what the 1Dx may tell us about the 5Diii

[Picsfor]

I am already having to consider the slightly unpalatable idea of having to get a 1Dx despite hating the huge body size, just to get that low-light performance. But really I want it in a body that a real-life human can carry around all day without feeling and looking stupid. The other thing is that I want a 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS as a walk-around lens, which would work for me given my shooting preferences, but those two together could be a painful walk-around combo. And they'd cost around £7.1k. OOF!

OK, why not get the 70-200 f4 IS - the low light capabilities of the 1DX is sooo good that the f4 will be more than adequate, and half the weight of the f2.8 MkII version.

Done a wedding reception last night with my 5D2 and was suddenly aware of how much easier that 51k ISO would have made my job. Maybe not as much as it would cost you, but i am not relishing the idea of having to splash out £4k+ for a 1DX - but you really are getting the extra money's worth.

 

[AJ]

i hope the new 1dx is telling us alot about the up coming 5dii ... i hope the ff sensor stays the same, no need for a larger mp sensor. whats the point?

The point is: studio photogs and landscape photogs want more megapixels.

My guess is 5D3 early next year. 36 mpix, iso characteristics similar to 5D2 on a pixel-by-pixel basis.

 

[Fleetie]

I am already having to consider the slightly unpalatable idea of having to get a 1Dx despite hating the huge body size, just to get that low-light performance. But really I want it in a body that a real-life human can carry around all day without feeling and looking stupid. The other thing is that I want a 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS as a walk-around lens, which would work for me given my shooting preferences, but those two together could be a painful walk-around combo. And they'd cost around £7.1k. OOF!

OK, why not get the 70-200 f4 IS - the low light capabilities of the 1DX is sooo good that the f4 will be more than adequate, and half the weight of the f2.8 MkII version.

Done a wedding reception last night with my 5D2 and was suddenly aware of how much easier that 51k ISO would have made my job. Maybe not as much as it would cost you, but i am not relishing the idea of having to splash out £4k+ for a 1DX - but you really are getting the extra money's worth.

Because I already have it (70-200 f/4 L IS)! And I love it! It is a fantastic lens! But apparently the f/2.8 is even better, and I do love OOF blur / bokeh. And the f/2.8 would/will give me even more of that creamy (OOF) yet sharp (in focus) quality. I intend to get the f/2.8, but it is 2nd in the queue, behind the 85 f/1.2 L II.

 

[Picsfor]

yeah, the 85 f1.2 really does give the narrowest DoF.

i had a play with one for an hour one sunny afternoon - i only shot at f1.2 all the time.
But not top of my list at the moment...

 

[VirtualRain]

I think there are four types of pro camera requiremets out there...

News/Sports => High speed, Med. print size => 1DX => FF, 12fps, Dense 61 point AF, 52K ISO, 18MP
Studio/Landscape => High quality, large print size => 5DII/III => FF, 5fps, Wide 9-19point AF, 25K ISO, 30+MP
Videographer => Can use the same camera as studio/landscape with video
Wildlife => High speed, Crop => 7D => APS-C, 8-10fps, Dense 19 point AF, 12K ISO, 18MP

Unfortunately, none of these really address my needs which are similar to the studio landscape photographer, but without the need to print at large sizes. I would prefer a low MPix FF sensor (like the 1Dx), a new AF that has points following the rule of thirds, in a body like the 7D. But that doesn't really align with any major pro market requirements so it's not likely to happen.

 

[Loswr]

But apparently the f/2.8 is even better, and I do love OOF blur / bokeh. And the f/2.8 would/will give me even more of that creamy (OOF) yet sharp (in focus) quality. I intend to get the f/2.8, but it is 2nd in the queue, behind the 85 f/1.2 L II.

The 70-200/2.8 II is excellent on FF, and does well as a walkaround lens. I don't mind the weight, even after carrying it all day, but I wouldn't hang it from my neck. I use a BlackRapid strap which puts the weight on my shoulder and is much more comfortable, plus leaves my hands free.

a new AF that has points following the rule of thirds

Difficult for technical reasons. The 1D Mark IV has points that sit at the intersections. The 1D X, 1DsIII, and 7D all come pretty close. The 5DII is no where near.

 

[Loswr]

I am already having to consider the slightly unpalatable idea of having to get a 1Dx despite hating the huge body size, just to get that low-light performance.

I think the jury is still out on that low-light performance, and will remain out until the RAW files can be examined.

Regarding the 2-stop improvement in ISO noise compared to the 1D IV, Chuck Westfall stated, "To get the full two stops of improved performance you’ll need to shoot in the JPEG format. That’s not to say that high ISO performance isn’t significantly better when shooting in RAW, because it absolutely is."

Ok, so two stops compared to the 1D IV. But that's for JPGs only. With current images, DxO promises (and delivers!) a 2-stop improvement in ISO noise compared to in-camera JPGs. So, the 1D X has a better in-camera jpg engine with better NR thanks to Digic5+. Whoop-de-do. I don't really care about improvements in JPG images because I'll be shooting in RAW.

But wait, Chuck said 'it absolutely is' significantly better in RAW. This speaks to the cleverness of the Canon marketing team in using the 1D IV as a baseline for the comparison. Of course, going from an APS-H sensor to a FF sensor means less ISO noise, because of the larger total area. As beaten to death, larger pixels than the 1DsIII/5DII means nothing, although the gapless microlenses will help. The 5DII beats the 1D IV on ISO noise, by about a 1/2-stop (which is slightly less than the improvement predicted by sensor size alone, and speaks to the improved on-sensor NR of the 1D IV). So, my guess is the when comparing the 1D X to the 1D IV RAW files, where it really matters, we'll see somewhere a bit less than 1 stop of ISO noise improvement.

Personally, I'm uninterested in the comparison to the 1D IV. What interests me is the comparison of the noise from the 1D X to the 5DII RAW files. Sadly, my guess is that we see less than 1/2-stop improvement there, probably closer to 1/3-stop. I think the math works out that way - 2-stops compared to 1D IV in JPG, which is 1 stop in RAW and 1 stop in the conversion. Of the RAW, 2/3-stop comes from the larger sensor, leaving 1/3-stop for tech improvement (gapless microlenses, on-sensor NR).

So, ISO 4000 on the 1D X will look ISO 3200 on the 5DII. Is that 'significant'? Sure. But it's nothing to write home about...and Martin, maybe not enough to justify the extra weight (although the low-light AF improvement is certainly also important).

 

[AprilForever]

I'm somewhat interested in FF, for a landscape camera, but not really hugely... If I did get a 5dIII, I would be getting it for higher resolution and improved noise over my 7d. And the higher resolution part would be something I wouldn't budge on. So, a FF18mp does not interest me!

I think that the 1DX style will probable seep more into the 7D than the 5D... Probably, the 5diii will be sort-of the what the 1DIVs would have been, except without the grip. Likely, I'm guessing it will sell for a hair over 3,000...

 

[K-amps]

i hope the new 1dx is telling us alot about the up coming 5dii, especially given the age we are in and the technological abilities of today. i know the 1dx is the cream of the crop but even half of these features on the new 5diii would be a major upgrade.

i hope the ff sensor stays the same, no need for a larger mp sensor. whats the point? i personally would like to see a higher frame rate, such as atleast 6 - 7 fps (half of the 1dx would suffice here). The dig. 5 processor is capable why not. high iso would be a major plus also, but i would like to see some more comparable features to the nikon d700 or the upcoming d800 such as more bracketing options, and lots of focus points.

who knows whats going to happen, but i can't wait. if its not up to my spec, i have no problems going over to the nikon d800. id pay around $3500 for the right camera. oh btw, i don't care one bit about upgraded video features.

+1

 

[K-amps]

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Multiple-Exposure Feature something new for a Canon Dslr!? I'd love to see this feature included in the 5D iii.

+1: and maybe not 9AEB, but at least 5?

 

[K-amps]

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Multiple-Exposure Feature something new for a Canon Dslr!? I'd love to see this feature included in the 5D iii.

Just curious. What does in-camera multiple-exposure offer that couldn't be done with layers in Photoshop? When Canon announced this, I admit I was scratching my head thinking this sounded more like a gimmick than a 1D series feature. I must be missing something here.

I'm not anti-tweaking photos, but I think it's much more fun to think creatively about setting up shots and trying to get the image I have in my head right in-camera first. I have been able to set-up multiple-exposures in-camera with my classic 5D but am very limited by light conditions and distance I can move from the camera during the exposure etc. Plus not all find it easy to use photo-editing software!

Try post processing 1k raw images like I do sometimes ... and see the time you save with this gimmick. Trust me it is not fun sitting on the comp for a week merging all the AEB frames.... It may not be much for you, but for some it is very welcome.

I used to have a 1D2, and loved to take HDR shots with the 7AEB and 8fps. Now I have a 5D, I have almost given up on HDR since it is so much more inconvenient now.... I would like to get back into it once they have a decent set of functions on the 5D3.

 

[K-amps]

Try post processing 1k raw images like I do sometimes ... and see the time you save with this gimmick. Trust me it is not fun sitting on the comp for a week merging all the AEB frames.... It may not be much for you, but for some it is very welcome.

I used to have a 1D2, and loved to take HDR shots with the 7AEB and 8fps. Now I have a 5D, I have almost given up on HDR since it is so much more inconvenient now.... I would like to get back into it once they have a decent set of functions on the 5D3.

I suspect that in camera HDR is becoming a tick-box thing that all new cameras of a certain grade must have in order to be worthy of the price tag.

I almost never use regular AEB brackets and use manual settings as sometimes the "darks" can be too dark.

One day I might be more comfortable with Manual bracketing, I don't like fidgeting with the camera once it has captured a frame and move it around even the slightest. ( it is on a decent tripod, yes)

As for your darks being too dark, how may AEB frames do you work with and do you use RAW or the jpegs?