Canon officially announces the development of the EOS-1D X Mark III

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Kit.

EOR R
Apr 25, 2011
1,700
1,049
If Canon comes with a 24/25Mp sensor, but without 6K RAW video, people will claim that Canon has intentionally crippled the camera to "protect" C500 II.
 

gsealy

EOS RP
Jan 3, 2014
345
14
Unfortunately Jack I think they are just after clicks. This is an old rumor that circulated here a while ago but we know the fps are 20, we know the screen isn't any bigger because we have seen the images. IBIS is a pipe dream and I doubt 28mp is going to happen, I suspect it will be closer to 24/25mp.
If they wanted to do something really great it would be to have a slower full sensor mode with 30mp, and then a high speed cropped mode with 22-24mp.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
If Canon comes with a 24/25Mp sensor, but without 6K RAW video, people will claim that Canon has intentionally crippled the camera to "protect" C500 II.
It doesn't matter if it is gold plated and comes with a free photo tour of wherever you'd dream of going and had IBIS, 16 stops of DR, 1,000,000FPS and a cuddly toy the bitches will find something to bitch about.

I'm sure there will be a CODEC, "issue" or a "crippled" crop in some modes, or the new AF button will be a "deal breaker", meanwhile creatives will be creating with it. Its funny how the differences on the talking heads on YouTube are reading it, from a "why bother DSLR's are dead" to a "wow I am super excited as this is a real upgrade to my 1DC and I can only imagine the stuff I am going to be able to shoot with it", if I hear one more pundit say "but it can't take the new RF lenses" I might just take a YouTube moratorium....
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
If they wanted to do something really great it would be to have a slower full sensor mode with 30mp, and then a high speed cropped mode with 22-24mp.
I would hate a crop mode. I hated the 1D-1D MkIV, I buy FF cameras to be FF cameras not overpriced APS-C cameras or worse, why would I pay over $2,000 for an 11-24 that is heavy as a brick doesn't have IS and I can't filter for it to become a modest 16mm lens I can get in a better design in the 16-35 f4 IS?
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,366
2,109
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
As an owner of a 1DX Mark I and Mark II I think we need to know a little more.

4) They say it has WiFi and Bluetooth but there are pictures of it with the WiFi adapter, so am looking forward to learning exactly what this means. Would be truly fantastic if I can send RAW pictures directly to the cloud and / or my phone without too much battery drain.

5) New cards. Ouch, if you shoot video - especially 4K - you are going to spend quite a bit of money to get cards big enough to fit your work. Add in a second or third for redundancy and that's a fair bit of change. I liked the dual system on the 1DX Mark II as it meant I could still use my old CF cards when the primary card was full without spending more money. Plus, there's no way of knowing whether these CF Express cards will be in the 1DX Mark IV. Personally I would have liked to have a CF card slot as well as a CF Express slot.

7) FPS - I have never locked my mirror in place to take advantage of the Mark I or Mark II's fastest FPS when using viewfinder. Will be good to learn more about the FPS and the viewfinder too.
The WiFi adapter will be faster and geared to pros who have a big support network to receive and process the files during professional sports and NCAA games. The built in WiFi is for us mere mortals.

On the cards, it looks like CF Express will be a little cheaper than CFast. I'm not happy about it, but I understand why they are doing it. Unfortunately, the Mark II was released at a time when card technology was in transition.

FPS -- For me, the only number that counts is the FPS through the viewfinder without mirror lockup. Everything else is impractical for my use.
 

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
789
155
Congratulations, you've just invented DPAF!
Fair enough. What I’m thinking of - and I think a few other posters in this thread are saying something similar - is the AF sensor being a combination of a DPAF sensor and phase detect system so you get the benefits of both including things like eye detect AF while the mirror is down, and when the mirror goes up the DPAF imaging sensor contributes AF data too when the mirror is up. To me, the idea of AF accuracy at shallow DOF and things like eye detect AF from the R system coupled with an OVF and the DSLR's ability to track fast moving things sounds good - even if it means no RF lenses for me (and at their current pricing, I’m not sure how many I’d buy even if I had an R system camera - but no doubt the price will go down over time).
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
28 mp is consistent with what Craig has posted and seems totally believable. The rest. Not so much.
If it's 28 then I will move sooner, I think it will be in the 24 range so I'm not quite as keen but will get there eventually.

I've been trying to do a reasonable extrapolation from the current specs of the MkII and the known specs of the MkIII.

MkII: 70 frame buffer with 20mp and 14fps.
MkIII: 5 times the buffer size and 20fps.

But I can't get a reasonable margin of error down low enough to indicate where in the 20's it might be. Besides the buffer is really just a road block that is negated by faster cards so it doesn't really help.

However if you take the C500 II pixel density and extrapolate a 135 format sensor you get just over 21mp. If I had to take a guess, though I'd be disappointed in the number and feel it would appeal to fewer stills shooters, I'd guess at that 21mp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

expatinasia

EOR R
Aug 18, 2011
1,712
6
Asia Pacific
MkII: 70 frame buffer with 20mp and 14fps.
MkIII: 5 times the buffer size and 20fps.
We do not know what the 20fps is right? That might be jpeg only. I would be very surprised if the Mark III can shoot RAW at 20fps.

For me personally I only want to know the max fps looking through the viewfinder and without locking the mirror up. The other fps stats mean very little to me, though am sure they may be important to others and certainly look good on paper.

Also, once you pass a certain point - which I think the 1 series has already - then the frame buffer doesn't matter so much either ( i know you were mentioning both trying to calculate the mps).
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
We do not know what the 20fps is right? That might be jpeg only. I would be very surprised if the Mark III can shoot RAW at 20fps.

For me personally I only want to know the max fps looking through the viewfinder and without locking the mirror up. The other fps stats mean very little to me, though am sure they may be important to others and certainly look good on paper.

Also, once you pass a certain point - which I think the 1 series has already - then the frame buffer doesn't matter so much either ( i know you were mentioning both trying to calculate the mps).
Yep, for me the one number worth a darn at this point is the mp.

The interesting thing for me for shooting via Live View/with the mirror up is the electronic shutter and the possibility we might have a silent camera, that would be very useful to me on occasions, though getting the mirror up and the mechanical shutter out of the way won't be silent...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
577
Hamburg, Germany
MkII: 70 frame buffer with 20mp and 14fps.
MkIII: 5 times the buffer size and 20fps.
Maybe another way of looking at it is throughput. Here are the products of max FPS and resolution for the outgoing generation of DSLR:

1DX II 323
5Ds 253
5D IV 210
7D II 202
6D II 170
80D 169

So the 1DX II has 191% the throuput of the 80D. One could assume this stays true with the 1DX III and 90D, which has the same throughput as the 1DX II. In that case the 1DX III could end up at 621 MP/s (That's Sony territory). With 20 FPS that would require a 31 MP sensor.

It seems more likely that Canon don't feel like they have to distance their flag ship so far from the other models and that they will go with something in the 20s. Although, with the lossy RAW option, how much space does it save? Could the resolution go up by 50% while the file size remains comparable to the 1DX II one? File size is the most legitimate reason I've read for keeping the resolution low in the 1 series.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,304
539
Maybe another way of looking at it is throughput. Here are the products of max FPS and resolution for the outgoing generation of DSLR:

1DX II 323
5Ds 253
5D IV 210
7D II 202
6D II 170
80D 169

So the 1DX II has 191% the throuput of the 80D. One could assume this stays true with the 1DX III and 90D, which has the same throughput as the 1DX II. In that case the 1DX III could end up at 621 MP/s (That's Sony territory). With 20 FPS that would require a 31 MP sensor.

It seems more likely that Canon don't feel like they have to distance their flag ship so far from the other models and that they will go with something in the 20s. Although, with the lossy RAW option, how much space does it save? Could the resolution go up by 50% while the file size remains comparable to the 1DX II one? File size is the most legitimate reason I've read for keeping the resolution low in the 1 series.
Another reason has been to get higher fps for a given throughput, but if the throughput constraints have gone away, then we might see a higher mp sensor.
 

Pape

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 31, 2018
510
315
No processor problem anymore .
Its more about read out speed and about how much they can raise megapixel and keep high iso peformance same.
Peoples here say downscaled 5ds high iso resolution is as good as 5div,so not imposible raise megapixels i guess.
and we dont know what new generation sensors can do.
How many M lenses they released this year 0 i believe and 3 RF lense. So if they equally put bigger effort to full frame sensor than to 32mpixel crop sensor,it should be awesome.
m62 does 448 throughput and focus same time , 1dx3 does have extra processor for focusing probably , so with 2 digig 9 i would think throughput is somewhere around 1500.
About missing 6k video. Also possible sensor is too small for 6k could be just 12mpixel, to make possible perfectly working electronic shutter.
Then lame 20fp burst is plausible cause canon just except peoples use video capture for more faster burst.
Sport pictures anyway used on internet so 12mpixel is just big enough.
So my guess for sensor size is 12-80 mpixel :D
Worst explanation to more worse readout speed than M6ii and no 6k video would be they reuse old 1DX2 sensor :p .
 
Last edited: