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

sdz

EOS RP
Sep 13, 2016
236
137
Pittsburgh, PA
I strongly suspect that Canon is waiting for a new sensor to debut the Pro R (and that it explains their delay in releasing one). I think they would have released a Pro R already if they thought they could, but with all the flack they got for recycling sensors in the R and RP could you imagine if they did it in an even more expensive camera? I don't think it would fly at all.
We assume that camera manufacturers primarily compete in the technology they bring to market. That's false, however. They compete over market share and profit rates. Brand pride aside, Canon will want to catch up to Sony in order to maintain its market share within the FF IL market. It will eventually need to bring technically competitive mirrorless cameras to market that will replace the 7D, 5D and 1D camera platforms. It will need to achieve this while the market for dedicated cameras shrinks.
 

digitalride

EOS T7i
Apr 2, 2012
51
28
Have you seen an account where the EF to RF converters did not work flawlessly?
I'm reluctant to even bring this up but I did see some idiot on some forum referencing this video as proof that using the adapter introduced focusing errors:

That isn't a scientific test and it really just compared the 6dii mirrored focusing system to the R focusing system. The 6dii mirror does better than the R, so its clear canon has a LONG way to go to replicate, let alone exceed 1dx level focusing without a mirror.

Unless canon makes pretty much the exact same version of a lens in both EF and RF mounts and puts the exact same focusing system into an EF body and an RF body we'll never know how the adapter might impact things. But I don't even see how it could negatively affect focusing performance as long as Canon doesn't intentionally cripple adapted lenses in software.

Some people seem to think "adapters = BAD BAD BAD no matter what" , and I can't understand it unless the adapter is not made well and is causing the lens to tilt on the mount. I really don't think pros will mind using EF lenses on RF bodies if that is the best tool for the job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
1,987
128
29
34109
www.facebook.com
Yes, but Sony does not have the sort of problem with continuous AF and FPS that Canon appears to.
Canon has 17 months to sort that out. The A9 was Sony's 1st mirrorless full frame sports body

A couple of SDXC UHS-II slots that can read/write at more than 300MB/s would be plenty nice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

lightthief

EOS T7i
Feb 23, 2014
73
5
Sure. And what's the difference between the 1DX2's 14 and 16fps modes? The latter can only be done with live view.

Look, if folks love their OVFs I'm not gonna argue with 'em. But the mechanics of articulating a mirror up and down 14 times a second is a huge limiting factor, especially when you think about all the stuff that has to *also* happen when the mirror is up or down (shutter curtains/the actual exposure, metering, focus, etc) and waiting for the damn thing to settle down (the mirror bounces for almost as long as it spends in motion)

Mirrorless removes an insanely complicated optical path and reduces the mechanical complexity at the expense of processing required to work with the increased data off the sensor. If I were designing a camera (and thank god I'm not) I know which problem I'd rather be trying to solve.
If the mirror movement limits the number of max. frames per second, then why not use the DPAF and take two or three pictures before the mirror moves back again. I think, pros are able to follow a bird or plane with short black out periods.
14 fps in classic mode, 28 with DPAF support.

But i do not know anything.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
358
313
117
Williamsport, PA
You've made a good point here. No one in their right mind will replace a 1DxII with something that's not as competent. So the Rf Pro (1Dr?) would need to be sufficiently better for a working pro to chop in their great whites and Pro DSLR's. Canon can't make a half baked Pro Rf...they have to literally knock it out of the park and into orbit to generate the competitive need to chop formats. I'm guessing Canon already have worked that out and are waiting until they have cracked that particular nut in a major way....in the mean time...oh...here's an Rp...it's very nice...
I like the way they are proceeding. Others have rushed in to be first and made real turkeys, example the screw drive AF. Canon waited 2 years before they replaced the F-1 with a pro AF camera the EOS 1. Also with digital they came out with other models until they were sure they had most all the boxes checked. They learned this when Nikon came out with the F and they had the R2000. They were destroyed in the pro realm until the EOS 1 was introduced and then they literally wiped the floor with Nikon and all others.
 

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
3,155
681
Have experienced 1DXii users (those who use the correct or custom case settings) been complaining about not having the fps they need?

Some folks here are great at disguising their lack of experience or ownership of certain models which they harp upon.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
358
313
117
Williamsport, PA
Makes no sense at all if Canon is not part of that association, and CFast does the job for now anyway, and existing users will not want to switch cards yet again.
The card is a minuscule cost compared to a 6,000 dollar camera. CFast is a dead format. But they might do it as you say as the last gasp for the CFast and the likely last Pro DSLR they make. But if they want to really bring out hyper fast shooting or FF 4K at 120p in this new pro camera the CFexpress would make more sense.
But who knows, I am just speculating as we all are.
Fun to do.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
358
313
117
Williamsport, PA
Sony appears to have done that with their A9. Canon has at least 2 more RF bodies to release within 17 months.
How does the Sony a9 do overall as a pro level camera? There is more than just being fast.
Durability, long lenses, ie 600mm, 800mm, Ease of use including menus, and other checklist items that Canon and Nikon have that Sony completely lacks to this date.
Consumer/enthusiast/pixel peepers bells and whistles do not seem to be major factors to actual working pros around the world.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
358
313
117
Williamsport, PA
And why is that, if I may ask?
What is it about mirrorless technology that makes it so much superior to a DSLR, for the 1D series?
A camera is a tool, just like a hammer. Are you gonna get rid of the black hammers because the red ones look better ...and have better DR..., even if they aren't any lighter or more durable?
I can see some benefits for the lower tier cameras, especially silent shutter for concerts, weddings, etc, but who the hell cares about the mirror slapping on a stadium with thousands of people yelling from their guts?
Camera size? No difference, and if there is one, that would be a mistake from Canon. Just image an A9 with a 600mm lens; just ridiculous!
Camera weight? Same as above.
EVF instead of OVF; which one would you prefer to use for a long time, like a couple of hours?
WYSIWYG? Pro's know better than that; they don't need to see the picture before they take it. Especially for night sport events, it's all a compromise and the exposure triangle is set in stone: 1/1000s, F/2.8, ISO 3200 or 6400, give or take.
In harsh conditions the woolly mammoths will survive while the butt-naked elephants will not:D
I believe it is not the size nor the being mirrorless per se.
Canon will make the pro body the size it needs to be to be durable and easily handled including with gloves.
The 1D is not obsolete but there is newer technology that the R will take advantage of.
The option for lenses with the smaller front elements and elements pushed back further yet have the same aperture value.
This will make handling much better with the weight pulled back from the front of the camera.
If they have IBIS it will allow for less complex lenses and actually smaller in diameter? I would hope for.
We cannot predict all but The future will likely be a pro R, R1?
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
358
313
117
Williamsport, PA
Yes, but Sony does not have the sort of problem with continuous AF and FPS that Canon appears to.
Actually Sony struggles with AF in video compared to Canon's DPAF.
Canon is very smooth and Sony is jerky and amateurish by comparison.
See reviews that are not fanboy of Sony. Very eye opening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
1,987
128
29
34109
www.facebook.com
How does the Sony a9 do overall as a pro level camera? There is more than just being fast.
Durability, long lenses, ie 600mm, 800mm, Ease of use including menus, and other checklist items that Canon and Nikon have that Sony completely lacks to this date.
Consumer/enthusiast/pixel peepers bells and whistles do not seem to be major factors to actual working pros around the world.
A bird photographer friend of mine sold his 1DX2 for an A9 to match with his Canon 600 Series 2 lens. He's very happy with it and is not looking at moving back to DSLR.

Sony's lens lineup is not as expansive as Canon but they do have the f/2.8 16-35, 24-70 70-200 & 400. They have 17 months to roll out 600 or 800.

As for AF performance and accuracy I have yet to watch a YouTube review that dismisses the body for sports. It does take issue with number of native lenses and some ergonomics but that's about it.

All signs has Canon only spending R&D money for RF mount camera bodies. Why else announce the development a f/2.8 with IS 15-35, 24-70, 70-200 lens and future RF mount camera bodies with in body image stabalization (IBIS)?

My hope is that these bodies will sport a dual SDXC UHS-II or SDXC UHS-II + XQD memory slot rather than CFast.

I would be very surprised if they come out with a DSLR-based replacement of the 1DX2.
 
Last edited:

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,057
556
Turku, Finland
If the mirror movement limits the number of max. frames per second, then why not use the DPAF and take two or three pictures before the mirror moves back again. I think, pros are able to follow a bird or plane with short black out periods.
14 fps in classic mode, 28 with DPAF support.
Because as of now, continuous DPAF + Live View (including EVF view) throughput is much bigger a bottleneck that the mirror. The 1DX2 does NOT have Servo autofocus in Live View! The 16fps figure is with AF locked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

kaptainkatsu

1DX Mark II
Sep 29, 2015
166
62
It is comical that people in here think we who shoot professionally just go out and buy new shit at the drop of a hat or announcement. I shoot professional motocross and road racing, I work with people and magazines that supply and use 1dmkiv’s, 1dx mki’s, 300mm version ones and all sorts of old gear still. I use my 1dxmkii and a 1dc, for me and those like me to say I’m going to get rid of allllll my super telephotos and these two bodies that work perfectly for a few mega pixels or new mount with no proven reliability are high. I do video as well and I have a c200 for that, it will take something ungodly drastic to get me to replace my 1dxmkii and 1dc. If it is not getting me more money, then there is no reason to purchase. We want a big bulky durable camera that can get drenched, dropped, and beaten,familiar grip and button layout and not some lightweight camera that doesn’t balance out our super telephotos with terrrible ergonomics. Mega pixels will not make me or other professionals think we should get this new camera but if improved autofocus and 10bit internally recorded video to Cfast is a thing then yes we professionals will consider. I like Cfast, I like it a lot, and 2 Cfast slots would be nice but one is still fine, having a 1tb Cfast makes having a second slot close to moot. The 1dxmkii is an incredible and reliable camera, it will be hard to beat.
Spot on.