Canon EOS-1D X Mark III appears on latest product list

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
581
354
I think that depends on what you're photographing and what look you're going for creatively. Eye-detect AF has been an absolute game-changer for me and I bought an RP in large part because of it.

If I'm trying to photograph my 3-year old playing, running and darting with an 85mm F1.8 wide open and him filling the frame, it's nearly impossible to get more than a 20% hit rate without eye AF. The DoF at that distance is tiny. No other AF method could produce the consistency I get with eye AF in servo mode at that aperture. Sure you could change aperture, distance, or focal length for more DoF, but I don't have to compromise my vision for the photo with eye AF. I get amazing background blur and tack sharp eyes pretty much every photo.

I wouldn't buy a camera going forward without it. I'd be surprised if the new 1D didn't have it in some capacity.
I can confirm that the RP+85mm is great for moving 3 year olds :) The trick is to avoid high contrast, that lens has horrible CA. Let's see if I can find some matte black hairclips :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Russ6357

I'm New Here
Dec 17, 2019
13
17
Wildlife shooters Cannon... please remember us! We are (I suspect) the majority of enthused amatures that buy the big glass (400 2.8, 500 & 600 f4) and we need a tough high end body with good frame rate and something I’m the 24-30 MP range.

A jump to mid to high 20’s over 20.1 makes a nice bit of difference when taking bird pics.

Improved lock-on and tracking for BIF would be nice too!
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,997
3,681
Wildlife shooters Cannon... please remember us! We are (I suspect) the majority of enthused amatures that buy the big glass (400 2.8, 500 & 600 f4) and we need a tough high end body with good frame rate and something I’m the 24-30 MP range.

A jump to mid to high 20’s over 20.1 makes a nice bit of difference when taking bird pics.

Improved lock-on and tracking for BIF would be nice too!
The pro sports shooters tell us that they are happy with 20-24 Mpx because it supports their need to rapidly process and transmit files and Mpx aren't limiting. As a bird photographer myself, 30 Mpx is not enough for me as for most of the time I have to crop, and for birds in flight I personally need a lightweight rapidly maneuverable lens I can swing around quickly. Someone is going to be unhappy, whatever Canon does.
 

Russ6357

I'm New Here
Dec 17, 2019
13
17
the new 400 2.8 and 600 4 are pretty darn "swingable" and I find the 500 f4 usable too, albeit none of them for more than a couple of minutes before I want it back on the strap or supported by the monopod.

~28-30MP should retain good iso, frame rate and buffer. I also like a higher MP camera for when the light is good but having owned a 5DSR for a few years personally didn't get on with it as a day to day (cropping like yourself) so I bit the bullet and got the 500 f4, which is 700 5.6 with a 1.4 TC which is as slow as I want to go most of the time.

There's no ideal of course and fieldcraft can certainly help. Luck too :)

...but I suspect they will focus on the sports photographers.

That said, with the new lens design, maybe a 500 f2.8 could be on the cards... no... no.... that would kill both 400 2.8 and 600 f4 which is one is rich enough and serious enough about wildlife you need one of each.... sigh......
 

fabao

I'm New Here
Apr 26, 2019
12
21
I think that depends on what you're photographing and what look you're going for creatively. Eye-detect AF has been an absolute game-changer for me and I bought an RP in large part because of it.

If I'm trying to photograph my 3-year old playing, running and darting with an 85mm F1.8 wide open and him filling the frame, it's nearly impossible to get more than a 20% hit rate without eye AF. The DoF at that distance is tiny. No other AF method could produce the consistency I get with eye AF in servo mode at that aperture. Sure you could change aperture, distance, or focal length for more DoF, but I don't have to compromise my vision for the photo with eye AF. I get amazing background blur and tack sharp eyes pretty much every photo.

I wouldn't buy a camera going forward without it. I'd be surprised if the new 1D didn't have it in some capacity.
I couldn't agree more. The $1000 RP is much better, in my opinion, for the scenario you described than my $$$$ 1DX. Eye AF is really reliable, even with razor thin DoF. Plus, the EF 85 1.2 was so slow to focus, that it was really hard to get eyes in focus of moving subjects. On RF 85 that has been much improved.
 

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
293
322
I couldn't agree more. The $1000 RP is much better, in my opinion, for the scenario you described than my $$$$ 1DX. Eye AF is really reliable, even with razor thin DoF. Plus, the EF 85 1.2 was so slow to focus, that it was really hard to get eyes in focus of moving subjects. On RF 85 that has been much improved.
I got an RP for the eye AF, really. Shooting primarily portraits, there's little else I care about, and it's given new life to my (otherwise abysmally innacurate) 85 1.8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,089
1,416
119
I think that depends on what you're photographing and what look you're going for creatively. Eye-detect AF has been an absolute game-changer for me and I bought an RP in large part because of it.

If I'm trying to photograph my 3-year old playing, running and darting with an 85mm F1.8 wide open and him filling the frame, it's nearly impossible to get more than a 20% hit rate without eye AF. The DoF at that distance is tiny. No other AF method could produce the consistency I get with eye AF in servo mode at that aperture. Sure you could change aperture, distance, or focal length for more DoF, but I don't have to compromise my vision for the photo with eye AF. I get amazing background blur and tack sharp eyes pretty much every photo.

I wouldn't buy a camera going forward without it. I'd be surprised if the new 1D didn't have it in some capacity.
Eye AF is a very powerful tool and can be very useful on occasions, but however good it is it doesn't change the fact that if somebody is only getting a 20% hit rate with 1D X II AF either they are doing something wrong or the camera has a fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Janek and GoldWing

tpatana

EOS 6D MK II
Nov 1, 2012
1,266
57
Eye AF is a very powerful tool and can be very useful on occasions, but however good it is it doesn't change the fact that if somebody is only getting a 20% hit rate with 1D X II AF either they are doing something wrong or the camera has a fault.
I shoot sports in challenging environments (with 1DX Mark 1) and I think I get somewhere around 70-90% hit rate, depending on how well I setup the AF squares when framing. Of those I miss, about 90% it catches on the background so technically it's not off-focus, it's just mis-focus on non-target area. Very rarely I actually miss the focus, probably few percent of all shots.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,446
427
Hello, I’d like to introduce you to Reality. Apparently the two of you haven’t met.
Neuro,
If I were you, I would not waste my time. Unless you charge for it of course. In fact, there are quite a number of of other forum members that may benefit from such a service. A reality matchmaking business ... :)
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,997
3,681
Canon has lost this decade to Sony. Let's hope Canon's 2020 will start with some new strategy.
I think one flagship camera is not enough for today's market.
Canon puts all the efforts to cheap cameras, but that market shrinks like something in a cold water. Canon could look at smartphones market. Apple, Google and other release several flagship models at once and do it every year.
I believe, Canon needs at least three current flagship models for different kind of consumers. Alas, Canon only indulges news agencies and older Japanese tourists who are looking for cheap crappy cameras. What about photogs of wildlife, fashion, portraits and all other kinds who prefer more megapixels in a form of a flagship? Canon has completely forgot about us.
You have spoiled your case by the silly first statement about Sony and the snide remarks about Canon. It is true that Canon birdshooters, for example, feel neglected. However, Sony isn't the answer. Their flagship the A9II is stuck on 24 Mpx and although great AF for BIF, it needs their 200-600mm or 600mm lens with extenders. Their high resolution A7RIV is a disappointment to the BIF experts because of blackout and poorer tracking, though it does work for less demanding cases. Struggling Nikon has tried hard with their D850 and D500 DSLRs and introducing lightweight DO-equivalents, that Canon should have. But, they don't have anything to match the 100-400mm II (and don't tell me they have the 200-500mm for it's not in the same league for AF, IQ and weight). My opinion is that the 90D + 100-400mm II is one of the best combinations for genuine enthusiasts, but Canon could have done better.
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,109
299
It certainly wasn't a lost decade for Canon. It was a strong decade of progress for Sony.
Canon needs good competition to continue to innovate.
Canon certainly haven't disappointed me. The 5D III , 5 DIV, 1DX and 1DX II are all great cameras.
The lenses have been stellar. Sony have a long way to catch up in the depth and breadth of Canon lens.
I've not been tempted yet by the Mirrorless Full Frame cameras.
I'm sure they will come good in 2020. Again here the RF lens all seem to be very good.
I waiting excitedly for the 1DX III to see what it really brings.
I'll be disappointed it its only a minor upgrade on the 1DX II. I hope in the intervening 4 years that Canon have improved a thing or two.
I'm sure they won't meet my wish list but I'm optimistic that it will be attractive
Hopefully the high MP EOS- R is a rounded product.
I was never in love with my 5DSR but I've learned to use it where it works best. Personally I always felt they pushed the sensor too far to reach 50MP.
At low ISO on a tripod or in a studio it is a great camera.
I hope the high mp EOS-R gets a good balance between high MP's and good ISO performance
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused
Sep 9, 2019
6
4
Very much looking forward to the 1DX III as a Canon bird shooter. My current setup is the 5DIV with the 800 5.6, though most all of bird stuff was with the 7DII, a good camera, just a touch noisy in low light. I love that lens, and got it used at a discount when many were going to the 600II, and now there is the 600 III. My main concerns are locking on birds in flight, in particular when they leave the perch, and will it be able to hold on when I'm tracking the bird. Also shoot a lot of warblers too who move around a lot. I'm confident it won't dissapoint, just hoping we get a official announcement soon.
 

Russ6357

I'm New Here
Dec 17, 2019
13
17
Very much looking forward to the 1DX III as a Canon bird shooter. My current setup is the 5DIV with the 800 5.6, though most all of bird stuff was with the 7DII, a good camera, just a touch noisy in low light. I love that lens, and got it used at a discount when many were going to the 600II, and now there is the 600 III. My main concerns are locking on birds in flight, in particular when they leave the perch, and will it be able to hold on when I'm tracking the bird. Also shoot a lot of warblers too who move around a lot. I'm confident it won't dissapoint, just hoping we get a official announcement soon.
My main rig is 1DX MKII and 500F4 (II) for BIF/Low light or a 5DIV with that or one of my other lenses for better light, perched, less "actiony" shots. The resolution of the 5DIV a bit faster (10FPS would do) and better AF, & solid build quality is my specificaiton for a grail Bird/Wild Life body, presuming a step up in ISO performance.