Well no Nikon was totally dominant in the pro market until Canon targeted them with their pro Eos lenses like the EF300 f/2.8 , EF50 f/1.0 and their first competitive pro camera the EOS 1nYou are showing your lack of age. The Canon F-1 was the pro camera that faced off against the Nikon F, and really put Canon on the map for sports photography.
And pre-date the EOS by many years.
Film, of course.
I think what you mean to say is:Well no Nikon was totally dominant in the pro market until Canon targeted them with their pro Eos lenses like the EF300 f/2.8 , EF50 f/1.0 and their first competitive pro camera the EOS 1n
Their older F-1 wasn't considered a pro camera by the professionals and the whole EOS system with the first decent autofocus system won the pros over to the point where nearly all pro sports photographers use Canon
But I use a hoodman and it works brilliantly to accomplish just what you are saying. I also use the smart controller to designate the start point when in auto point selection modes and it is impressive.I shoot a lot of sports, and there's no substitute for the great full-frame optical viewfinder. But one of my gripes with the 1D X Mark III (and all predecessors) is the small AF area coverage for viewfinder shooting. So the subject has to enter a good ways into the frame before AF can latch on.
Switch to Live View shooting, and you get 100% coverage Vertical/90% Horizontal.
Viewfinder AF Area:
View attachment 192982
Live View AF Area:
View attachment 192983
For shots where you want the player's full height head to toe to fill the frame, their head (the desired AF point) can be outside of the Viewfinder AF area, so you get focus lock on the torso/shoulder instead.
Consequently, I occasionally switch to live view to get the player's heads entering the left or right edge of view; camera locks on.
But I really dislike looking at the rear LCD to cover action (my eyes can't focus that close anymore anyway ).
So from this perspective alone, I think an EOS-1D R, if it has a great fast viewfinder, would be a good compromise as I would expect it to retain 90%+ AF Area coverage.
I'm waiting for my R5...hoping to have it before the Eagle season gets hot. I will have to wait to see what it can do with sports photography.Same here. I sold my EF 200-400 (weight more than migration to R5) and 1dx II prior to the R5 announcement based on the “mirrorless“ performance of the 1dx III (Jared P. review). I felt it showed where Canon was headed and what we could expect in an R5 and beyond. I received one of the first shipments of the R5 at the end of July and very happy with my decision. I was going to buy a second R5 for backup, but I may hold off until I have clarity on the pro + Canon. I don’t really need another high-end body until an Africa trip late 2021. My preference would be a body similar in size to an R5 + grip, although I am sure it would need to be a little larger.
I think fps is more important than 8k, so having some ~30Mpix sensor and ~30fps would be more important than 8k and 45Mpix@20fps.Every year that they delay the Olympics we will see another camera. And, since it will be broadcast in 8K, it makes sense that a new flagship will do 8K. Sony was not able to put out a 8K camera because of the parts shortages needed for the sensor but expect it on upcoming models. It doesn't matter if you need it or not, it sells cameras as Canon has found out.
Say it again.Nobody will buy an EF lens for an R camera? Well, I guess I am another nobody.
I would revise the opinion of those who think it impossible...Only smart people will buy EF lenses for their R camera as they a have a lot more choices and will usually pay less. Of course, we aren't all gear-heads who have to have the latest and greatest to impress their friends. Some of us actually take photos - and the EF lenses with adapter work just fine.
I think this is why they will still buy them...the RF lenses will be too expensive for some, while the EF lenses will be more attractive price wise, plus the EF lenses still produce beautiful images. I personally would not spend money to upgrade from my 600II to the 600III knowing the RF600 will eventually arrive, but someone who doesn't already have a 600 may upgrade to EF version when the RF version arrives and folks start selling the EF versions...you know the folks that has to have the latest and greatest.Nobody will buy a NEW EF Big White who owns only an R body.
A higher percentage of the fewer and fewer remaining full-time photojournalists do video. I wouldn't exactly say more and more photojournalists are doing anything, because every week it seems I hear of another of my PJ friends' jobs being eliminated. PJs are no longer the #1 buyers of 1-Series class cameras.Actually there are some benefits of a good video hybrid for the market the 1d series is made for, photojournalism being the one of them where more and more photographers do video and photo, also the ability screen grab which is also really usable for photo assignments.
What? The R5 slows down to 6 fps with flicker reduction turned on? Say it ain't so, Joe!Flicker reduction has to be 10+ FPS, ideally they would implement the shutter finetuning of the Sony A9 which allows you to adjust shutter speed on such a micro level you can avoid flicker even in electronic 20 fps shutter. I love my R5, but it's not great for night sports when flicker reduction is limited to a pitiful 6 fps, but that's to be expected of a 5D level camera.
I'd also like to see an absolute minimum of 16 FPS in 14 bit, which is what the 1DX mark II was always able to pull off all those years ago.
It seems more and more like the most significant source of the heat problem in the R5 are the CFExpress cards, rather than the DiG!C X processor.I wondered, after the R5 overheating issues, if the R1 was not in the works yet because of thermal issues. I think these typically get a dual Digic set up, and if one of those bad boys is throwing lots of heat imagine 2.... That's not to say they wouldn't just do a single next gen Digic, but it was just my thought that the processing required for an R1 series could be a limiting issue at the moment.
The larger body with built in grip could give them some opportunities though for heat dissipation ideas.
And no, I'm not trying to sound the alarm that this thing is going to melt down or what not.
I'm just really excited to see what this can do. I imagine its hard to top the R5, but perhaps they have something up their sleeve. Top of the line EVF, faster mechanical shutter, smarter focus tracking AI....who knows. I imagine they'll forego any 8k video. Maybe land this on a 24MP sensor to differentiate from the R6, but still not go overboard for what most users need. Maybe instead of memory cards it will have a slot for one of those m type SSDs (crazy idea I know).
I'll never own one, but I'm still excited to see what it can do.
This is why I did not consider the 1DX3. I knew this probably was a peak into the future mirrorless 1D body and Canon trying to get that last money grab for the 1D Dslr body.
They should name the new body EOS 1DR to distinguish it from the previous generation 1D camera, like they did going from the 1D4 to the 1DX.
I like R1 D.I think "R1," on its own, sounds more graceful.
The processing power of a single DiG!C X (which is what the 1D X Mark III has -a single DiG!C X processor) dwarfs the combined power of the Dual DiG!C6+ processors in the 1D X Mark II.The list is a hybrid between current 1DXiii specs and R5 specs.
It describes an excellent stills machine from R5 and improves on video capabilities from R5 (mostly thermal) with a new sensor.
Dual processors have been the case with 1DX ii and there is space for 2 processors in a 1D body
Dual Digic X would provide the horsepower for
- the oversampled video and
- 16fps downsampled 45->~20mp stills to meet the existing 1DX user base's requirements
IBIS for full frame is already in R5
9 megadot EVF from the A7Siii
Flippy screen already in R5... would mean a redesign of 1D body
Canon's engineers went completely out of (over!) the box with R5. If we saw the R5 spec list (even with thermal limits) 6 months ago, everyone would think we are crazy. It is amazing even now!
The 1DXiii specs are similarly great and would need to improve to have migration from 1DX users and R5 users. 1DX users don't need/want a smaller body and would accept the same weight but prefer less. Reducing the depth of the 1DXiii due to pentaprism and separate (heat generating) OVF metering sensor is a possibility but the space could be used for thermal dissipation as long as space around the lens is sufficient.
The biggest assumption on my part is the sensor being 8k (~45mp) with a faster readout for 16fps mechanical and less rolling shutter for 20fps and video. The rest is processing power, thermal management and battery life in a 1D body.
The 1D X Mark III has a single DiG!C X processor. It's still has an insane level of processing power compared to the dual DiG!C 6+ processors of the 1D X Mark II.Well 50% larger body size and 2 Digic X processors writing to 2 cf express cards makes it a lot easier to manage heat