1dx II delivers on jpeg quality

[luckydude]

One of the reasons I splurged on the 1dx ii was that Canon claimed that they worked on the quality of the jpegs it delivers. And yes, yes, they did, oh, my did they ever.

Check this out:

http://mcvoy.com/lm/2017-carrizo-plain/23.html

nothing special, right? Now go look at the original size off the camera:

http://mcvoy.com/lm/2017-carrizo-plain/2017-04-15-10.08.41.jpg

That is straight off the camera jpeg, the lens is the 24-105, not held up as the best lens ever,
but look at the detail in that picture. It's insanely good. In my opinion. As a jpeg shooter I
could not be more happy. I love my 5DIII but the 1DXII is pretty darn good.

 

[sanj]

Happy for you.

I, personally, on the other side, did not buy my 1dx2 to shoot JPEG.

 

[tpatana]

Yea, to each their own. But that's almost like buying a Ferrari and then using regular gas on it. It still drives awesome fast, but you're missing that last bit on the performance. For normal street driving it doesn't matter, but if you go racing on a track you want that last bit. Same with camera, for most normal situations it doesn't matter.

 

[luckydude]

Happy for you.

I, personally, on the other side, did not buy my 1dx2 to shoot JPEG.

I'm well aware that you can take something that looks like this:

http://mcvoy.com/lm/2017-carrizo-plain/37.html

and make it look like this:

http://www.trbimg.com/img-58e6cac9/turbine/la-1491520291-grvsb2z6r1-snap-image/750/750x422

but that's not my thing. At all. I like my pictures to look like real life. And yeah, it's harder to get stuff that looks good but when I do, that's what was actually there.

To me, post processing is (a) a huge time sink that would take a lot of the fun out of this and (b) a way, for some people (who are we kidding, a lot of people) to make their pictures appear better than they did in real life. If I wanted to do that I'd be like Ken Rockwell and crank up saturation and contrast in my settings. I don't like that. I like knowing that what I see is what I saw.

To each their own. It's pretty clear to me that Canon saw fit to put some effort into jpeg quality. Kinda hard to believe they did just for little old me.

 

[JBSF]

One of the reasons I splurged on the 1dx ii was that Canon claimed that they worked on the quality of the jpegs it delivers. And yes, yes, they did, oh, my did they ever.

Check this out:

http://mcvoy.com/lm/2017-carrizo-plain/23.html

nothing special, right? Now go look at the original size off the camera:

http://mcvoy.com/lm/2017-carrizo-plain/2017-04-15-10.08.41.jpg

That is straight off the camera jpeg, the lens is the 24-105, not held up as the best lens ever,
but look at the detail in that picture. It's insanely good. In my opinion. As a jpeg shooter I
could not be more happy. I love my 5DIII but the 1DXII is pretty darn good.

If you shoot static subjects in open sunlight, you can get nearly identical results with a 7D and a good lens. You can save about $5,000 and prevent a trip to your chiropractor.

 

[luckydude]

If you shoot static subjects in open sunlight, you can get nearly identical results with a 7D and a good lens. You can save about $5,000 and prevent a trip to your chiropractor.

For starters, I shoot sports a lot. Vastly prefer full frame. I don't know what it is about the 7D II (which I have), it just doesn't do as good of a job for me.

For seconders, my experience with the 7D doesn't match your comments. It's "OK". It is not at all what I had hoped for, which was basically a crop factor version of the 5DIII - same quality, just with a 1.6x multiplier.

I've gotten good pictures with the 7D but the keeper rate is way, way lower than either the 5D or the 1DX.

It's like any set of tools, after a while your hands automatically grab the one that works better. I rarely grab the 7D. Probably just me though, I'm sure if I post processed all my troubles would go away

I agree on the chiropractor part though, sheesh. The other bodies feel like plastic after using the 1DX for a while.

 

[danski0224]

Happy for you.

I, personally, on the other side, did not buy my 1dx2 to shoot JPEG.

It's probably safe to assume that most 1DXII buyers are professionals or business entities catering to professionals, not hobbyists. Out of that pool of professionals, it is probably safe to assume that most of them are working in an environment that requires a speedy turnaround time.

A speedy turnaround time automatically eliminates a stop at a computer for processing.

It's probably safe to say that most professional (as in paying) images out of a 1DXII will be jpegs compared to CR2 files that have had additional processing.

So, using something like a 1DXII for jpegs would fit. Canon would not have expended the development resources otherwise.

 

[luckydude]

As an example of a subject that would oh-so-love post processing, check this one out:

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/fog.jpg

That, if it were shot in raw and post processed, would be easier to get.

But it's not, that's a jpeg straight off the 1dx, no post processing. I struggle
like crazy to get a result like that in jpeg, it's really hard (for me) to get any
detail in the foreground and not having the sun just blow up (it's shot
straight into the sun).

I know it's not a fantastic picture but I like it, it's one of the better ones I've
done of that subject (I get lots of chances though, that's the view from
our back yard, living in the Santa Cruz mountains has many costs but
views like that are one of the fantastic benefits).

 

[dak723]

but that's not my thing. At all. I like my pictures to look like real life. And yeah, it's harder to get stuff that looks good but when I do, that's what was actually there.

To me, post processing is (a) a huge time sink that would take a lot of the fun out of this and (b) a way, for some people (who are we kidding, a lot of people) to make their pictures appear better than they did in real life. If I wanted to do that I'd be like Ken Rockwell and crank up saturation and contrast in my settings. I don't like that. I like knowing that what I see is what I saw.

To each their own. It's pretty clear to me that Canon saw fit to put some effort into jpeg quality. Kinda hard to believe they did just for little old me.

Personally, I post process most of my pics, but very minimally. Usually just some shadow lifting and a bit of brightness/contrast adjustment. I do this for the exact reason of making the pics look more like the scene did in real life. Alas, cameras can't expose the same as eyes can, so minimal post processing is usually necessary.

The JPGs in today's cameras are so good, I rarely need to use the RAW file for post processing. In some cases, I get better results processing the JPGs and it is much quicker. The camera makers, quite frankly, have a pretty good grasp as to what settings make the best pics. So the JPGs often look much better than most folks can post process from RAW, in my experience. (CR members excluded, of course!)

 

[Old Sarge]

I shoot both raw and jpeg most of the time. That way my needs are usually met. I like these jpgs from the 1DX II. I especially like the subject matter. When I was a kid in Wilbarger County there were horned toads all over. I hadn't seen one for years until my wife and I went to Caprock State Park a few years ago and saw one in the middle of the road. He hung around for quite a few pictures then I chased him out of the road because the traffic was increasing. This picture reminded me of good times, thanks Luckydude.

 

[Mikehit]

As an example of a subject that would oh-so-love post processing, check this one out:

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/fog.jpg

That, if it were shot in raw and post processed, would be easier to get.

But it's not, that's a jpeg straight off the 1dx, no post processing. I struggle
like crazy to get a result like that in jpeg, it's really hard (for me) to get any
detail in the foreground and not having the sun just blow up (it's shot
straight into the sun).

I know it's not a fantastic picture but I like it, it's one of the better ones I've
done of that subject (I get lots of chances though, that's the view from
our back yard, living in the Santa Cruz mountains has many costs but
views like that are one of the fantastic benefits).

I agree with dak (and yourself) that it is very hard to beat jpegs nowadays unless you need to do some drastic recovery. But in most cases even basic post-processing on the jpeg can improve an image like that a lot, and very quickly. I wouldn't process every one, but if I like the image it is certainly worth it.

 

[luckydude]

This picture reminded me of good times, thanks Luckydude.

My pleasure, I liked the little critter as well, glad it brought back some memories.

 

[AlanF]

Don't let's have a jpeg vs RAW battle. Both have their places.

 

[privatebydesign]

Don't let's have a jpeg vs RAW battle. Both have their places.

How very true.

I was at an evening event/function on Saturday in Florida and shot jpeg and RAW, it finished at 9:30pm and by 10:30pm I had FTP'd the jpeg images to Serbia for a newspaper deadline. I worked the RAW files and had them in a web gallery for the primary customer before they got to their office on Monday morning.

By the way, I used a loaner 1DX MkII and have to say the 10,000iso jpegs (and subsequently worked RAW files) were impressive enough that I ordered two.

 

[Eldar]

By the way, I used a loaner 1DX MkII and have to say the 10,000iso jpegs (and subsequently worked RAW files) were impressive enough that I ordered two.

Really ??? If I read this right, you´re getting the 1DX-II? If so, I´d be most interested in hearing your in-depth views on the camera.

 

[privatebydesign]

By the way, I used a loaner 1DX MkII and have to say the 10,000iso jpegs (and subsequently worked RAW files) were impressive enough that I ordered two.

Really ??? If I read this right, you´re getting the 1DX-II? If so, I´d be most interested in hearing your in-depth views on the camera.

Hi Eldar, yep you read right.

I picked up a new to me gig that includes more event work that is too far outside the capabilities of my trusty 1DS MkIII's. As the 1DX MkII IQ will never be worse besides an irrelevantly few pixels I decided I have the business need to upgrade.

I had a short term loan 1DX MkII for a low iso shoot about a month ago but even then didn't see enough of an IQ difference specifically where I shoot most often, that is tripod mounted low iso images, to make it worth the upgrade for me but the new customer changed that equation.

Saturday night was a mixed bag, I had the camera for a few hours before the event so had an opportunity to play with a few of the settings, but I did't have the time to get seriously into custom settings, button configuration and AF tuning.

Stand out initial first impressions;
1/ Ergonomics, the slightly deeper grip and twin joysticks were a real pleasure, as were the 'softer' button pushing and their feel.
2/ AF specifically in very low light was solid.
3/ AF whilst not being as convoluted as I thought needs getting used to as many of the settings are too easy to fool, but I put that down to unfamiliarity with it. Certainly when you narrow it down it is very solid, single point and single point spot are like lasers with their precision.
4/ ISO performance is obviously in a different league to my several generations old cameras.
5/ AF illuminated points during servo is very nice especially in poor light
6/ Moving the zoom button from the right thumb to the left thumb was a killer! I am sure that can be remapped, or I could chop my thumbs off, but that was my biggest muscle memory issue.
7/ AF, really liked the option to scroll 'off' the points one side to come back on the other, much quicker than going back the other way.
8/ I needed to reconfigure the dial or joystick to run through just the nine AF zones rather than do one by one, again I am sure that is available in custom configuration. I am very used to rolling the command dial on my 45 point AF with 9 or 19 selectable points activated, rarely do I need AF more refined in placement than that lower number of well spread points.
9/ GPS, for the work I am getting them for the GPS is a nice thing I hadn't put any milage in before but can see me using a lot.
10/ On wide AF arrays with face tracking it wanders far more than I expected, again maybe just needed more familiarity.
11/ Flicker warning is hyperactive. It was warning me of all sorts of instances where I didn't think cycling lights were relevant or a part of the exposure.

Of course the bottom line was I got images with the 1DX MkII I couldn't get with my current cameras and that was down to ISO and low light AF performance.

All in all enough of a good impression to make me commit to a purchase. I'm sure I'll have many more thoughts on my upgrade as I get more use.

 

[H. Jones]

By the way, I used a loaner 1DX MkII and have to say the 10,000iso jpegs (and subsequently worked RAW files) were impressive enough that I ordered two.

Really ??? If I read this right, you´re getting the 1DX-II? If so, I´d be most interested in hearing your in-depth views on the camera.

Stand out initial first impressions;
3/ AF whilst not being as convoluted as I thought needs getting used to as many of the settings are too easy to fool, but I put that down to unfamiliarity with it. Certainly when you narrow it down it is very solid, single point and single point spot are like lasers with their precision.
4/ ISO performance is obviously in a different league to my several generations old cameras.
5/ AF illuminated points during servo is very nice especially in poor light
6/ Moving the zoom button from the right thumb to the left thumb was a killer! I am sure that can be remapped, or I could chop my thumbs off, but that was my biggest muscle memory issue.
9/ GPS, for the work I am getting them for the GPS is a nice thing I hadn't put any milage in before but can see me using a lot.
10/ On wide AF arrays with face tracking it wanders far more than I expected, again maybe just needed more familiarity.
11/ Flicker warning is hyperactive. It was warning me of all sorts of instances where I didn't think cycling lights were relevant or a part of the exposure.

Of course the bottom line was I got images with the 1DX MkII I couldn't get with my current cameras and that was down to ISO and low light AF performance.

All in all enough of a good impression to make me commit to a purchase. I'm sure I'll have many more thoughts on my upgrade as I get more use.

Happy to hear a different perspective on the 1DX2. Have had mine since August and have truly fallen in love with everything about it, except maybe the weight.

Hard to pick a favorite feature, but flicker reduction is probably one of my favorites. So convenient to get back from a poorly lit basketball assignment and have all the exposures come out looking the same-- I can't put a value to the amount of time and struggle that saves me, but when you look at other photographers at the same places, it's incredible the quality difference from having no flicker to worry about. I do turn it off sometimes when I really need 14 fps though; but 10 fps is more than enough for most indoor stuff.

In regards to the zoom button, I actually really enjoy the button vs the ones on the right side! I just love that it zooms immediately to the focus point at 100% so I can super quickly hit the button and check critical focus.

Remapping controls rocks on the 1DX2. I have a lot customized, but right now I really enjoy having playback set to the second multi-function button on the front so that I can easily check exposure with one hand while keeping the other on bigger lenses. It's also nice to know I can continue to experiment with remapping since there's so many options.

I'm also constantly surprised by the dynamic range and ISO difference from my 5D Mark III to my 1DX2. I almost always try to primarily shoot with my 1DX2 now because of that, nevertheless the amazing AF or FPS. I had expected to still shoot landscapes with the 5D3 since it has two extra megapixels, but the shadow quality on the 1DX2 is just so amazing in comparison that I just don't bother.

Also really love the in-camera crop and lens correction. I often tweet out and file photos remotely while on the scene of breaking news, and it makes me able to shoot RAW, touch up in-camera, crop in-camera, and then send the photos out as soon as I arrive.

Overall the perfect camera for me, it's just awesome.

 

[Eldar]

By the way, I used a loaner 1DX MkII and have to say the 10,000iso jpegs (and subsequently worked RAW files) were impressive enough that I ordered two.

Really ??? If I read this right, you´re getting the 1DX-II? If so, I´d be most interested in hearing your in-depth views on the camera.

Hi Eldar, yep you read right.

I picked up a new to me gig that includes more event work that is too far outside the capabilities of my trusty 1DS MkIII's. As the 1DX MkII IQ will never be worse besides an irrelevantly few pixels I decided I have the business need to upgrade.

I had a short term loan 1DX MkII for a low iso shoot about a month ago but even then didn't see enough of an IQ difference specifically where I shoot most often, that is tripod mounted low iso images, to make it worth the upgrade for me but the new customer changed that equation.

Saturday night was a mixed bag, I had the camera for a few hours before the event so had an opportunity to play with a few of the settings, but I did't have the time to get seriously into custom settings, button configuration and AF tuning.

Stand out initial first impressions;
1/ Ergonomics, the slightly deeper grip and twin joysticks were a real pleasure, as were the 'softer' button pushing and their feel.
2/ AF specifically in very low light was solid.
3/ AF whilst not being as convoluted as I thought needs getting used to as many of the settings are too easy to fool, but I put that down to unfamiliarity with it. Certainly when you narrow it down it is very solid, single point and single point spot are like lasers with their precision.
4/ ISO performance is obviously in a different league to my several generations old cameras.
5/ AF illuminated points during servo is very nice especially in poor light
6/ Moving the zoom button from the right thumb to the left thumb was a killer! I am sure that can be remapped, or I could chop my thumbs off, but that was my biggest muscle memory issue.
7/ AF, really liked the option to scroll 'off' the points one side to come back on the other, much quicker than going back the other way.
8/ I needed to reconfigure the dial or joystick to run through just the nine AF zones rather than do one by one, again I am sure that is available in custom configuration. I am very used to rolling the command dial on my 45 point AF with 9 or 19 selectable points activated, rarely do I need AF more refined in placement than that lower number of well spread points.
9/ GPS, for the work I am getting them for the GPS is a nice thing I hadn't put any milage in before but can see me using a lot.
10/ On wide AF arrays with face tracking it wanders far more than I expected, again maybe just needed more familiarity.
11/ Flicker warning is hyperactive. It was warning me of all sorts of instances where I didn't think cycling lights were relevant or a part of the exposure.

Of course the bottom line was I got images with the 1DX MkII I couldn't get with my current cameras and that was down to ISO and low light AF performance.

All in all enough of a good impression to make me commit to a purchase. I'm sure I'll have many more thoughts on my upgrade as I get more use.

Interesting to read. Keep us posted on how it develops. In my case I went trough the majority of changes in handling when I got the 1DX. I have not changed much after I got the 1DX-II. The thing I am still playing with, because I have not been able to get it right in every use case, especially birds in flight, is AF. I play with modes, reprogram buttons, change individual AF settings etc. But I keep returning to just using the 6 standard modes and toggle one shot/servo with the AF-ON button.

 

[privatebydesign]

By the way, I used a loaner 1DX MkII and have to say the 10,000iso jpegs (and subsequently worked RAW files) were impressive enough that I ordered two.

Really ??? If I read this right, you´re getting the 1DX-II? If so, I´d be most interested in hearing your in-depth views on the camera.

Hi Eldar, yep you read right.

I picked up a new to me gig that includes more event work that is too far outside the capabilities of my trusty 1DS MkIII's. As the 1DX MkII IQ will never be worse besides an irrelevantly few pixels I decided I have the business need to upgrade.

I had a short term loan 1DX MkII for a low iso shoot about a month ago but even then didn't see enough of an IQ difference specifically where I shoot most often, that is tripod mounted low iso images, to make it worth the upgrade for me but the new customer changed that equation.

Saturday night was a mixed bag, I had the camera for a few hours before the event so had an opportunity to play with a few of the settings, but I did't have the time to get seriously into custom settings, button configuration and AF tuning.

Stand out initial first impressions;
1/ Ergonomics, the slightly deeper grip and twin joysticks were a real pleasure, as were the 'softer' button pushing and their feel.
2/ AF specifically in very low light was solid.
3/ AF whilst not being as convoluted as I thought needs getting used to as many of the settings are too easy to fool, but I put that down to unfamiliarity with it. Certainly when you narrow it down it is very solid, single point and single point spot are like lasers with their precision.
4/ ISO performance is obviously in a different league to my several generations old cameras.
5/ AF illuminated points during servo is very nice especially in poor light
6/ Moving the zoom button from the right thumb to the left thumb was a killer! I am sure that can be remapped, or I could chop my thumbs off, but that was my biggest muscle memory issue.
7/ AF, really liked the option to scroll 'off' the points one side to come back on the other, much quicker than going back the other way.
8/ I needed to reconfigure the dial or joystick to run through just the nine AF zones rather than do one by one, again I am sure that is available in custom configuration. I am very used to rolling the command dial on my 45 point AF with 9 or 19 selectable points activated, rarely do I need AF more refined in placement than that lower number of well spread points.
9/ GPS, for the work I am getting them for the GPS is a nice thing I hadn't put any milage in before but can see me using a lot.
10/ On wide AF arrays with face tracking it wanders far more than I expected, again maybe just needed more familiarity.
11/ Flicker warning is hyperactive. It was warning me of all sorts of instances where I didn't think cycling lights were relevant or a part of the exposure.

Of course the bottom line was I got images with the 1DX MkII I couldn't get with my current cameras and that was down to ISO and low light AF performance.

All in all enough of a good impression to make me commit to a purchase. I'm sure I'll have many more thoughts on my upgrade as I get more use.

Interesting to read. Keep us posted on how it develops. In my case I went trough the majority of changes in handling when I got the 1DX. I have not changed much after I got the 1DX-II. The thing I am still playing with, because I have not been able to get it right in every use case, especially birds in flight, is AF. I play with modes, reprogram buttons, change individual AF settings etc. But I keep returning to just using the 6 standard modes and toggle one shot/servo with the AF-ON button.

As a little follow up, here is a screenshot 'before and after' of an image I took whilst playing with the settings of the camera I borrowed. Played with the shadows of a RAW file just to have a look, I have included the sliders and all adjustments are global there is no local processing.

 

[Eldar]

As a little follow up, here is a screenshot 'before and after' of an image I took whilst playing with the settings of the camera I borrowed. Played with the shadows of a RAW file just to have a look, I have included the sliders and all adjustments are global there is no local processing.

Yupp, it is in a totally different league, both in terms of noise and dynamic range, compared to its predecessors.