What surprises does Canon still have in store for the EOS-1D X Mark III?

Buck

EOS M50
Jul 28, 2015
49
13
One issue about resolution that is overlooked, how quick can you get the files transferred. Can the the wireless transmitter handle the higher resolution pictures, is the current transmitter limited in performance?
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,286
1,913
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
One issue about resolution that is overlooked, how quick can you get the files transferred. Can the the wireless transmitter handle the higher resolution pictures, is the current transmitter limited in performance?
I'm guessing so I could be wrong, but I imagine that most photographers who use the wireless transmitter are transferring jpgs for the sake of speed and file size. I doubt that higher resolution jpgs would be beyond the capability of the wireless transmitter and it it were, I would expect that Canon would either produce a new transmitter or upgrade the current transmitter through firmware if possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,409
646
I have owned Canon gear for many years but have had opportunities to used the Nikon D6 and the Sony A92 for BIF. Canon has ground to make up in regards to AF tracking and stability. Hopefully, Canon will make advances with the 1DX3.
Nikon D6? Do you know someone who is testing it? And if so you compare a future camera with an old one?
Sorry but even so - which I doubt - you failed to address my post which referred purely to Ari's work and nothing else!

You see he has presented so nice pictures shooting BIF with Canon which makes it hard for me to believe him when he says something oposite (to his own work!)
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,286
1,913
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I would welcome 24mp, but I would welcome better low light performance more--for my shooting...
It depends on the improvement. If it is less than a full stop, I'll take more resolution. And, based on what people who understand these things better than I do have written on this forum and elsewhere, I doubt that a full stop of improvement is likely even at 20 mp. Of course, Canon may amaze us all with some massive leapfrog over all competitors in sensor performance, but based on what exists today I'm not holding my breath.

Compare the 1DII and the 5DIV and there is no significant difference in low light performance at 30 mp. As I've said before, I'd happily take a 1DX II with a 5DIV sensor and improved autofocus.
 

peters

EOS 80D
Dec 25, 2017
180
154
Blah, waiting to see what the high resolution R brings, I just don't see any excitement in the 1DX MkIII for stills shooters, so far the most interesting thing has been illuminated buttons, big whoop (not)!
The completely silent Shutter is a big plus for wedding photographers or general event photographers.
The higher resolution is also quite nicefor event photographers that like to have a more versatile camera.

The AF improvements are certainly great for sports photographers. And this is probably the most important group of people that canon builds this camera for. On sports events you pretty much EXCLUSIVELY see 1DX and some nikon D5... there are simply pretty much zero 5Ds or Sony A9s on the sideline of a olympia stadium. And for this market the improvements are certainly great =)
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

richperson

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2019
127
141
It depends on the improvement. If it is less than a full stop, I'll take more resolution. And, based on what people who understand these things better than I do have written on this forum and elsewhere, I doubt that a full stop of improvement is likely even at 20 mp. Of course, Canon may amaze us all with some massive leapfrog over all competitors in sensor performance, but based on what exists today I'm not holding my breath.

Compare the 1DII and the 5DIV and there is no significant difference in low light performance at 30 mp. As I've said before, I'd happily take a 1DX II with a 5DIV sensor and improved autofocus.
I disagree with this statement in my practice. I don't have a variable-controlled studio comparison, but when shooting football in low light, my 1DXii is significantly better than my R, which has essentially then same sensor as the 5DIV.

And yes, a full stop would likely not be reasonable, but a half stop would make a big enough difference for me to get excited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj and SecureGSM

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
437
239
This one does. Shooting sports means cropping, sometimes radical cropping. The more pixels available to throw away and still have a usable image the better.
I used to shoot sports for CBS a a long time ago. Most of that goes to newspapers or magazines, or now, online mags who don’t print more than a lowered rez, small image. It’s rarely over 2,000 x 1500 pixels, and usually a lot smaller.
 

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
437
239
I'm guessing so I could be wrong, but I imagine that most photographers who use the wireless transmitter are transferring jpgs for the sake of speed and file size. I doubt that higher resolution jpgs would be beyond the capability of the wireless transmitter and it it were, I would expect that Canon would either produce a new transmitter or upgrade the current transmitter through firmware if possible.
Believe it or not, most mags use jpeg. It’s often speed to press that matters most. Nobody is sitting there fixing RAW images in the press room. It’s shoot, and transmit. Back at the mag, it’s select and print.
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,286
1,913
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I used to shoot sports for CBS a a long time ago. Most of that goes to newspapers or magazines, or now, online mags who don’t print more than a lowered rez, small image. It’s rarely over 2,000 x 1500 pixels, and usually a lot smaller.
And those same pictures that I post at 1140 px wide on the website have to be available for publication at 300 dpi, sometimes in a double page spread in the college catalog, or put on display outside the gym or used on a banner or billboard. So please, don't tell me how you used to shoot on Tri-X and printed using a hot type letterpress at 72 dpi, so that should be good enough for everybody else.
 
Last edited:

peters

EOS 80D
Dec 25, 2017
180
154
Just to clarify, the silent shutter is in live view mode only. I don't shoot weddings. But I do shoot events and a silent shutter in live view doesn't really interest me. I'll keep my R for silent shutter work.
True, but obviously a DSLR can never have a silent shutter AND a viewfinder with a mirror. So thats a compromise I am fine with.
Though they should CERTAINLY improve the silent shutter mode on the 1D in "normal mirror viewfinder mode". The silent shutter mode is still MUCH louder than the 5D regular shutter mode xD
 

geffy

EOS M50
Jun 24, 2019
42
23
the problem is i cannot carry two lensed 1d's anymore and i see less of them at shoots where they were the badge of success only a year ago amongst a rabble of snappers, it may well be a video and sports camera but photographers are making less money than when the mark II came out and videographers have been selling their II's to buy elsewhere which may well sink its launch
 
  • Wow
Reactions: slclick

geffy

EOS M50
Jun 24, 2019
42
23
Jeah on the photography side I totaly agree.
The video front is REALY exciting though. 4k RAW with 60fps on a canon fullframe... this is truely exciting! The 1DX II even competes with c200 and got a truely beautifull image (though the dynamic range and shadow details are quite bad compared to a blackmagic pocket cinema camera 6k for example or compared to the Panasonic S1H, which we both have in my studio).
The Mark III could get closer to a c500 (at least when it comes to resolution and pure image quality). Its truely promising =)
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,626
582
If, after they've strung out this release for an extra year, the iii has a 20.X sensor I'm going to Sony. I can't wait to complain about whatever they complain about in the AlphaRumors forums.

Seriously though, if they need to go with their little 20MP micro-sensor to match what Sony/Nikon/The rest of the world can do as far as IQ, ISO performance, etc. on larger sensors, then they're tacitly admitting their R&D/technology sucks.
Remind me what the Sony A9II sensor resolution is? Was it 24MP? So you are technically saying Canon is a incompetent company if they released a specialist camera with sensor resolution 14% less measured along the longest side of the sensor?
Never mind all other parameters, build quality, lens and services eco system. You are going to a Sony. Ok. Do us a favour.
 
Feb 15, 2017
6
7
If I saw a dramatic change of elite gymnastics photographers dropping Canon for any other single brand I'd think you had a point, but I don't so I don't.

But you will get the silent sguttewre in the MkIII.

View attachment 187817
When did I say any other brand was better than Canon?

Here are a few of my own. By the way, AF works very well when shooting events like these in TV lighting. Shooting in less ideal conditions is when the AF gets challenged and can be improved. In my experience Nikon has had the AF edge for a few generations, but not by much. Certainly not enough for me to switch.
39920926020_87fac9a6c9_c.jpg
41010786654_3bd5e59016_c.jpg
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: allanjay

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
437
239
I do wonder if Canon may have distributed some test bodies wi

And those same pictures that I post at 1140 px wide on the website have to be available for publication at 300 dpi, sometimes in a double page spread in the college catalog, or put on display outside the gym or used on a banner or billboard. So please, don't tell me how you used to shoot on Tri-X and printed using a hot type letterpress at 72 dpi, so that should be good enough for everybody else.
Double page spread is 17MP.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,626
582
I disagree with this statement in my practice. I don't have a variable-controlled studio comparison, but when shooting football in low light, my 1DXii is significantly better than my R, which has essentially then same sensor as the 5DIV.

And yes, a full stop would likely not be reasonable, but a half stop would make a big enough difference for me to get excited.
Half a stop can make a big difference in low light settings. That’s a difference between say shooting at iso6400 and iso10000. That’s tangible.thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: richperson

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
437
239
I do wonder if Canon may have distributed some test bodies wi

And those same pictures that I post at 1140 px wide on the website have to be available for publication at 300 dpi, sometimes in a double page spread in the college catalog, or put on display outside the gym or used on a banner or billboard. So please, don't tell me how you used to shoot on Tri-X and printed using a hot type letterpress at 72 dpi, so that should be good enough for everybody else.
No, I’m not going to tell you that, because it wouldn’t be true. But I did work in fashion and product photography before opening a commercial film lab in NYC with some people where we developed a professional Kodachrome line in conjunction with Kodak, and were one of the first labs to go digital in 1988 with “The Crossfield System” before Adobe asked us, in 1990, to become one of the first Adobe shops.