The Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Specifications?

[Famateur]

Technology companies (and that includes Canon) must keep a pipeline of innovation and meter its release in order to stabilize the R&D to product cycle (only if you want to remain solvent for decades, of course). This means releasing only what your market needs, and very little more.

The problem with this approach is that customers don't upgrade with each new model, so effectively you reduce your sales when you depend on upgrades vs new sales. An example of this is Neuro, he has a 1Dx and stated that he is not going to upgrade to the new one. So how is that good for Canon?

Good question. The simplest answer is, Neuro is a sample of N=1 in a very large market.

I understand that he may be representative of many more people*, but there is at least one post on this thread of a current 1DX owner expressing that F8 AF on all points and illuminated AF point would be enough for them to upgrade. Now N=2.

Decisions about what to include or hold back will invariably fall between those who will make the leap to upgrade and those who won't. Maximizing the upgrade rate while pursuing a long term road map while still responding to present market conditions and competition is more art than science, though rest assured Canon puts as much science into its market research as is practical.

In business, there is often no "right" or "wrong" strategy, only "more profit" or "less profit" than before, and educated guesses about what factors determined success in that market.

* I could be wrong, but I think Neuro is more of an enthusiast with perhaps some paid work. The market segment Canon would cater to in making decisions is more likely professional sports, wildlife or photo-journalism photographers (or companies that employ them and provide the gear). We'll know in a year or two if Canon made the right decision. Remember how many people said similar things about not enough in the 5DIII to upgrade from the 5DII, particularly with a significantly higher price? Given the success of the 5DIII, it appears Canon made the right decisions. Let's see what Canon releases and how the sales go...

 

[Jack Douglas]

Interesting how everyone including me rationalizes away unrealistic expectations. For birds, I just wish I'd be getting a few more MPs for cropping. However, I'm coming from a 1D IV that didn't quite equal my 6D IQ to beyond a 1DX that, from viewing my friends 1DX shots equaled/slightly bettered it.

Bottom line, when the dust settles I'm expecting I'll be purchasing and not regretting it relative to 6D IQ. Wishing I had the 6D in hand when using the 1D IV for a still shot was disconcerting.

Jack

 

[Bennymiata]

A I do lot of night time events, the red focussing point would be a godsend for me, as would the dpaf for video.
It would mean that I would only need to carry the one camera, and doing 120fps in HD would also be very useful as it would give me some new tricks to use to improve my event video.

Can't wait to try one.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Technology companies (and that includes Canon) must keep a pipeline of innovation and meter its release in order to stabilize the R&D to product cycle (only if you want to remain solvent for decades, of course). This means releasing only what your market needs, and very little more.

The problem with this approach is that customers don't upgrade with each new model, so effectively you reduce your sales when you depend on upgrades vs new sales. An example of this is Neuro, he has a 1Dx and stated that he is not going to upgrade to the new one. So how is that good for Canon?

I do not know if you know ... But our friend Neuro is not a photojournalist, and he NOT works with photography. He is a "wealthy amateur" who loves the potential of your 1DX for shooting fast-moving subjects, such as their small children.

How many people on earth would consider that "NEED" something more sophisticated than 1DX to photograph their children?

 

[redpoint]

It's hardly something to worry about, but compared to the 1DX, that (presumably) GPS hump on the prism housing really makes the camera ugly!


d.

Couldn't agree more - hopefully this is just a rendering. That "hump" looks like a complete after thought - very ugly. Looks aren't everything of course, but I hope they didn't do that on such a beautiful camera. Reminds me, to a lesser degree, of the raised bezel on the iPhone 6 camera lens - which is very un-Appleish.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

What a joke! Lolz! They had 4 years to make it right and they couldn't even catch up? Rip innovative, rip canon.

Defining "right" for one person is easy.

Defining "right" for a broad market with varying needs? Not so easy...

---

A thought from the economist in me: Take a look at the global markets. It's very possible that we're on the verge of another global recession, and perhaps a very painful one. Technology companies (and that includes Canon) must keep a pipeline of innovation and meter its release in order to stabilize the R&D to product cycle (only if you want to remain solvent for decades, of course). This means releasing only what your market needs, and very little more. I'd prefer the security of a company that is stable in the long term (and that produces amazingly capable cameras) over a vomit of radical tech...followed by bankruptcy...or obsolescence.

People point to Sony. Sony is "innovating" because it must do so in order to make a dent in market share. It has to convince buyers to not only choose their product but to also depart from the comfort zone of an established ecosystem. Example of the risk of that departure: Samsung NX1. Dead end.

One last thought about R&D to product cycle and metering releases of tech: If you had any idea what SanDisk has in its pipeline, you'd either wet your pants, feel cheated that it's not available NOW, or perhaps both.

Peaks and valleys mean volatility. Slow and steady means viability. Which ones do investors (which includes customers who adopt the ecosystem) prefer?

I wouldn't bother "Famateur" this poster has obviously never used a D4/D4s (with Nikon lenses), Canon is already well ahead in most aspects and virtually all aspects that concern me as a wildlife shooter.
Having tried/used the best that Nikon offer, well let's just say that I am very happy with Canon. The D5/D500 will improve this situation but not change it unless Nikon upgrade and significantly reduce the prices of a number of their lenses.

 

[kphoto99]

Technology companies (and that includes Canon) must keep a pipeline of innovation and meter its release in order to stabilize the R&D to product cycle (only if you want to remain solvent for decades, of course). This means releasing only what your market needs, and very little more.

The problem with this approach is that customers don't upgrade with each new model, so effectively you reduce your sales when you depend on upgrades vs new sales. An example of this is Neuro, he has a 1Dx and stated that he is not going to upgrade to the new one. So how is that good for Canon?

I do not know if you know ... But our friend Neuro is not a photojournalist, and he NOT works with photography. He is a "wealthy amateur" who loves the potential of your 1DX for shooting fast-moving subjects, such as their small children.

How many people on earth would consider that "NEED" something more sophisticated than 1DX to photograph their children?

I know exactly what category Neuro fits into. A PJ will very likely replace his 1DX when it wears out and he would buy a 1DX anyways. So making a MarkII is not necessary to make a sale to the PJ. But by not making the MarkII more significant Canon looses the opportunity to make a sale to a "wealthy amateur".
Think of it as a difference in selling hammers vs selling jewellery.

 

[Tugela]

I also thought that there might be a new processor "digic 7" to handle the 4K and near unlimited raw shooting throughput.

There is. It's called the Digic 6 +

As a reminder, the difference in speed from the Digic 5 to Digic 5+ was pretty serious. It was something like 2-3 times faster. Just because they perhaps didn't alter the entire architecture and call it a Digic 7 doesn't mean it's not new and significantly faster than what's out there now.

The encoder stayed the same however. If the new camera uses the encoders used in the DV5 processors, it will be a Digic 7, not 6+.

 

[H. Jones]

Technology companies (and that includes Canon) must keep a pipeline of innovation and meter its release in order to stabilize the R&D to product cycle (only if you want to remain solvent for decades, of course). This means releasing only what your market needs, and very little more.

The problem with this approach is that customers don't upgrade with each new model, so effectively you reduce your sales when you depend on upgrades vs new sales. An example of this is Neuro, he has a 1Dx and stated that he is not going to upgrade to the new one. So how is that good for Canon?

I do not know if you know ... But our friend Neuro is not a photojournalist, and he NOT works with photography. He is a "wealthy amateur" who loves the potential of your 1DX for shooting fast-moving subjects, such as their small children.

How many people on earth would consider that "NEED" something more sophisticated than 1DX to photograph their children?

I know exactly what category Neuro fits into. A PJ will very likely replace his 1DX when it wears out and he would buy a 1DX anyways. So making a MarkII is not necessary to make a sale to the PJ. But by not making the MarkII more significant Canon looses the opportunity to make a sale to a "wealthy amateur".
Think of it as a difference in selling hammers vs selling jewellery.

The sister newspaper to the one I work for just bought some of their staff Nikon D4s to replace their D4 because the budget came up. They get replaced if they get broken, but there's plenty of procedural upgrades whenever the budget opens up, and having 4-5 year development times works out well for that. That's at least somewhat a good market for Canon I'd say.

 

[Tugela]

Why is CFast 2.0 a necessity for 4K? Shouldn't a CF with adequate speeds (1066x Lexar) be able to handle it? I wonder if inclusion of CFast 2.0 is an indicator that there's a serious codec on board.

Just using Magic Lantern to get some metrics -- Using ML the 5DIII can write HD Raw at 24 FPS just barely on a 1066x Lexar card. Yes, there is some wiggle room, but not much. Now for 4K we are talking 4 times the resolution at more than double the frame rate, but then probably only 10 bit. Okay, the 1DxII should internally be able to write faster than the 5DIII, but the increased amount of data needed to store is much greater. I am thinking this pushes it into the CFast 2 realm.

CFast is not required for 4K (most 4K cameras use SD cards), but high bit rate codecs do require fast cards.

The critical criteria for video is sustained write speeds, as opposed to burst write speeds (the parameter typically cited in card specs). Not all cards are created equal, even if they have the same spec.

 

[expatinasia]

Im pissed bc Im gonna have to buy this camera just bc it has DPAF for video. I have a 1Dx but now I'll be paying 6 grand just so my video will auto focus.

I bet when I buy it I'll take a pic at ISO 3200 with my 1Dx and then at ISO 3200 with the mark II and it will look like I used the same damn camera!!!

I had a similar thought at first, but now am not so sure. I shoot both stills and video, but if these are the real specs I may hold onto my 1DX for my sports work and possibly buy a 1DC (problem with that is I don't want to buy new lenses/weight for two camera shoots), XF305, Sony F5 or something else which would be used primarily for video when I need auto focus.

Anyway am not getting excited or upset yet, will wait until Canon's official announcement and then another 6 months after it comes out to see if there are any issues.

excuse my ignorance in the video world, but couldn't you save a butt-ton of cash and just pick up a 70D and toss ML on it?

ML raw on the 5D3 is softer than the C100 compressed codec. Also, workflow is terrible with ML DSLR's. I'd get the C100/300II or 1DXII if these specs are true. Not sure why you'd want the 1DC for more money.

Also for the prior two nested posters, I'm not sure how 120 fps 1080p, 60 fps 4k is not a significant upgrade in addition to Dual Pixel AF which is also supposedly better than other AF implementations for video.

Sorry, it was I that mentioned the 1DC which was a mistake, as I meant to write C100.

Of course the 1DX II will be an upgrade over the 1DX but whether it will be enough of an upgrade to justify me shelling out US$ 6,000 is another question.

The 1DX takes amazing stills and is the best I can get right now for sports and the other stills work I do.

I also really like the video the 1DX produces and I can use the same L lenses I use for stills so that is great too.

But of course the 1DX does not have 4K, DPAF and a few other things.

The question I will be asking myself when the final official specs are out from Canon is whether the stills and video enhancements in the 1DX II justify me buying it. I will also be questioning whether I should sell my current 1DX or keep it. All this will come into my own personal evaluation of whether to get it or not.

My first reaction after seeing these rumoured specs is I may keep my 1DX and use whatever cash I have, to look at a C100 (the C300 is out of my budget I think), XF300, FS5 or something like that. If I do that, I still end up with an amazing stills camera for the sports work I do, but also get another camera for my video work.

I say this because I do not think the rumoured stills side of the 1DX II warrants me to upgrade, and buying that and keeping the 1DX would also be redundant as there is too much overlap on the stills side of both cameras.

That's why it may be better for me to keep the 1D X and look at spending any money I do have on a more dedicated video camera such as those mentioned, rather than upgrading.

We will see.

 

[pedro]

A I do lot of night time events, the red focussing point would be a godsend for me, as would the dpaf for video.
It would mean that I would only need to carry the one camera, and doing 120fps in HD would also be very useful as it would give me some new tricks to use to improve my event video.

Can't wait to try one.

I know, this comment is slightly off topic. I really appreciate the red AF light on my recently purchased 6D. Never was really happy, that my former 5DIII (stolen during an assault last year, insurance fully covered) didn't have that option. AFing is much easier. With respect to the 1DxII, I am looking forward to the official specs next week. Altough, CR was quite right many times in the past. As the 6D is as much as camera I ever need for my stuff, I am looking forward what might trickle down to a follow up body... Recently made an ISO 51200 portrait of one of my sons and in b/w it looked quite like a pushed ISO 3200 photograph back in the filmdays. Some NR was applied of course...

 

[Loswr]

A I do lot of night time events, the red focussing point would be a godsend for me, as would the dpaf for video.
It would mean that I would only need to carry the one camera, and doing 120fps in HD would also be very useful as it would give me some new tricks to use to improve my event video.

Can't wait to try one.

I know, this comment is slightly off topic. I really appreciate the red AF light on my recently purchased 6D. Never was really happy, that my former 5DIII (stolen during an assault last year, insurance fully covered) didn't have that option. AFing is much easier.

Of course, the 1D X has red-illuminated AF points already. But perhaps the implementation on the MkII will be different. Anyone thinking there will be a return to the 1DIV type of illumination will be disappointed.

 

[Peer]

Oh, and apparently the 4k 60fps is real. I was among those who didn't believe this rumour. That's a pretty big deal, I would say.

Indeed -- 4k 60fps might be the deal breaker for me... if it's 10bit.

-- peer

 

[3kramd5]

DR - Again it depends on the sensor, but if Canon claims to have better DR and the D4s only had in the low 13s and didn't list better DR in their specs then I bet they are about the same too.

High 12s, actually, but I wouldn't characterize that as "only." It has wider DR, for example, than the A7R ii.

 

[F1since72]

Have a look at the back of the body, why is there a LAN-LED, if WiFi is optional?

 

[Loswr]

Have a look at the back of the body, why is there a LAN-LED, if WiFi is optional?

Because LAN means LAN, which isn't the same as WLAN. Like the 1D X (which has the same LED indicator), the 1D X II will also have a LAN port.

 

[pedro]

A I do lot of night time events, the red focussing point would be a godsend for me, as would the dpaf for video.
It would mean that I would only need to carry the one camera, and doing 120fps in HD would also be very useful as it would give me some new tricks to use to improve my event video.

Can't wait to try one.

I know, this comment is slightly off topic. I really appreciate the red AF light on my recently purchased 6D. Never was really happy, that my former 5DIII (stolen during an assault last year, insurance fully covered) didn't have that option. AFing is much easier.

Of course, the 1D X has red-illuminated AF points already. But perhaps the implementation on the MkII will be different. Anyone thinking there will be a return to the 1DIV type of illumination will be disappointed.

Hope not. Didn't ever have an 1DIV. Was it the black AF light version? Canon might be annoying quite some folks by doing so...How come, that they opted for such a road in the 5D3 back in 2012?

 

[PureClassA]

Im having a hard time believing another 61 pt AF system. Ok... All can do f8. That's pretty substantial... But still the same 61?? Didnt the 7D2 come out with 65? Something's fishy here.

why?

Cuz I'd be a bit surprised if the new flagship didn't at least have 65 points (or a lot more as has been previously rumored several times) like the 7D2. Perhaps they had to make some technical trade off in more number of AF points vs making the existing system of 61 faster/better and all f8. I don't know I'm not technically savvy enough on this. If one of our geniuses here cares to help, I'm all ears.

 

[Loswr]

A I do lot of night time events, the red focussing point would be a godsend for me, as would the dpaf for video.
It would mean that I would only need to carry the one camera, and doing 120fps in HD would also be very useful as it would give me some new tricks to use to improve my event video.

Can't wait to try one.

I know, this comment is slightly off topic. I really appreciate the red AF light on my recently purchased 6D. Never was really happy, that my former 5DIII (stolen during an assault last year, insurance fully covered) didn't have that option. AFing is much easier.

Of course, the 1D X has red-illuminated AF points already. But perhaps the implementation on the MkII will be different. Anyone thinking there will be a return to the 1DIV type of illumination will be disappointed.

Hope not. Didn't ever have an 1DIV. Was it the black AF light version? Canon might be annoying quite some folks by doing so...How come, that they opted for such a road in the 5D3 back in 2012?

The challenge is the transmissive LCD. Older cameras, like the 1DIV, had the AF points physically etched on the focus screen, and they could be red-illuminated from an angle that didn't affect metering. The transmissive LCD needs a steeper angle for illumination, which affects the metering sensor. Not an issue for single shots, but an issue with AI Servo where focus and metering are continuous. It was fixed in the 1D X by a firmware update, where the point illumination 'blinks' and I believe the red channel data from the RGB metering sensor is ignored. The 7DII can illuminate in AI Servo, it too has a RGB metering. The 5DIII has a two-layer iFCL metering sensor, and therefore can't selectively ignore red light.