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

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,877
1,675
How many Canon shooters will decide not to buy this one without an IBIS? I think, a lot. Hopefully Canon has something in mind. In the last decade Canon made enough bad decisions. Those who switched to Sony aren't coming back soon and there are many many of them.
From what I hear here, the IBIS crying crowds is not the 1D group. A few sure but not the actual working pro's from what I gathered.Just the latest thing to carry on about. First it was DR then card slots now stabilization. As if Canon hasn't had top tier lens IS all along.

Seriously, the other companies lenses do not hold a candle to Canons IS yet so many demand they put it in bodies? It seems it's just the case of crying about having what others have even though the end result is a fantastic 4+ stops of stabilizing. How can you complain about that? Oh yeah, video....ugh.
 

Profit007

EOS T7i
Nov 2, 2014
58
38
Re: 5.9k Raw Video
Canon will only offer 5.9k raw if they feel 'forced' to by Nikon and Sony, but would rather keep this capability at C500/C700 $$$.
Leaks like this and announcements about 'considering' offering XYZ are often signals to competitors - ie 'if you do we will too, but if you don't, we can all force the market to pay more.'
For example, Sony did with with their FX9 announcement, they 'may' offer more capability in the future (if competitors make the market hotter or anyone tires to trump them).
I suspect at least one CR informant is from inside Canon and occasionally sends strategic info with permission. If you can't stop the leaks, at least use them to your advantage from time to time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
278
90
Re: 5.9k Raw Video
Canon will only offer 5.9k raw if they feel 'forced' to by Nikon and Sony, but would rather keep this capability at C500/C700 $$$.
Leaks like this and announcements about 'considering' offering XYZ are often signals to competitors - ie 'if you do we will too, but if you don't, we can all force the market to pay more.'
For example, Sony did with with their FX9 announcement, they 'may' offer more capability in the future (if competitors make the market hotter or anyone tires to trump them).
I suspect at least one CR informant is from inside Canon and occasionally sends strategic info with permission. If you can't stop the leaks, at least use them to your advantage from time to time.
Keep in mind that there's a lot of internal power struggles with Sony. Sony's alpha line is bullied by the cinema line, but it doesn't stop Sony Semiconductor from selling their new secret sauce sensor to Nikon.

Otherwise, the A7S III is likely to be handicapped, even though the sensor has the capability to outperform the FX9. The same sensor will be available to third parties.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,223
1,580
119
I've never understood what the big hoopla about illuminated buttons is. I rarely actually look at most of the buttons I push. I've already learned where they are before shooting in the dark with a new camera.
I'd very much like illuminated buttons, not for when I am hand holding where muscle memory is plenty good enough, but for tripod mounted dawn, dusk, and night shots they would be much nicer than a night vision busting flashlight. A common scenario for me would be using a stupid high iso to get the exposure I want in a relatively speedy timeframe then changing iso, shutter speed and aperture to get much lower noise, this would be much faster with illuminated buttons. Dawn shoots are another example where I'd find them useful especially if Canon do the regular 1 series trick of moving one or two buttons, I cannot say how often I have missed the magnify button on the 1DX MkII because it changed place from my 1DS MkIII's and earlier.
 

Drcampbellicu

EOS 80D
Jul 31, 2019
102
76
Completely agree

anyone who is excited by the high resolution R and think AF improvements aren’t needed is basically a landscape or showroom shooter.

we just live in different worlds

I run into AF limitations all the time and I know what I'm doing. Try shooting an elite gymnast in a highly sequined leo often against an extremely busy background, or a dancer in a head to toe black costume against a velour back drop...you'll find the limitations very quickly. A big Improvement in AF is about the only reason I'd quickly pickup a III. I don't need any more MP. Actually I could really use a vastly improved silent shutter mode for dance, but I'm pretty sure I have to wait for a pro mirrorless body to get that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974 and perfpix

BigAntTVProductions

Hey Fellow Canon Shooters
Oct 13, 2014
276
21
37
NYC
www.facebook.com
Let’s be real, the mark II is ok, as a owner of that and a 1dc there is a couple nice upgrades but nothing revolutionary, this mark iii has the potential to be what the mark ii should have been. I’ll take better pixels with better iso range and a camera that tracks as advertised over what we were sold on with the mark ii. I love the mark ii but it has a lot of short comings. This mark iii could be the ultimate DSLR but let’s hope canon doesn’t shit the bed like they oh so often do.
what are the shortcomings?
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R Fanboi
Jan 3, 2018
64
78
Kenosha, WI
As a generalist I very rarely run into AF limitations, when I do it is invariably due to light limitations so my only real interest in AF improvements for DSLR's is in low light sensitivity.

Indeed I find the criticism of AF to be, in general, farcical when most people don't even know exactly what the three variables do and rarely if ever change them. I ignore anybodies comments about AF unless I know they know what they are talking about, people like Grant Atkinson, Ari Hazeghi, who not only shoot a lot but also intimately understand the specifics of the AF settings. I find AF so adjustable I will use different settings after I have been shooting for a half hour and gotten into the swing of things and then after a few hours I'll dial responsiveness down as I get tired.

Eye AF in a DSLR is a cute gimmick with very limited functionality outside video, at which point we go back to the video centricity of the majority of these improvements.
Why is a generalist shooting/interested in a camera like this? The cost, size/weight, low resolution/high speed combo seems like the worst of all worlds for such a person - by necessity, by design. If video is the focus, there are better cameras for the configured system price. I just don't get it.
 

criscokkat

EOS RP
Sep 26, 2017
313
286
Madison, WI
How much for the lenses?
I think canon has kept the potential for “larger than 35mm“ up their sleeve with the RF mount. I think they have the ability to add at least 25% more area that fits under the design optimum image circle area, all the way up to roughly 42x28 (vs 36x24). Nikon has similar capabilities, if not a fraction larger. Sony doesn’t easily have that option with their much smaller diameter mount. However computational photography might open that up by using a sensor on rails. Making defocused areas focused by having detailed 3D models computed on the fly might be a thing in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

domo_p1000

EOS-1D X MkIII | EOS-1D X MkII
Aug 22, 2013
16
16
The 1D range has always opted for quality rather than quantity where resolution is concerned, but I thought I would take a different angle on the discussion:

Perhaps I have been influenced by the recent UK Elections, but worried by the 'suggested' resolution, I have been looking at the statistics for the EOS-1D range...
1576661687797.png

So, throwing photography, hopes and wishes out of the window, and taking into account ONLY the date and resolution of the 'normal' bodies (i.e. not the 's' or 'C' ranges), then the suggestion of a 20MP sensor looks entirely wrong. 22.3MP would be a direct continuation of the development/evolution of the '1D X' series. Something around 24MP would start to bring the sensor size back in line with previous incremental developments (24.4MP being the statistically predicted resolution), with 28MP being the data point that best matches the evolution from 1D to 1D MkII, as well as from 1D MkIII to 1D MkIV.

I would like to see the sensor around 24MP, not least because I have just exchanged my 1D X as a deposit against the MkIII. However, even if the resolution remains around 20MP, developments in the DIGIC processors et al. would help to produce improvements in AF, dynamic range, low light capabilities and shooting speed. I would welcome improvements in the low light capabilities and dynamic range over image resolution.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
543
363
Frankfurt, Germany
20 mp is okay for an action camera. My wife just recently made impressively detailed A3 prints from image files shot with her old 12 mp Nikons. The only downside is that there's not much room for cropping, which is indeed something a birder could miss.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,223
1,580
119
I doubt if most pros who use the 1D care much about whether the Rez will be 20 or 24, and probably wouldn’t want more that 24. That’s not the business for this camera.
No.

There are still 1DS MkIII holdouts that want, like or need the 1 series but also want and need more than the 20 odd MP they have had since 2007. I bought the 1DS MkIII when it was the only way to get that resolution, I refused to go backwards on resolution to the 1DX but really had to get new cameras after 10 years use so got the 1DX MkII's. I'd welcome any resolution increase in the 1 series and would pay very dearly for a high resolution 1 series with limited (comparatively) fps as the technological tradeoff for that higher resolution.

But I do admit that I and my kind are in a small minority, unfortunately.
 

ozturert

EOS 80D
Jan 16, 2019
116
90
IBIS and 5K with no crop! Now that would be something.
But, I think Canon also needs to improve AF tracking as well. D5 is sitll the best to track erratic subjects but A9 II is not far behind D5. 1DX II is behind these cameras, I think, in that area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorskHest

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,745
671
No.

There are still 1DS MkIII holdouts that want, like or need the 1 series but also want and need more than the 20 odd MP they have had since 2007. I bought the 1DS MkIII when it was the only way to get that resolution, I refused to go backwards on resolution to the 1DX but really had to get new cameras after 10 years use so got the 1DX MkII's. I'd welcome any resolution increase in the 1 series and would pay very dearly for a high resolution 1 series with limited (comparatively) fps as the technological tradeoff for that higher resolution.

But I do admit that I and my kind are in a small minority, unfortunately.
PBD, the key poynt is: most pros who use the 1D care much about whether the Rez will be 20 or 24
you have just admitted that You and your" kind are in a small minority"
so correct answer is "YES", with exception of a small minority - the "Your kind". ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark