# Canon EOS-1D X Mark III technical white papers released



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 7, 2020)

> Canon has released two separate technical white papers for the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III, one is for stills photography and the other is for its video technology.
> These are great if you really want to know every technical thing about the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III.
> 
> *Canon Technical White Paper – Photography *(PDF)
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## degos (Jan 7, 2020)

Very disappointed not just in the reduction in effective MP but also that the viewfinder AF coverage is slightly reduced from the earlier 1DX models. 

155 of the 191 points are cross-type, 65 are available at f/8. Which is a big step up but again why the restriction? They tout the wonderful new square-pixel AF array but then mumble that the coverage isn't extended 'for technical reasons'.

Too many compromises, I'll wait for the R1D...


----------



## LDS (Jan 7, 2020)

degos said:


> mumble that the coverage isn't extended 'for technical reasons'.



Look at where the AF sensor is placed, and how it gets enough light to work, and you may start to understand why there are some technical reason it can't work the same way when reading data directly out of the sensor.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 7, 2020)

degos said:


> Very disappointed...



Dramatized for ya!


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

This is my number one wish and looks like it was granted: That plus increased fps is enough to get me on board.



> While Canon engineers are careful not to over-promise on results users should expect, overall preliminary comparisons of images show about a 1-stop improvement in general noise performance vs. the previous EOS-1D X Mark II camera.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 7, 2020)

I find it interesting that it can ignore heat waves in the atmosphere and focus on the subject at a distance and not get confused.
Very good Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> This is my number one wish and looks like it was granted: That plus increased fps is enough to get me on board.


That's encouraging, but I am a little concerned about this statement: 


> The larger pixels of a 20 million pixel, fullframe CMOS image sensor provide an excellent foundation for delivering minimal noise and high image qualities at ISOs such as 3200, 6400, and above.



I'm primarily interested in the "and above" range since the 1DxII already performs pretty well through ISO 6400. If it offers a one-stop improvement above 6400 I will be pleased. If not...well...


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

unfocused said:


> That's encouraging, but I am a little concerned about this statement:
> 
> 
> I'm primarily interested in the "and above" range since the 1DxII already performs pretty well through ISO 6400. If it offers a one-stop improvement above 6400 I will be pleased. If not...well...



I've seen a few high ISO samples and the different looks pretty significant. From what I have seen the almost one stop difference seems pretty close. That would get me up to 12000, which is all I need in most situations.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> I've seen a few high ISO samples and the different looks pretty significant. From what I have seen the almost one stop difference seems pretty close. That would get me up to 12000, which is all I need in most situations.


If it adds a 1 stop improvement above iso 6400 it will be a miracle. At high isos, the overall noise for modern sensors and circuits is generated by the noise in the photon flux and not by the sensor or electronics, and the counting efficiency of modern sensors is well over 50%, leaving room for only a fraction of stop improvement.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 7, 2020)

degos said:


> the reduction in effective MP



What does this mean?


----------



## flip314 (Jan 8, 2020)

scyrene said:


> What does this mean?



The Mark III has 20.1M useable pixels, the Mark II had 20.2M. I think it's a stretch to call that a reduction, it's all but identical.


----------



## raptor3x (Jan 8, 2020)

scyrene said:


> What does this mean?



That he has no clue what he's talking about. The 1DXii and 1DXiii have *exactly *the same resolution at 5472 x 3648.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 8, 2020)

OUCH! https://www.amazon.ca/SanDisk-128GB...eywords=cfexpress+cards&qid=1578457567&sr=8-2

I presently have 3 - 256, 1-128, and a 64 in CFast and I thought those were costly. The CF slot was used sparingly and was a dumb idea from Canon, IMHO.

Jack


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 8, 2020)

scyrene said:


> What does this mean?




That living under a bridge means one gets a poor education?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 8, 2020)

flip314 said:


> The Mark III has 20.1M useable pixels, the Mark II had 20.2M. I think it's a stretch to call that a reduction, it's all but identical.



It's a bit of a cheat. The resolution of the images you get out is 5472 x 3648 which is 19.96 megapixels, and is identical for both the mark II and mark III. For the photographer this is the only figure that actually counts. the 20.1 megapixels is a marketing figure, and all the change does is make it slightly less deceptive than the 20.2 figure from the older camera. There is no reduction in resolution.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 8, 2020)

AlanF said:


> If it adds a 1 stop improvement above iso 6400 it will be a miracle. At high isos, the overall noise for modern sensors and circuits is generated by the noise in the photon flux and not by the sensor or electronics, and the counting efficiency of modern sensors is well over 50%, leaving room for only a fraction of stop improvement.


according to photons to photos, 1Dx II low light performance was: ISO 5189
Nikon D5 - around ISO 7000-ish
It seems that 1Dx III low light performance may end up being around ISO 10,000.
Now, this is amazing if true.... Simply amazing. This will afford me shooting with 300/4 lens where previously I had to resort to a heavy and expensive 300/2.8 indoors. I hope this tech will be used in 5DV. Exciting times indeed.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 8, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> according to photons to photos, 1Dx II low light performance was: ISO 5189
> Nikon D5 - around ISO 7000-ish
> It seems that 1Dx III low light performance may end up being around ISO 10,000.
> Now, this is amazing if true.... Simply amazing. This will afford me shooting with 300/4 lens where previously I had to resort to a heavy and expensive 300/2.8 indoors. I hope this tech will be used in 5DV. Exciting times indeed.


According to DxOmark, it's the other way round. D5 is 2434 and the 1DXII is 3207! https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...D5-versus-Canon--EOS-1D-X-Mark-II___1062_1071
Why the difference? The first is that photonstophotos uses the iso stated by the manufacturer, and they are rarely accurate, but DxO actually measures them However, the fundamental laws of physics apply irrespective of these numbers, and it would be a miracle to get a stop extra.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 8, 2020)

richperson said:


> I've seen a few high ISO samples and the different looks pretty significant. From what I have seen the almost one stop difference seems pretty close. That would get me up to 12000, which is all I need in most situations.


The high ISO examples seem to be from jpgs with noise reduction applied in-camera. They look good from a noise standpoint, but I wasn't impressed with the smearing of details, especially since Canon is touting the low-pass filter as providing more detail. I think we will have to wait until we have raw files to really see what if any high ISO improvements there are. I'd like to believe Canon and I'd love a one stop improvement, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

@AlanF understands this stuff a lot better than I do and I tend to trust his opinion on this.


----------



## richperson (Jan 8, 2020)

unfocused said:


> The high ISO examples seem to be from jpgs with noise reduction applied in-camera. They look good from a noise standpoint, but I wasn't impressed with the smearing of details, especially since Canon is touting the low-pass filter as providing more detail. I think we will have to wait until we have raw files to really see what if any high ISO improvements there are. I'd like to believe Canon and I'd love a one stop improvement, but I'm not getting my hopes up.
> 
> @AlanF understands this stuff a lot better than I do and I tend to trust his opinion on this.



You are correct and it will be interesting to see what I can do in post when I get mine. But it does give me reason to be optimistic as there are several test photos in low light and ISO >10k that look much better than what I have been able to achieve at lower ISO values.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 8, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> OUCH! https://www.amazon.ca/SanDisk-128GB...eywords=cfexpress+cards&qid=1578457567&sr=8-2
> 
> I presently have 3 - 256, 1-128, and a 64 in CFast and I thought those were costly. The CF slot was used sparingly and was a dumb idea from Canon, IMHO.
> 
> Jack








B&H Photo Video Digital Cameras, Photography, Computers


Shop Digital Cameras, 35MM Camera Equipment, Photography, Photo Printers, Computers, Home Theater, Authorized Dealer Canon, Sony, Nikon, Apple, Olympus, Panasonic, Kodak, JBL




www.bhphotovideo.com





Amazon Canada, or that seller, are trying to rip somebody off...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 8, 2020)

I must confess that the more I read about the video and the AF the more I have trouble dispensing with GAS. If I knew something similar to the 1DX3 was relatively imminent in the R line with reasonably higher MPs, the GAS would disappear but traditionally Canon only gives the 1D series the bells and whistles that I've come to love. I really am looking forward to full reviews and sample RAWs, especially when CR folk get their hands on this camera!

Jack


----------



## peters (Jan 8, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> OUCH! https://www.amazon.ca/SanDisk-128GB...eywords=cfexpress+cards&qid=1578457567&sr=8-2
> 
> I presently have 3 - 256, 1-128, and a 64 in CFast and I thought those were costly. The CF slot was used sparingly and was a dumb idea from Canon, IMHO.
> 
> Jack


100% agree. I realy hope prices go down soon. Some competition may stir up this market. 
But I must say, the write/read speed of these MEMORY cards is damn impressive. Its close to a NVME SSD :-D


----------



## peters (Jan 8, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> B&H Photo Video Digital Cameras, Photography, Computers
> 
> 
> Shop Digital Cameras, 35MM Camera Equipment, Photography, Photo Printers, Computers, Home Theater, Authorized Dealer Canon, Sony, Nikon, Apple, Olympus, Panasonic, Kodak, JBL
> ...


Thing is, if you want to record RAW, 128GB will only last for 6 (!) Minutes. 
To realisticaly produce anything in RAW and not having to worry all the time about cards, you need probably 4 cards with 512gb. Which cost 2400€ right now xD 
But I guess at this production level where you realy need RAW video, these prices are probably okay. At least its not as overpriced as RED MAGS :-D These cost an insane 1300€ for 480gb :-D


----------



## unfocused (Jan 8, 2020)

richperson said:


> You are correct and it will be interesting to see what I can do in post when I get mine. But it does give me reason to be optimistic as there are several test photos in low light and ISO >10k that look much better than what I have been able to achieve at lower ISO values.


I really_ want_ to believe. If the autofocus and the high ISO deliver close to what has been promised, it will take the sting out of the lower resolution for me.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 9, 2020)

The ability to track heads through the evf combined with 16fps and a stop of high ISO improvent would have to involve some sort of meddling in the dark arts surely!! If this is all legit then....... WOW!!!!!. oh. And lets not forget a doubling of battery life.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 9, 2020)

Going back over the white paper, this sounds very close to what I have been saying I want in autofocus:



> Subject Switching — Disable; Enable (slow); Enable Disable: AF points will stay locked on to initial subject, once the AF system has acquired it. In other words, once focus points are upon a subject (or part of a subject), the AF system will strongly resist switching to another subject that may enter the AF array.



If this works like I hope, I should be able to focus on a single player and have the autofocus follow that player across the court or field, even if others get in the way. Keeping my fingers crossed.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 9, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Going back over the white paper, this sounds very close to what I have been saying I want in autofocus:
> 
> 
> 
> If this works like I hope, I should be able to focus on a single player and have the autofocus follow that player across the court or field, even if others get in the way. Keeping my fingers crossed.



I'd say double crossed. 

Jack


----------



## Pascal Parvex (Jan 11, 2020)

Did not read the whole thread, but is it known in which modes DPAF can be used?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jan 25, 2020)

Reading the white paper is quite something, so much has changed, imo the Mk3 is not getting enough credit for the amount of upgrades, even new modes for flash control etc, I feel a whole lot better and more excited about selling my Mk2. All you read is how people keep saying Canon have not done enough, really, have they read the whole white paper....


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 25, 2020)

What is it about human nature that seems to come into play so often, and certainly in gear oriented forums? What stands out for me is the tendency to focus on my needs, to pontificate about how important my opinions are. Perhaps, it's ego, given that a forum thread is like a grandstand where I can demonstrate (supposedly) how smart I am and how important I am.

Consider this, what if we were now having to stand before an audience of say 200 people in an auditorium to give our little talk, which would be followed by a question and answer period where the various experts in our field were going to question us.

What's different in this scenario?

Jack


----------

