Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Known Specifications
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Shouldn't that be called a WTF as in: WHy the F isn't that included for $6,000 ? i mean by itself isn't that like $900 i don't know anyone who uses that do u? How well do they work?neuroanatomist said:sportshooter said:
Upvote
0
it might not be as easy to use as the builtin wifi modules of 6D and 70D, not mentioning the upcoming G1X with NFC connection...but this should not be that high in price!
Upvote
0
saveyourmoment said:
Technically, what you're asking for is the USB Type-C Specification 1.0 connector. That's a physical connector. Then you can have USB v2.0 (hi-speed), USB-3.1 Gen1 (formerly known as USB-3.0), and USB-3.1 Gen 2. Those are the electrical and performance specs.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB#USB_3.1
Upvote
0
sportshooter said:
I actually wrote about it earlier in this thread.
Even though i didn't mention the WFT-E6, that i use for it.
Actually, there have been solutions for transmitting photos thru wifi, from Canon al the way back to the 1D mkII.
When it comes to the WFT-6. A lot of pr sport shooters use it. Including me. And it works well.
Except that, you can also use the Ethernet connection on the 1Dx.
That will for sure stay for the 1Dx mkII.
Upvote
0
Eldar said:I inherited nothing. Every thing I have is a result of my own efforts and labour. Which I must admit is a good feeling. Growing up we had very little and I learned to save my hard earned money for the few things that mattered the most, like my first Canon AE-1. Today I am fortunate to make enough money to buy stuff and do things that adds value to my spare time and makes me happy (what beats taking Big Vic´s portrait (the big elephant bull in Mana Pools), in the moonlight by the Zambezi?), but not enough to take away my dreams. Which is also good. I will be rather surprised myself, if I don´t buy this camera ...Jack Douglas said:IgotGASbadDude said:
Must offer a slight qualification on the sentiment being expressed, even though I plan to make this purchase. My dear generous kind mother (father), now sleeping in her(his) grave is the primary reason I have the gear I do. As a widow in the dirty thirties, she survived with the help of others but later made sure she in turn contributed. She also taught me that while it is reasonable to "treat" yourself and enjoy the fruits of your labour, in the long run the greatest personal satisfaction/contentment in life comes from sharing.
CR is proof that we all enjoy "sharing".
Jack
Not suggesting that parents have an obligation to their grown kids to provide an inheritance. By no means. When love is the motivation and there is appreciation then there is nothing wrong with it. We all have a right to determine how we use our hard earned money and I'm not interested in passing judgment on others.
Now, when is this beast going to be announced so we have something of substance to debate?
Jack
Upvote
0
fentiger said:
I use the CamRanger, and have owned various Canon WFT's and the EyeFi card. The CamRanger is far and away the best solution for wireless control and remote Live View I have used, not cheap but way cheaper and easier to use than the WFT's!
The CamRanger is solid, dependable and has a robust connection, the interface on the iPad is really nice too, sure it might be a flashed $25 TPLink, so what, you are paying for the totally dependable software and integration, the developer answers emails very fast too. Couldn't recommend it higher.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
Interesting device. I see that you have to specify which camera you want to use it for, but nothing on the web site tells me what the differences might be. More specifically, if I get one for my 7D2 will it work (with a different USB cable) on my 5D2, or a future Canon like the 5D4 or 1DX2? I'd hate to have to buy more than one. Had any experience with this? TIA.
Upvote
0
JMZawodny said:
http://camranger.com/supported-cameras/
As per the link, the 7D MkII and 5D MkII are both supported. Future support is an unknown.
Upvote
0
yes you are right, technically it should have USB 3.1 with the USB-C connector. And i doubt that there will be USB-C with USB lower than 3.0 in the future...kaihp said:
Upvote
0
sportshooter said:Shouldn't that be called a WTF as in: WHy the F isn't that included for $6,000 ? i mean by itself isn't that like $900 i don't know anyone who uses that do u? How well do they work?neuroanatomist said:sportshooter said:
Not quite 900, but definitely 699 reasons (or thereabouts) for Canon not to put it in. There are very few reviews of them online too, but it is what most sports photographers who need WiFi use.
I would like something like Nikon's SnapBridge technology that uses Bluetooth and NFC (less power consumption) than with WIFI and no need to keep logging in / pairing etc., and one less thing to forget to bring.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
My question was more about why they needed to know which specific camera body I was buying it for. It made me wonder whether they made adaptations for each body and, therefore, whether each unit was specific to a particular body.
Upvote
0
JMZawodny said:
I believe the only difference is connecting cables, the actual dongle hardware and software are the same. Certainly mine has worked on many different cameras.
Upvote
0
Orangutan said:
On ECC errors:
dilbert, the reason that you're seeing RAM modules reporting ECC errors/NMIs (aka "the engine siezed") is that you haven't paid attention to the Event Log in the first place ( aka "Oil light is on"): the by far most commen ECC code is a Single Error Correction, Double Error Detection (SECDED) code, which means that you will get "Correctable ECC Errors Encountered" in your System Event Log long before getting Uncorrectable ECC Errors.
On RAM lifetime:
RAM failure modes are divided into two groups: "Soft" errors and "Hard" errors.
Soft errors are caused by background radiation that flips the content of one or more memory cells. This can happen because there are around ~20 electrons in a memory cell (ie: capacitor) that is storing the information. With that few electrons, the amount of electron/hole pairs generated from a background radiation hit is comparable. To avoid this happening too often, DRAM chips employ ECC internally to the rows in order to keep the refresh times up and the error rates down (a DRAM row-read destroys the information read, so every read needs to be internally followed up by a row-write. This is why a change of rows takes longer time than reading another address within the same row).
Adding the extra 8-bits of RAM to a 64-bit RAM word basically add another layer of ECC, which is orthogonal to the internal row-oriented ECC. Not having ECC is kinda equivalent of unplugging that oil light in the car - you have no warning mechanism to tell you're heading towards trouble.
Hard errors are caused by electro-migration, where physical damage happens to wires or contacts. This is driven by heat, current density, and time (in that order of significance). See Black's formula on wikipedia.
In an ECC memory, errors (both soft and hard) are masked by the inherent redundancy of the Error Correcting Code. To avoid this, an Event Log storage is often used to log these events and notify the system administrator and then further action can be decided by said sysadmin. Which brings me back to: if you have a system with ECC-RAM, check your bleeping Event Log.
As an illustration, I just checked up on my own server's Event Log. It showed six "Correctable ECC - Asserted" events over the course of 14 months. Without ECC, I could have gotten silent corruption of the data on my server, including files on the disks (think in-RAM data corrupted before getting written to the disk. This data could be filesystem meta-data or file contents [that golden photo of your first-born]). With ECC, all I got was an Event Log entry.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
