1Dx3 - to be honest a bit disappointed

[kirispupis]

For those curious, I made a final call about the camera. I decided to keep it, because even though it isn't a huge upgrade, it has enough things that make it worthwhile for me.

• Dual CFExpress cards mean a much higher fps. Remember that the 1Dx2 is 12 fps if dual writing to CFast + CF, so the 1Dx3 at 16 fps is noticeably quicker.
• When I compared images from the same subjects, ISO, shutterspeed, aperture, and lighting, I did see that the 1Dx3 images are sharper. Is it a huge difference? No, but there is a difference.
• Also when I compared the images, I did see a noise improvement in the 1Dx3. I didn't see the 1 stop improvement Canon claimed. It's maybe a half or a third of a stop, but it is better.
• The AF selection button is amazing, especially as I get used to it. Once I changed the custom button settings, I can use it to change AF points without pressing another button first. I was able to very quickly change AF points using it, and it pretty much removes the need to have buttons map to two different AF points.
• AF does lock on better. In general I'm finding that the AF algorithms have changed, so some things that worked on the 1Dx2 don't work as well on the 1Dx3. I do believe as I get used to it, though, that overall the AF is improved.
• Supposedly longer battery life. I haven't verified this, but if it's true - then nice.

On the negative, I really haven't gotten LiveView AF to be that useful. I tried it on a more static subject today - a red-winged blackbird on a reed - but I couldn't get it to lock on, which was very easy through the viewfinder.

 

[vjlex]

@kirispupis

Not really related to the topic of this thread, but I checked out your gallery page. That Sienna shot is amazing! I've admired it for quite a while now. I didn't realize it was yours. Congrats!

 

[Thrashard]

I've got a 5D Mark III and think Im gonna hold onto it for a long time. Nikon already has 46MP ,so it's really cheap they don't have 30-36 MP.

Hopefully they come out with a Mark IV version. I don't really care for all the video features, and it seems that's what they have focused on most.

 

[Nelu]

Thanks for taking the time to outline all these observations. I'd love that AF selector and was hoping it'd be on an R variant.

Jack

I do have the 1DX Mark III and I disabled that AF point selector because it’s interfering with back-button AF use.
It’s moving AF points randomly, even at its lowest sensitivity.
I never owned a 1DX Mark II but I do have the first generation 1DX; there’s no comparison between the first and the third generation.

 

[Jack Douglas]

I do have the 1DX Mark III and I disabled that AF point selector because it’s interfering with back-button AF use.
It’s moving AF points randomly, even at its lowest sensitivity.
I never owned a 1DX Mark II but I do have the first generation 1DX; there’s no comparison between the first and the third generation.

Thanks for that. It'll be interesting to hear the different views on that button. I tend to always have my thumb on it so maybe that would result in what you describe - like I typically am toggling between shutter and back button(s) a lot.

Well, now that a fairly significant amount of information is out on the R5 I'm just as impressed as when the specs were rumoured. I've seen enough AF examples of wildlife that I'm sold on that and it will be super for a change to have an abundance of pixels. I'm sure there will be those moments where I'll miss 1 series features but I won't let that sour my experience. I no longer feel any urge to own a 1DX3; it just wouldn't make any sense for my situation.

It's been fun to watch the antics of the Sony fanboys/girls making comparisons and how 12 MPs is now just fine for a hybrid camera. However, I think I've now had my fill of R5s being on fire and similar spiteful nonsense, so I'll just wait for the serious reviews and purchase when the world becomes more normal.

Jack

 

[privatebydesign]

Thanks for that. It'll be interesting to hear the different views on that button. I tend to always have my thumb on it so maybe that would result in what you describe - like I typically am toggling between shutter and back button(s) a lot.

Well, now that a fairly significant amount of information is out on the R5 I'm just as impressed as when the specs were rumoured. I've seen enough AF examples of wildlife that I'm sold on that and it will be super for a change to have an abundance of pixels. I'm sure there will be those moments where I'll miss 1 series features but I won't let that sour my experience. I no longer feel any urge to own a 1DX3; it just wouldn't make any sense for my situation.

It's been fun to watch the antics of the Sony fanboys/girls making comparisons and how 12 MPs is now just fine for a hybrid camera. However, I think I've now had my fill of R5s being on fire and similar spiteful nonsense, so I'll just wait for the serious reviews and purchase when the world becomes more normal.

Jack

Now the furor is dying down I still think my logical upgrade path from 2 1DX II's is to a 1DX III and an R5, I believe they compliment each other well and will enable me to transition to an R1 easily if and when the time comes. I pretty much have the money for the R5 but limited availability and I think the initial swamping of the used market of good 1DX II's will mean the value of them will firm up in a few months. Any way it works out I am in no real rush but looking forwards to the new AF capabilities in both bodies.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Now the furor is dying down I still think my logical upgrade path from 2 1DX II's is to a 1DX III and an R5, I believe they compliment each other well and will enable me to transition to an R1 easily if and when the time comes. I pretty much have the money for the R5 but limited availability and I think the initial swamping of the used market of good 1DX II's will mean the value of them will firm up in a few months. Any way it works out I am in no real rush but looking forwards to the new AF capabilities in both bodies.

Assuming I own the R5, what rationale would compel me to own the 1DX3 other than it would be in certain respects better than the 1DX2. Live View shooting is not something I do and the viewfinder focus points are all bunched in the centre and don't have the same functionality as Live View. Now if money were no consideration perhaps, and I of course haven't tried the 1DX3. It's the R5 AF that is the killer for me, coupled with the MPs.

Now if R1 has 20 MPs are you going to be happy?

Jack

 

[john1970]

Assuming I own the R5, what rationale would compel me to own the 1DX3 other than it would be in certain respects better than the 1DX2. Live View shooting is not something I do and the viewfinder focus points are all bunched in the centre and don't have the same functionality as Live View. Now if money were no consideration perhaps, and I of course haven't tried the 1DX3. It's the R5 AF that is the killer for me, coupled with the MPs.

Now if R1 has 20 MPs are you going to be happy?

Jack

Jack my thoughts are the same as yours. I used to own two 1Dx Mk2 and waited until now to purchase two R5s. For me the R5 is a great replacement for the 1Dx Mk2 and at a significantly lower cost. If I want to lower the noise, I can always downsample the 45 MP file to 20 MP.

 

[privatebydesign]

Assuming I own the R5, what rationale would compel me to own the 1DX3 other than it would be in certain respects better than the 1DX2. Live View shooting is not something I do and the viewfinder focus points are all bunched in the centre and don't have the same functionality as Live View. Now if money were no consideration perhaps, and I of course haven't tried the 1DX3. It's the R5 AF that is the killer for me, coupled with the MPs.

Now if R1 has 20 MPs are you going to be happy?

Jack

None. For what you do the R5 is the singular camera for you as it combines the fps of the 1 series with the new generation AF and the resolution you need for cropping.

Personally I have never got on with EVF's so won't go to them 100% yet, the majority of my work is easy to accomplish with 20mp. If I get on with EVF's on a full time basis and the R1 has 20 mp I'd be happy, I'd keep the R5 and sell the 1DX III, but that is a long way off... In the meantime I'll get the R5 first, then upgrade the last 1DX II to a 1DX III and see how I get on with the EFV vs OVF on the main bodies.

 

[Jack Douglas]

None. For what you do the R5 is the singular camera for you as it combines the fps of the 1 series with the new generation AF and the resolution you need for cropping.

Personally I have never got on with EVF's so won't go to them 100% yet, the majority of my work is easy to accomplish with 20mp. If I get on with EVF's on a full time basis and the R1 has 20 mp I'd be happy, I'd keep the R5 and sell the 1DX III, but that is a long way off... In the meantime I'll get the R5 first, then upgrade the last 1DX II to a 1DX III and see how I get on with the EFV vs OVF on the main bodies.

Makes sense. I, not having EVF experience, will probably have some complaints in that realm but otherwise John1970 seems to express my thoughts. Of course I hate throwing not so easy to come by $$ away.

John - have you received the R5 yet?

Jack

 

[deleteme]

None. For what you do the R5 is the singular camera for you as it combines the fps of the 1 series with the new generation AF and the resolution you need for cropping.

Personally I have never got on with EVF's so won't go to them 100% yet, the majority of my work is easy to accomplish with 20mp. If I get on with EVF's on a full time basis and the R1 has 20 mp I'd be happy, I'd keep the R5 and sell the 1DX III, but that is a long way off... In the meantime I'll get the R5 first, then upgrade the last 1DX II to a 1DX III and see how I get on with the EFV vs OVF on the main bodies.

While I have not laid hands on an R5 I think the EVF may be a real improvement but I do have to agree that the R EVF, while decent is a pain for me outdoors and with glasses.
As far as the sensor I do believe I will not think I died and went to heaven. Sensors are all within a narrow range of excellent among all brands with only slight differences at the extremes of adjustment or lighting. Even then none is a "deal breaker".
The R5 AF and frame rate are the standouts for stills shooters.

 

[reef58]

Assuming I own the R5, what rationale would compel me to own the 1DX3 other than it would be in certain respects better than the 1DX2. Live View shooting is not something I do and the viewfinder focus points are all bunched in the centre and don't have the same functionality as Live View. Now if money were no consideration perhaps, and I of course haven't tried the 1DX3. It's the R5 AF that is the killer for me, coupled with the MPs.

Now if R1 has 20 MPs are you going to be happy?

Jack

I know this is an older thread, but I made a YouTube video on this very subject. I have both the 1dx3 and the R5. I shoot outside and in all kinds of weather. In bad weather I am grabbing the 1 series. I actually plan to use the 1d for video and the R5 for stills. I can also leave the 1dx3 on and it doesn't overheat. The animals where I film are skittish so that makes a difference. The 1dx3 has lots of little advantages as does the R5. Depends on what you shoot.

 

[tron]

I will be a little heretic here. I believe that there are cases where 1DxIII would make a better solution for birding. One case is - as mentioned in other places and Alan have mentioned too - when the bird target is in front some time R5 fails to focus and focus at the background (at least this is what it has done with 400II+2XIII so I guess with a smaller magnification it would behave even worse.

I tried to shoot a chiffchaff behind/among the leaves of a big plant and my R5 with 400DOII (no TC) failed MISERABLY. The result was a total blur. I was using the smallest AF -point as eye focusing on this situation is worse that a joke.

Using my D850/500PF with the one AF-point I do not have any issues. Keep in mind that even my "lowly" 90D with 100-400II works correctly with the smallest AF-point. I needed the R5 with 400DOII f/4 combination though because where the chiffchaff goes to my plant there are strong shadows and the ISO most of the time is in the high 4 digits and I try to avoid a 5th digit!!!

There was a case where R5 eye focusing impressed me.
R5 could focus on a pigeons eye. That pigeon was on the opposite building and I was shooting from behind a plant in my balcony! That I would not be able to do with a DSLR. But this is a very rare case that does not interest me so much. Shooting a bird between leaves is a more common scenario which R5 - and only R5 - fails miserably. If they could improve the small point focusing capability that would change though.

 

[AlanF]

I seem to be luckier with my R5. For example, on this very dull overcast afternoon, I took a 1 sec burst of a Great Tit singing. The eyeAF locked and even though the 400mm DO II + 1.4xTC on the R5 wandered because of the weight bearing down on my arms, as you can see from the full frames, I can make an animated gif of the plot, every frame of which is tack sharp.

 

[tron]

Well, when R5 is good it is very good but when it's bad.....

 

[AlanF]

Well, when R5 is good it is very good but when it's bad.....View attachment 195888View attachment 195889

Your friend the chiffchaff! They haven’t got to us yet.

 

[tron]

I have left food in two places in the specific tree (actually it is a plant that had became really big) but I have never seen it eating it. And I have left water nearby. Never mind. The food is there in case it is needed.

 

[tron]

I want to like R5. In fact I just got RF85mm f/2 Macro and it is my 6th RF lens (excluding TC). It seems a nice little lens. And I will definitely get the 100-500 since I have already got the RF1.4X !!

I just do not feel confident to be to a birding place only with R5. When I am with car I can carry R5 as a second camera (system).

I would really like to have R5 when I was in Rome and Florence where I was shooting inside churches and museums. But it didn't exist back then.
Also I would like to use it when shooting with my 500mm the moon rising behind the Poseidon temple during Summer.

Finally it could take nice astrophotos with my Sigma 14mm 1.8 (Although 5DIV has been quite nice with it).

So there are uses for R5. It is just birding that it does not seem 100% suitable for.

 

[Hector1970]

I will be a little heretic here. I believe that there are cases where 1DxIII would make a better solution for birding. One case is - as mentioned in other places and Alan have mentioned too - when the bird target is in front some time R5 fails to focus and focus at the background (at least this is what it has done with 400II+2XIII so I guess with a smaller magnification it would behave even worse.

I tried to shoot a chiffchaff behind/among the leaves of a big plant and my R5 with 400DOII (no TC) failed MISERABLY. The result was a total blur. I was using the smallest AF -point as eye focusing on this situation is worse that a joke.

There was a case where R5 eye focusing impressed me.
R5 could focus on a pigeons eye. That pigeon was on the opposite building and I was shooting from behind a plant in my balcony! That I would not be able to do with a DSLR. But this is a very rare case that does not interest me so much. Shooting a bird between leaves is a more common scenario which R5 - and only R5 - fails miserably. If they could improve the small point focusing capability that would change though.

I would find the 1DXIII fails in cases like this as well. I'd love to be photographing big birds but we don't have that many of them. They tend to be small finches or thrushes and move about trees quite alot. The 1DXIII is still quite hit and miss with this type of set up. It's much better when its against a clear background, it locks on quickly. Hopefully eventually a camera will be able to detect and focus on something by detecting what it is. It would be great if it could intelligently work out what in the scene the photographer might be tracking.
The main disadvantage for me in the IDXIII is the 20MP. Small birds need that higher MP. For sport the 20MP is not an issue (if there was any sport to photograph - hopefully it will restart).
The R1 I'm sure will be a higher MP camera and its focusing ability might be superior. I'm holding out for a high MP R5 style camera but is probably a way off. I have a loupe for the IDXIII but unless in a hide its not very practical. Even at that its awkward. I don't know if it focuses any better in live view .

 

[tron]

I would find the 1DXIII fails in cases like this as well. I'd love to be photographing big birds but we don't have that many of them. They tend to be small finches or thrushes and move about trees quite alot. The 1DXIII is still quite hit and miss with this type of set up. It's much better when its against a clear background, it locks on quickly. Hopefully eventually a camera will be able to detect and focus on something by detecting what it is. It would be great if it could intelligently work out what in the scene the photographer might be tracking.
The main disadvantage for me in the IDXIII is the 20MP. Small birds need that higher MP. For sport the 20MP is not an issue (if there was any sport to photograph - hopefully it will restart).
The R1 I'm sure will be a higher MP camera and its focusing ability might be superior. I'm holding out for a high MP R5 style camera but is probably a way off. I have a loupe for the IDXIII but unless in a hide its not very practical. Even at that its awkward. I don't know if it focuses any better in live view .

I read and accept your 1DxIII findings. You have it and I don't. In that case I do not have a 100% solution. For some R5 is the perfect camera but as I mentioned I do not believe that. Even the button placement (Menu, Info, Q, etc) is arranged differently than other Canon cameras! For other 5DsR + big whites could be another way (I have it and I like it. It is not fast and the buffer is small but it is surprising good). I also use D850/D500 with 500mm PF. If I had to take one combo I would take D850/500PF (with the TC1.4III). It has nice and fast focusing (without the TC) and the basic battery can be used for 2000 shots! It makes the grip with the big battery useless! With the TC focusing suffers but IQ does not!

Regarding R1 and any other successor they will have to improve Dual Pixel a lot (Maybe Quad pixel?) That small area AF sometimes is a joke in many situations which are easy for Canon's and Nikon's DSLR's one point AF.