Close Menu

    What surprises does Canon still have in store for the EOS-1D X Mark III?

    By 194 Comments2 Mins Read Canon EOS Rumors
    eos1dxmark3 728x462 - What surprises does Canon still have in store for the EOS-1D X Mark III?

    As the world knows, Canon has announced the development of the EOS-1D X Mark III DSLR. While some good information was given by Canon about the upcoming flagship DSLR, not everything about the camera has been made public.

    We have been told by multiple sources that there are at least 2 “major” features that are unannounced at this time.

    The first one, and probably expected is that the EOS-1D X Mark III will shoot 4K video without a crop and with DPAF.

    One source also claims that 5.9K external RAW recording has also been tested in the EOS-1D X Mark III prototypes, but that a decision had not been made at the time of the testing whether or not to include it. We were told a few months ago that 6K was a possibility for the EOS-1D X Mark III.

    IBIS hasn't yet been confirmed by any of our sources at this time, but I do believe it's still a possibility. Canon does have to save some surprises for the official announcement in early 2020.

    We have been told in the past that the resolution of the sensor would be 20.1mp, and now a second source has made the same claim. Though I haven't been able to confirm it with known sources at this time.

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    194 comments

    1. Well all the rest is icing on the cake, if there isn't a resolution bump I will have no compelling reason to sell my two 1DX MkII's to upgrade. As so often it sounds like the emphasis on new features is strongly weighted to video shooters and video just isn't that big a deal to me personally.

      If it had 24MP I'd swap out one of my current cameras pretty quickly, if it had 28MP I'd sell both and get two MkIII's as soon as I could, 20.1MP, absolutely no compelling reason to spend the money, I'd rather invest in a faster NAS and newer monitors.
    2. Well all the rest is icing on the cake, if there isn't a resolution bump I will have no compelling reason to sell my two 1DX MkII's to upgrade. As so often it sounds like the emphasis on new features is strongly weighted to video shooters and video just isn't that big a deal to me personally.

      If it had 24MP I'd swap out one of my current cameras pretty quickly, if it had 28MP I'd sell both and get two MkIII's as soon as I could, 20.1MP, absolutely no compelling reason to spend the money, I'd rather invest in a faster NAS and newer monitors.

      I'm looking forward to hearing more about the autofocus improvements and if it's as good as they're suggesting it is. It may be worth the price of admission alone.
    5. Well all the rest is icing on the cake, if there isn't a resolution bump I will have no compelling reason to sell my two 1DX MkII's to upgrade. As so often it sounds like the emphasis on new features is strongly weighted to video shooters and video just isn't that big a deal to me personally.

      If it had 24MP I'd swap out one of my current cameras pretty quickly, if it had 28MP I'd sell both and get two MkIII's as soon as I could, 20.1MP, absolutely no compelling reason to spend the money, I'd rather invest in a faster NAS and newer monitors.
      Let’s be real, the mark II is ok, as a owner of that and a 1dc there is a couple nice upgrades but nothing revolutionary, this mark iii has the potential to be what the mark ii should have been. I’ll take better pixels with better iso range and a camera that tracks as advertised over what we were sold on with the mark ii. I love the mark ii but it has a lot of short comings. This mark iii could be the ultimate DSLR but let’s hope canon doesn’t shit the bed like they oh so often do.
    6. I'm looking forward to hearing more about the autofocus improvements and if it's as good as they're suggesting it is. It may be worth the price of admission alone.
      Right! The mark ii doesn’t do so well like so many say it does.
    10. The only thing that can surprise me is If they find a way to avoid AFMA torture.
      And use some magic to put RF mount on it.
      It's not possible but the opposite is. They could make a mirrorless camera with EF mount!
      We would not need AF adjustment and if they could make 2 more EF L IS 2.8 zooms (15-35, 24-70) everything would be OK. We would miss nothing!
      At least this does not require magic. Still, both of the above combinations will not happen.
    11. I'm looking forward to hearing more about the autofocus improvements and if it's as good as they're suggesting it is. It may be worth the price of admission alone.
      As a generalist I very rarely run into AF limitations, when I do it is invariably due to light limitations so my only real interest in AF improvements for DSLR's is in low light sensitivity.

      Indeed I find the criticism of AF to be, in general, farcical when most people don't even know exactly what the three variables do and rarely if ever change them. I ignore anybodies comments about AF unless I know they know what they are talking about, people like Grant Atkinson, Ari Hazeghi, who not only shoot a lot but also intimately understand the specifics of the AF settings. I find AF so adjustable I will use different settings after I have been shooting for a half hour and gotten into the swing of things and then after a few hours I'll dial responsiveness down as I get tired.

      Eye AF in a DSLR is a cute gimmick with very limited functionality outside video, at which point we go back to the video centricity of the majority of these improvements.
    12. How do you get 5.9K video from a 20Mpix sensor? Wouldn't that require more resolution? 20Mpix is around 5400x3600 right?
      Technically 20.1 megapixels is just a hair over 6000x3375 which would be 5.9k.
    13. How do you get 5.9K video from a 20Mpix sensor? Wouldn't that require more resolution? 20Mpix is around 5400x3600 right?

      Must be going back to the Cinerama (2.66:1) or the VistaVision (2:1) aspect ratios for the sensor. A VistaVision aspect sensor at 20 mp would be about 5900x3390. Just like Hitchcock's 'Vertigo.' Of course, your stills would wind up cropped to 15mp at normal print sizes, but apparently stills "pros" love low megapixels.

      And, just to be clear to the (video) people who don't think camera stuff is funny, that was tongue-in-cheek. The warning is required because Canon's decisions in the past 1-2 years have been guided by, well, I don't know what they've been guided by. They bet the company on a suite of new mount lenses, but use a 4-year-old body/sensor with a new mount to seat them. When they do announce a new pro body, they make it the old mount. They certainly needn't poll the high end users to make a long-term plan, but the high end users do want to have a sense that they HAVE a plan. That sense of there being a governing strategy has gone from "it's just mysterious, and their market share proves that they're smart" to something that smells more like "yeah, these are random actions by competing departments in an unmanageably large organization."
    14. Technically 20.1 megapixels is just a hair over 6000x3375 which would be 5.9k.
      Yes, but the 1D doesn't take photo's in 16:9 format. It is a photo camera first, video camera second.
    15. As a generalist I very rarely run into AF limitations, when I do it is invariably due to light limitations so my only real interest in AF improvements for DSLR's is in low light sensitivity.

      Indeed I find the criticism of AF to be, in general, farcical when most people don't even know exactly what the three variables do and rarely if ever change them. I ignore anybodies comments about AF unless I know they know what they are talking about, people like Grant Atkinson, Ari Hazeghi, who not only shoot a lot but also intimately understand the specifics of the AF settings. I find AF so adjustable I will use different settings after I have been shooting for a half hour and gotten into the swing of things and then after a few hours I'll dial responsiveness down as I get tired.

      Eye AF in a DSLR is a cute gimmick with very limited functionality outside video, at which point we go back to the video centricity of the majority of these improvements.
      It really depends on the sport. But it's really identifying and focusing on eyes is stepping stone to future enhancements. Eventually computational photography applied to the af system is going to expand the horizon quite a bit. With more horsepower, depth perception in the af sensors could be used to have a setting that focuses on the eyes and calculates a focus that keeps every other point within x number of feet (forwards and backwards) in focus too, by changing the aperture and speed on the fly to match the distance and speed needed to crisply capture the objects in motion.
    16. Yes, but the 1D doesn't take photo's in 16:9 format.
      you're right. hrmmm. It would need to be 23.4 mp to hit 5.9k on a 3:2 sensor.

      Unless of course they said "5.9k at the optional 3:2 aspect ratio". :ROFLMAO:
    17. Well all the rest is icing on the cake, if there isn't a resolution bump I will have no compelling reason to sell my two 1DX MkII's to upgrade. As so often it sounds like the emphasis on new features is strongly weighted to video shooters and video just isn't that big a deal to me personally.

      If it had 24MP I'd swap out one of my current cameras pretty quickly, if it had 28MP I'd sell both and get two MkIII's as soon as I could, 20.1MP, absolutely no compelling reason to spend the money, I'd rather invest in a faster NAS and newer monitors.
      Jeah on the photography side I totaly agree.
      The video front is REALY exciting though. 4k RAW with 60fps on a canon fullframe... this is truely exciting! The 1DX II even competes with c200 and got a truely beautifull image (though the dynamic range and shadow details are quite bad compared to a blackmagic pocket cinema camera 6k for example or compared to the Panasonic S1H, which we both have in my studio).
      The Mark III could get closer to a c500 (at least when it comes to resolution and pure image quality). Its truely promising =)

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment