5D Mark III/X Information [CR1]

[sublime LightWorks]

The other problem with that argument is that they aren't proving f/8 AF sensor, making the TCs occasionally useless. Added pixel density doesn't have that problem.

See, you've struck upon something that has nagged at me about that lack of AF at f/8.....

Since the 1Dx is now a FF camera, 1D shooters have "lost" the 1.3x tele effect of the crop on the APS-H sensor. As a result, if you've been shooting at major sporting events with a 300mm or 400mm lens your net effect is:

390mm on 1DIV to 300mm on 1Dx, 90mm less effective reach
520mm on 1DIV to 400mm on 1Dx, 120mm less effective reach

(note, I've neglected accounting for the effect of going from a 16M to 18M pixel sensor on the overall cropping ability due to more pixels, but it's not a major factor in the results anyway)

Suddenly, as a pro sports or wildlife shooter, you find yourself with 30% less reach than you're used to shooting. That's not chump change, especially when you consider to make up for that a pro shooter using a 300mm in the past would have to go a 400mm lens, along with the added weight and significant costs.

Whats worse....if you've been shooting f/5.6 long tele-lenses, turning to a 1.4x extender to make up the difference puts you at f/8 and you lose AF when that happens. You don't have the option of going to another lens to make up the difference in some of these cases, either due to cost, weight, size, or the fact that a longer lens does not exist.

Part of me wonders if this isn't why Canon improved the 1.4x and 2x tele rev 3's as much as they did and specifically so for the super-tele lenses. They accounted for the move to full-frame and to ease the pain so to speak in the lost of the 1.3x tele crop effect, seriously improved the extenders for this reason, and gave shooters a reason to purchase the pricy 300mm and 400mm f/2.8 rev II L lenses.

Think about it...... if I was shooting a 400mm f/5.6 on a 1DIV (520mm f/5.6 effective), on a 1Dx that's a 400mm f/5.6. To make up the loss of reach, if I add a 1.4x tele, I get a 560mm f/8. I make up the loss in reach with some to spare, but I lose AF.

My options? By the "new" 400mm f/2.8 IS L II, add the 1.4x tele rev3 "specially enhanced for that series of lens", and BANG!!! I have a 560mm f/5.6 lens.....at the budget busting cost of $8000 (not to mention the $6800 the 1Dx cost me as well).

End result...Canon sells a new body, new lens, and new tele-extender so you, the pro-shooter, can maintain the reach and AF capability you had previously. All three for the low price of $14,800.

I'd bet that has a lot to do with the rumors and statements that Canon is re-thinking the loss of AF at f/8....a lot of big shooters and agencies are probably not very happy about this.

 

[DzPhotography]

I think we need to wait until the first real test report to make final judgement on the new camera performance. We have also seen the opposite claim that the D800 is so much worst then the D700 in noise and that Nikon users are frustrated.

The 1DX might end up to be one notch below the new D4 in noise comparaison but I would assume the opposite for the new 5DmkIII versus the D800. Either way until we see RAW image, it is very hard to assess...

When something so unbelievable that D800 would not better than D700 at high ISO performance then it's better to make the assumption that something is wrong with the people who reports it. At least untill such an extremely strange thing would be confirmed by undoubtable tests.

Are you assuming that 5D3 is better that 1DX at high ISO? The current reports, hope they are wrong, indicates that 1DX and D800 is similar in high ISO performance.

Again, which reports are you talking about?

 

[Martin]

According to lens u right- I even own 70-200 II IS (by the way-is nikon 70-200 worse??). You are also right about 1.2 lens, but i mentioned that in my post. What about cameras and flash system? Maybe Canon was, let my say "1st in FF cameras" but talking about past is nonsense at the present. I cant say about 1series as i didn't own one, only 5d2. But why only 1series have good ergonomics. Look at ergonomics in Nikon-even lower class cameras, look at quality, ISO,AF, and dynamic range ie. d7000, thay care about product. Trust me i would do a lot to stay in Canon and be happy with the company, but I just can't convience myself that would be good decision in any terms.A year ago I searched for studio camera, with rather hight pixel count and ISO 100. I could not afford Nikon D3x so i ve decided to go with 5dII and 6 lens. Now i have a better choice. D800 with iso 100, high mpix and xsynx 2 1/250 (by the way-my 5dII was sync. good at 1/125). Also d800 is probably very good for weddings, having it's AF in mind. It's hard to decide now what to do, but my heart as well as my brain says loudly-sell your gear even still on warranty and go with Nikon. Does anyone has good arguments for me to stay with Canon? Anything?, even in 1Dx?. Will 5dIII be better in any terms that D800??? If, yes i would be positively surprised...but reality is different in my opinion.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

I hear your points and I did include the D800 in my thoughts, but I will also point out that the D800 is going to sacrifice performance at ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400. The D800 images available so far (all well lit I might add) show it's no match for the 5Dmk2 at those ISO levels. Actually it looks a lot like the 7D in that regard.

It is already confirmed by people with RAW files from D800 that is it about 0.5 stop better than 5Dmk2. The D800 beats D700 in image quality at all ISO. Since D800 sensor has similar pixels as D7000 sensor this was of course expected. When something is so expected (that the D800 should be better than 5D2 and D700 at high ISO) then we should not really believe in reports that tells otherwise untill it's confirmed by undoubtable tests.

Can you provide a link to any RAW comparisons as noted in your reply? I have not seen any and would love to see this analysis. The D800's I've seen today don't come close to a 5Dmk2 at ISO 1600 and higher.

What ISO values did these people compare the D800 to the 5Dmk2 to make that statement? I have serious doubts that a 36mpix sensor is out performing the 5Dmk2 and would like to see this for myself.

 

[chito]

I think we need to wait until the first real test report to make final judgement on the new camera performance. We have also seen the opposite claim that the D800 is so much worst then the D700 in noise and that Nikon users are frustrated.

The 1DX might end up to be one notch below the new D4 in noise comparaison but I would assume the opposite for the new 5DmkIII versus the D800. Either way until we see RAW image, it is very hard to assess...

When something so unbelievable that D800 would not better than D700 at high ISO performance then it's better to make the assumption that something is wrong with the people who reports it. At least untill such an extremely strange thing would be confirmed by undoubtable tests.

Are you assuming that 5D3 is better that 1DX at high ISO? The current reports, hope they are wrong, indicates that 1DX and D800 is similar in high ISO performance.

Again, which reports are you talking about?

I don't know where Tuggen is getting his reports.. but fake Chuck Westfall is trashing the D800 IQ.. a LOT.. especially comparing it to the 1Dx

 

[necator]

Maybe Canon was, let my say "1st in FF cameras" but talking about past is nonsense at the present.

Well you asked for

.A year ago I searched for studio camera, with rather hight pixel count and ISO 100. I could not afford Nikon D3x so i ve decided to go with 5dII and 6 lens. Now i have a better choice. D800 with iso 100, high mpix and xsynx 2 1/250 (by the way-my 5dII was sync. good at 1/125). Also d800 is probably very good for weddings, having it's AF in mind. It's hard to decide now what to do, but my heart as well as my brain says loudly-sell your gear even still on warranty and go with Nikon.

Funny. My 5D mk I can do xsync relieably (with skyports and elinchrom flashes) up to 1/160s. With 1/200s there is sometimes a hint of a shadow at the edge of the frame. Which flashes are you using? Was your old Nikon better with them? (Ok, I'd also be happy if the 5D would allow for faster xsyncs ...)

The 1dx is said to have a xsync of 1/250s, so 1/200 should be safe. But who kows, nobody can test for it until now. Same with the d800.

Does anyone has good arguments for me to stay with Canon? Anything?, even in 1Dx?. Will 5dIII be better in any terms that D800??? If, yes i would be positively surprised...but reality is different in my opinion.

Perhaps the D800 is really for you. But also consider MF.
Or perhaps the Pentax 645D? Or even Hasselblad/Phase One? (xsync with special lenses faster than 1/1000s). But MF is, of course, a hefty investment.

 

[kpk1]

Hmmm, something is fishy.

First things first: After 1D X I quess we will see 1Dx mark II, not 1D XI or 1D Mark V; X means extreme by the ISO and speed, etc. and now it's related to the fact that is full frame.

Second: If the next 5D is the lower mpx camera and is in the same line, extreme, then it should be called 5D X or even 3D. It is not a replacement of the 5D2.
It's logical then to keep the 5D2 on the market for the lower price and replace it sometime in late 2012. 5D mark III by my expectations has to be the highest mpx sensor in the lineup, more or less functions. It's the landscape, studio body. It's he 5D logical follower.

That being said it doesn't make sense the name of the french book 5D mark III.

 

[DzPhotography]

You can start reading this and then search further yourself. If you don't read swedish it's confirming that D800 at pixel level noise is more or less the same as D7000 as other sources also do. (and therefor with no doubt is better than 5Dmk2 and D700).
http://www.fotosidan.se/forum/showthread.php?t=138355&page=84
Similar information is also to be found at DPreview.

Errrrm why do you think that if it's the same as D7000 then it's better than D700 or 5DmkII? Excuse me but that doesn't make sense.

And on a comic note:
http://fakechuckwestfall.wordpress.com/2012/02/07/nikon-d800-vs-canon-eos-1dx-image-quality/

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Am I to expect the same 61pt AF system that's in the 1D X?

Considering what Nikon offers, you should be expecting that only even more considering how resting on their laurels and holding as much back as possible and milking out every last penny rather than charging forward and blowing Nikon out of the water (which they easily could have done a few times over the last few years) and arrogant about their position they have become, quite possibly not. But you can hope. Maybe, maybe, maybe, Nikon/Sony have put enough fear into them to wake them up again.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

What I'm mostly worried about is the DR. Not only it has been less on the Canon side than the competition by raw figures for quite some years already, it is also less usable, shadow area does not tolerate much pushing.

Btw DR is not a goal by itself, but the tool to overcome harsh lighting conditions, targeting pleasant non-hdr like output. Add wrong exposure to the list, being it a different user wish after the shoot or biased mesurement due to tricky light conditions etc.

Yeah me too. It's a little worrisome that they aren't bragging about it. If they had gone to a new process where they could improve the 5D2 DR by 2 measured stops and 3 usable stops at ISO 100 then you'd think we'd already be hearing all sorts of claims about the 1DX. They did mention DR a bit when it came to the 1DX but they were unclear calling it DR in one spot and SNR in another and improved largely in JPG in another so it's hard to say, there is reason for hope for sure but also reason to doubt, i.e. nobody yet knows and we will see soon enough.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Regarding the argument of 22MP not being enough to replace the 7D - because a 1.6x crop would not give enough pixels - Canon will probably argue that users should use a 1.4x TC to get the extra reach. - I am not saying this will get the results people are looking for - just that that is what I would expect Canon to argue.

Sorry don't agree with you:
7D + 400 MM F4 + 1.4x = 896 @ F5.6 (autofocused) (560 * 1.6)
5D (or 1D) + 400 mm F4 + 1.4x = 560 @ F5.6 (autofocused)


To add antother 1.4 behind it would be a 2x (1.4 * 1.4) resulting in:
5D (or 1D) + 400 mm F4 + 2x = 800 (still shorter) @ F8 (Manual focused)

You can't do the math like that. What matter is pixels per duck and so you need to use the camera's photosite densities not whether they are FF or APS-H or APS-C. A 5D, a 5D2 and 1Ds2 and a 1DX all would need a different results, not the same result.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

You have to wonder, if Canon had released a 5Dmk3 in September (before the 1Dx was announced) and it basically had:

1) generally the same 21M sensor as today
2) the 7D functional feature set (AF system, metering, horizon guide, auto ISO, etc.)
3) a Digic-V processor or dual Digic-IV's like the 7D
4) a slight improvement in the high ISO noise, say 1/2 stop better due to improved sensor manufacturing
5) a 5-6fps shoot rate
6) used the same batteries and grip as the 5Dmk2
7) added a 60 fps video frame rate
8 ) additional firmware options

This for $2499......

How many people would be completely happy with that camera?

You're basically looking at off the shelf technology and mainly adaptation costs involved in the construction and integration, along with improved firmware. Yet what you'd have would kick the crap out of 80% of the market.

I know that for a lot of mid-range, general studio, and wedding shooters, that's a solid camera and offers just about all that is needed in that market segment. When you realize the image quality of a 3 year old 5Dmk2 still beats a vast majority of the competition, these tweaks remove the negatives of the current body and flesh out it's feature set nicely.

Looking at prosumer and up, it would still leave room for a 7Dmk2, an enhanced version of the 7D, same 18M pixels, but improved APS-C sensor, 10 fps. It leaves room for a 5Dx with higher megapixels, and the 1Dx for the pro market.

i would rather have the current rumoured camera at 3k

Understood. But you do realize the rumored camera will NOT have a better noise performance at high ISO (low light) than the 1Dx....it will be worse.

You might ask why....it's simple. The 1Dx has the latest 18M FF sensor and represents the best Canon can currently do with the sensor technology ready for mass production. A 22M FF sensor will have more pixels and won't be able to produce images with less noise at the same ISO settings.

So, you're going to trade off more noise for those extra pixels for $3k. Frankly, I'd take what's in the package I outlined for $500 less and be able to use my existing grip and batteries making it about $800 less than the rumored option, and shoot cleaner images at ISO 3200 and 6400.

If the 22MP lets them get better video quality and you don't lose 4MP (not that it matters so much, although at some point it becomes a slippery slope and since we had hoped to gain some even....) then why not? Seriosult what different does 18MP vs 22MP make for SNR and DR? Zero for DR and like what maybe 1/10th stop? 1/6th stop at worst for SNR? Who cares about that? Nobody can see the difference between a fraction of a stop difference for noise.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

but fake Chuck Westfall is trashing the D800 IQ.. a LOT.. especially comparing it to the 1Dx

There are no proper samples available to anyone not testing the cams to really compare them properly with, for starters (although he seems to be hinting that he is an official tester so maybe he actually has but he can't obviously use real samples to show). But he does appear to be mixing up some terms posterization and pattern banding, for one.

 

[awinphoto]

but fake Chuck Westfall is trashing the D800 IQ.. a LOT.. especially comparing it to the 1Dx

There are no proper samples available to anyone not testing the cams to really compare them properly with, for starters (although he seems to be hinting that he is an official tester so maybe he actually has but he can't obviously use real samples to show). But he does appear to be mixing up some terms posterization and pattern banding, for one.

Everyone has some sort of agenda, even you and me... Perhaps his agenda is trashing high MP, which was canon's mantra, now nikons... I dont know what his deal is but i'm sure once it's released you'll find as many who love the camera and those who will hate the camera... it's the cycle of life in the camera world.

 

[Axilrod]

You can be certain that they will not offer a clean HDMI output.

How/why are you so sure that they won't offer a clean HDMI out? Nikon did it with the D800, why does it seem so out of the question for Canon to follow suit?

I can understand if you're suggesting it based on the idea that the 5D series is a still camera at heart, and a clean HDMI out may be a feature that only a small percentage of buyers would use. But to suggest Canon is deliberately releasing a crummy camera just sounds kind of crazy. The next 5D is one of the most anticipated cameras of all time and people have been waiting on it for years. Canon would have to be run by a bunch of morons to only make minor updates.

This is a rumors forum, you can't be certain of anything...

 

[Axilrod]

Canon do not care about me, as a customer. I need to wait to long for the new product which for me is 5dmarkIII. To be honest I do not think that they will do enything worth staying with them. Despite the fact i am heavy invested in Canon's gear, now i am considering switching back to nikon with it d800 and great AF and many many other benefits. I originally came from Nikon D300, to Canon's team, but i am really dissapointed with the gear. In my opinion Canon does not move forward, they make everything to let us think they make a huge steps, but thats only marketing., thats only few paid photographers who push good opinions in the web. I will lost a lot selling my Canon gear, but i really think thay its not worth staying with them. It's strange i know but-Canon is a step behing Nikon, they just dont have good ideas, they dont think in revolutionary way, they only slightly rebuild old products, the dont satisfy thier costumers, imho they just look at Nikon product and want to have something similar, but worse...why not...well...people will not sell their gear and switch to Nikon.

You're right, I don't think Canon cares about your individual wants/needs, you're just one person in a giant market. It's arrogant to even think that a multi-billion dollar company should do everything based around what YOU want. Just because you aren't happy with a product doesn't mean that other people feel the same. "They don't satisfy their customers?" Then WHY does ANYONE own a 5DII, 7D, or anything else? Why are you on this rumor site trying to figure out what they are releasing next? That's crazy logic, "This company sucks, I'm not satisfied, what are they releasing next?!" Go ahead and head over to Nikon rumors, because bitching about Canon on this forum isn't going to bring about whatever it is you're looking for.

You're pretty much saying you are going to switch to a Nikon camera (that was just announced, that you have never used) based on the idea that Canon's next camera won't be any good (even though it hasn't been announced). And it's kinda hard to say that Canon is a "step behind Nikon," this is all based on the D800 specs, Canon hasn't even had a chance to counter.

Everyone just needs to chill out, we have 2 weeks until announcement, if the camera sucks then you can complain all you want. But until then everyone is just guessing and comparing numbers, none of these arguments are based on performance.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

I hear your points and I did include the D800 in my thoughts, but I will also point out that the D800 is going to sacrifice performance at ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400. The D800 images available so far (all well lit I might add) show it's no match for the 5Dmk2 at those ISO levels. Actually it looks a lot like the 7D in that regard.

It is already confirmed by people with RAW files from D800 that is it about 0.5 stop better than 5Dmk2. The D800 beats D700 in image quality at all ISO. Since D800 sensor has similar pixels as D7000 sensor this was of course expected. When something is so expected (that the D800 should be better than 5D2 and D700 at high ISO) then we should not really believe in reports that tells otherwise untill it's confirmed by undoubtable tests.

Can you provide a link to any RAW comparisons as noted in your reply? I have not seen any and would love to see this analysis. The D800's I've seen today don't come close to a 5Dmk2 at ISO 1600 and higher.

What ISO values did these people compare the D800 to the 5Dmk2 to make that statement? I have serious doubts that a 36mpix sensor is out performing the 5Dmk2 and would like to see this for myself.

I'm reading forums all over the net.
Why do you belive the D800 would have worse pixels than D7000 when they are similar? If they have similar performance then clearly the D800 will beat 5Dmk2.
Why are putting anything into 36MP when it has been confirmed in this forum and all over the net that pixel size itself has nothing to do with high ISO performance?

You can start reading this and then search further yourself. If you don't read swedish it's confirming that D800 at pixel level noise is more or less the same as D7000 as other sources also do. (and therefor with no doubt is better than 5Dmk2 and D700).
http://www.fotosidan.se/forum/showthread.php?t=138355&page=84
Similar information is also to be found at DPreview.

Where, pray tell, has it been "confirmed" all over the place that pixel size has nothing to do with ISO noise performance?

And, I'm still waiting for a link to a RAW comparison that shows the images.

 

[EYEONE]

Everyone just needs to chill out, we have 2 weeks until announcement, if the camera sucks then you can complain all you want.

And complain they will. Some will switch to Nikon, but will it make them better photographers? Nope.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

Am I to expect the same 61pt AF system that's in the 1D X?

Considering what Nikon offers, you should be expecting that only even more considering how resting on their laurels and holding as much back as possible and milking out every last penny rather than charging forward and blowing Nikon out of the water (which they easily could have done a few times over the last few years) and arrogant about their position they have become, quite possibly not. But you can hope. Maybe, maybe, maybe, Nikon/Sony have put enough fear into them to wake them up again.

I seriously doubt the 5D? camera will have the same AF and metering as the full 1Dx system.

Again, from the Canon doc on the 1DX, the AF and metering system have a dedicated Digic 4 processor. For the 5Dx to have this AF system, it would necessitate having similar processing power. At minimum, that means the 5Dx would have to be dual processor (Digic 5 for the images, video, and all other functions), and Digic 4 for the AF and metering.

An 18Mpix FF image on a 1Dx at 12 fps is going to push (excluding all other items), 216Mpix thru those two Digic 5 processors. A 5Dx, based on the rumored specs, at 22Mpix and 7fps, will push 154 Mpix thru the processor(s). I do not believe a single Digic 5 can push that pixel load, and handle all other camera functions alone.

If it could, then the 1Dx should be able to push approx 300Mpix thru (based on the 5Dx needs handled by a single Digic 5) and still handle all other functions (except the aforementioned AF and metering using the Digic 4). Now, if that is correct, then the 1Dx should not have to resort to JPEG only in the 14 fps burst mode, it should be able to handle RAWs (the mirror lockup in that burst mode has zero to do with the JPEG only ability of that mode, its the data being pushed that limits it). By estimation and basic scaling of the processors, the 1Dx should have nearly 80Mpix additional bandwidth available for processing.

So, based on this model, the 5Dx would have to have 3 processors to handle the estimated pixel load, the camera functions, and the 1Dx AF and metering. I don't think that is going to happen. As a result, I believe the AF and metering will be a subset of the 1Dx that does not require it's own dedicated processor.

Don't get me wrong my friend, I would LOVE for you to be right and it did have the full-on 1Dx AF and metering. I just think that's beyond what this body will have.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

If the 22MP lets them get better video quality and you don't lose 4MP (not that it matters so much, although at some point it becomes a slippery slope and since we had hoped to gain some even....) then why not? Seriosult what different does 18MP vs 22MP make for SNR and DR? Zero for DR and like what maybe 1/10th stop? 1/6th stop at worst for SNR? Who cares about that? Nobody can see the difference between a fraction of a stop difference for noise.

I hear you, but......

Based on what you're saying, why not put the 22Mpix sensor on the 1Dx? It certainly had to be ready last fall (in reality for this March release). If the noise is that little and there is no DR difference as you state....

Let's go further.....if we are to assume the 5Dx has a single Digic 5 to support 22Mpix at 7 fps and a single Digic 4 dedicated to the AF per the 1Dx specs (as you have stated you believe the 1Dx AF will be in this camera), then the two Digic 5 processors in the 1Dx should be able to handle 22Mpix full RAW at 14fps.

There should be zero reasons for Canon NOT to put that sensor in the 1Dx. It would truly be the flagship camera body with the best image quality, top functional options, weather-seal, etc., all as stated in the brochures and news releases.

But they didn't do that. They put an 18Mpix FF sensor in the 1Dx, not this rumored 22Mpix FF sensor. If these are so close in image quality that nobody can see a difference as you state, why then is it not in the 1Dx?

Remember, Canon's own words:

replacing both the EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS-1D Mark IV models in Canon’s lineup.

I cannot see the 5Dx taking that IQ spot again and Canon having it jump the IQ lineup.