BS gets stamped upon.

 

[Antono Refa]

Mirrorless isn’t revolutionary, it’s at best evolutionary. However, it is very processor-limited. Since processors show no sign of slowing their advancements, I wouldn’t expect mirrorless cameras to slow theirs.

As PC evolution shows, we didn't get anything new since the seventies, except smaller. Digital made cameras smaller, but we've already hit the wall due to physics of sensor area and lens size.

 

[Antono Refa]

Long cycle times just like the iPhone, laptops etc?

iPhones are <$1,000 fashion items, just like clothes. High end cameras are >$2,000 work tools. Therefore, no - not alike.