Review: Canon EOS-1D X Mark III real world sports review

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,198
963
I do not believe the M6II, M6, M5, M50, G7X II, G5X or G1X III are aimed a casual shooters and they cost considerably more than the entry level DSLR's that for many years made Canon their money.

But what doesn't the M6 II do that any crop sensor MILC does? Why is the M50 the 'content creators' darling? Same for the EOS R now they have gotten used to it! I think people are far too dismissive of Canon and even their current mirrorless cameras.
I think he does have a point, however, in that Canon hasn't released a mirrorless as good as their 1 series.

You've also both forgotten the really-low-level point and shoots that cost less than US $200. I believe one model is still available, and even if not, the sales of those are no doubt part of the number of mirrorless cameras sold that exceeds the number of DSLRs sold....and those were indeed casual shooter cameras.
 
Nov 3, 2014
698
507
I do not believe the M6II, M6, M5, M50, G7X II, G5X or G1X III are aimed a casual shooters and they cost considerably more than the entry level DSLR's that for many years made Canon their money.

But what doesn't the M6 II do that any crop sensor MILC does? Why is the M50 the 'content creators' darling? Same for the EOS R now they have gotten used to it! I think people are far too dismissive of Canon and even their current mirrorless cameras.
This is a thread about shooting sports and the comments I made were in that context. I have no idea how the M50 relates to that. There is no evidence that Canon can make a sports/wildlife mirrorless camera that performs up to the standard of their S/W DSLRs. There is another thread about an APSC mirrorless and in that thread I commented that Canon would be better off making a 7D Mark III because that would be class leading for wildlife but I see no reason to believe that a DPAF based camera would be. My XT3 is also poor in that regard. I don’t think Canon should ambandon what they are very good at in pursuit of a line that clearly needs more work. I guess we’ll see how well the 1DX III does in live view but I noted that the reviewer didnt seem to think those features were relevant. I think if Canon was serious about live view they would have offered an accessory EVF.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
I guess we’ll see how well the 1DX III does in live view but I noted that the reviewer didnt seem to think those features were relevant. I think if Canon was serious about live view they would have offered an accessory EVF.
Live view can be very useful when using a tripod, either with stills or video.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Larsskv

EOS R
Jun 12, 2015
828
268
I think he does have a point, however, in that Canon hasn't released a mirrorless as good as their 1 series.
I love the 1D-series, but that claim is only partially true. After getting the EOS R, I sold my 1DXII. The main reason for it was that I got much more keepers with less effort, when shooting my daughter indoors in poor lighting. Canons current mirrorless cameras has much more precise AF than any DSLR I have used, and it works in lower light conditions.
 

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,198
963
I love the 1D-series, but that claim is only partially true. After getting the EOS R, I sold my 1DXII. The main reason for it was that I got much more keepers with less effort, when shooting my daughter indoors in poor lighting. Canons current mirrorless cameras has much more precise AF than any DSLR I have used, and it works in lower light conditions.
It's a partial match on some very important criteria, I'm willing to stipulate. I've played with an R (borrowed it and got frustrated by the settings it was in and didn't have time to figure out how to adjust them--no, I don't hold that against the camera, but I bring it up to point out how limited my experience is) and rarely even laid eyes on a 1 series camera (even at the local brick and mortar shop).

But my understanding is the 1 beats out the R in ruggedness and number of manual controls--to say nothing of the ever lamented second card slot. Those, I think, would have to be added to a mirrorless to make it truly comparable to the 1 series. Plus I'm sure others could bring up other matters.

Once those are taken care of, we really would have a match for the 1 series, but until then, my claim is only partially false.
 
Nov 3, 2014
698
507
Nobody is saying DPAF isn’t accurate. Of course it is. When I’m shooting non moving targets at high magnification in low light I often switch to live view. The issue with DPAF and moving targets with complicated foregrounds and backgrounds is that it very quickly becomes overwhelmed in a way that the focusing sensor of a IDX rarely does. If that’s not what your shooting it probably isn’t a problem for you but that’s exactly why I use a 1DX rather than a 5D or an R. I don’t think that’s a controversial statement but maybe it is. I don’t really know anymore now that we are all living in EOS R bizarre-o-world.
 

arthurbikemad

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2015
493
97
UK
I love the 1D-series, but that claim is only partially true. After getting the EOS R, I sold my 1DXII. The main reason for it was that I got much more keepers with less effort, when shooting my daughter indoors in poor lighting. Canons current mirrorless cameras has much more precise AF than any DSLR I have used, and it works in lower light conditions.
Well I for one am happy for you. I own(ed) ((5D4 sold as pointless for me, 1DX2 sold and waiting for 1DX3)) 5D4, EOSR and the 1DX2 at the same time, there is no way in a million years my EOSR comes close to the 5D4 or 1DX2, the 1DX2 is king of focus in any situation, to be clear in my case the EOSR is great, BUT it FAILS in low light or shooting into sold backgrounds like a single colour wall or shooting into bright light or the sun, where it fails the 1DX2 nails it, also low light performance of the 1DX2 is incredible, forget pixel counts the 1DX2 kills them all when light is low, it just nails it time and time again for me hence I found it easy to sell and upgrade to the Mk3. I love the features of the EOSR and hope to upgrade mine as soon as the Mk2 is out, people often overlook the fact the 1DX2 is slick, zero shutter lag, perfect snappy focus, clear OVF in any light, and so much more than the 5D4 or the EOSR. I'd never sell up my 1DX2 for the R unless size was an option, and then I still feel the 5D4 is better at AF than the R by some margin when things get tough. The EOSR is a great camera but it has a long way to go to compare with the 1DX2 IMO, as for the 1DX3, well, spec wise it's a BEAST.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Hector1970

EOS R
Mar 22, 2012
1,184
356
I love the 1D-series, but that claim is only partially true. After getting the EOS R, I sold my 1DXII. The main reason for it was that I got much more keepers with less effort, when shooting my daughter indoors in poor lighting. Canons current mirrorless cameras has much more precise AF than any DSLR I have used, and it works in lower light conditions.
I was talking to a professional sports photographer yesterday who happened to be using an R when I ran into him. i asked him what he thought of it and he was glowing in his praise of it. His main tool is a 1DX II but he replaced his 5DIII with an R and finds it a great camera. I was surprised just how positive he was. He said for normal type of work the R is perfect, a big fan of its eye focus. He thought image quality was great. Rate of keepers is high. I asked him about the control bar and he said he disabled it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

arthurbikemad

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2015
493
97
UK
I was talking to a professional sports photographer yesterday who happened to be using an R when I ran into him. i asked him what he thought of it and he was glowing in his praise of it. His main tool is a 1DX II but he replaced his 5DIII with an R and finds it a great camera. I was surprised just how positive he was. He said for normal type of work the R is perfect, a big fan of its eye focus. He thought image quality was great. Rate of keepers is high. I asked him about the control bar and he said he disabled it.
I'd agree with him. A good photographer can get a great pic of action with 1 frame and Manual focus, with that in mind give the same person an EOSR and expect great results haha

I dont mind the touch bar, its just an extra control to me, mine is locked with the lock button, set to ISO 100 and Auto ISO, I can also use it to scroll through the ISO range, I dont mind it, to disable it fully is a waste imo.
 

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,854
5,912
I was talking to a professional sports photographer yesterday who happened to be using an R when I ran into him. i asked him what he thought of it and he was glowing in his praise of it. His main tool is a 1DX II but he replaced his 5DIII with an R and finds it a great camera. I was surprised just how positive he was. He said for normal type of work the R is perfect, a big fan of its eye focus. He thought image quality was great. Rate of keepers is high. I asked him about the control bar and he said he disabled it.
The 5DIV is an upgrade over the 5DIII, with the same IQ as the R and also very reliable AF.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,646
2,608
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I was talking to a professional sports photographer yesterday who happened to be using an R when I ran into him. i asked him what he thought of it and he was glowing in his praise of it. His main tool is a 1DX II but he replaced his 5DIII with an R and finds it a great camera. I was surprised just how positive he was. He said for normal type of work the R is perfect, a big fan of its eye focus. He thought image quality was great. Rate of keepers is high. I asked him about the control bar and he said he disabled it.
To each his own. After a number of attempts at using the R as a second sports body, I've switched back to the 5DIV as my second body. Neither compares to the 1Dx II, but I just found I had more success with the 5DIV. I still use the R for non sports, but I don't find it ready for prime time when it comes to sports shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arthurbikemad

Larsskv

EOS R
Jun 12, 2015
828
268
Well I for one am happy for you. I own(ed) ((5D4 sold as pointless for me, 1DX2 sold and waiting for 1DX3)) 5D4, EOSR and the 1DX2 at the same time, there is no way in a million years my EOSR comes close to the 5D4 or 1DX2, the 1DX2 is king of focus in any situation, to be clear in my case the EOSR is great, BUT it FAILS in low light or shooting into sold backgrounds like a single colour wall or shooting into bright light or the sun, where it fails the 1DX2 nails it, also low light performance of the 1DX2 is incredible, forget pixel counts the 1DX2 kills them all when light is low, it just nails it time and time again for me hence I found it easy to sell and upgrade to the Mk3. I love the features of the EOSR and hope to upgrade mine as soon as the Mk2 is out, people often overlook the fact the 1DX2 is slick, zero shutter lag, perfect snappy focus, clear OVF in any light, and so much more than the 5D4 or the EOSR. I'd never sell up my 1DX2 for the R unless size was an option, and then I still feel the 5D4 is better at AF than the R by some margin when things get tough. The EOSR is a great camera but it has a long way to go to compare with the 1DX2 IMO, as for the 1DX3, well, spec wise it's a BEAST.
I don’t believe we differ very much in opinion. I agree with much of what you say, and I have a lot of praise for the 1DX. I made a post praising it earlier in this tread.

My point is; put a 50 f1.2 or 85 f1.2 on a 1DX 1 or 2, shoot at f1.2, with “fill the frame framing” , when shooting a kid moving in around indoors in poor lighting and compare it to the R with the RF50 1.2 or RF 85 f1.2, and I can guarantee you that you get a much higher percentage of keepers, with eyes in focus. It’s no contest, and not even funny. The R works sooo much better in that scenario.

The DSLRs have their advantages, but using larger apertures Than f2 isn’t their force.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arthurbikemad

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,646
2,608
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I don’t believe we differ very much in opinion. I agree with much of what you say, and I have a lot of praise for the 1DX. I made a post praising it earlier in this tread.

My point is; put a 50 f1.2 or 85 f1.2 on a 1DX 1 or 2, shoot at f1.2, with “fill the frame framing” , when shooting a kid moving in around indoors in poor lighting and compare it to the R with the RF50 1.2 or RF 85 f1.2, and I can guarantee you that you get a much higher percentage of keepers, with eyes in focus. It’s no contest, and not even funny. The R works sooo much better in that scenario.

The DSLRs have their advantages, but using larger apertures Than f2 isn’t their force.
I have found the eye focus works great if you are shooting one subject. However, if you have a group of people and are trying to select just one (as in sports) it tends to move around picking different subjects. Other's may disagree, but that's my experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larsskv

arthurbikemad

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2015
493
97
UK
I don’t believe we differ very much in opinion. I agree with much of what you say, and I have a lot of praise for the 1DX. I made a post praising it earlier in this tread.

My point is; put a 50 f1.2 or 85 f1.2 on a 1DX 1 or 2, shoot at f1.2, with “fill the frame framing” , when shooting a kid moving in around indoors in poor lighting and compare it to the R with the RF50 1.2 or RF 85 f1.2, and I can guarantee you that you get a much higher percentage of keepers, with eyes in focus. It’s no contest, and not even funny. The R works sooo much better in that scenario.

The DSLRs have their advantages, but using larger apertures Than f2 isn’t their force.
Ah yes indeed, I agree totally, the main reason I have the R is for the RF50 and RF85. And yes, eye AF with my kids is a joy on the R in that situation. There is no comparison coming from the old EF50 and 85.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larsskv

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
299
298
Just out of curiosity, why would you want to shoot 4k video external on a 1DX body, when you could do it on an R body more conveniently and much cheaper?
The (current) R model offers only 30fps at 4k. 60fps makes a HUGE difference in my kind of work because you get quite nice slow-motions out of it.
The R also got a very big crop with 1,84 which is realy a lot and makes Wide angled shots very difficutl to get.
The biggest dealbreaker on the R is the insane rolling shutter though. This is completely unaccaptable in my personal opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: richperson

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,609
1,970
Alberta, Canada
The (current) R model offers only 30fps at 4k. 60fps makes a HUGE difference in my kind of work because you get quite nice slow-motions out of it.
The R also got a very big crop with 1,84 which is realy a lot and makes Wide angled shots very difficutl to get.
The biggest dealbreaker on the R is the insane rolling shutter though. This is completely unaccaptable in my personal opinion.
I wholeheartedly agree on the rolling shutter (also slo-mo) I was shocked when I saw my daughter's video where she panned too fast, me having been used to the 1DX2.

Jack
 

Pixel

EOS 90D
Sep 6, 2011
164
72
Is this supposed to be a good photographer? He has nothing to say and his photos are mediocre. I have seen his instagram account. Can anyone send me a link with great work from peter read miller? Why is it so important what he has to say?
You didn't just say that....?
 

Pixel

EOS 90D
Sep 6, 2011
164
72
A little background on PRM for those not in the know.
(Taken from his Canon Explorer of Light bio)


"Peter Read Miller has been photographing athletes, events and the sporting life for more than 40 years. He has worked as a staff and contract photographer for Sports Illustrated for more than 35 years. His images have appeared on over 100 Sports Illustrated covers.
His editorial clients have included: TIME, LIFE, People, Money, The Associated Press, Playboy, Runner's World, Newsweek, USA Weekend and The New York Times. In addition to covering 9 Olympic Games and 38 Super Bowls, Peter has shot 14 NBA Finals. He has covered the Stanley Cup Finals, the World Series, the Kentucky Derby, the NCAA Basketball Final Four, and the Men's and Women's World Cup Soccer Finals.
Peter has been teaching Sports Photography workshops for over 15 years at locations including Denver, Atlanta, Phoenix, Santa Clara, Knoxville and Honolulu.
Peter has spoken at the Los Angeles Chapter of the Advertising Photographers of America, Photoshop World, Imaging USA, CES and PDN's Photo Plus East. He has also lectured at numerous colleges, universities and professional photographic organizations.
Peter and his work has been the subject of articles in Photo District News, American Photographer, Digital Photo Pro, Rangefinder Magazine and Shutterbug.
Peter is the 2006 winner of The Dave Boss Award of Excellence Photographer of the Year awarded by The Pro Football Hall of Fame. He is a member of Canon's Explorers of Light program. Peter is also the winner of the Society of Professional Journalists 2012 Award for Sports Photography.
Peter's book "Peter Read Miller on Sports Photography" is currently available from New Riders Press. Peter's advertising clients have included Canon, Nike, Microsoft, Western Digital, Adidas, Visa, Coca-Cola, Footlocker, ABC Television, Panasonic, and The National Football League."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Pixel

EOS 90D
Sep 6, 2011
164
72
Somebody was asking about extensive low light testing, there is no RAW software available for it yet, so nobody has had any depth look at IQ. Also the firmware is still considered pre-production so there's really nothing to gain on it yet other than the basic operations.
It's also not legal for anyone outside of Canon's approval to even have possession of it yet either, so those in depth reviews will have to come in the second part of February.