“Dramatically longer battery life”. ——- nailed it!All 1 series batteries last a long time, they always have...
Upvote
0
“Dramatically longer battery life”. ——- nailed it!All 1 series batteries last a long time, they always have...
Nope, not going to fall for that "these are actually good" line. The manufacture of Li-ion batteries may be somewhat more common today but the reliable sources are OEM because they demand it. Independent packagers like Watson and Sterling Tek cannot and thus one will get burned sooner or later.You're buying the wrong third party batteries. Some of them are junk. Others are just as good, if not better than, the genuine Canon batteries. Try STK (Sterling Tek), they last more charge/recharge cycles than my Canon originals do.
Doesn't look an impressive step forward by any stretch. More like - "oh, we have to release a new 1DX in 2020". It's a very good camera, of course, but there seems to be very little innovation over the past 4 years - compared to what happens elsewhere in technology, not the least in the mirrorless department. And that's for a product with a pricing that could buy you ~7 iPhone 11's (256 GB).
- Modest bump in FPS from 14 to 16 mechanically. Who regularly shoots 20 fps in live view?
- No improvements to silent shutter seemingly. The 5D Mark III from 2012 is still the best. Of course, there are mechanical reasons for this, but it would be exciting to see some novelty innovation in important aspects like this where the DSLR's are lagging behind terribly.
- A new wildly expensive WFT unit (WFT-E9) - despite stating that WiFi is built into the camera? I can get WiFi in a tiny 100 USD phone. I should be able to send images to my tablet/phone/laptop instantly without needing to purchase a clumsy 400 USD device. How about mobile network/LTE support as a feature? Allowing it to be turned on/off to save battery of course. Connectivity features still seem to be 5-10 years outdated.
- No innovations such as a switchable electronic/optical viewfinder to make use of the live view improvements.
- Still way too poor focus coverage optically. Improvements mainly gone into live view.
- Eye-AF? Intelligent subject tracking improvements?
- No IBIS - okay, that's a lesser deal.
- High ISO noise improvements? Not expecting much in that regard based on the press release, but that's important as well.
- Has the new AF-On quick-select focus feature been properly tested? Not sure it's a big UX improvement to combine AF-On with focus point selection. Theoretically it should be an advantage, but it's highly critical that the button is well-functioning, so the main function - AF tracking - isn't compromised.
Did you read the development announcement?Doesn't look an impressive step forward by any stretch. More like - "oh, we have to release a new 1DX in 2020".
It will do 20 FPS electronically shutter, so completely silent at insane speed.No improvements to silent shutter seemingly. The 5D Mark III from 2012 is still the best.
They have made a massive upgrade to the iTR sensor, going from less than half a Megapixel to over 10. I wouldn't make any negative statements about AF yet, especially since the hardware got such a boost and Canon claim it will be improved significantly. Eye AF should be a piece of cake since the 90D already handles face detection in the viewfinder.Still way too poor focus coverage optically. Improvements mainly gone into live view.
Eye-AF? Intelligent subject tracking improvements?
There's just not much space left for improvement.High ISO noise improvements? Not expecting much in that regard based on the press release, but that's important as well.
Have you used it?Doesn't look an impressive step forward by any stretch.
There are lots of people regularly shooting 60 fps in live view.Modest bump in FPS from 14 to 16 mechanically. Who regularly shoots 20 fps in live view?
I doubt this modest change would cause people to start using the more battery-draining live view mode for remotes which they sometimes can't access for hours. I have never used live view for a remote - and can't recall seeing anyone else doing that - either in person or in a tv broadcast. The light from the screens might also not be popular with tv broadcasters if you have 10 of them close to a long jump sandpit for instance. Unless you can turn off the screen while still in live view technically speaking. But not sure if this is doable."Who regularly shoots 20 fps in live view?"
Someone at the Olympics with a remotely controlled tripod mounted camera pointed at the gymnastics vault horse or the finish line at the sprint races or at the World Series pointed at the batter's box, or...
I don't know that, but seeing there is no mention of what could be potentially be a groundbreaking new feature for many sports shooters, I assume it sounds pretty much like the predecessors. Which is not surprising, of course. I'm just listing things that would be strong selling points. Esp. for shooters considering a switch to mirrorless."No improvements to silent shutter seemingly."
Do you have sound recordings of the shutter operation of the new 1D Mark III? How do you know this?
I didn't read that from the press release. Are you sure you can transfer files from the built-in WiFi unit - and does it support both ad hoc (direct connection to another device) and infrastructure (connection to an Access Point)? I was excited to read this part, but they immediately go on to mention a new WFT device in relation to file transfers. It just doesn't seem very innovative for 2020 to still have to rely on a clunky 500-600 USD appendage.The external unit is only for extended longer range, if needed. The internal radio is fine for short distances, such as transmitting to a device on the photog's body. Did you even bother to read the entire press release before launching into your diatribe?
I guess they might, but no real mention of this in the press release. AF improvements seemed mostly to be in live view mode."Eye-AF? Intelligent subject tracking improvements?"
Have you not seen the substantial improvements in those areas with the updated firmware for the EOS R? Why wouldn't Canon also include that in the 1D X mark III?
No, and it is indeed an interesting new addition/potential improvement if it can be pulled off successfully. So I hope they know what they are doing as this is an essential working function."Has the new AF-On quick-select focus feature been properly tested? Not sure it's a big UX improvement to combine AF-On with focus point selection. Theoretically it should be an advantage, but it's highly critical that the button is well-functioning, so the main function - AF tracking - isn't compromised."
Again, what information do you have in this regard? Are you one of the pre-production testers of this camera?
It is just a development announcement though, and they do mention the electronic shutter. So they have stated already that there is an actually silent shooting mode. Going into details for the sound of regular shooting seems like something too granular at this point for a pure development announcement.I don't know that, but seeing there is no mention of what could be potentially be a groundbreaking new feature for many sports shooters, I assume it sounds pretty much like the predecessors.
From the announcement: "The camera’s new autofocus algorithm will improve stability and tracking when using both the Optical Viewfinder and in Live View shooting mode"I guess they might, but no real mention of this in the press release. AF improvements seemed mostly to be in live view mode.
You can have the camera connected to the mains and the live view streamed over Gigabit Ethernet to basically whatever you want. Just bear in mind that if you are on the other side of the planet from your camera, due to network delays you will need to start your 20fps burst a little earlier than normal.I doubt this modest change would cause people to start using the more battery-draining live view mode for remotes which they sometimes can't access for hours. I have never used live view for a remote - and can't recall seeing anyone else doing that - either in person or in a tv broadcast. The light from the screens might also not be popular with tv broadcasters if you have 10 of them close to a long jump sandpit for instance. Unless you can turn off the screen while still in live view technically speaking.
That is an improvement for sure. But you are still taking those shots looking at the rear LCD instead of through the optical viewfinder, which is not very practical in a lot of situations - for accuracy, handling and simply viewing the screen outside in bright daylight. That's where a hybrid viewfinder would have been a very interesting feature. But it could be argued such a feature would be unintuitive of course. Why not just make the switch to mirrorless in that case.It will do 20 FPS electronically shutter, so completely silent at insane speed.
I will try and be optimistic about the AF improvements in terms of tracking. But I was hoping for some significant change in optical AF points coverage. One of the main DSLR limitations for me in that regard is the lack of wider coverage of AF points for composition.They have made a massive upgrade to the iTR sensor, going from less than half a Megapixel to over 10. I wouldn't make any negative statements about AF yet, especially since the hardware got such a boost and Canon claim it will be improved significantly. Eye AF should be a piece of cake since the 90D already handles face detection in the viewfinder.
It would still be groundbreaking if they had made significant improvements. This is already a critical issue for pros, and increasingly so. There was this recent story of press photographers with DSLR's getting kicked out of a political event, while the Sony A9 guy could stay...It is just a development announcement though, and they do mention the electronic shutter. So they have stated already that there is an actually silent shooting mode. Going into details for the sound of regular shooting seems like something too granular at this point for a pure development announcement.
Was the story or the event sponsored by Sony, by the way?It would still be groundbreaking if they had made significant improvements. This is already a critical issue for pros, and increasingly so. There was this recent story of press photographers with DSLR's getting kicked out of a political event, while the Sony A9 guy could stay...
"The grapes are sour"?Come to think of it, I doubt they would invest many resources pursuing this from a practical point of view, as the electronic shutter will always be superior to any mechanical tweak of the current shutter sound.
It was a PetaPixel article quoting the Washington Post (paywalled article). The event was the recent NBC-sponsored Democratic debate.Was the story or the event sponsored by Sony, by the way?
I consciously try to refrain from injecting any kind of personal attacks or innuendo in my posts as it derails from the subject. We all have biases, preferences and interests, and it's impossible to know what motivates someone to participate here or in any other online platform."The grapes are sour"?
I wonder... what caused you to register on this forum just to spread FUD about this particular camera?
It is just a development announcement though, and they do mention the electronic shutter. So they have stated already that there is an actually silent shooting mode. Going into details for the sound of regular shooting seems like something too granular at this point for a pure development announcement.
That "opinion" piece in the Washington Post is not paywalled (at least to me) and tells a different story. While this article (and the preceding, linked blog post of the same author) about Doug Mills shooting Sony does look like a Sony ad, its message is not about "press photographers with DSLR's getting kicked out of a political event".It was a PetaPixel article quoting the Washington Post (paywalled article). The event was the recent NBC-sponsored Democratic debate.
Silent Sony a9 a ‘Great Advantage’ for Photographer at Democratic Debate
Knowing the motivation simplifies communication. Too much time is being spent on discussing irrelevant matters because people have XY problems.I consciously try to refrain from injecting any kind of personal attacks or innuendo in my posts as it derails from the subject. We all have biases, preferences and interests, and it's impossible to know what motivates someone to participate here or in any other online platform.
You are right, it doesn't.If it matters - which I don't think it does
I could theoretically spend hours on correcting all your misrepresentations, but I don't have time for it, so the key question: why does it matter to you? What are you trying to achieve and what would I need to help you with?If I misread, misunderstood or misrepresented the press release in expressing my concerns, you are of course fully entitled to correct me on that basis. Obviously, we don't have a full spec sheet yet, so there will be some degree of speculation before an actual production camera is out.
That's the same as a checking account when it comes to affording something, no? It's money you have, not credit you can use. I just "purchased" a $13,000 embroidery machine, and didn't break my bank. Because I used Credit (with 60months, no interest), but it makes me money, so affording the extras that are required of it really isn't a big deal. Extra hoops can cost up to $700, depending. They aren't necessary, but if it's going to pay for itself, nbd.Well, some people do have savings accounts.
I use a mix of third party and first in my 5DMIV and my t3i. For the t3i, the Wasabi Power brand of batteries are absolutely solid performers. They last as long as official on a charge, no problem. For about two years, anyway. They're definitely fading faster, but for $12 for two of them, I can't really complain. I usually only stock up on third parties when I know I'm going to be gone for a while and want to have a cache of extras on hand.You're buying the wrong third party batteries. Some of them are junk. Others are just as good, if not better than, the genuine Canon batteries. Try STK (Sterling Tek), they last more charge/recharge cycles than my Canon originals do.
It's money you might have wanted to use for something else. Like a downpayment for your new home. Or paid education for your children. Or, if you are really cheap, even a photo tour to Serengeti.That's the same as a checking account when it comes to affording something, no? It's money you have, not credit you can use.
How much do you think an average pro photographer earns?I just "purchased" a $13,000 embroidery machine, and didn't break my bank. Because I used Credit (with 60months, no interest), but it makes me money, so affording the extras that are required of it really isn't a big deal. Extra hoops can cost up to $700, depending. They aren't necessary, but if it's going to pay for itself, nbd.
Same with batteries, compared to the $6k of the camera, is an extra $100 really a deal breaker? If you're a working pro, you'll probably pay that off pretty quick.
How much do you think an average pro photographer earns?