Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Known Specifications

[Adelino]

Media: 1 CFast / 1 CompactFlash I think that's a big mistake from Canon.

Yup, if you're able to dump $6k on a new body, the price of these faster memory cards won't stop the purchase. Okay, so keeping a single slot as CF allows a bit of backward compatibility but dual CFast would be neat.

Not how that works. Giant media outfits who own/buy these cameras by the boatload are running CF now. If they have to purchase 100 new cards at $250 each for 128GB cfast2 .... Do the math. No, you dont shank your biggest bulk buying audience.

That's exactly how it works, if the buyers are getting cameras by the hundred then the cards are still a comparatively small expense, besides, your assumption is that these bulk buyers don't already own any CFast cards, which is unlikely considering the wide application of them already in video.

Don't forget all this bulk buying is done at huge discounts and is a 100% business write off.

It isn't shanking, it is progress.......

last time i checked a business writeoff only gets you back around 30% at the end of the year.

also the vast majority of the 1DX customers probably don't have CFAST.

also I suspect going by "what is in your kit" that the majority of pros have around 10-20 cards.

at $200 a pop that actually gets close to the cost of the camera.

The bulk buyers we were talking about will be getting finance houses to lease them the gear, lease payments are 100% deductable.

Those buyers (the ones I was specifically referring to) almost certainly have CFast cards too.

Don't go by number of cards people have, CF has been around so long everybody has loads, go by capacity.

Anyway you look at it cards are a running cost of cameras, and even the most expensive cost a fraction the amount film did! Progress is progress, whilst it might be frustrating for stills only shooters to be forced into video centric card formats the truth is all these 'standards' are pushed on us.

You need to take some accounting classes. Between the 100% write offs and the 100% deductibles, you make it sound like it's all free.

I will refrain from political comments, but yeah a lot of people think businesses spend on anything they want and it's all free.

 

[YuengLinger]

So...nobody's using second slot for backup?

 

[tron]

So...nobody's using second slot for backup?

Good question! I was wondering the same! For me the most important use of dual slots is for backup purposes. Otherwise someone can always get a double size card (128 instead of 2x64, etc, etc...)

 

[Viggo]

So...nobody's using second slot for backup?

Bingo! That is the way inside the double slot. Is there anyway one can still use the second as backup?

 

[PureClassA]

So...nobody's using second slot for backup?

Bingo! That is the way inside the double slot. Is there anyway one can still use the second as backup?

You can write dual on the 5D3 with 2 different card slots. Can't imagine why you cant do dual writes on CF & CFast

 

[neuroanatomist]

You can write dual on the 5D3 with 2 different card slots. Can't imagine why you cant do dual writes on CF & CFast

Sure, but writing RAW to the SD card throttles frame rate. Hopefully that won't be the case for CF on the 1D X II.

 

[rrcphoto]

You can write dual on the 5D3 with 2 different card slots. Can't imagine why you cant do dual writes on CF & CFast

Sure, but writing RAW to the SD card throttles frame rate. Hopefully that won't be the case for CF on the 1D X II.

if I recall, it was because the SD card support on the 5D III was gimped but not having UHS support.

not sure why that would have any bearing on the 1DX and the CF card slot.

seems people are creating a problem before one even exists around here.

 

[neuroanatomist]

if I recall, it was because the SD card support on the 5D III was gimped.

not sure why that would have any bearing on the 1DX.

It doesn't on the 1D X, per se. But the 1D X is capped at 12 fps for RAW, but shoots 14 fps in JPG, suggesting write speed to the CF is a bottleneck. The 1D X II will have more MP and likely a higher frame rate than 12 fps.

 

[PureClassA]

Ok. Then this CFast card business makes more sense. If we need bigger/faster media to keep up with a 1DX2 (that a CF can NOT do) then CFast is understandable. I'm still wondering (since I have no experience with them, is the slot/pin config the SAME for CFast and CFast 2.0? Could you buy either? CFast cards are not too bad, but CFast 2.0 are still very expensive. And I can't imagine why we need 480MB/Sec write speeds. Even 4K doesn't need that much unless you're doing full 4k RAW.

if I recall, it was because the SD card support on the 5D III was gimped.

not sure why that would have any bearing on the 1DX.

It doesn't on the 1D X, per se. But the 1D X is capped at 12 fps for RAW, but shoots 14 fps in JPG, suggesting write speed to the CF is a bottleneck. The 1D X II will have more MP and likely a higher frame rate than 12 fps.

 

[rrcphoto]

if I recall, it was because the SD card support on the 5D III was gimped.

not sure why that would have any bearing on the 1DX.

It doesn't on the 1D X, per se. But the 1D X is capped at 12 fps for RAW, but shoots 14 fps in JPG, suggesting write speed to the CF is a bottleneck. The 1D X II will have more MP and likely a higher frame rate than 12 fps.

it shoots 14 fps in JPG with the mirror locked up in AE/AF locked (most importantly the aperture)

while it will shoot 12 fps normally with AE/AF.

pray tell how you get the conclusion it's because of the CF card slot again?

 

[Fantec]

It works out then that Canon is keeping the older CF technology. I think it is a smart move.

I disagree.

1. What is all this nonsense about speed? Yes, CFast is faster. Yes, there are benefits to it. However, the current 1DX is a total speed demon and runs on good old CF. At the absolute worst, the new camera cannot possibly be any slower than the current camera if for some reason the CF slot is holding it back, which I doubt. Yes, the larger files will be slower to offload, but larger buffer can offset this.

My 1Dx is setup to use the 2 CF cards as mirrors (both RAW files). Therefore the write speed is limited by the slowest card. If the 1Dx2 has a mix of CF/CFast slots, the cost of purchasing cards will be twice the price of CF cards (if the CFast card costs ~3 times more) but the performances will be exactly the same...

 

[neuroanatomist]

if I recall, it was because the SD card support on the 5D III was gimped.

not sure why that would have any bearing on the 1DX.

It doesn't on the 1D X, per se. But the 1D X is capped at 12 fps for RAW, but shoots 14 fps in JPG, suggesting write speed to the CF is a bottleneck. The 1D X II will have more MP and likely a higher frame rate than 12 fps.

it shoots 14 fps in JPG with the mirror locked up in AE/AF locked (most importantly the aperture)

while it will shoot 12 fps normally with AE/AF.

pray tell how you get the conclusion it's because of the CF card slot again?

Yes...at 14 fps mirror movement doesn't happen and AF/AE are locked.

Pray tell why at 14 fps the camera will not record RAW images?

To be clear, I'm not suggesting the CF speed has anything to do with either the 12 fps normal or 14 fps high-speed, only the restriction to JPG images at 14 fps.

 

[bescki]

i hope it will have WIFI and Speedlight Transmitter ...

 

[privatebydesign]

Media: 1 CFast / 1 CompactFlash I think that's a big mistake from Canon.

Yup, if you're able to dump $6k on a new body, the price of these faster memory cards won't stop the purchase. Okay, so keeping a single slot as CF allows a bit of backward compatibility but dual CFast would be neat.

Not how that works. Giant media outfits who own/buy these cameras by the boatload are running CF now. If they have to purchase 100 new cards at $250 each for 128GB cfast2 .... Do the math. No, you dont shank your biggest bulk buying audience.

That's exactly how it works, if the buyers are getting cameras by the hundred then the cards are still a comparatively small expense, besides, your assumption is that these bulk buyers don't already own any CFast cards, which is unlikely considering the wide application of them already in video.

Don't forget all this bulk buying is done at huge discounts and is a 100% business write off.

It isn't shanking, it is progress.......

last time i checked a business writeoff only gets you back around 30% at the end of the year.

also the vast majority of the 1DX customers probably don't have CFAST.

also I suspect going by "what is in your kit" that the majority of pros have around 10-20 cards.

at $200 a pop that actually gets close to the cost of the camera.

The bulk buyers we were talking about will be getting finance houses to lease them the gear, lease payments are 100% deductable.

Those buyers (the ones I was specifically referring to) almost certainly have CFast cards too.

Don't go by number of cards people have, CF has been around so long everybody has loads, go by capacity.

Anyway you look at it cards are a running cost of cameras, and even the most expensive cost a fraction the amount film did! Progress is progress, whilst it might be frustrating for stills only shooters to be forced into video centric card formats the truth is all these 'standards' are pushed on us.

You need to take some accounting classes. Between the 100% write offs and the 100% deductibles, you make it sound like it's all free.

I will refrain from political comments, but yeah a lot of people think businesses spend on anything they want and it's all free.

What a ridiculous notion. I can't fathom how you could draw that conclusion from the words I wrote.

For business users there is a big difference between buying outright and leasing, however, ultimately the costs of running a business can be offset against taxable income. I don't know what tax brackets you fall into but several times I have been advised to make business purchases before my tax year ends to lower my tax bill.

 

[Etienne]

The bulk buyers we were talking about will be getting finance houses to lease them the gear, lease payments are 100% deductable.

Those buyers (the ones I was specifically referring to) almost certainly have CFast cards too.

Don't go by number of cards people have, CF has been around so long everybody has loads, go by capacity.

Anyway you look at it cards are a running cost of cameras, and even the most expensive cost a fraction the amount film did! Progress is progress, whilst it might be frustrating for stills only shooters to be forced into video centric card formats the truth is all these 'standards' are pushed on us.

just because it's 100% deductible means you still only get back whatever your corporate tax bracket is.

is that really that difficult to follow?

and most pros I know have around 10-20 64GB cards, so yeah, I'm looking at capacity? 10-20 CFAST runs around 200 a pop. that's 2000-4000.

but nice going on moving the goalposts now bringing up film.

the point of the matter is .. for alot of people at the 1DX would be catering to, having compatibility with CF cards is certainly advantageous.

If you lease your camera you can write off 100% of the cost of the lease. Buy back at the end of the lease is typically about $1.

 

[Jack Douglas]

As long as performance doesn't suffer, and the 1DX MkII has a big buffer for stills, I don't think having two different card slots is that big of a deal.

It would be nice if the 5D MKIV has the same two card slot types as the 1DX MKII for us customers who plan on purchasing both cameras!

At the end of the day, I think Nikon's decision to offer 2 different card slot model options for the D5 customers makes the most sense, and if Canon did the same thing for it's customers, I think it would make everyone happy.

Surely there is a cost to offering an option on the card types and then differentiating all through its life span - parts/servicing etc. I'm inclined to go along with what K has added.

Don, if you look back at the 7D II threads the CR3 rumors close to the big day, were pretty accurate!

My modest disappointment will be the 22 MP but 18 -> 22 is close to 20%, not bad if we get the FPS.

Jack

Jack you take very nice pictures of birds so I believe you will enjoy the 1DxII. May I ask if your disappointment for the 22Mp is that the pixel density will be lower than the pixel density of the 1D4 you were using?

My problem's lack of reach and subsequent cropping. Probably like all the others that were hoping for 24 MP or more. I'm more or less happy with the 6D, which was better than the 1D4 in that regard (assuming higher ISO) so I'll take 22. I'd rather have 1D features now over more MP.

Jack

 

[NorBro]

Hello,

I haven't read any of the previous pages, but what's the general consensus on 4K/60P?

That would be really something for Canon and I just don't see it...but would be absolutely thrilled!

 

[HighLowISO]

If it really ships without WiFi I will be very surprised no matter how many good leaks say it will not be there. Maybe they will offer a WiFi dongle of some sort... but no WiFi ... hard for me to believe (I'm not in the market for this camera though so it does not affect me).

 

[tpatana]

if I recall, it was because the SD card support on the 5D III was gimped.

not sure why that would have any bearing on the 1DX.

It doesn't on the 1D X, per se. But the 1D X is capped at 12 fps for RAW, but shoots 14 fps in JPG, suggesting write speed to the CF is a bottleneck. The 1D X II will have more MP and likely a higher frame rate than 12 fps.

it shoots 14 fps in JPG with the mirror locked up in AE/AF locked (most importantly the aperture)

while it will shoot 12 fps normally with AE/AF.

pray tell how you get the conclusion it's because of the CF card slot again?

Yes...at 14 fps mirror movement doesn't happen and AF/AE are locked.

Pray tell why at 14 fps the camera will not record RAW images?

To be clear, I'm not suggesting the CF speed has anything to do with either the 12 fps normal or 14 fps high-speed, only the restriction to JPG images at 14 fps.

Some data lane gets choked, otherwise 12 vs. 14 RAW pushing to buffer would be fine, and then dump to card when have time. So something between the raw/jpeg converter to buffer can just handle 12 raws but not 14.

Card has nothing to do with that.

 

[scottgoh]

i like the idea of having one CFast and one CF slot. the old cards CF can all be used and do not have to buy all CFast cards