Canon EOS-1D X Mark II To Feature CFast & CF Slots [CR3]

[fentiger]

Canon could use their corporate muscle and purchase c-fast in bulk, then ship each new camera with a card,
they do cash back promotions when you buy 5D3's with a battery pack so it can be done!!!

 

[Chaitanya]

Canon could use their corporate muscle and purchase c-fast in bulk, then ship each new camera with a card,
they do cash back promotions when you buy 5D3's with a battery pack so it can be done!!!

Like they are giving a 64GB CFast card for free with their XC10.

 

[PureClassA]

I plan to order the 1dxII when announced unless disappointed by the specs and lack of a truly new sensor (on chip ADC, etc). My personal preference is dual CFast. That said, I can work with either dual CFast or CFast + CF. The only thing I request with CFast + CF is a highly reliable feature to copy CFast to CF. That would give me more confidence to copy the CFast to CF + USB drive then reuse the CFast. I always leave my CF cards intact in the field until I can validate the backups, but this would let me have a little more confidence if I had to reuse the CFast in the field.

The one thing that might derail my 1dxII purchase is if Canon doesn't step up on sensor tech to match the D5. My focus at this time is wildlife and I want cleaner / useable high ISO with more DR (Shadows). I am honestly considering a move to Nikon if we get a rehash of the same old sensor with marginal improvement. The problem is that I HATE the Nikon interface and believe Canon has a better lens selection and ergonomics for my interest. I do like the Nikon D5/D500 combination for wildlife if tests and samples hold up. The win for me would be a leap in sensor tech for Canon and a new matched 1dx II and 7dIII. I have been a Canon user since the 10d/1ds and would hate to make the switch. I rent big white glass as needed, so my primary investment would be zooms in 16-400 range since I would sell current bodies whether D5 or1dxII.

I have a major trip in July and hope to have this sorted in time to buy the equipment and run through a couple of test cycles.

You need to do better research before succumbing to the hyperbole and bullS___.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D5-versus-Nikon-D4s-versus-Canon-EOS-1Dx___1062_945_753 go to the measurements link then the dynamic range tab, even DXO, who are extremely anti Canon biased, can't find a measurable difference.

At anything over 800iso there's zero difference in DR between a Nikon or Canon sensor, stop buying into the bullS___ and actually look at stuff.

+1000 thank you

 

[kphoto99]

sigh...... if you have a bunch of CF cards, they are not going to go instantly obsolete and get tossed in the garbage can.....

You can use the CF card out of your 1DX (or whatever) in the CF slot of a 1DXII and leave the CFast card slot empty until prices on the cards drop or your finances recover.....

and look at this from the other direction.... a heck of a lot more people would be complaining if there was no CFast slot at all.....

Your are missing the point here, a while back there was a long thread about professionals having to use two cards at the same time. If you are not shooting with both cards at the same time you are not a pro, and you are not using a pro camera, that is not acceptable to anybody who buys a 1D class camera. How could they lord over the peons with a single slot camera.

 

[tpatana]

Quite funny that the most argued feature on 1DX2 is the one that has zero percent (0%) impact on anyone who buys the camera to shoot pictures.

Only single marginal group of photographers who might benefit from CFast are people who some reason don't have any (decent) CF cards but have CFast cards. I would guess that's small group of people.

So now everyone is going ape shit that they don't have dual-CFast, even when it only impacts 4k video people. And like said before, there's tons of better and cheaper options for 4k video people than buying 1DX2.

I just don't get it.

I'm usually the one who buys latest shit and gadgets, even when I don't need them. But dual-CFast just wouldn't make sense unless the camera is some 50MPix/12fps monster. Which it isn't. And even then, it could be worked around by enough buffer. And Canon hasn't released the buffer size yet, and still people are crying that leaving one CF slot is the beginning of downfall for Canon.

 

[tron]

Quite funny that the most argued feature on 1DX2 is the one that has zero percent (0%) impact on anyone who buys the camera to shoot pictures.

Only single marginal group of photographers who might benefit from CFast are people who some reason don't have any (decent) CF cards but have CFast cards. I would guess that's small group of people.

So now everyone is going ape S___ that they don't have dual-CFast, even when it only impacts 4k video people. And like said before, there's tons of better and cheaper options for 4k video people than buying 1DX2.

I just don't get it.

I'm usually the one who buys latest S___ and gadgets, even when I don't need them. But dual-CFast just wouldn't make sense unless the camera is some 50MPix/12fps monster. Which it isn't. And even then, it could be worked around by enough buffer. And Canon hasn't released the buffer size yet, and still people are crying that leaving one CF slot is the beginning of downfall for Canon.

+1000

 

[rrcphoto]

I think this is a mistake. Reminds me a bit of my old Porsche which had both cassette and CD players. If we can afford Canon's flagship camera, I would assume we can also afford CFast media.

-- peer

98% of people will use this for pictures, so 98% of people don't see absolutely any benefit from CFast.

Fast CF is more than enough for pictures.

So now we're catering to picture shooters, while making small compromise to the small minority who'll buy this for 4k.

Wrong. People will buy this because of video as well.

At this point we can only guess, but I doubt not too many will buy this for video. There's tons of better options, especially non-Canon options.

there is?

and how do you know that?

I'm talking ILC's not cini cameras.

assuming the spec is certainly 4K 60fps, and obviously a bit rate to match (200-300Mbps).

just what exactly would be the tons better options?

 

[tron]

I think this is a mistake. Reminds me a bit of my old Porsche which had both cassette and CD players. If we can afford Canon's flagship camera, I would assume we can also afford CFast media.

-- peer

98% of people will use this for pictures, so 98% of people don't see absolutely any benefit from CFast.

Fast CF is more than enough for pictures.

So now we're catering to picture shooters, while making small compromise to the small minority who'll buy this for 4k.

Wrong. People will buy this because of video as well.

At this point we can only guess, but I doubt not too many will buy this for video. There's tons of better options, especially non-Canon options.

there is?

and how do you know that?

I'm talking ILC's not cini cameras.

assuming the spec is certainly 4K 60fps, and obviously a bit rate to match (200-300Mbps).

just what exactly would be the tons better options?

I do not know (or care) about video. But I can try to discuss the bit rate:

Let's say worst case the maximum you mentioned: 300Mbps = 300 Million bits per second.
This is 300/8 = 37.5 M Bytes /sec. Now fast CF cards can handle max 150 MB/sec write and they guarantee 65Mb/sec for video (I remember seeing this in latest/fastest sandisk extreme pro). So it seems a doable task for the fastest CF cards. Granted, If you are talking raw video it is not enough but somehow I doubt that Canon will support writing raw 4K video to cards....

EDIT: I confirmed in Sandisk site Copying from:

https://www.sandisk.com/home/memory-cards/compact-flash/extremepro-compactflash

This industry-leading memory card is optimized for professional-grade video capture, with a minimum sustained write speed of 65MB/s for rich 4K and Full HD video.

 

[bdunbar79]

No matter what, as a sports shooter, this is not a good thing. I'm not dealing with it so I am definitely not upgrading to the 1Dx2.

 

[MrToes]

No matter what, as a sports shooter, this is not a good thing. I'm not dealing with it so I am definitely not upgrading to the 1Dx2.

We'll upgrade if sensor shows a significant improvement!

 

[PureClassA]

This industry-leading memory card is optimized for professional-grade video capture, with a minimum sustained write speed of 65MB/s for rich 4K and Full HD video.

The problem is that rate is only good for the higher compression 4K codecs. Forget RAW. ProRes HQ needs a lot more than 65. Even some of the lower tier ProRes. I don't think Canon will have ProRes, but they may have a much nicer codec included that needs 100MB/sec. Again, we have a rumor floating about 4K RAW video for frame capture on this new camera. IF that's true, then 65MB/sec is also not likely enough.

I'm fine with a CFast slot so long as the product really needs it. We just dont know enough yet.

 

[tron]

This industry-leading memory card is optimized for professional-grade video capture, with a minimum sustained write speed of 65MB/s for rich 4K and Full HD video.

The problem is that rate is only good for the higher compression 4K codecs. Forget RAW. ProRes HQ needs a lot more than 65. Even some of the lower tier ProRes. I don't think Canon will have ProRes, but they may have a much nicer codec included that needs 100MB/sec. Again, we have a rumor floating about 4K RAW video for frame capture on this new camera. IF that's true, then 65MB/sec is also not likely enough.

I'm fine with a CFast slot so long as the product really needs it. We just dont know enough yet.

I agree with you for RAW 4K. But I do NOT believe Canon will provide it. I guess we will know soon...

 

[PureClassA]

I think it's entirely possible and not altogether improbable. If the rumors bear out about this feature, I don't think they do 24fps+ 4K RAW ... but something like 20FPS 4k RAW isn't out of the question. It's not enough to use for RAW video/cinema but it's great for stills. Set your shutter speed to whatever you like and voila.

This industry-leading memory card is optimized for professional-grade video capture, with a minimum sustained write speed of 65MB/s for rich 4K and Full HD video.

The problem is that rate is only good for the higher compression 4K codecs. Forget RAW. ProRes HQ needs a lot more than 65. Even some of the lower tier ProRes. I don't think Canon will have ProRes, but they may have a much nicer codec included that needs 100MB/sec. Again, we have a rumor floating about 4K RAW video for frame capture on this new camera. IF that's true, then 65MB/sec is also not likely enough.

I'm fine with a CFast slot so long as the product really needs it. We just dont know enough yet.

I agree with you for RAW 4K. But I do NOT believe Canon will provide it. I guess we will know soon...

 

[rrcphoto]

This industry-leading memory card is optimized for professional-grade video capture, with a minimum sustained write speed of 65MB/s for rich 4K and Full HD video.

The problem is that rate is only good for the higher compression 4K codecs. Forget RAW. ProRes HQ needs a lot more than 65. Even some of the lower tier ProRes. I don't think Canon will have ProRes, but they may have a much nicer codec included that needs 100MB/sec. Again, we have a rumor floating about 4K RAW video for frame capture on this new camera. IF that's true, then 65MB/sec is also not likely enough.

I'm fine with a CFast slot so long as the product really needs it. We just dont know enough yet.

I agree with you for RAW 4K. But I do NOT believe Canon will provide it. I guess we will know soon...

they won't almost guaranteed. they don't even have to.

heck no consumer sony goes above a 100mpbs bitrate.

 

[tron]

I think it's entirely possible and not altogether improbable. If the rumors bear out about this feature, I don't think they do 24fps+ 4K RAW ... but something like 20FPS 4k RAW isn't out of the question. It's not enough to use for RAW video/cinema but it's great for stills. Set your shutter speed to whatever you like and voila.

This industry-leading memory card is optimized for professional-grade video capture, with a minimum sustained write speed of 65MB/s for rich 4K and Full HD video.

The problem is that rate is only good for the higher compression 4K codecs. Forget RAW. ProRes HQ needs a lot more than 65. Even some of the lower tier ProRes. I don't think Canon will have ProRes, but they may have a much nicer codec included that needs 100MB/sec. Again, we have a rumor floating about 4K RAW video for frame capture on this new camera. IF that's true, then 65MB/sec is also not likely enough.

I'm fine with a CFast slot so long as the product really needs it. We just dont know enough yet.

I agree with you for RAW 4K. But I do NOT believe Canon will provide it. I guess we will know soon...

From a previous post by Dilbert I saw that a 64GB card would hold about 5min 4K RAW video. So what's point of using the internal cards for that? An external recorder with a big ssd disk would be more practical.

 

[zim]

The problem is that rate is only good for the higher compression 4K codecs. Forget RAW. ProRes HQ needs a lot more than 65. Even some of the lower tier ProRes. I don't think Canon will have ProRes, but they may have a much nicer codec included that needs 100MB/sec. Again, we have a rumor floating about 4K RAW video for frame capture on this new camera. IF that's true, then 65MB/sec is also not likely enough.

I'm fine with a CFast slot so long as the product really needs it. We just dont know enough yet.

That's exactly it, nobody really knows, but.......... If I were to make a guess Canon may allow very short raw video burst, just to enough sell those micro expression/moments as a feature to stills photographers. After all fps is (maybe already has) reached it's limits.

The paperartsy and red tops will have a ball

 

[DudeInTheSky]

Lots of misinformation in this thread! And some good info too. Some points about CFast 2.0 and XQD and CF.

1. CFast 2.0 is here and now and it works. So is XQD 2.0. (I own CFast 2.0 cards and use XQD cards too...) CFast 2.0 cards and XQD 2.0 cards are right now pretty much on par performance & price wise. Just above 400Mbytes/s write. CF is much slower. I barely get 100Mbytes/s write out of my 1066x CF cards.

2. CFast 2.0 is based on SATA 6Gbit/s. SATA is EOL'ed, so once faster memory cards are desired it will be a new type. So the CFast 2.0 cards you buy right now are pretty much as fast as they will ever get. My guess is 3-5 years until this standard hits the wall, but could be sooner.

3. XQD 2.0 has two lanes of PCI-Express 2.0, so should be upgradeable to PCI-Express 3.0 and then to PCI-Express 4.0. And possibly add more PCI-E lanes if needed. So XQD 2.0 has 1000MBytes/s interface speed now. 4000MBytes/s (or even faster with more lanes) later, with backwards compatibility very likely. In other words: Your memory cards will last a long time if the XQD standard is maintained. My guess is 10 years, maybe 15 for this standard.

4. CFast 2.0 is much more reliable than CF (Yes, that's my opinion based on theory and my real life experience, but just the frail mechanical 50pin design of the old CF should speak for itself... it sucks!) CFast 2.0 is still missing a write protect switch, which is not good.

5. Right now only CFast 2.0 Sandisk 64GB and 128GB work in Canon C300mk2. They are also the only two memory cards approved by Canon for this camera. My colleagues who bought Lexar CFast 2.0 cards have reported write errors and lost footage. Both the discontinued 3400x and the new Lexar 3500x. It's very possible that we will only have one brand and two capacity options of CFast 2.0 cards available in the beginning for this new Canon 1D stills camera! (Hopefully more cards will work!!!!)

6. Neither CFast 2.0 nor XQD 2.0 are proprietary formats. They are both open formats. Right now there's limited availability of cards that actually work in various cameras for both standards. With Canon C300mk2 being the most limited with only Sandisk CFast 2.0 64GB & 128GB working.

7. Currently both memory card standards are limited by flash memory heat generation. This gives a small advantage to CFast 2.0 since those cards are a bit physically bigger so more space to dissipate heat. This year (2016) will see the release of products with new memory technology (Intel/Micron 3DxPoint). If we are to believe the specs, we are soon to get memory cards limited only by the interface speed. Hence, XQD could end up with a significant speed advantage 10 months from now. This, of course, remains to be seen.


Hope that helps a little.