Canon’s EOS-1D X Mark II equivalent mirrorless is coming sooner than originally thought [CR1]

cellomaster27

Capture the moment!
Jun 3, 2013
334
21
San Jose - CA
I will thank Nikon here for this plausible announcement from canon. Nikon stated that they will release a FF ML after the D5. Then canon came out with this response. Yay for Nikon. haha
 
Reactions: Pape

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,953
330
Another sensor war of course!!
But seriously I'm looking forward to seeing what sensor Canon puts in the next high(er) end camera.
What I really meant was: define compete?

Commercially? Canon doesn’t attempt to sell consumer camera sensors externally (although there was talk of that maybe late last year), so you likely won’t be satisfied if that’s what you mean. Playing the guessing game, Sony makes more sensors so they may yield better profit margins (a good measure of competitiveness), but on the other hand they appear to invest more than canon in their foundry, etc., and develop new models more frequently, and those costs may tip the profit scales towards Canon.

I suspect you meant technically, i.e., performance. In that context, what defines competitive?

Does canon have to be within a given range relative to some Sony sensor for each performance parameter to be considered “competing with?” e.g., +/- .1 dB; +/- 3%, +/- .2 watts, etc.? Or only for certain parameters and, if so: which ones (#of AF points, noise and well capacity, output bandwidth, power consumption, thermal resistance at the junction, etc)?

Finally, how will we asses it? Outside of the OEMs and their customers, it’s doubtful anyone has built equipment to measure sensor-level performance. Sony will probably sell evaluation boards, but not their acceptance-test equipment and software. Canon doesn’t publish datasheets as far as I’ve seen (since as discussed above they don’t sell consumer camera sensors), and Sony only publishes limited data for some sensors.

Seems to me evaluating cameras is both more applicable to users and substantially easier to do than evaluating the sensors inside them.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: scyrene

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,161
1,434
The extreme BIF folks claim that Canon lags behind in AF, which is inferior to Sony A9 and Nikon D850/500 for tracking fast flying birds against backgrounds. For my type of BIF and even flying dragonflies, Canon locks on very quickly. But, I have seen some remarkable shots from Sonys and Nikons for the extreme stuff.
Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.
 
Reactions: pj1974 and jprusa

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,467
499
119
Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.
My experiences with 1DX MkII and EOS-R have been the same, though completely different circumstances, I was shooting slower moving subjects in poor light. I have zero interest in Canon mirrorless for continuous AF situations until it at least matches the 1DX MkII.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,953
330
My experiences with 1DX MkII and EOS-R have been the same, though completely different circumstances, I was shooting slower moving subjects in poor light. I have zero interest in Canon mirrorless for continuous AF situations until it at least matches the 1DX MkII.
Outside of the canon implementation, I know two people (I know, it’s anecdotal) who own both a Sony A9 and a Sony a99ii. Despite A9 having a tremendous advantage in terms of how quickly data comes off the sensor, both maintain that for quick subject acquisition in difficult situations, the older a99ii is more reliable, likely due to its off-image-sensor PDAF. They also maintain that for subject tracking, once acquired, A9 is more reliable. So, at least in one lawn, there is not uniformly green grass.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,467
499
119
Outside of the canon implementation, I know two people (I know, it’s anecdotal) who own both a Sony A9 and a Sony a99ii. Despite A9 having a tremendous advantage in terms of how quickly data comes off the sensor, both maintain that for quick subject acquisition in difficult situations, the older a99ii is more reliable, likely due to its off-image-sensor PDAF. They also maintain that for subject tracking, once acquired, A9 is more reliable. So, at least in one lawn, there is not uniformly green grass.
I know two pro tennis and golf photographers who have been doing the job at the highest level for decades. They sold 1DX MkII’s and 5D MkIV’s for A9’s and A7 somethings, they couldn’t be happier.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,953
330
I know two pro tennis and golf photographers who have been doing the job at the highest level for decades. They sold 1DX MkII’s and 5D MkIV’s for A9’s and A7 somethings, they couldn’t be happier.
The ability to shoot silently without sacrificing framerate or AF is likely a substantial advantage to tennis and golf photographers.

That aside I don’t doubt A9 is really good (used one for a few weeks: if I found it more comfortable I’d probably buy one) especially in typically good conditions (like tennis). I’ve not used an a99ii so I can’t vouch for such a comparison, I’m only mentioning it as it comes from wildlife photographers whose opinions I respect. My suspicion is that an a99iii with stacked image sensor (like that in A9) and off-image-sensor PDAF (like that in SLR) would be significantly capable.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,146
2,071
Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.
Canon DSLRs, the 1, 5 and 7Ds in particular.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,146
2,071
I do not believe this can be accurate as focus is achieved at the sensor plane. AFMA is an adjustment that offsets the calibrated settings of a lens to correct for the mis-alignment of the PD array that is in the body of the camera and not at the focal plane.
The very definition of focus at the sensor plane means no inaccuracy can be introduced as the focus error would be instantly detected and adjusted for.
None of my ML cameras have AFMA and they are frantically sharper with better AF accuracy than any of my Canon DSLRs.
The R does not even have that ability.
As for hunting, that is not an AFMA issue but an AF issue that bedevils AF of every stripe.
Can you then answer why Olympus, Sony and Nikon have AFMA for phase detect AF and there are reports of it being necessary fo a Nikon? That’s not a rhetorical question.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,953
330
Can you then answer why Olympus, Sony and Nikon have AFMA for phase detect AF and there are reports of it being necessary fo a Nikon? That’s not a rhetorical question.
I don’t know about Olympus and Nikon, but for Sony mirrorless cameras it’s intended for use with the a-mount adapters which have mirrors.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

degos

EOS 80D
Mar 20, 2015
194
119
I know two pro tennis and golf photographers who have been doing the job at the highest level for decades. They sold 1DX MkII’s and 5D MkIV’s for A9’s and A7 somethings, they couldn’t be happier.
Golfers and tennis players are fairly easy AF targets, especially as they usually occur under good / high-contrast light. Once the camera acquires focus there's not a lot to disrupt other than movement.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,146
2,071
I am beginning to piece together more information about AFMA on mirrorless, particularly the Nikon Z7. As I have mentioned earlier, many mirrorless use phase detect for rapid initial acquisition and then contrast detect for final accuracy - on-sensor CD is pretty close to being absolutely accurate. This review by the ever reliable Thom Hogan http://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/camera-reviews/nikon-z-mirrorless-camera/nikon-z7-camera-review.html discusses the AF of the Z7 in detail. It uses only PD (apart from the special case of pinpoint focus). There can be AFMA errors when using on-sensor PD without CD - I posted a link to where one user had to do AFMA with the Z7, and here is another from a specialist company about doing it for the Z7 https://www.cameracal.co.uk/calibration/mirrorless-cameras-and-lens-calibration/ (Canon DPAF is different but more computationally expensive).
That last article points out that Sony A7 and Olympus have AFMA for use with the MC11 and Metabones adapters and also for correcting errors in lenses. Why would those adapters cause AFMA problems I wonder as they don't have lenses in them?

Whatever the theoretical arguments, there is definite practical and observational evidence that on-sensor PD when used without CD is not necessarily accurate and can benefit from AFMA.
 
Last edited:

jedy

EOS T7i
Feb 14, 2014
83
15
Canon should bring out a mirrorless 5DIV successor next. I believe enticing the 5D users over to mirrorless would be more successful right now. Pro users using the 1D-X line are not the sort of people to be early switchers. Firstly, there would need to be equivalent lenses in RF mount or else they’d have to use an adapter. Secondly, Pro shooters will generally stick with an older camera model for longer because they know it inside out and how to get the best out of it. Thirdly, it would need a very decent evf as, from comments I’ve seen over the years, ovf’s, with their ‘always on’ approach are still highly valued amongst the sports/action photographers.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,953
330
That last article points out that Sony A7 and Olympus have AFMA for use with the MC11 and Metabones adapters and also for correcting errors in lenses.
Sony didn’t go out of its way to help sigma and metabones users. As stated above and cited from Sony documentation, it’s for their a-Mount adapters which have mirrors and built-in PDAF.
 
Reactions: max_sr

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
982
88
Sony didn’t go out of its way to help sigma and metabones users. As stated above and cited from Sony documentation, it’s for their a-Mount adapters which have mirrors and built-in PDAF.
Speaking of Sigma on Sony E Mount:

 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,467
499
119
Golfers and tennis players are fairly easy AF targets, especially as they usually occur under good / high-contrast light. Once the camera acquires focus there's not a lot to disrupt other than movement.
I do wish people would stop saying that. Half of tennis is indoors without the benefit of TV lighting and as for golf, it isn’t only played in Florida!

High end tennis shooting is as technically challenging for AF as any other pro level sport, the ball is small and the erratic movements of the players very fast considering your proximity to them.

I am still using my 1D MkIII’s, I know professional sports shooters who have gained a market advantage swapping systems and camera type. It is a simple statement of fact, stop trying to make pathetic excuses or overly broad generalizations.
 
Reactions: Dantana