Frame grabs from 6K footage should be enough for everybody!I agree totally on this. I want a quiet IDX3. I currently have 2 well used 1DX2's (1.5 and 1.6 million actuations) and would love them to be quite. I can hear them shooting across the room!
The dslr is not quite dead so therefore Canon is Domed. (Hump on top of camera)canon is dooooooomed
Perhaps the same way that other cameras with super high speed burst do it — options to either use the mechanical shutter at slower speeds or electronic shutter at much higher speeds.30 fps still shooting.. how?
I read what you said and think its sillyRe read what I said, I said they have comparable AF, and they do. The iso performance is comparable between the two as well, the lines of DR to iso cross several times and are never a significant distance apart, even the A9 II has the same sensor so will have very comparable DR performance.
Not if you need a viewfinder.Frame grabs from 6K footage should be enough for everybody!
So your positions is the A9 AF is incomparably better than the 1DX MkII? That is a farcical position.I read what you said and think its silly
canons AF is inferior
no objective reviewer would agree with your assessment
the 1D is overdue for a refresh
I agree...for most types of photography. But for wildlife I think the DSLR is still king. That is of course changing slowly now that Sony has some long primes out. But in terms of ergonomics and durability I still see most people with Nikons and Canons in the wild. I am intrigued by the eye focus for animals that Sony has developed. I have seen it work well on pets, but how does it do in the wild when a Cheetah is running full pelt? How does the Sony overall function after it's been in hot and dusty conditions for 30 days straight...and than taken into the jungles? I think Canon knows there is still a bunch of photographers who will stick with DSLR which have a long track record of successful use in the wild.Nuh, that makes a very little sense commercially. Sorry. money is on the SLR to MILC transition. Hence all these amazing new Canon RF lenses are popping up like mushrooms after the good rain.
Anything that does not take RF glass is a Sunset strategy for Canon at this stage.
I agree for the most part. But I do feel if the 1DxIII isn't a substantial upgrade over the 1dxII (which I have used extensively) than most people will simply not bother updating.The 1dx II is still one of the best wildlife cameras I have ever used. So switching will only make sense if the new version has something that will tangibly make photography a better experience. The AF and IQ for me are the two most important factors in this regard and that is where I hope to see the 1dxIII make the biggest leap. IBIS is also a welcome updateI'm certainly no expert, but from what I've observed and read over the past few years on these forums and elsewhere, I see it like this: the 1-series is aimed at/largely the preserve of professionals who value reliability and ruggedness above most other things, and who are the last group who will transition to mirorless (if they ever do). In that regard, the 1Dx3 doesn't need to prevent people being lured to ML - it just needs to do what the 1Dx2 does, only a bit better. Besides, it seems the expectation is a mirrorless equivalent will be released at some point in the next year or two, in which case people will be able to chooe what suits them best (a bit like the 90D/M6II position now).
Um...it would be awesome! I don't know if most wildlife photographers care if a camera is mirrorless or mirrorslappers. We just need the system to be durable and not let us down when we have that once in a lifetime shot. I need the camera to have a good battery life. I want the AF to be fast and responsive. If it's got some AI which keeps track of an eye that's awesome - otherwise give me a joystick so i can track it myself. And finally give me nice clean files upto 6400 iso...and i'm sold. The biggest key of course is the lens and they already have adapters for that so the body just needs to be better than the one they made 4 years ago for me to switch.How would people feel if the 1DXiii was a mirrorless R body, that had no blackout and Canon had solved all issues important to sports/bird photographers? I would actually like this as it would unify my kit, but I wonder if hard core DSLR 1DXii owners would welcome the new mirrorless arrival or would some be upset?
I would think the biggest complaint by pros would be the need for an adapter to all those big white lenses until the R versions came out.
Please tell us what you're shooting that leads you to believe a 1dxII has inferior AF...I'd love to know (honestly).I read what you said and think its silly
canons AF is inferior
no objective reviewer would agree with your assessment
the 1D is overdue for a refresh
For BIF, the 1Dx2 struggles to maintain focus on fast moving subjects against a complex background. The A9 and D5 both perform better in such situations.Please tell us what you're shooting that leads you to believe a 1dxII has inferior AF...I'd love to know (honestly).
I thought it was the enthusiasts/monied amateurs that go for the latest and greatest every time, whereas professionals hold onto existing gear until it dies, or something game changing comes along? Indeed the idea often repeated that a new version of a camera must entice owners of the preceding one generally seems a bit far fetched to me. It's much more complex/haphazard than that, and I suspect more realistic that people leapfrog models more than this supposes.I agree for the most part. But I do feel if the 1DxIII isn't a substantial upgrade over the 1dxII (which I have used extensively) than most people will simply not bother updating.The 1dx II is still one of the best wildlife cameras I have ever used. So switching will only make sense if the new version has something that will tangibly make photography a better experience. The AF and IQ for me are the two most important factors in this regard and that is where I hope to see the 1dxIII make the biggest leap. IBIS is also a welcome update![]()
Canon sensor inferior?I read what you said and think its silly
canons AF is inferior
no objective reviewer would agree with your assessment
the 1D is overdue for a refresh
It’s so weird that Canon PDAF continues to have problems with busy backgrounds. Should be obvious that the camera should not suddenly focus far away if a moment ago it was locked on to a much closer subject.For BIF, the 1Dx2 struggles to maintain focus on fast moving subjects against a complex background. The A9 and D5 both perform better in such situations.
I'm hoping my lawnmower can be repaired a few times until I can buy one that supports 24pMy guess is that Canon does a lifetime buy of spare parts for models that have been replaced and when those parts run out, the body becomes irreparable. I've run into the same issue with 20-year old Canon lenses, as well as lawn mowers.
heh...Ari Hazeghi is that you? (for those that don't know Ari and Art Morris mentioned this when they made the public switch from Canon to Nikon)For BIF, the 1Dx2 struggles to maintain focus on fast moving subjects against a complex background. The A9 and D5 both perform better in such situations.
28 MP is too much und completely unnecessary. The same i think of 30 fps. Really important factors are autofocus and dynamic range. Anyway I´m waiting for a 14 to 20 fps mirrorless model with a body in good, namely bigger size, ibis and two memory cards. Besides that I think, that a mirrorless model isn`t at all important for shooting many sorts of sports. A noiseless camera is important for solemn moments.