Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Known Specifications

[dolina]

I am curious...

Are those intending to order this body doing so because of client requirement, competitive edge, just "because I want too"?

I have always held that if the client will pay more for the the service if the gear is up to date then it is worth it. If not then....?

 

[Eldar]

I am curious...

Are those intending to order this body doing so because of client requirement, competitive edge, just "because I want too"?

I have always held that if the client will pay more for the the service if the gear is up to date then it is worth it. If not then....?

I have absolutely no commercial interest in photography. Whenever I sell an image, I donate the money to anti-poaching or to support work for endangered species. Photography is my battery charger and main excuse/driver to get up and out. If it became commercial, it becomes work and I believe some of the joy would go away.

Having seen the first leaks of the 1DXII, there are three areas that could motivate me to upgrade and that is DR (I hope the announced 15 is not too far off the mark), improved high ISO noise performance and improved AF, primarily for fast moving targets. Like Private, I would have preferred a bit more resolution. 24-28MP would have been great. But combined with a 5DSR I should have most situations covered.

I have two safaris planned for September and October (South Africa and Botswana), so if I decide to buy, I need to have it under my skin in time for that.

(PS! I have a weak character though, so I´ll probably upgrade anyway ...)

 

[PureClassA]

... if I'm not then I get a 5DSR.

I'm curious as to what the intended use is. Two very different cameras you're considering.

I am a generalist, I shoot everything from yacht racing in St Tropez to homeless people in Haiti, my most common work is real estate/architecture for developers in Florida and the Caribbean.

I have used 1 series cameras for many years, indeed since before the were called 1 series cameras, I am currently still using 1DS MkIII's and whilst the 1DX never really seemed like a 1DS MkIII replacement for my uses, I don't need high iso nor huge AF demands, or the fps, most of the time, I am used to the 1 series niceties and refinements, build quality and reliability. But my 1Ds MkIII's are old and there are many capabilities available in all the newer cameras I'd like, things like iso capabilities, full RT flash functionality, improved AF, better menus and controls, auto iso in M for dynamic situations etc etc. The 5DSR supplies all these but is not a 1 series and misses on a few things I am very used to.

If they put a 5DSR sensor in a 1DX body with the menu of the 1DX and reduced fps I would of found a true 1Ds MkIII replacement, but I don't need 50MP much of the time and when I do I can usually stitch to get them. For my personal shooting a 28MP 1DX MkII with zero video would hit the mark, I know I am not going to get it but I need to see where the compromises I will have to make are.

That makes sense. It's not about the fps or resolution so much as it is everything else for you. As big as the 1 bodies are, I do enjoy shooting with them, and they did pass a lot of that feature set on to the 5DSR, which I really love. Part of me wants to sell my 5D3 & 6D for a 1DX2 if it hits with the rumored feature set. At the same time I wrestle with ditching my 5D3 because I enjoy it so much, but a 5DSR can do everything the 5D3 can and then some. Just have to knock it down to Medium or Small RAW to get similar files. And that may be what I wind up doing. If I can get my net purchase cost of a 1DX2 down under $4000 by selling those two, then it becomes much more attractive

 

[MrToes]

I am curious...

Are those intending to order this body doing so because of client requirement, competitive edge, just "because I want too"?

I have always held that if the client will pay more for the the service if the gear is up to date then it is worth it. If not then....?

100% agreed if your trying to make a profit!

 

[emailfortom]

I just can't believe Canon isn't going to insert a WIFI radio into the 1Dx MkII. Having the ability to download "rated" images almost instantly to my iPhone...and then email an image or two to my client (college sports) is an important. Has Canon forgotten about social media (twitter, FB, Instagram, etc) and their use in college and professional sports ?

 

[neuroanatomist]

I just can't believe Canon isn't going to insert a WIFI radio into the 1Dx MkII. Having the ability to download "rated" images almost instantly to my iPhone...and then email an image or two to my client (college sports) is an important. Has Canon forgotten about social media (twitter, FB, Instagram, etc) and their use in college and professional sports ?

Oh, they haven't forgotten...

 

[scyrene]

Why no internal SSD in a camera?
When that bully with a gun thinks your photos insult his political masters, he would confiscate your camera instead of your card.
When the drive fails, because it is a matter of when, not if, the camera goes in for service rather than you go to the spare in your bag.
What about a removable, hot swappable, clip fed, whatever SSD?
Semantics, but more importantly, this must be an existing and standardized product. Despite their imperfections SD, CF, CFast, DQX (SP!!!!) all exist in a reliable delivery infrastructure. Whichever card slots Canon makes will anger some, but a choice that wouldn't be available until months after the camera arrives would anger all.
Why not a removable 1 TB device?
I can imagine a terribly remote time lapse application where that could make sense. But the vaste majority of users should be downloading their pictures more often than that.

I don't think people are saying internal memory *instead* of a card slot, but in addition to. Also there's already memory in the camera (the buffer), and how often does that fail and need to be repaired?

 

[Erik S. Klein]

I imagine a few places will be offering deals on CFast cards if bought with a 1DX2.

I hope!

Question is, for those of us who are thinking of getting one, do you get one the month they are available or wait a bit to see if there are any, cough, cough, issues?

I pre-ordered my 1Dx on the first morning I could and got one of the first few hundred made. Mine actually pre-dated the later issues with the mirror housing or whatever it was that they repaired on later ones...

I intend to do the same this time as well. The money is already set aside for my 1Dx2 and I have events starting in May that I'm hoping to shoot with it.

 

[TAW]

i use RRS gear and it seems to me it took them a few months to come out with a bracket after the 1Dx launch? I love their gear (and it is worth the wait) but I am curious how others bridge the gap?

 

[neuroanatomist]

i use RRS gear and it seems to me it took them a few months to come out with a bracket after the 1Dx launch? I love their gear (and it is worth the wait) but I am curious how others bridge the gap?

A Wimberley P-5 universal plate.

 

[rrcphoto]

Why no internal SSD in a camera?
When that bully with a gun thinks your photos insult his political masters, he would confiscate your camera instead of your card.
When the drive fails, because it is a matter of when, not if, the camera goes in for service rather than you go to the spare in your bag.
What about a removable, hot swappable, clip fed, whatever SSD?
Semantics, but more importantly, this must be an existing and standardized product. Despite their imperfections SD, CF, CFast, DQX (SP!!!!) all exist in a reliable delivery infrastructure. Whichever card slots Canon makes will anger some, but a choice that wouldn't be available until months after the camera arrives would anger all.
Why not a removable 1 TB device?
I can imagine a terribly remote time lapse application where that could make sense. But the vaste majority of users should be downloading their pictures more often than that.

I don't think people are saying internal memory *instead* of a card slot, but in addition to. Also there's already memory in the camera (the buffer), and how often does that fail and need to be repaired?

you ARE aware of the differences of volatile memory used in buffers and your computer memory for instance, versus flash memory used in cards and ssd's .... right?

 

[scyrene]

Why no internal SSD in a camera?
When that bully with a gun thinks your photos insult his political masters, he would confiscate your camera instead of your card.
When the drive fails, because it is a matter of when, not if, the camera goes in for service rather than you go to the spare in your bag.
What about a removable, hot swappable, clip fed, whatever SSD?
Semantics, but more importantly, this must be an existing and standardized product. Despite their imperfections SD, CF, CFast, DQX (SP!!!!) all exist in a reliable delivery infrastructure. Whichever card slots Canon makes will anger some, but a choice that wouldn't be available until months after the camera arrives would anger all.
Why not a removable 1 TB device?
I can imagine a terribly remote time lapse application where that could make sense. But the vaste majority of users should be downloading their pictures more often than that.

I don't think people are saying internal memory *instead* of a card slot, but in addition to. Also there's already memory in the camera (the buffer), and how often does that fail and need to be repaired?

you ARE aware of the differences of volatile memory used in buffers and your computer memory for instance, versus flash memory used in cards and ssd's .... right?

Only vaguely. Is one much more prone to failure than the other?

 

[kaihp]

you ARE aware of the differences of volatile memory used in buffers and your computer memory for instance, versus flash memory used in cards and ssd's .... right?

Only vaguely. Is one much more prone to failure than the other?

I'm fairly certain that rrcphoto is referring to volatile (ie RAM) vs non-volatile (ubiquitily(sp?) flash these days) memory.

There are performance differences, access differences, un-powered retention differences. Differences everywhere.

 

[akn]

Do you think the 1DX mkII will have the ability to crop like the 5DS/R?

 

[scyrene]

you ARE aware of the differences of volatile memory used in buffers and your computer memory for instance, versus flash memory used in cards and ssd's .... right?

Only vaguely. Is one much more prone to failure than the other?

I'm fairly certain that rrcphoto is referring to volatile (ie RAM) vs non-volatile (ubiquitily(sp?) flash these days) memory.

There are performance differences, access differences, un-powered retention differences. Differences everywhere.

I get that they're different. My original point was, why can't we have a bit of built-in memory in cameras. I don't understand the intricacies of memory. But I don't get why it's so hard. Mobile phones have built-in memory, even the ones with card slots. They are small and don't get hot and are fairly reliable.

Hey ho, I understand that the reason we don't have this is, there's not enough demand/people are used to memory cards and have no expectation of internal memory too. It's pure wishful thinking, I understand.

 

[rrcphoto]

Why no internal SSD in a camera?
When that bully with a gun thinks your photos insult his political masters, he would confiscate your camera instead of your card.
When the drive fails, because it is a matter of when, not if, the camera goes in for service rather than you go to the spare in your bag.
What about a removable, hot swappable, clip fed, whatever SSD?
Semantics, but more importantly, this must be an existing and standardized product. Despite their imperfections SD, CF, CFast, DQX (SP!!!!) all exist in a reliable delivery infrastructure. Whichever card slots Canon makes will anger some, but a choice that wouldn't be available until months after the camera arrives would anger all.
Why not a removable 1 TB device?
I can imagine a terribly remote time lapse application where that could make sense. But the vaste majority of users should be downloading their pictures more often than that.

I don't think people are saying internal memory *instead* of a card slot, but in addition to. Also there's already memory in the camera (the buffer), and how often does that fail and need to be repaired?

you ARE aware of the differences of volatile memory used in buffers and your computer memory for instance, versus flash memory used in cards and ssd's .... right?

Only vaguely. Is one much more prone to failure than the other?

flash memory in SSD's and your CF/SD cards will "wear out" .. they basically have a finite amount of times for each cell that it can be written to. there's little controllers in them to help "level" that out across all the memory, however they do wear out.

Volatile RAM like in your computer and the camera buffer does not have wear issues.

PCIe M.2 SSD's as mentioned in this thread - are super fast. fast = more power = more heat.

the controllers used for the PCI lanes again, have to run fast,etc,etc.

usually a phone, the batteries will wear out before the internal memory will and for the most part, with phones, the entire memory contents are not erased all the time and reloaded.

that's why CF cards and SD cards can and will fail over time.

 

[scyrene]

Why no internal SSD in a camera?
When that bully with a gun thinks your photos insult his political masters, he would confiscate your camera instead of your card.
When the drive fails, because it is a matter of when, not if, the camera goes in for service rather than you go to the spare in your bag.
What about a removable, hot swappable, clip fed, whatever SSD?
Semantics, but more importantly, this must be an existing and standardized product. Despite their imperfections SD, CF, CFast, DQX (SP!!!!) all exist in a reliable delivery infrastructure. Whichever card slots Canon makes will anger some, but a choice that wouldn't be available until months after the camera arrives would anger all.
Why not a removable 1 TB device?
I can imagine a terribly remote time lapse application where that could make sense. But the vaste majority of users should be downloading their pictures more often than that.

I don't think people are saying internal memory *instead* of a card slot, but in addition to. Also there's already memory in the camera (the buffer), and how often does that fail and need to be repaired?

you ARE aware of the differences of volatile memory used in buffers and your computer memory for instance, versus flash memory used in cards and ssd's .... right?

Only vaguely. Is one much more prone to failure than the other?

flash memory in SSD's and your CF/SD cards will "wear out" .. they basically have a finite amount of times for each cell that it can be written to. there's little controllers in them to help "level" that out across all the memory, however they do wear out.

Volatile RAM like in your computer and the camera buffer does not have wear issues.

PCIe M.2 SSD's as mentioned in this thread - are super fast. fast = more power = more heat.

the controllers used for the PCI lanes again, have to run fast,etc,etc.

usually a phone, the batteries will wear out before the internal memory will and for the most part, with phones, the entire memory contents are not erased all the time and reloaded.

that's why CF cards and SD cards can and will fail over time.

Those are fair points.

 

[Don Haines]

Do you think the 1DX mkII will have the ability to crop like the 5DS/R?

NO.

This is a terrible "feature" on a DSLR, particularly one with a relatively low megapixel count.

You have an optical viewfinder. The traditional pentaprism design does not have the ability to change magnification, so if you were to put it into a crop mode, it would not change the field of view of the viewfinder. Your options are to either put a thin line around the part of the image you are going to capture, or to completely block out the part of the image you are going to discard.

If you go the first route, you run the risk of not realizing you are in the crop mode and wasting shots. If you take the second option, you have just turned your viewfinder into a tiny peephole. If you had an electronic viewfinder which could zoom in to show more detail in crop mode it would be different.... but you do not.

 

[sportskjutaren]

Do you think the 1DX mkII will have the ability to crop like the 5DS/R?

If you mean "cropmode", probably not.
If you talk about the "crop tool", where you can crop the image, as you want it, after it´s taken.
Well, then 'm quite sure that it will be there.
Just as it is on the 5Ds(r).
I know that Canon actually had plans for that in the current 1Dx.
But they didn't have the time to develop in time before release.
(They wanted it to be on the market before the Olympic games).

When it comes to the "crop tool". I´ve been asking the Swedish Canon pro representative about this for years.
There are many sports photographers that will have use of it.
Especially when you publish images straight from the camera.
(Something i do a lot, and have written about before in this thread).
Also, this feature has been on the cameras from the "dark side".
Even the consumer ones. For years back.
So I'm pretty confident that it will be there.
Also, i would be disappointed if not. (I do really miss it).

When talking about new features.
I´m also pretty sure that we will se PDAF, and "anti flicker mode".
Both are features that will help photographers.

A "wish" from me, is to have more C-modes.
Use them a lot. But since there are only 3. I have to used stored settings on memory cards. really often.

 

[PhotographyFirst]

Do you think the 1DX mkII will have the ability to crop like the 5DS/R?

NO.

This is a terrible "feature" on a DSLR, particularly one with a relatively low megapixel count.

You have an optical viewfinder. The traditional pentaprism design does not have the ability to change magnification, so if you were to put it into a crop mode, it would not change the field of view of the viewfinder. Your options are to either put a thin line around the part of the image you are going to capture, or to completely block out the part of the image you are going to discard.

If you go the first route, you run the risk of not realizing you are in the crop mode and wasting shots. If you take the second option, you have just turned your viewfinder into a tiny peephole. If you had an electronic viewfinder which could zoom in to show more detail in crop mode it would be different.... but you do not.

For Canon I agree. Nikon's system made sense in that one could put crop lenses onto FF bodies, which is pretty awesome if you want to carry a super compact lens for some uses in combo with FF lenses. It also increased buffer depth and FPS. Canon offers none of those advantages to crop mode. Well... except maybe buffer depth.

If I was shooting Nikon for my landscapes, I would have a big fast UWA zoom like the 14-24 and a small crop zoom (or two) for longer shots.