Canon 1D Mark IV or 1Dx?

[tiger82]

I finally have enough funds to purchase either a 1Dx but I am not sure if it is that much better than a 1D Mark IV. I can compare the specs but I'd like to hear from those who currently own both bodies. Is the 1Dx worth the price of TWO 1D Mark IVs? Are the better specs worth the extra expense? Thanks in advance

 

[Steve Todd]

I am fortunate enough to have both bodies. And both of them produce outstanding images. I actuall had two 1D4 bodies until Nov 2012, when I sold one of them in order to buy the 1DX. After giving the 1DX a good workout to get familiar with the differences, I find myself using both of them on a regular basis. Depending on the type of shooting I am doing, I will generally use the 1D4 fitted with my 100-400 for wildlife. Although the 1DX works just as well for wildlife, I like the 1.3 crop factor of the 1D4 when not using a 1.4X or 2X TC. The 1DX get used the most with my 24-70, 2.8 L II. If I am traveling, I will usually carry the 1DX with my 28-300L as an all-in-one combination. That allows me to cover just about any subject with one lens and eliminates lens changes on the go. I don't think you can go wrong with either body! However, If I could only keep just one of my two bodies, I would have to pick the 1DX. It really is that much better!

 

[TexPhoto]

I have a 1D IV and love it. I have used a 1DX briefly, and it is a better camera. But the real issue is what are you going to hang off the front. A IV with a 70-200f2.8 IS II, will shoot so much better than an X with a body cap.

Now what are you shooting? If mostly daytime sports like me, the IV is the better choice. Low light weddings etc... iDX, but then a 5DIII or even 6D might be the better choice.

If money is an issue, I'd say buy a IV, especially now when X is still the newest but might get updated anytime.

 

[rdalrt]

Need to know what you shoot. Or are planning on shooting. No doubt the 1dx is the better camera. But depending on what you are doing, two 1d4's may be the better option.

 

[Michael_pfh]

I upgraded from 1D4 to 1DX earlier this year and must say that the 1DX is the better camera - however I wish I would have kept the 1D4 as back-up body as I miss the in-built 1.3x teleconverter whenever I am using a big white...

 

[barton springs]

I got the 1DX right after it came out. Already had 2x Mark IV's and 2x Mark III's. I now have the 2x Mark IV's and the 1DX. I shoot only action sports for a living anything else is personal fun stuff which I use the 1DX for. For work I use the 1.3 crop Mark IV's and go to the 1DX only in very low light situations. I do better work away from full frame.

<off topic> Canon sent me a 5D Mark III to try out just after release and that was a total disaster trying to use that full frame thing with no grip for what I do... not that they were trying to get a action shooter to switch to what I refer to as a wedding camera

If you can really get two Mark IV's for the price of one 1DX it's a no brainer. The Mark IV is an awesome tool and super good in low light just not as good as 1DX. I wish the 1DX could change crop factor like Nikon.

 

[tiger82]

I shoot a 5D Mark II for portraits, landscapes, architecture, etc. I need the 1D Mark IV or 1Dx to shoot sports and dance so my venues can be bright outdoors, poorly lit arenas, dimly lit theaters and stages, etc. I need to capture motion in a variety of lighting.

As for lenses, all Ls: 8-15 f/4, 16-35 II f/2.8, 24-70 I f/2.8 , 50 f/1.2 70-200 IS I f/2.8, and 200 IS f/2 plus 1.4x and 2.0x II TCs

I traded in my 7D for a 70D to limp along with better low light capability. I sold my 7D for $1100 and got the 70D for $949 last Christmas. I just sold my 1D3 to raise more funds.

 

[AlanF]

I upgraded from 1D4 to 1DX earlier this year and must say that the 1DX is the better camera - however I wish I would have kept the 1D4 as back-up body as I miss the in-built 1.3x teleconverter whenever I am using a big white...

The teleconverter factor depends on the megapixel density, not the relative field of view. The sizes of the pixels on the 1D4, IDX and 5DIII are 5.7, 6.9 and 6.25 µ, which gives a 1.21x TC for the 1D4 over the 1DX and 1.096 over the 5DIII.

 

[danski0224]

I shoot a 5D Mark II for portraits, landscapes, architecture, etc. I need the 1D Mark IV or 1Dx to shoot sports and dance so my venues can be bright outdoors, poorly lit arenas, dimly lit theaters and stages, etc. I need to capture motion in a variety of lighting.

As for lenses, all Ls: 8-15 f/4, 16-35 II f/2.8, 24-70 I f/2.8 , 50 f/1.2 70-200 IS I f/2.8, and 200 IS f/2 plus 1.4x and 2.0x II TCs

I traded in my 7D for a 70D to limp along with better low light capability. I sold my 7D for $1100 and got the 70D for $949 last Christmas. I just sold my 1D3 to raise more funds.

The 1DX will focus better than the 1DIV in low or poor light.

The X does not have the same focus point illumination in the viewfinder as prior 1D series bodies.

You get full compatibility with the 600RT flash system with the X.

There is little "crop factor" difference between the X and IV.

Based on the quoted post above, I'd suggest the 1DX.

The only ? is compatibility between your 200/2 and the X.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

The 1DX will focus better than the 1DIV in low or poor light.

The X does not have the same focus point illumination in the viewfinder as prior 1D series bodies.

You get full compatibility with the 600RT flash system with the X.

There is little "crop factor" difference between the X and IV.

Based on the quoted post above, I'd suggest the 1DX.

The only ? is compatibility between your 200/2 and the X.
[/quote]

I would echo the above comments - except that I don't have a 200 F2 so I can't comment on that.
I had my 1D4 for about 4 months after I bought the 1DX so I had plenty of time to compare them. Firstly they are both excellent cameras and either would be a very good choice.
To me the negatives of the 1DX are:
1. It is heavier, when wildlife shooting I often carry 50lbs, that little extra does not help - though it's worth it.
2. Battery life is shorter, not enough to matter to me but there is a difference.
3. The loss of the 1.3 crop. My 2 main lenses (by usage) are a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS and a Canon 800 F5.6 L IS so, in theory, I am losing 90 to 240mm in field of view. In practice, however, the difference appears considerably less than the 1.3 difference would suggest.
4. Unlike the rest of the planet I don't like the new menu system - though it is quite usable.

Everything else is positive. The AF is faster and more accurate as is the metering. The IQ is better (though both are awfully good). The buttons/dials are better, this is not as daft as it sounds, as this allows quicker navigation of menus/options etc. More importantly I find the shutter release to be more tactile (is that the right word??) allowing single shots to easily be taken in high speed mode and better timing of shots.
Overall I am on target and shooting just a little quicker with the 1DX vs the 1D4, and the results are better with fewer OOF shots.

Much as I am impressed by the 1DX the difference is not night and day, it is just that bit better in nearly all respects. If you have the budget and don't want/need any new glass the I would say go for it! On the other hand if you feel the need for a lens or two then I would go for the 1D4, especially if silly ISO performance is not top of your list. I used my 1D4 happily at ISO 3200 and would push to 6400 when necessary - with the 1DX those figures are 8000 and 16000 respectively.

 

[mackguyver]

I'm still a newbie to the 1D club, but I think the firmware update resolved the 200 f/2 IS and 800 f/5.6 IS issues, so if johnf3f says his 800 works, the 200 should as well. Also, johnf3f, I miss the old menus as well, with the 5DIII being my first introduction to the new ones. You get used to them but it was nice to have all of the Cf in one place.

As for my 2 cents on this post, I absolutely love the 1D X but have many friends with the Mk IV who love that camera. I don't think you can go wrong with either.

 

[Viggo]

I had the 1d3 and 1d4 previously, but the 1dx, to me, is like coming home. It's the best camera I have ever used. And the thing is, I have no desire about an upgrade like I did with the others I felt
Lacking in certain areas, sensor size and AF being two.

As for 1dX And 200 f2, my ultimate dream combo, and boy does it deliver ! It does not ever do anything than put a big smile to my face, I'm surprised and impressed with every shot. Be aware of nailing focus with it on Fullframe is something to practice a bit, but do not ever stop it down ;D

 

[Halfrack]

After reading his glass options, I'm thinking a single IV and a round of upgrades to his 24-70 and 70-200 IS, plus a 6D? Having 2 identical bodies makes moving between them much easier, but it seems that you're all over the board, and sinking your entire budget into a single X isn't going to solve all your issues at once.

Not that spending money isn't fun, but hitting these upgrades now would make adding a 1Dx in a year just that much stronger overall.

 

[eml58]

I have owned the 1DMK IV since it's release, I also currently own 2 x 1Dx Bodies, both the 1DMK IV & 1Dx are amazingly good Cameras, as long as the Price Point isn't a factor, there's very little between them.

The 1DMK IV is older Tech, the 1.3 Crop Factor I like, which is the Main reason why I still keep the 1DMK IV, for Wildlife it's "reach" is at times very useful, I also do Underwater Photography & I use this Body for my Macro Imaging, effectively get's me closer than say the 5DMK III. The body is lighter & smaller than the 1Dx, Files from this Body are very good.

The issue with the 200f/2 is in the synchronisation between the older Big Whites & the 1Dx/5DMK III, in particular the 200f/2, you get a clicking sound in the AF motor on the Lens, when I went to the 1Dx I needed to send into Canon my 200f/2, 300f/2.8 II, 400f/2.8 II, and have new firmware uploaded to the Lenses, this wasn't required with the newer 200-400f/4 & 600f/4 II.

With the 1Dx you are getting up to date Tech, a huge improvement in the AF, 61 Point AF system, if your shooting fast moving subjects this is a huge boon to your Imaging, the Body is heavier & slightly larger than the IV, but until I go back to the IV I don't really notice it.

The 1Dx is compatible with the 600EX RT & ST E3 RT, this system is much better & so much more usable than the 580EX system, the new Flash system is not fully compatible with any Canon Cameras except the 1Dx & 5DMK III.

I do like the 1DMK IV, and if price is an issue I wouldn't hesitate in recommending this Body, but if price isn't an issue, I'de recommend the 1Dx, and in a Perfect world a 2nd Hand 1DMK IV as back up & something that gives you a little extra reach on your Large Whites.

If you haven't owned either, both will be great Cameras for you, having owned both, there's a real difference going from the 1DMK IV to the 1Dx, and it's all Positive.

 

[tiger82]

After reading his glass options, I'm thinking a single IV and a round of upgrades to his 24-70 and 70-200 IS, plus a 6D? Having 2 identical bodies makes moving between them much easier, but it seems that you're all over the board, and sinking your entire budget into a single X isn't going to solve all your issues at once.

Not that spending money isn't fun, but hitting these upgrades now would make adding a 1Dx in a year just that much stronger overall.

I thought I was clear that I need to shoot both indoor and outdoor action so upgrading lenses I already have and getting a 6D will not provide a solution. Thanks for your input and for everyone who stayed on topic, you gave me tremendous insight. Since I have a respite between fall sports and late fall dance performances, I can wait a bit for the purchase. I have 2 more CPS 1Dx loaners to cover anything that may come up that I can't cover with my 5D2 and 70D. I know I can't cover volleyball in the venues I shoot so I think I will opt for a 1Dx just before volleyball season starts. Hopefully, Canon will have made announcements before my next purchase and drive the price down. If the announcement means I wait for the new camera rather than the 1Dx, then I can rent as needed.

 

[wickidwombat]

Have you considered a 1D4 and a 5Dmk3? the %dmk3 while on 6fps still has an amazing AF system and is well suited to action. Im not a spray and pray guy so i don't machine gun I shoot in short bursts or time shots so the 6FPS is not much of an issue for me. also should a new 1D model come out and the 1Dx price drops the 5D3 will lose less and you can sell it and grab a cheap 1Dx or keep the 3 as a 3rd cam with a wide angle on, also its silent shutter is very very worth while. Not sure if you plan on shooting tennis or golf but the silent shutter would be gold for these.

 

[tiger82]

A 5D2/5D3 does not fit my needs and a 10-12fps burst is not spray and pray when it comes to action. My reaction time coupled with my anticipation of movement I want to capture means I may be early or late by 1/10th of a second and 10/12fps makes it more likely that the camera will make up for my bad timing. I am more likely to capture that shot in a 1 second sequence. 6fps means that if I am off by 0.16seconds, I am likely to miss the moment I want. Split second timing is not as critical with a higher frame rate. 12fps means I will get a shot in between every frame in a 6fps body. That is why I am willing to pay the premium for a 1Dx or a 1D4. My departed 1D3 was great with 10fps in daylight but unusable in a dimly lit arena or theater.

 

[bdunbar79]

I had both. I sold a 5D3 and my 1D4 to buy a 2nd 1Dx. But I have the lenses (300 f/2.8 and 400 f/2.8 ) to shoot sports. My recommendation to you, based upon your lenses, would be to get the 1Dx. It fits both of what you need: low-light and sports. My worry is that you are missing a long lens now should you decide to amp up your sports shooting and do field sports. Otherwise, you would have sufficient lenses for indoors and the ISO performance, as well as superior tracking abilities. The 1D4 was not nearly as good as the 1Dx at ISO 6400 and we all know that can be a common ISO in tough lighting. I have a few basketball galleries, all shot at ISO 5000 on a 1Dx and every file is perfectly clean after applying only a 40 in NR setting LR. The 1D4 took more work, if it could be done. The 1Dx's AF system is noticeable "snappier" than the 1D4, and the 1D4 is in my opinion more accurate than the 5D3.

Either way, 1Dx or 1D4, the outer points rarely miss, even at wide apertures. That's the difference between the 1D/1Ds lines and the other lines.

1Dx you can now do Manual mode, auto ISO, and exposure compensation. That might be really handy during sports.

I must say though, that both are great cameras. If I would buy a backup to the 1Dx, if I didn't have one, I might consider a 1D4 again. In my opinion the 1D4 is still Canon's 2nd best camera. Did you know the flash sync speed on the 1D4 is 1/300s? Pretty cool!

 

[ppix]

I wish the 1DX could change crop factor like Nikon.

+1

 

[ppix]

I finally have enough funds to purchase either a 1Dx but I am not sure if it is that much better than a 1D Mark IV. I can compare the specs but I'd like to hear from those who currently own both bodies. Is the 1Dx worth the price of TWO 1D Mark IVs? Are the better specs worth the extra expense? Thanks in advance

I own both. Since getting my 1DX, my Mark IV has lived a pretty lonely life of neglect in my camera bag waiting for my 1DX to fail. I shoot a lot of gymnastics and dance. I choose to use my 1DX with a 1.4x III extender on either my 70-200 f/2.8 II or my 200 f/1.8 over using my Mark IV with these lenses without an extender. The JPGs straight of the 1DX are phenomenal. This happens to be what I shot the most. I just picked up a 2nd 1DX because I have a bazillion clicks (fast approaching 1,000,000) on my original 1DX.

John