Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Known Specifications

[Ozarker]

Media: 1 CFast / 1 CompactFlash I think that's a big mistake from Canon.

Yup, if you're able to dump $6k on a new body, the price of these faster memory cards won't stop the purchase. Okay, so keeping a single slot as CF allows a bit of backward compatibility but dual CFast would be neat.

Not how that works. Giant media outfits who own/buy these cameras by the boatload are running CF now. If they have to purchase 100 new cards at $250 each for 128GB cfast2 .... Do the math. No, you dont shank your biggest bulk buying audience.

That's exactly how it works, if the buyers are getting cameras by the hundred then the cards are still a comparatively small expense, besides, your assumption is that these bulk buyers don't already own any CFast cards, which is unlikely considering the wide application of them already in video.

Don't forget all this bulk buying is done at huge discounts and is a 100% business write off.

It isn't shanking, it is progress.......

Any company buying "boatloads" of these cameras doesn't give a crap about $25,000 worth of cfast cards anyhow. That is just the price of four 1DX Mark II at retail... before the inevitable price drop and bulk discount.

 

[tpatana]

Media: 1 CFast / 1 CompactFlash I think that's a big mistake from Canon.

Transitions are always difficult, but this is probably a well-considered marketing decision, and it probably tells us something about who they expect (hope) to buy the product.

Pro sports shooters: memory cards are cost of doing business, but deep buffer and wireless connectivity may be more important. For them it probably doesn't matter.

Pro Adventure photographers: current CF is good enough, especially with a deep buffer

Pro wedding/event photographers: CF is good enough

Dedicated amateurs (e.g. serious amateur bird photographers): CF with deep buffer is good enough

Videographers using 4K: need CFast. If this camera is worth using for serious 4K video, it's worth buying some CFast; however, as CR Guy said, they would likely use an external recorder if it's an option.

Remember, Canon is not looking at the usability advantages for YOUR specific shooting style, they're looking at the sales potential. What potential buyer would refrain merely because one of the slots is old CF?

This +1.

 

[davidmurray]

For business users there is a big difference between buying outright and leasing, however, ultimately the costs of running a business can be offset against taxable income. I don't know what tax brackets you fall into but several times I have been advised to make business purchases before my tax year ends to lower my tax bill.

Two types of business expenditure: capex and opex - capital expenditure and operational expenditure.

The govt tax laws set the max amount per item that can be put as opex. Opex is entirely tax deductible within 1 financial year.

The govt tax laws specify the minimum period of time each type of capex is to be deprecated over, with an equal percentage being tax deductible each year until fully depreciated. Generally the higher the cost and more durable the item the longer the depreciation period.

Generally anything over 2 hundred or so is capex.

Purchasing a $6000 camera outright would be capex, but a modest monthly rental charge would be opex with each months bill being fully deductible.

The advantage of renting a camera for the occasions it is needed is not needing to hold it on the balance sheet as an asset and instead having the capital available for other purposes. Also any maintenance issues are generally resolved by the owner of the camera.

The disadvantage of renting the camera is a larger long term expenditure over and above what would have been the purchase price and you don't have an asset.

Mostly the advantage is accounting and budget related.

It's not a political issue - it's just how business finances work.

 

[davidmurray]

If you lease your camera you can write off 100% of the cost of the lease. Buy back at the end of the lease is typically about $1.

You can claim 100% of the lease as a tax deductible expense. You cannot "write off" an opex cost because it is not an asset written onto the finance books.

Also, the sum total you would have paid over the lease would have paid for the purchase of the asset and all their expenses, taxes, and profit.

A significant financial reason is necessary before going down the path of leasing a high value item that you could otherwise own.

 

[Peer]

[...] support internal recording of 4K 60p (and I heard, 10 bit).

Really... you heard 10 bit..?! Now, finally, also I'm on board (even with only one CFast slot).

-- peer

 

[jeffa4444]

Most people commenting on CFast have likely not bought any!

We got into purchasing CFast cards with the arrival of the Arri Amira. These were certified cards bought through Arri and at the time very expensive. The price of CFast cards has considerably dropped since then, with more companies making them. Yes more expensive than CF cards but for the big outfits like Reuters etc. a cost of doing business nothing in tech lasts forever and they face that with other tech they purchase. We have had almost zero CFast card failure in nearly two years of using them so they have proved reliable and as such cost effective.

 

[YuengLinger]

Most people commenting on CFast have likely not bought any!

We got into purchasing CFast cards with the arrival of the Arri Amira. These were certified cards bought through Arri and at the time very expensive. The price of CFast cards has considerably dropped since then, with more companies making them. Yes more expensive than CF cards but for the big outfits like Reuters etc. a cost of doing business nothing in tech lasts forever and they face that with other tech they purchase. We have had almost zero CFast card failure in nearly two years of using them so they have proved reliable and as such cost effective.

Reuters? Well equipped armies of photojournalists are fading fast. More freelancers now, and photos only need to be good enough for tablets.

Sports, wildlife, commercial photographers...Dwindling market to support latest, greatest dSLR tech my friend.

Sigh...

 

[IglooEater]

Obviously I'm no one to know, but I prefer nikon's approach to card slots this time. From my understanding, the likely user base of this camera is working pros, who are likely to want to protect their work with double cards, no? But if that's so, one can't get the speed of the cfast because of the cf slot there, nor the cost savings of cf because of the cfast slot. Seems like a way to get the worst of both worlds imho.. Though for those shooting with only one card at a time (like me) it seems brilliant. (I say like me, but I'll not be able to afford this camera until it's obsolete in 15 years )

 

[Maui5150]

People are whack. Not sure what the final buffer and all comes out to, but if it is anything like the 7D MK II which would be similar sized files, than fast CF is fine for far more than the majority of shooters.

CFast seems more aimed at 4K video, and majority of what I see posted on the higher end photogs is they don't care about video.

Really seems like it is more about a spec war and feature / need that is not needed by most.

 

[Etienne]

If you lease your camera you can write off 100% of the cost of the lease. Buy back at the end of the lease is typically about $1.

You can claim 100% of the lease as a tax deductible expense. You cannot "write off" an opex cost because it is not an asset written onto the finance books.

Also, the sum total you would have paid over the lease would have paid for the purchase of the asset and all their expenses, taxes, and profit.

A significant financial reason is necessary before going down the path of leasing a high value item that you could otherwise own.

Call it "Write off" or "expense", only a bean counter can be so pedantic.
The point is that it is subtracted from your taxable income.
Further more, since you missed the point, the but back is $1, so but it at the end of the lease. It is like a business loan, and lease rates are low. Retailers have offered %2 lease rates recently.
If you have income from your gear, leading makes 100% sense, no self-important bs jargon required.

 

[wildbirdimages]

Looks like Canon and Nikon flipping their positions this time. D4 had two types of cards, pretty similar AF compared to its predecessor and price tag of 6k. 1DX had same card, but brand new AF and price tag of $6800. D5 have same card in both slots (option), brand new AF and price tag of $6500. 1DXII (if the rumor is right) have two different card type and price tag of 6k. Does it mean Canon didn't do anything new with their AF?. I'm sure AF will be at lease 7D II's AF (All cross type) with more dual cross type. Any thoughts? Otherwise it's hard to believe Canon will go back on price.

 

[whothafunk]

Any thoughts? Otherwise it's hard to believe Canon will go back on price.

1DX Mark II will offer only 1 million something ISO and not the 3M as opposed to D5's, because we all know these numbers mean nothing. But nevertheless, Canon is obliged to offer it at lower price, so people will shut up about it.

 

[Ozarker]

The bulk buyers we were talking about will be getting finance houses to lease them the gear, lease payments are 100% deductable.

Those buyers (the ones I was specifically referring to) almost certainly have CFast cards too.

Don't go by number of cards people have, CF has been around so long everybody has loads, go by capacity.

Anyway you look at it cards are a running cost of cameras, and even the most expensive cost a fraction the amount film did! Progress is progress, whilst it might be frustrating for stills only shooters to be forced into video centric card formats the truth is all these 'standards' are pushed on us.

just because it's 100% deductible means you still only get back whatever your corporate tax bracket is.

is that really that difficult to follow?

and most pros I know have around 10-20 64GB cards, so yeah, I'm looking at capacity? 10-20 CFAST runs around 200 a pop. that's 2000-4000.

but nice going on moving the goalposts now bringing up film.

the point of the matter is .. for a lot of people at the 1DX would be catering to, having compatibility with CF cards is certainly advantageous.

I don't know why anyone would own 10-20 cards. Maybe guys who are out trekking for a couple of months with no access to a computer. Especially since the Sandisk Extreme Pro cards are much less expensive per gigabyte if one gets a 128 gb card (20 Twenty 64 gb cards = 1.28 terabytes(?)). That is a heck of a lot of storage to carry around even for three cameras. I would think a pro would shoot less photos than an amateur.

I personally know just 1 pro in my tiny area of Nevada. He has two 64gb CF cards and 2 SD cards for his 5D Mark III. He does a lot of fitness magazine work, automobile magazine work, and outdoor adventure work. He told me once that he's never filled a 64gb card.

That's just one guy though. I have no idea how many pros you know or what they do.

I'm happy with however Canon configures the 1Dx II though. I hope to get one someday.

 

[ecka]

Yes, please, dual CF or dual CFast or nothing.

 

[PureClassA]

Any thoughts? Otherwise it's hard to believe Canon will go back on price.

1DX Mark II will offer only 1 million something ISO and not the 3M as opposed to D5's, because we all know these numbers mean nothing. But nevertheless, Canon is obliged to offer it at lower price, so people will shut up about it.

We have a rumored price of $5999 but we don't know that for sure yet. But absolutely it can be cheaper. Here's why:

In 2011-2012 when the 1DX was released the exchange rate Yen:USD was 80:1. Currently the same exchange rate is about 120:1 That is a HUGE depreciation of the Yen against the USD. So in 2011 a $6700 1DX sold in America was a gross sale of 536,000 Yen (we dont know what wholesale/dealer cost is, so let's just use retail to compare). In 2016 a $6000 1DX2 sold in America will yield 720,000 Yen. Canon isn't charging LESS for a 1DX2, they are actually charging substantially MORE.

They just spent a TON of money re-outfitting their fabrication processes so they have a lot of capital outlay to recoup. However, because the exchange rates have fallen so much for their currency, it's a huge advantage for them as the seller AND us as the buyers because if the rates were still 80:1 like in 2011-2012 that same 1DX2 may have been priced over $8000 just using the similar numbers.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

Yes, please, dual CF or dual CFast or nothing.

Are you really saying that you would prefer a 1DX II with no card slots at all to one with mixed slots?

 

[ecka]

Yes, please, dual CF or dual CFast or nothing.

Are you really saying that you would prefer a 1DX II with no card slots at all to one with mixed slots?

You know, CF, CFast, UHS1,2,3, XQD ... it is all old tech and it's already limiting your camera potential. I would prefer a built-in memory storage, next gen SSD, NVME, NGFF, 3dXpoint, whatever works best.

 

[wildbirdimages]

I doubt it

Any thoughts? Otherwise it's hard to believe Canon will go back on price.

1DX Mark II will offer only 1 million something ISO and not the 3M as opposed to D5's, because we all know these numbers mean nothing. But nevertheless, Canon is obliged to offer it at lower price, so people will shut up about it.

I'm not sure if the pros will buy into the ridiculous ISO number. I can't wait to see their AF specs. Well spec is one thing and actual result is another matter. Very interesting time ahead for us into photography

 

[PureClassA]

Re: I doubt it

There should be little doubt if any that Canon will once again bring industry leading AF performance to the 1D line. Nikon's new D5 system initially looks impressive on paper, but loses a lot of luster once you start digging into it. Granted, no one has actually USED it yet, but merely based on specs, there's really nothing all that spectacular. 153AF points.... but only 50 something are user selectable. Only Some are cross type and none are dual cross type. That really isn't all that special for a top of the line, $6700 everything camera in 2016. Not saying it sucks. Just saying, it's nothing mind blowing. You reach a limit of diminishing returns on AF points, because no matter how many you have, they are still all grouped in the center of the frame. I'd rather have 61 high performance AF points I can select any of, than 153 pretty good AF points, two-thirds of which I can't even select. Hence a lot of the comments here and other forums declaring that the D5 feels more like a way-too-late competitor to the 1DX rather than the 1DX2.

Any thoughts? Otherwise it's hard to believe Canon will go back on price.

1DX Mark II will offer only 1 million something ISO and not the 3M as opposed to D5's, because we all know these numbers mean nothing. But nevertheless, Canon is obliged to offer it at lower price, so people will shut up about it.

I'm not sure if the pros will buy into the ridiculous ISO number. I can't wait to see their AF specs. Well spec is one thing and actual result is another matter. Very interesting time ahead for us into photography

 

[wildbirdimages]

Any thoughts? Otherwise it's hard to believe Canon will go back on price.

1DX Mark II will offer only 1 million something ISO and not the 3M as opposed to D5's, because we all know these numbers mean nothing. But nevertheless, Canon is obliged to offer it at lower price, so people will shut up about it.

We have a rumored price of $5999 but we don't know that for sure yet. But absolutely it can be cheaper. Here's why:

In 2011-2012 when the 1DX was released the exchange rate Yen:USD was 80:1. Currently the same exchange rate is about 120:1 That is a HUGE depreciation of the Yen against the USD. So in 2011 a $6700 1DX sold in America was a gross sale of 536,000 Yen (we dont know what wholesale/dealer cost is, so let's just use retail to compare). In 2016 a $6000 1DX2 sold in America will yield 720,000 Yen. Canon isn't charging LESS for a 1DX2, they are actually charging substantially MORE.

They just spent a TON of money re-outfitting their fabrication processes so they have a lot of capital outlay to recoup. However, because the exchange rates have fallen so much for their currency, it's a huge advantage for them as the seller AND us as the buyers because if the rates were still 80:1 like in 2011-2012 that same 1DX2 may have been priced over $8000 just using the similar numbers.

In that case Nikon is over charging for D5