Check the firmware updates of the 1DX II in the past four years and then check the firmware updates of the A9 (mark 1) in the past 2 years. See the difference?
Upvote
0
Canon EOS-1D X Mark III Summary
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I just can't grasp the idea of DPAF omission on 4k60 videos.
1DX2 could do DPAF at 4k60 even though in cropped mode. Surely 1DX3 should be able to do DPAF in 4k60 at least in cropped mode.
Such a laughable downgrade.
I just hope that the spec isn't final & there'll be DPAF in 4k60 mode, both crop & full size, on final consumer product.
1DX2 could do DPAF at 4k60 even though in cropped mode. Surely 1DX3 should be able to do DPAF in 4k60 at least in cropped mode.
Such a laughable downgrade.
I just hope that the spec isn't final & there'll be DPAF in 4k60 mode, both crop & full size, on final consumer product.
Upvote
0
What I think is happening is that doing a full sensor readout at 50+fps leaves no room/time for AF, but reading a cropped part or using line/column skipping does.
If we look at the closest performing camera Canon has, the M6II, that tops out at 18MP, 30FPS in 12-bit mode for AF. I don't know if that's a sensor or digic limitation, the 1dx3 specs make me think it's the digic 8 being the bottleneck in the M6II, but not by a large margin.
Upvote
0
Even the R and RP are employing some technology from previous SLR cameras, saying they don't count is simply an opinion and voicing it as fact sounds silly.
In any case Canon has a line of wildly successfull APS-C mirrorless bodies far longer than the R has been around.
Upvote
0
This is a key observation and one reason why so much of the trolling (i.e. 'Canon is doomed because they haven't released the BEST POSSIBLE BODY') by some on these forums is misplaced. Releasing a camera that many - even most - think is better does not necessarily yield better sales. I'm not advocating for laziness, but then I don't think Canon are being lazy - you change what you need to, and not everything needs to be changed (especially as it costs money, and if doing so doesn't help you make more back, then it's a bad business decision).
Upvote
0
It's not the loss of weight overall, which I agree is a good thing, but how the weight is distributed. Mind you, the latest supertelephoto lenses are also a fair bit lighter, so the balance may still be fine with a lighter body.
Incidentally, bravo! I have tried BIF with the 500L II and found it too cumbersome to do for very long (mind you this was swifts, maybe it's more feasible with bigger birds). I figured using a shorter focal length with a much lighter lens was the best compromise (in that case the 70-200 + extender was what I had to hand).
Edit - I missed that you said the mark III. Even so, impressive! How easy do you find keeping moving birds in the frame at such a narrow FOV?
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
So does DPAF still has an advantage over sony's af ? live A7III and A7SII ?
Upvote
0
Some people say the latest version of DPAF is now just about equal to Sony, that Canon has finally more of less caught up. Others claim that the most recent DPAF is better than Sony's combination of focus techniques.
FYI Canon has a patent on quad pixel AF or Sony would be using it, for example in their rumored quad bayer A7S III sensor design, which would be just perfect - a 15Mp design each with 4 sub pixels creating 60Mp in 'slow read mode' what apparently can be read at 15fps. (60Mp @ 15fps, but no on-chip AF). In fast read mode the leaked designs show 4.8k video @ 90fps.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
