Canon EOS-1D X Mark III field testing has begun [CR2]

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,969
1,181
119
To be a bit pedantic: USB-C is a form factor, not a protocol. The protocol speeds are like this:
  • USB 3.1 gen 1 (rebranded USB 3.0) allows for 5gbps over a single lane
  • USB 3.1 gen 2 allows for 10gbps over a single lane
  • USB 3.2 gen 2x2 allows for an extra lane, so 2x 10gbps or 2x 5gbps.
  • Thunderbolt 3 allows for 40gbps over an USB-C cable
The USB spec tends to rebrand N-1 as N in some form e.g. USB2 'full speed' is actually USB1 speed and the 3.1gen1 thing above, so this list will probably be wrong in the future :)
Sorry, I should have said USB-C/USB 3.1 gen 2.

However Thunderbolt 3 does not allow for 40Gbps over a USB-C cable, they might look the same (but for the lightening bolt and the 3 on them) but they don’t perform the same. If you want Thunderbolt 3 speeds you have to use Thunderbolt 3 cables.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
There's little chance that they could get a 1DX level R body out before the games, and even less chance that they could get photographers to switch. A comprehensive selection of R sports lenses won't be there either.
I'd agree in terms of native mount sport lenses, but the camera architecture's basically proven I think. Unless I'm overlooking something, any sensor in the DSLRs you can even more easily put in an R-type body. The main shortcomings of the R, like dual memories or doubling battery, are trivial to implement. Ditto the few weird things in the UI. (Example, in Fv mode you can pick AUTO off the backscreen GUI but not on the jog wheels.)

Should they have the same sensor available for a pro R as they do for the 1DX II, I'd prefer to shoot the Olympics with the pro R and adapters. Heck, even the current R probably cannot be matched for AF and MF by the 1DX II.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
As I've been reading/watching about the RF/EOS R and looking at all my EF glass, I have started to wonder if I won't just stay in the EF-DSLR world for awhile. I could use a converter with a new R body (once one I want is announced), but I know as soon as I have one I am going to want RF lenses and that is where $$$ starts flowing from my bank account.
I sold my EOS-1Ds MkIII, EF 24-105/4LIS, EF 50/1.2L, and EOS M+kit zoom, for the R+RF24-105/4LIS. The AF **and** MF aids are so good I think the R utterly blows away all the SLRs, even the next SLR whatever it is. The R can focus **PERFECTLY** while the SLR's simply can't. And because the SLR's can't, they can't even make use of 30MP much less 50+. Maybe on tripod at f/8 but handheld? Wide-open? Fast action? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha forget it.


I'd say totally get the R and use adapters. Other than durability (compared to the EOS-1 line) and battery life it's a total step up from the SLRs.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
It shows they can't yet make a true heavy duty pro mirrorless yet.
With the EF rollout in 1987, the EOS-1 was like their 4th or 5th body. They have to build a reasonable number of lenses before making it available, and ten is about what they had when the EOS-1 came out. They'll start with the trinity of zooms, three alternative standard lenses (the f/2, the f/4, and the f/1.2 prime), and a peppering of other lenses on the side. That's enough to allow a pro to start working.

I had every EOS-1 from 1995 to 2008, and just now switching to the RF I just don't see what specifically about it wouldn't be just as good with a 50MP or 70MP sensor, two memories, double-size battery, and a vertical grip. Technologically they're ready for it. They just want acceptance to build a bit and for the lenses to be there when they actually release it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Architect1776

scyrene

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 4, 2013
2,510
395
UK
www.flickr.com
EVFs are also next to worthless in astro conditions. I can see and manually focus stars and even the Milky Way through a good OVF. I have yet to get anything but static in LiveView or in an EVF under the same conditions. Not to mention that an EVF destroys your night vision in one eye. I'll grant that when I'm shooting astro I'm generally reviewing the shot and thereby wrecking my night vision any way, but I could leave my night vision untouched with an OVF. No option to with mirrorless.
Fwiw when I've done astrophotography, I've focused in Live View exclusively, although it only works on brighter stars zoomed in at 10x.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Don Haines

scyrene

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 4, 2013
2,510
395
UK
www.flickr.com
--

I kinda beg to differ on that, as our parent company uses the Canon 1Dx Mk2 AS a video camera system for various internal uses AND they bought 32 of them! Yes they bought the 1Dc too but they only bought four of them but once the 1Dx2 came out, they right away got 32 of them too. And when the DCI 4K C700 Global Shutter Cinema Camera came out, they bought 32 of them! AND 32 of the Sony Venice 6K. It depends upon the company, You can use ANY type of camera system for whatever video or still photo use you want. You just have to have the money to buy them. (the parent company can afford it! They're BIG!) Again imagining the amount that was spend to by 64 Fujinon Cinema Zoom lenses! THAT was an incredible bill. Good thing IT WASN'T MY MONEY!
.
.
I love how you think fictional examples from a fictitious company are evidence as counterexamples. No, wait, I mean I hate it.
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,045
1,427
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...Or are you working in academia shooting college sports in the last bastion of the staff photographer with a near unlimited gear budget provided by Uncle Sam's near-limitless student loan guarantees? Just wait until some administrator gets the bright idea to hire out-of-work former PJ's as part-time adjuncts to teach the 'photography/new media journalism/whatever they're calling it these days' classes and let the students pay the school to do all of the shooting. I've seen it happen in more than one place...
I have no idea what your comments have to do with the discussion. You would have been better off to just be quiet after your first response. But, since you ask. I do work for a small, underfunded, private college that serves mostly minority students. There is no budget for photo equipment and nothing is provided by my employer. As for the future viability, I really don't care. I came out of retirement to take this job because I believe in the mission of the school to serve students, mostly students of color, who are not being served by either public universities or the shrinking class of elite private colleges that skim off the top students and leave no option for the great majority of students. It would please me no end if the school were to begin offering classes in photography and allow the students to take over. However, I could not in good conscience recommend that because I don't believe in training students for jobs that do not exist, nor do I see the budget available to provide the necessary equipment to support such a course.
 
Feb 25, 2019
4
5
The AF **and** MF aids are so good I think the R utterly blows away all the SLRs, even the next SLR whatever it is. The R can focus **PERFECTLY** while the SLR's simply can't. .
Because of the poor autofocus function, I did not buy the R. In the harsh photo everyday, I have to be able to focus and trigger very quickly with one hand. A 1DX II is the R superior in all respects.
 

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,066
579
Turku, Finland
I'd agree in terms of native mount sport lenses, but the camera architecture's basically proven I think. Unless I'm overlooking something, any sensor in the DSLRs you can even more easily put in an R-type body. The main shortcomings of the R, like dual memories or doubling battery, are trivial to implement. Ditto the few weird things in the UI. (Example, in Fv mode you can pick AUTO off the backscreen GUI but not on the jog wheels.)

Should they have the same sensor available for a pro R as they do for the 1DX II, I'd prefer to shoot the Olympics with the pro R and adapters. Heck, even the current R probably cannot be matched for AF and MF by the 1DX II.
You might be overlooking something...

I sold my EOS-1Ds MkIII, EF 24-105/4LIS, EF 50/1.2L, and EOS M+kit zoom, for the R+RF24-105/4LIS. The AF **and** MF aids are so good I think the R utterly blows away all the SLRs, even the next SLR whatever it is. The R can focus **PERFECTLY** while the SLR's simply can't. And because the SLR's can't, they can't even make use of 30MP much less 50+. Maybe on tripod at f/8 but handheld? Wide-open? Fast action? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha forget it..
As has been said repeatedly, Canon has not demonstrated that they can achieve anything close to a 1D level burst speed with full servo Dual Pixel AF. Good luck selling the R's 5.5fps (3fps in focus priority) burst mode to an Olympic shooter. Even the original 1D was faster than that. Or, in your own words, "Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha forget it."
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
388
346
118
Williamsport, PA
With the EF rollout in 1987, the EOS-1 was like their 4th or 5th body. They have to build a reasonable number of lenses before making it available, and ten is about what they had when the EOS-1 came out. They'll start with the trinity of zooms, three alternative standard lenses (the f/2, the f/4, and the f/1.2 prime), and a peppering of other lenses on the side. That's enough to allow a pro to start working.

I had every EOS-1 from 1995 to 2008, and just now switching to the RF I just don't see what specifically about it wouldn't be just as good with a 50MP or 70MP sensor, two memories, double-size battery, and a vertical grip. Technologically they're ready for it. They just want acceptance to build a bit and for the lenses to be there when they actually release it.
I have said as you have regarding introduction of the pro bodies in the past especially the first EOS cameras were not. They have the technology but want to test certain parameters etc. before introducing the pro model. I am totally on board with this and applaud canon's conservatism vs others rushing flawed junk out just to be first. The whole EOS concept was "Late" to the dance but was right the first time rater than going through 8 different iterations to try to get it right as others did before they finally caught up with how Canon did it from the start.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
388
346
118
Williamsport, PA
I don't think so. If 1DX were $3000, Canon would not sell millions of them, because it isn't a great camera for a lot if casual and enthusiast photographers. It is too heavy and large for a lot of people, a lot of folks don't care about a rotatable/gripped body, and in the midrange, megapixels sell cameras, especially where a user wants to be able to crop more deeply (possibly because they don't want to swap lenses or don't own a longer lens).

And anyways, I don't see even the perfect full frame ILC selling millions of units af $3k - that is just too much money for a lot of people.
The thought is not the 1D series.
It is the R (1) series.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
605
219
OK. OK. OK. There are people who buy the 1D X Mark II to use primarily as a video camera. I hear you. I just haven't run into any of them.

Having said that, I'm sure Canon would prefer one buy a 1D X (Mark whatever) for stills and a C whatever for video. That's what seems to drive a lot of their decisions about what they do and don't include in specific models: a way to dangle that last carrot to get you to buy both.
Maybe you haven't run into this post yet - or YT for that matter :)
https://www.canonrumors.com/all-of-the-nominated-documentaries-at-the-oscars-were-shot-on-canon-cameras/
 

Pape

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 31, 2018
433
267
Harry... :rolleyes: The aliens disable advanced cameras with EMP weapons that they shared with Sasquatch. Your only hope is to use primitive technology. 1980s style camcorder or 8mm film.
dunno got this with 300d todaypikkuufo.jpg
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
Because of the poor autofocus function, I did not buy the R.
??? If you didn't buy it, what makes you think it's poor?

I don't know how you shoot, so I don't know how your 1DX II works under the conditions you need to shoot, but I've got a 10-frame burst of my 5-year-old son running towards me from like 7 to 1 meter, with the RF50/1.2 WIDE OPEN, and every shot is sharp enough to count his eyelashes. He's not even centered, he's all over the frames, but face-tracking followed him. This is one-hand shooting. Select face-track with the touch bar. Center the focus point with the garbage can button. Put over his face and tell him to run to me. 10/10 perfect shots. My EOS-1Ds MkIII certainly couldn't have done that.

For manual focus, the focus-peaking or magnifier in the viewfinder are both great. Again, the 1Ds MkIII could only do mag if I didn't use the viewfinder, and it didn't have peaking.
 
Last edited:

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
I have said as you have regarding introduction of the pro bodies in the past especially the first EOS cameras were not. They have the technology but want to test certain parameters etc. before introducing the pro model. I am totally on board with this and applaud canon's conservatism vs others rushing flawed junk out just to be first. The whole EOS concept was "Late" to the dance but was right the first time rater than going through 8 different iterations to try to get it right as others did before they finally caught up with how Canon did it from the start.
I'm sorry but I disagree. I think on the R the technology is already 100% mature. I just think their problem is timing:

What if they sold the EOS-1 model now? Little uptake because 1) few lenses and 2) people are just conservative and institutions often plan these purchases a year or so ahead of time. So no or low sales.

Then when a lot of lenses are available, and the camera's been on the market for a year or two... now it's no longer a new camera, and Nikon/Sony come out with a pro body... so again no or low sales.

Instead, by releasing several models at the beginning, just as they did with the EOS 650 and 620 in 1987, they're mostly killing time while they build up the lens line, and letting just enough "bleeding edge" adapters start using the new tech to get the market familiar with it. THEN, in 2020 or whenever, they can release the pro R, and people will know the concept well enough from the early-adopters, and there will be be 10-15 native lenses plus all the adapted optics to choose from.
 

HarryFilm

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2016
457
49
Dumb question. Why not just keep the smartphone in the pocket? :alien:
---

Interestingly, those child's plasticky Fisher Price and VTech still and video cameras are actually TOUGH AS NAILS! They can take a beating that leaves even the Canon 1Dx Mk2 in the dust!

Those Fisher Price and Vtech cameras may be only 640 by 480 or 1280x720 pixel at 15 fps, but they can definitely take the worst from even the most tantrum-beast of a child AND they tend to have large easy-to-use buttons, so if it can take such a pounding, it might be a good idea to have one around. My smartphone is far too expensive and delicate to take into the vast wilderness and wet weather of the Pacific Northwest, but those rather rugged Fisher Price / VTech toys cameras were only $49 so you can't beat the price!

Again, they MIGHT buy you a new house IF you finally take that SHARP and CLEAR photo or video of some Sasquatch, UFO and/or Alien!
.