Canon EOS-1D X Delays [CR2]

[Viggo]

I have owned the 1d3 and the 1d4 so I know very well about setting fps. The thing is, the 1d4 at 10 fps got me less keepers than the 5d3 with 6 fps, so essentially wasting frames. I didn't shot 10 fps to get that critical moment, I shot 10 fps to be sure I had a few sharp images to choose from a sequence. And I have used the 1d X, and for me personally 12 fps means I really have to dig to find something that is THAT fast that I need it, AND the AF has to able to keep up. That is a very hard task to do, and none of the 1d's have done it so far, or any other camera, ever. The X is good, but the AF isn't as fast as your vision and mind. And I think that when shooting a sporting event with the X, you could have gotten by with 6 fps, but you have it set to 12 to be sure, meaning your shooting a huge amount of images not neccesary to catch a critical moment. And then you're still absolutely have to have 100% of those shot perfectly focused. That would be absolutely crazy to have 100% hitrate at all times.

That is why paying double and slowing down doesn't make sense. This is, again, singled out only in the discussion of shutter durabillity taken out of contex when considering the (on paper since no one has used both and compared) way better tracking of the 1d X. Shutter durabillty only

You might no see the sense behind it - but I do - and that is no doubt why all the faster frame rate cameras offer a slow continuous - yes including Nikon D4 etc

As for you having less keepers, well over the weekend I was taking pictures of planes at 10fps and the problem I had was the extremely high keeper rate. This was with the 1D4 and 600mm (and sometimes with the 1.4).

Do you think the world sports pros would tolerate lots of missed shots? These are those pros that you see with the long white lens. If they missed shots on a regular basis they would have moved to the D3S - the ones with big black lens that are conspicuously absent at sporting events. So how come you miss shots and slag off Canon when the majority of top pros seem to be happy?

First off, I did not slag off Canon, this was specified as being related to shutter durabillty, and how fast you run through the given actuations guranteed by Canon, nothing else.

"So how come you miss shots and slag off Canon when the majority of top pros seem to be happy?"

Because I don't shoot planes at infinty but close subjects with fast lenses, such as kids at 1,2 aperture.

Did I say the D3s was better? If I recall the D3s and 1d4 scored pretty equally. So you don't have a choice but have to use the best that is out there, now, if the 1d4 gave you the best keeperrate ever, what's the need for a COMPLETELY new AF-system that is better in every which way in the 5d3 and 1d X compared to previous models?

 

[briansquibb]

I have owned the 1d3 and the 1d4 so I know very well about setting fps. The thing is, the 1d4 at 10 fps got me less keepers than the 5d3 with 6 fps, so essentially wasting frames. I didn't shot 10 fps to get that critical moment, I shot 10 fps to be sure I had a few sharp images to choose from a sequence. And I have used the 1d X, and for me personally 12 fps means I really have to dig to find something that is THAT fast that I need it, AND the AF has to able to keep up. That is a very hard task to do, and none of the 1d's have done it so far, or any other camera, ever. The X is good, but the AF isn't as fast as your vision and mind. And I think that when shooting a sporting event with the X, you could have gotten by with 6 fps, but you have it set to 12 to be sure, meaning your shooting a huge amount of images not neccesary to catch a critical moment. And then you're still absolutely have to have 100% of those shot perfectly focused. That would be absolutely crazy to have 100% hitrate at all times.

That is why paying double and slowing down doesn't make sense. This is, again, singled out only in the discussion of shutter durabillity taken out of contex when considering the (on paper since no one has used both and compared) way better tracking of the 1d X. Shutter durabillty only

You might no see the sense behind it - but I do - and that is no doubt why all the faster frame rate cameras offer a slow continuous - yes including Nikon D4 etc

As for you having less keepers, well over the weekend I was taking pictures of planes at 10fps and the problem I had was the extremely high keeper rate. This was with the 1D4 and 600mm (and sometimes with the 1.4).

Do you think the world sports pros would tolerate lots of missed shots? These are those pros that you see with the long white lens. If they missed shots on a regular basis they would have moved to the D3S - the ones with big black lens that are conspicuously absent at sporting events. So how come you miss shots and slag off Canon when the majority of top pros seem to be happy?

First off, I did not slag off Canon, this was specified as being related to shutter durabillty, and how fast you run through the given actuations guranteed by Canon, nothing else.

"So how come you miss shots and slag off Canon when the majority of top pros seem to be happy?"

Because I don't shoot planes at infinty but close subjects with fast lenses, such as kids at 1,2 aperture.

Did I say the D3s was better? If I recall the D3s and 1d4 scored pretty equally. So you don't have a choice but have to use the best that is out there, now, if the 1d4 gave you the best keeperrate ever, what's the need for a COMPLETELY new AF-system that is better in every which way in the 5d3 and 1d X compared to previous models?

We had this discussion before about how the human cannot adjust fast enough when taking pictures at 10fps so at f/1.2 you are bound to get more OOF - that is because of the human not the camera.

I didn't say the D3S was better - but that if the 1D4 AF was so poor then the top pros would have moved to the D3S.

The new AF system of the 1DX is different because of the new metering and extra AF points

 

[JaxPhotoBuff]

So, we are 5 pages into this thread, and still no one has weighed in to affirm or deny that they have 1) received a 1DX that they purchased rather than borrowed, and 2) that the camera is or is not a pre-production model.

Anyone...? Beuler...Beuler?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Well that explains why the guy on that other forum that said he had received his and uploaded pictures, but then later deleted his post and the pictures.

That doesn't explain anything Because I was allowed to publish photos from preproduction version almost without any restrictions. I probably could even post raw files (at least the document I received didn't make any difference between raw and jpg.)

Few real life samples (converted from RAW in Camera RAW 6.7 RC with default settings):
http://www.martinkozak.com/?p=12170

Can you post an ISO100 RAW file?
It can be of anything or nothing.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

What I heard is the reflex mirror problem because of the 14fps continious shoot

???

It doesn't even move the mirror in 14fps mode.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Meantime, here we are on May 31, and still no 5D3 battery grip in hand or firmware update either.

People are already using the 5D3 grip.

 

[pwp]

Meantime, here we are on May 31, and still no 5D3 battery grip in hand or firmware update either.

People are already using the 5D3 grip.

He's right, the grips definitely are in. Had mine for 10 days or so. Even seeing price drops from RRP. Even seeing the eBay clones starting to ship. It completes the 5D3 for me...but grips generally do when that's what you're used to. But boy it's big...a BG-E11 gripped 5D3 is taller, thicker bulkier and around 30 grams heavier than a 1D Mk4.

PW

 

[hhelmbold]

Not sure why everybody is so worked up about delays... the 1Dx was announced in october and said to be available in march 2012. It seems delays are 2-3 months right now, if they start to ship in june.

I highly doubt they are trying to do major redesign... with 2,5 months delay. I bet they are trying to iron out firmware bugs and get all it in good working order for the olympics.

Got to agree there, "if" it is delayed again(it is just a rumor..lol). I can't see Canon missing the Olympics...if they do it would be an EPIC fail.

I also have to agree... this is all based on rumors that it will be delayed once again, or is there some proof? This is all based on the olympic photographers not getting a production 1DX already... well why should they? I have been waiting just as long and the 1DX is just as important to me, only difference is that I am not going to the olympics. I don't think photographers are going to the olympics based on the assumption that they will have a 1DX.

On the other hand I do think it is of Canon's interest to have the 1DX at the olympics and if they release it too late, then photographers might not feel comfortable enough to use it. So any chance this is why they are giving out pre-production models to certain photographers, maybe to get to know the camera? Every single person who has used the pre-production model loved the camera, I haven't seen anything on mirrors or firmware or battery issues in any of their reviews (maybe they aren't allowed to speak the truth, but I doubt it)

All I am saying is that I won't jump to conclusions because some photographers haven't been treated better than others. I'll wait for Canon to do the delay announcements... I think at this stage we need Canon Rumors to be our light at the end of the tunnel and rather rumor good news... we're already depressed ;D

 

[wickidwombat]

(maybe they aren't allowed to speak the truth, but I doubt it)

LOL i just had an image of chuck westfall in a brown robe performing jedi mind tricks of them

 

[nikkito]

Not sure why everybody is so worked up about delays... the 1Dx was announced in october and said to be available in march 2012. It seems delays are 2-3 months right now, if they start to ship in june.

I highly doubt they are trying to do major redesign... with 2,5 months delay. I bet they are trying to iron out firmware bugs and get all it in good working order for the olympics.

Got to agree there, "if" it is delayed again(it is just a rumor..lol). I can't see Canon missing the Olympics...if they do it would be an EPIC fail.

I also have to agree... this is all based on rumors that it will be delayed once again, or is there some proof? This is all based on the olympic photographers not getting a production 1DX already... well why should they? I have been waiting just as long and the 1DX is just as important to me, only difference is that I am not going to the olympics. I don't think photographers are going to the olympics based on the assumption that they will have a 1DX.

On the other hand I do think it is of Canon's interest to have the 1DX at the olympics and if they release it too late, then photographers might not feel comfortable enough to use it. So any chance this is why they are giving out pre-production models to certain photographers, maybe to get to know the camera? Every single person who has used the pre-production model loved the camera, I haven't seen anything on mirrors or firmware or battery issues in any of their reviews (maybe they aren't allowed to speak the truth, but I doubt it)

All I am saying is that I won't jump to conclusions because some photographers haven't been treated better than others. I'll wait for Canon to do the delay announcements... I think at this stage we need Canon Rumors to be our light at the end of the tunnel and rather rumor good news... we're already depressed ;D

+1.000 ;D

 

[John Thomas]

Given the target market, the price and the fact that their reputation in the professional market rides on this camera, is it any wonder that Canon wants to make sure the thing is as close to perfect as possible before releasing it?

If they think this, they must be really desperate - engineering is always a compromise between dev time and product lifecycle, thus making "near perfection" an idea for geeks, not for a commercial company. It's much more likely that they found flaws (f8 af?) they couldn't get away with given the competition, so rather than "near perfection" its more like "good enough".

1.) By improving 1DX to not leave the impression that 5D3 is abandoned.
Abandoned customers will abandon the brand.

Are you suggesting that Canon would be well-advised not to put any significant last-minute improvement in the 1dx, because it may make the 5d3 look bad? Geez, this is the way of technology - and Canon will hardly stop development because some 5d3 users are a bit touchy when they hear "Nikon" and could not stand internal Canon competition, too. Didn't tons of 5d3 threads establish that the 5d3 is a great body at any price and nothing else matters, esp. not other alternatives :-o ?

I had in mind that they could try NOT to put a "last-minute improvement" (significant or not) but to include a "big" improvement which they have behind the closed doors - something like a BSI sensor - they have the technology, put the link bellow in the Google Translate to see:

http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2012-01-23

...also have a look here:

http://photorumors.com/2012/01/23/sony-develops-next-generation-back-illuminated-cmos-sensor-with-rgbw-coding-and-hdr-movie-function-canon-files-a-patent-for-a-large-bsi-sensor/

For an expensive product with a long life cycle like 5D3/1DX the early adopters are one of the most valuable assets of a company. It they will feel betrayed then they will betray - a damage which is very hard to repair after. I know this from many years of experience.

Having a camera being twice as expensive and two or even three times better it is understandable. But having a camera ten times better just because they wanted to fool the early adopters and enthusiasts with 5DMk3 - this will backfire. Too few will think that they had a stiff competition from Nikon/Sony and they needed to throw everything against them. The ones who purcased an comparatively over-priced 5D3 will feel cheated and next time who will dare to commit?

OTOH, from my small experience, as I stated elsewhere and it seems that I'm not alone, they now try to overcome some design issues and to improve to the max the firmware (this includes also end-user features like black AF thing but also the internal processing engines like ADC / noise handling etc.). The risk is way to big (imho) to redesign hardware now.

But I think that's critical for them to crowdsource their problems even in the form of "rumors" (this is one the best ways to keep the brand goodwill untouched) because more eyeballs will see better and perhaps a solution will appear from "nowhere" (if it didn't appeared already ).

JustMy0.02c++

JohnTh.

 

[wockawocka]

I've never considered using Nikon but if they keep going the way they seem to be, i.e. removing the AA filters from sensors and release a D4 like that then I'll probably be off.

You don't realise how clear images can be until you've shot something without an AA filter like a MF back.

 

[expatinasia]

Maybe it is a lot simpler than all this. Maybe it is just like I suggested in another thread some time back. Maybe they have just run out of black tape! ;-)

 

[helpful]

There is some good news out there, though. Have any of you seen the recent series of sample images? I thought for sure someone was going to post the link because they have been there for 36 hours or so, but I haven't noticed anyone mention it yet.

http://www.fotomagazin.de/test_technik/testbilder/detail.php?objectID=6204&class=&thema

If you toggle through the photos at full screen size (not 1:1), it's impossible to tell any difference until beyond ISO 12,800. At 1:1 it is great, no worse than ISO 400 on cameras five-six years ago. The top of the regular ISO range, 51,200, actually does look usable as well--certainly better than 25,600 on the 5D3.

I am so excited because I was still grappling in my mind with the worry that I should have gone with the D4 (I already own complete systems of both Canon and Nikon, so the array of lenses isn't an issue for me).

 

[lonebear]

I had in mind that they could try NOT to put a "last-minute improvement" (significant or not) but to include a "big" improvement which they have behind the closed doors - something like a BSI sensor - they have the technology...

A BSI sensor, if it ever be true, will place Canon at the same starting line as Nikon/Sony, and should be worth of the long bitter waiting period...

 

[jrista]

I had in mind that they could try NOT to put a "last-minute improvement" (significant or not) but to include a "big" improvement which they have behind the closed doors - something like a BSI sensor - they have the technology...

A BSI sensor, if it ever be true, will place Canon at the same starting line as Nikon/Sony, and should be worth of the long bitter waiting period...

BSI primarily benefits sensors with small pixel pitch, and the aim is to increase QE (quantum efficiency), which only might affect noise levels as more of a byproduct of its primary job. (BSI basically "flips" the fabricated sensor upside down, putting all the R/C activation and readout wiring behind the photodiode, and therefor out of the light path from the pixel/microlens.) The pixel pitch on the 1D X sensor is relatively very large, and it would benefit little from a BSI design. The D800 does not use a BSI design either...it is still FSI.

The difference between Sony cmos sensors and Canon cmos sensors is that Sony integrates FAR more hardware-level noise reduction technology than Canon. Currently, to my knowledge, Canon sensors only employ CDS, Correlated Double-Sampling...however I believe their patents date back nearly a decade. Sony sensors employ a newer and more effective form of CDS, a form of transistor differential compensation to reduce FPN, integrated column-parallel ADC (a smaller, slower ADC for every column of pixels built right into the sensor...slower ADC's produce less noise of their own, and having one ACD per column also helps reduce FPN), and a few other smaller improvements that I currently can't find the patents for. Its these explicit noise reduction features that make a Sony Exmor sensor produce cleaner pictures than a Canon sensor.

Canon could benefit from a BSI sensor in their compact and bridge cameras, but the improvement to QE in a large sensor with a very large pixel pitch like the 1D X would be very small...maybe 1-2%...definitely not enough to put them in the same league as a Sony Exmor. (It should be noted that Canon uses a gapless "microlens" sensor design...but the pixels themselves still have gaps between them...most of the activate and readout wiring exists within the spaces of the gaps, with minimal intrusion into the light path from a pixel. If this were not the case, as might indeed be the case with a very high density full-frame camera (say 60mp or more, the 2-3 micron pixel pitch range), then a BSI design would probably benefit a full-frame high resolution sensor as much as it benefits a tiny point and shoot sensor.)

 

[AG]

I had in mind that they could try NOT to put a "last-minute improvement" (significant or not) but to include a "big" improvement which they have behind the closed doors - something like a BSI sensor - they have the technology...

A BSI sensor, if it ever be true, will place Canon at the same starting line as Nikon/Sony, and should be worth of the long bitter waiting period...

BSI primarily benefits sensors with small pixel pitch, and the aim is to increase QE (quantum efficiency), which only might affect noise levels as more of a byproduct of its primary job. (BSI basically "flips" the fabricated sensor upside down, putting all the R/C activation and readout wiring behind the photodiode, and therefor out of the light path from the pixel/microlens.) The pixel pitch on the 1D X sensor is relatively very large, and it would benefit little from a BSI design. The D800 does not use a BSI design either...it is still FSI.

The difference between Sony cmos sensors and Canon cmos sensors is that Sony integrates FAR more hardware-level noise reduction technology than Canon. Currently, to my knowledge, Canon sensors only employ CDS, Correlated Double-Sampling...however I believe their patents date back nearly a decade. Sony sensors employ a newer and more effective form of CDS, a form of transistor differential compensation to reduce FPN, integrated column-parallel ADC (a smaller, slower ADC for every column of pixels built right into the sensor...slower ADC's produce less noise of their own, and having one ACD per column also helps reduce FPN), and a few other smaller improvements that I currently can't find the patents for. Its these explicit noise reduction features that make a Sony Exmor sensor produce cleaner pictures than a Canon sensor.

Canon could benefit from a BSI sensor in their compact and bridge cameras, but the improvement to QE in a large sensor with a very large pixel pitch like the 1D X would be very small...maybe 1-2%...definitely not enough to put them in the same league as a Sony Exmor. (It should be noted that Canon uses a gapless "microlens" sensor design...but the pixels themselves still have gaps between them...most of the activate and readout wiring exists within the spaces of the gaps, with minimal intrusion into the light path from a pixel. If this were not the case, as might indeed be the case with a very high density full-frame camera (say 60mp or more, the 2-3 micron pixel pitch range), then a BSI design would probably benefit a full-frame high resolution sensor as much as it benefits a tiny point and shoot sensor.)

Your post needs more acronyms ;D

 

[John Thomas]

I had in mind that they could try NOT to put a "last-minute improvement" (significant or not) but to include a "big" improvement which they have behind the closed doors - something like a BSI sensor - they have the technology...

A BSI sensor, if it ever be true, will place Canon at the same starting line as Nikon/Sony, and should be worth of the long bitter waiting period...

BSI primarily benefits sensors with small pixel pitch, and the aim is to increase QE (quantum efficiency), which only might affect noise levels as more of a byproduct of its primary job. (BSI basically "flips" the fabricated sensor upside down, putting all the R/C activation and readout wiring behind the photodiode, and therefor out of the light path from the pixel/microlens.) The pixel pitch on the 1D X sensor is relatively very large, and it would benefit little from a BSI design. The D800 does not use a BSI design either...it is still FSI.

The difference between Sony cmos sensors and Canon cmos sensors is that Sony integrates FAR more hardware-level noise reduction technology than Canon. Currently, to my knowledge, Canon sensors only employ CDS, Correlated Double-Sampling...however I believe their patents date back nearly a decade. Sony sensors employ a newer and more effective form of CDS, a form of transistor differential compensation to reduce FPN, integrated column-parallel ADC (a smaller, slower ADC for every column of pixels built right into the sensor...slower ADC's produce less noise of their own, and having one ACD per column also helps reduce FPN), and a few other smaller improvements that I currently can't find the patents for. Its these explicit noise reduction features that make a Sony Exmor sensor produce cleaner pictures than a Canon sensor.

Canon could benefit from a BSI sensor in their compact and bridge cameras, but the improvement to QE in a large sensor with a very large pixel pitch like the 1D X would be very small...maybe 1-2%...definitely not enough to put them in the same league as a Sony Exmor. (It should be noted that Canon uses a gapless "microlens" sensor design...but the pixels themselves still have gaps between them...most of the activate and readout wiring exists within the spaces of the gaps, with minimal intrusion into the light path from a pixel. If this were not the case, as might indeed be the case with a very high density full-frame camera (say 60mp or more, the 2-3 micron pixel pitch range), then a BSI design would probably benefit a full-frame high resolution sensor as much as it benefits a tiny point and shoot sensor.)

Your post needs more acronyms ;D

Nope. It was quite informative as it was.

 

[nikkito]

ehhh what? ???

 

[pwp]

Your post needs more acronyms ;D

Awww you're being tough. FWIW he's probably from the Democratic Republic of Acrynomia (DRA).
Famous for some great photographers and excellent BLT's.

PW