Pro dedicated wildlife/sports: 1DX
Amateur dedicated wildlife/sports: 5D4
Pro or amateur shooting a mixture: 5D4
Yeah, the 1DX's AF is a little bit better, and it'll rattle off shots and clear the buffer a fraction faster, too. If your entire photographic career relies on being the absolute fastest and most accurate, the 1DX is the only choice out of these two. We're talking about people who are already using lenses which get them the framing they need without cropping; who pay the bills exclusively with their photos of such subjects.
If your income doesn't completely rely on that speed and accuracy then the 5D4 is the better camera. What it lacks in AF it makes up for in resolution, which is double important if maybe you're not a full-time pro wildlife shooter and you maybe don't have access to those 600mm lenses. If you're an amateur, the ability to crop in more is going to help you get results you're happy with more than a fractionally better AF or burst rate. If you're a pro but not all of your income comes from wildlife/distant sports, and you're doing a lot of product shoots or weddings, portraiture, landscapes, or whatever else, then the 5D4 will do a better job for the rest of your work.
That said, the 1DX does feel a lot nicer in the hand. Could just be me. I've always preferred not having a top dial and a heavier body.
Of course if anybody simply has the money to burn, the 1DX is still a really great camera for any task, really. It's not like it's going to do a bad job of anything. Even though it's now 'old' and been replaced, it's still more camera than 99.99% of professionals will ever need, let alone any amateur. So if someone is reading this and has that money sitting there and wants to justify buying a 1DX, look, go for it if it's what you really desire. Just don't lie to yourself that it's going to do anything for you that the 5D4 couldn't. It's a lovely body, still, but it's well beyond surplus for most people's use.
Amateur dedicated wildlife/sports: 5D4
Pro or amateur shooting a mixture: 5D4
Yeah, the 1DX's AF is a little bit better, and it'll rattle off shots and clear the buffer a fraction faster, too. If your entire photographic career relies on being the absolute fastest and most accurate, the 1DX is the only choice out of these two. We're talking about people who are already using lenses which get them the framing they need without cropping; who pay the bills exclusively with their photos of such subjects.
If your income doesn't completely rely on that speed and accuracy then the 5D4 is the better camera. What it lacks in AF it makes up for in resolution, which is double important if maybe you're not a full-time pro wildlife shooter and you maybe don't have access to those 600mm lenses. If you're an amateur, the ability to crop in more is going to help you get results you're happy with more than a fractionally better AF or burst rate. If you're a pro but not all of your income comes from wildlife/distant sports, and you're doing a lot of product shoots or weddings, portraiture, landscapes, or whatever else, then the 5D4 will do a better job for the rest of your work.
That said, the 1DX does feel a lot nicer in the hand. Could just be me. I've always preferred not having a top dial and a heavier body.
Of course if anybody simply has the money to burn, the 1DX is still a really great camera for any task, really. It's not like it's going to do a bad job of anything. Even though it's now 'old' and been replaced, it's still more camera than 99.99% of professionals will ever need, let alone any amateur. So if someone is reading this and has that money sitting there and wants to justify buying a 1DX, look, go for it if it's what you really desire. Just don't lie to yourself that it's going to do anything for you that the 5D4 couldn't. It's a lovely body, still, but it's well beyond surplus for most people's use.
Upvote
0
