# Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 12, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10305"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10305" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10305"></a></div>
<strong>Some reading….


</strong>The manual for the upcoming Canon EOS-1D X was posted online today.</p>
<p>We’ve heard to expect some shipments in late June & July, with preferential treatment given to the Olympic photographers. The rest of us should see 1D X’s in August and September.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/8/0300007358/02/eos1dx-im2-c-en.pdf" target="_blank">Read the Manual</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## weixing (Jun 12, 2012)

Hi,
Look like no AF at F/8 for 1Dx (Page 81)...  

Have a nice day.


----------



## Malek Fayoumi (Jun 12, 2012)

this is completely 1 year of Delay !!


----------



## mjayadev (Jun 12, 2012)

This has been a serious disaster for Canon..PR I mean. I am can CPS member and I am so locked in with tons of Canon lens. Even then I am seriously thinking of switching. I browsed today for D4 ..but couldn't find that one either.


----------



## wopbv4 (Jun 12, 2012)

I see this is as positive!!
Finally there is a sign that the production models are not that far away from delivery, can't wait to pick up mine


----------



## Panurus (Jun 12, 2012)

Thank you for the manual.

It will be nice to read the " Wired lan instruction manual"


----------



## dr croubie (Jun 12, 2012)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> Look like no AF at F/8 for 1Dx (Page 81)...
> 
> Have a nice day.



Damn. That's the only reason why I clicked to read it, to see if there was anything about f/8.
But nope, you're right, f/5.6 it is for this generation...


----------



## Speed (Jun 12, 2012)

I know that I'm very selfish, I'm sorry, but personally since 99% of my shots are at f2.8 & since the reason they left out f8.0 to improve operation wide open, I'm very happy that it is missing.

Thanks for the link to the manual.


----------



## AmbientLight (Jun 12, 2012)

+ 1 Many thanks for the manual. Now I can read it before my new camera finally arrives. ;D This negates the effect that I would rather be shooting with the camera than reading the manual once I have finally got it.


----------



## alek35 (Jun 12, 2012)

Surprisingly "Group E" AF (61 points) will function with the EF-400mm f/2.8 + 2x extender (effectively f/5.6) whereas the EF-800mm f/5.6 can only use "Group F" AF (47 points).

This is weird - these two combinations should be equivalent AF-wise - or am I missing something ?

Looks like owners of the 800mm will be crippled on top of the loss of f/8 AF...


----------



## olivander (Jun 12, 2012)

The AF display was what got me, has anyone noticed that it says it illuminates in low light automatically so you can see what you're shooting.

To me that's what they must of been addressing.

Something we'll hopefully see occur in the Mark III as well.


----------



## nikkito (Jun 12, 2012)

AmbientLight said:


> + 1 Many thanks for the manual. Now I can read it before my new camera finally arrives. ;D This negates the effect that I would rather be shooting with the camera than reading the manual once I have finally got it.



Also typical me. 
Haha ;D


----------



## wockawocka (Jun 12, 2012)

olivander said:


> The AF display was what got me, has anyone noticed that it says it illuminates in low light automatically so you can see what you're shooting.
> 
> To me that's what they must of been addressing.
> 
> Something we'll hopefully see occur in the Mark III as well.



I 'believe' this is already in the 5D3?


----------



## pwp (Jun 12, 2012)

mjayadev said:


> This has been a serious disaster for Canon..PR I mean. I am can CPS member and I am so locked in with tons of Canon lens. Even then I am seriously thinking of switching. I browsed today for D4 ..but couldn't find that one either.



Well let's wait and have a good look at the camera before calling it a serious PR disaster. 
It could quite possibly be a high point in Canon history.
But switch to Nikon by all means if you're sure that would serve your business better in the long run. 

PW


----------



## GuyF (Jun 12, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> weixing said:
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> ...



Just because the manual says something doesn't mean it's true! My 5D3 will focus at f8 (300mm f2.8 IS and stacked Kenko 1.4x and 2x convertors). I assume the 1D X focus system is the same.

Mind you, maybe Canon's teleconvertors won't work when stacked.


----------



## hollybush (Jun 12, 2012)

The Ec-S isn't supported (p. 327). You can fit it, but it won't meter properly.

So its omission from the "Technical Report"

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=3078.msg65361#msg65361

wasn't a mistake.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 12, 2012)

nikkito said:


> AmbientLight said:
> 
> 
> > + 1 Many thanks for the manual. Now I can read it before my new camera finally arrives. ;D This negates the effect that I would rather be shooting with the camera than reading the manual once I have finally got it.
> ...



I did the same thing with my 5D3, read the manual the week before I got the camera.

Am I missing something or are Exposure Compensation and Automatic Exposure Bracketing also disabled on the 1Dx in "M" mode with auto ISO? That's how it works on the 5D3 and it's really annoying.


----------



## DzPhotography (Jun 12, 2012)

GREAT! 3 months of reading... :


----------



## expatinasia (Jun 12, 2012)

I am on page 47 or 420 and have just learned how to turn it on and off. Should make ideal bed-time reading, I just hope there is an unexpected twist at the end of this book. ;-)


----------



## jmac1 (Jun 12, 2012)

I think I finally figured it out the 'X' stood for the number of months that it would take to become available (Oct-August).

Then again when I got contacted to verify my CPS number for my pre-order my response should have been"Olympics... yeah, yeah, I'm going to the Olympics... sure. Yeah right I need it for the Olympics!"


----------



## SuperCrazySamurai (Jun 12, 2012)

jmac1 said:


> I think I finally figured it out the 'X' stood for the number of months that it would take to become available (Oct-August).
> 
> Then again when I got contacted to verify my CPS number for my pre-order my response should have been"Olympics... yeah, yeah, I'm going to the Olympics... sure. Yeah right I need it for the Olympics!"



HAHAHA! I should of said that too...OMW to London!


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jun 12, 2012)

Looking at page 393, it looks like the 1Dx is going to use the same codec as the 5d3(same data-rate), so I doubt their will be any improvement in the video. That's absurd for the amount of horsepower this thing has. Totally nerfed.


----------



## messus (Jun 12, 2012)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Looking at page 393, it looks like the 1Dx is going to use the same codec as the 5d3(same data-rate), so I doubt their will be any improvement in the video. That's absurd for the amount of horsepower this thing has. Totally nerfed.



Agreed! Let's just hope the guys at Magic Lantern get things going fast on the 1DX. (1080p/60, 4K video, clean HDMI out)

Still kinda an expensive camera to buy to rely on and wait for Magic Lantern (or others) to enable higher video bitrate, and clean HDMI out!

Canon need to understand it does not help if they cripple the 1DX for features to prevent canibalizing their video department, as long as the competition gives us the features (Nikon=clean HDMI out) there is always a risk of some users jumping ship.


----------



## clicstudio (Jun 12, 2012)

mjayadev said:


> This has been a serious disaster for Canon..PR I mean. I am can CPS member and I am so locked in with tons of Canon lens. Even then I am seriously thinking of switching. I browsed today for D4 ..but couldn't find that one either.



Hold on man! I am feeling the same way but wouldn't jump ship! 
Just a few more weeks for total camera bliss!
Can't wait!


----------



## messus (Jun 12, 2012)

Page.120.

The one thing that dissapoints me with the 1DX is the buffer size and the number of RAW frames possible to store during a high burst.
The 35 frames takes only 3seconds, 3 !!!!! to fill the buffer..

Anyway, there seem to be something strange going on, since shooting m-RAW mode actually decreases the number of possible burts
shots to 26, while shooting s-RAW mode increases the number to 39. I understand it takes some computing time to resize the RAW, but this will also happen while downsizine to s-RAW. Hence it is strange that the number of frames possible during m-RAW is "only" 26,
which is a ridicilously small number which you will reach within 1.5sec !! Why could not Canon install a 3 x bigger buffer when the rest
of the camera is built for speed?? (shutter/cpu). The D4 can shoot up to 3 times more frames than the 1DX.

I have tested the 1DX with the fastest memory card currently available on the planet (Lexar 128G 1000x Pro UDMA7 150/150MBps),
and the buffer was still full after 35frames continious shooting.

Too bad Canon!!


----------



## clicstudio (Jun 12, 2012)

Excuse my ignorance but can someone explain in plain english why the camera can't focus at F8.0?
I have a 24-70 2.8L and use F8 all the time... I find it to be the best, sharpest and most natural F-stop for studio work...
Please someone tell me if that is going to affect me or not. :-\

Cheers

Pat


----------



## sparda79 (Jun 12, 2012)

clicstudio said:


> Excuse my ignorance but can someone explain in plain english why the camera can't focus at F8.0?
> I have a 24-70 2.8L and use F8 all the time... I find it to be the best, sharpest and most natural F-stop for studio work...
> Please someone tell me if that is going to affect me or not. :-\
> 
> ...



It's not that you can't focus at f/8. It means that you can auto-focus using any lens that has widest aperture more than f/5.6.
E.g. when you use the EF 400 f/5.6L + 2.0x extender, your widest aperture will be f/8, therefore, you'll lose the auto-focus ability.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 12, 2012)

messus said:


> HurtinMinorKey said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at page 393, it looks like the 1Dx is going to use the same codec as the 5d3(same data-rate), so I doubt their will be any improvement in the video. That's absurd for the amount of horsepower this thing has. Totally nerfed.
> ...



Probably not going to happen for Magic Lantern. They tried to get it working for the 7d which has dual Digic processors which was a problem for them. They have it booted on the 5d3, although it's so far from even having an Alpha release it'll probably be a year unless they can get someone devoted full time to develop on it. If they can eventually figure out multiple Digic cameras, then it may be possible to come to the 1DX, but it probably won't happen.


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Jun 12, 2012)

messus said:


> Page.120.
> 
> The one thing that dissapoints me with the 1DX is the buffer size and the number of RAW frames possible to store during a high burst.
> The 35 frames takes only 3seconds, 3 !!!!! to fill the buffer..
> ...



That seems to conflict with this report:

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/10/hands-on-canon-eos-1d-x-lots-of-photos.html



> When I read about the 12fps performance of this camera I was excited – especially given the larger image size – but I was also worried as my 10fps performance of the 1D Mark III & IV has always been significantly limited by its puny buffer. In my early testing with what I was told was a slow CF card, I was able to get 52 full-size RAW frames in burst mode before the buffer started to stutter. That’s up from 30 in the 1D Mark IV, so that’s promising given the significantly larger file sizes. However, I would have really loved to have seen that number closer to 100 for RAW. RAM is pretty cheap, so I’m always frustrated there isn’t a way to add RAM or do something to overcome this limitation. With that gripe aside, the 52 RAW frames is going to be usable enough in most practical scenarios so this is a welcome relief. This also means that sRAW or JPEG only shooters will find themselves with an endless supply of buffer for sports shooting.


----------



## messus (Jun 12, 2012)

Drizzt321 said:


> messus said:
> 
> 
> > HurtinMinorKey said:
> ...



You are probably right. And the more I think about it, I am considering canceling my 1DX preorder since it IMO is simply not worth it given too few extra benefits compared to the 5D3. (weather sealing put aside). No noticable improvement in high ISO performance, DR or picture quality from what I can see from my own testing. And, in particular due to the dissapointingly low buffer of the 1DX you will in many cases not be fully able to utilize the shutter speed improvements on the 1DX over the 5D3.

And if Canon think I am gonna ruin myself with 15000 dollars to get clean HDMI out from the 1D C, they have to think twice. I know of other ways of getting what I want, even if it is drastic and expensive, it may still be cheaper than spending 15000 on the 1D C.

Hey let's hope ML at least get's things going for clean HDMI out on the 5D3, and maybe even short bursts of 4K video.


----------



## messus (Jun 12, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> messus said:
> 
> 
> > Page.120.
> ...



Indeed, and check Ole Salomonsen comments back then in that thread!!! (which he (Ron) called BS!! )


----------



## JaxPhotoBuff (Jun 12, 2012)

IF, and I know it's a big "if," the 5D Mark III is anything to go by, it is worth noting that the a search of the Canonrumours historic posts reveals that the 5D Mark III owner's manual was posted approximately one week before vendors started shipping cameras that had been pre-ordered. (Followed by fits and starts of availability)

I realize that the 1DX has been a different beast, and that the availability in different countries may vary depending on whether Canon is adhereing to their "Olympic photographers first" philosophy in particular countries (earlier threads suggested that this was not going to happen in the U.S., even though it was in Canada), available only in limited quantities at first, your mileage may vary, blah, blah, blah. 

That said, none of us can get one until they START SHIPPING, so maybe that trigger date is now within a week or two. I, for one, am happy to have something to look forward to.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 12, 2012)

messus said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > messus said:
> ...



If you mostly shoot video, why would you go for the 1DX to begin with? I'd think, at that level, you'd go for a more dedicated video option. I don't know prices exactly, but I've read that there are some reasonably priced (I think ~$10K or so) options for other manufacturers with similar or more features than the 1D C. 

I don't really do much video, but I do have the 5d2 and I'd love to get a hold of ML (hopefully closed beta will be over soon) and play with it more. Things like the focus assist zebra striping, PiP 5x zoomed for precise focusing. And I hope they can get it on the 5d3 and do things like [email protected], maybe better/higher bit-rate/compression options, maybe even MJPEG? I wonder if the JPEG engine can keep with with 24/30/60 fps. That'd be freaking awesome, even if it's just 1080/720. Even better if we could get S1 (2880 x 1920) sized JPEGs. That'd seriously be awesome!


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jun 12, 2012)

Given its processor, the 5d3 should at least be able to double the bit-rate on the All-I codec. That would go a long way to reducing the blocking artifacts. 

The 1Dx should almost be capable of RAW 1080, at least for short clips.


----------



## mitchell3417 (Jun 12, 2012)

clicstudio said:


> Excuse my ignorance but can someone explain in plain english why the camera can't focus at F8.0?
> I have a 24-70 2.8L and use F8 all the time... I find it to be the best, sharpest and most natural F-stop for studio work...
> Please someone tell me if that is going to affect me or not. :-\
> 
> ...



All lenses focus at their maximum aperature. You're lens has a max of 2.8, therefore the autofocus will work splendidly. The camera doesn't close down the aperature until you hit the shutter button (or the dof preview). As long as you don't use teleconverters you should never run into a situation where AF does not work. I would venture to say if you don't know this stuff then you probably shouldn't be getting a 1DX anyway.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 12, 2012)

mitchell3417 said:


> clicstudio said:
> 
> 
> > Excuse my ignorance but can someone explain in plain english why the camera can't focus at F8.0?
> ...



I don't think that knowledge excludes anyone from owning a 1DX or any body for that matter. The poster who asked this question is a pro and shoots very fine photographs. If you've never had to run into this situation, ie you don't use teleconverters, then it matters none that you wouldn't know this.


----------



## messus (Jun 12, 2012)

I am trying to upload and attach a video I shot when testing the 1DX buffer, proving it can only handle 35 frames, but uploads does not seem to work on this forum.

Filetype I am trying to upload is mpg, did also try with flash (flv), still not working..


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Jun 12, 2012)

messus said:


> sublime LightWorks said:
> 
> 
> > messus said:
> ...



I re-read those comments to get a refresh on that, but dug further to some reliable sources. When you tested the 1Dx, where and when did you get to test it?

Here's what I'm finding odd on your comments:

1) the 1Dx manual states in RAW the burst is 35 images with a regular card and 38 with a UDMA 7 card. If the data xfer rate of 167MB/sec (max) for UMDA7 is supported, as stated in the specifications for the 1Dx, then I would expect that Ron's numbers of approx 50-55 RAW images to be about right. Your statements would have you believe that zero data made it out of the Lexar UDMA7 card, something not possible.

2) I know from experience with my 5D3, I can shoot approx 19-20 RAW images at 6 fps on a SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB UDMA6 card before the buffer stutters. The 5D3 manual states it's RAW burst is 13 images, 18 when using UDMA7. I have not used a UDMA7 card in the 5D3 yet but would expect a little better performance than I have observed.

3) The D4 numbers you claim are highly questionable given reliable testing. For example, they totally conflict with Rob Galbraith's documented testing. That testing shows in a 30 second period the D4 using a Lexar 1000x 32GB UDMA7 was able to write 86 RAW+Jpeg images, with a max RAW data rate of 61.4MB/s. In the same testing with the same card on the 5D3, it could write 75 RAW+Jpeg images with a max RAW data rate of 80.2MB/s .

So, given documented testing by a known method and source of information that is also well know for his like of Nikon, the 5D3 is out performing the RAW xfer rate of the D4 by about 19MB/sec on the same card. I seriously doubt the 1Dx would be slower than the 5D3. In combined RAW+Jpeg, the D4 manages just 11 images more than the 5D3 in 30 seconds of shooting despite the 5D3's RAW+L-Jpeg rated burst capacity of 7 images. And let's not forget the 5D3 is a 22Mpix image....the D4 is 16Mpix, about 30% smaller.

This does not agree with your claims of the 1Dx or the D4's image rates and burst capacity. The D4 is barely outperforming RAW+Jpeg compared to the 5D3. So, can you tell us when you tested the 1Dx, where and when did you get to test it with the Lexar 1000x card?

Further, if anyone is wondering why M-RAWand S-RAW numbers seem odd, it because M-RAW is a 10M image which requires more processing (size reduction to a non-multiple of the RAW and processing to handle that). S-RAW you will note is exactly 1/4 of the original RAW (4.5M vs. 18M), so the math is far simpler, thus the greater burst ability.

D4 Performance:

http://robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_wb_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-12444

5D3 Performance:

http://robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_wb_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-12452&sort_col=raw&sort_dir=DESC

Additional hands on that do not agree with the D4 statements by the poster:

http://www.slashgear.com/nikon-d4-vs-canon-1d-x-burst-depth-continue-shutter-hands-on-videos-13209249/

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d4/nikon-d4A6.HTM

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/nikon-d4-body-only/4505-6501_7-35117818.html


----------



## clicstudio (Jun 12, 2012)

mitchell3417 said:


> clicstudio said:
> 
> 
> > Excuse my ignorance but can someone explain in plain english why the camera can't focus at F8.0?
> ...


I've been shooting pro for 9 year but I never owned a 300mm or 400mm or any lens that needs a teleconverter.
I only own ONE lens (24-70 F2.8L) and that is all I need. I don't do sports or birds or need telephoto lenses.
I don't know about this F8.0 phenomenon because it has never been an issue for me.
But I really don't like your comment. I can get any camera I want and it doesn't make me less of a Pro not knowing all this technical stuff... On the contrary, you are either creative or not. You are born with it. I never took classes or studied any photography and I make a ton of money doing what I love. 
If you had to learn it, then you didn't have it... I only use the things and features I need in a camera and I've been using 1D's since 2003 so the obvious upgrade from my current 1D IV is the 1D X...


----------



## clicstudio (Jun 12, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> mitchell3417 said:
> 
> 
> > clicstudio said:
> ...


 Than for your comment. I am really disappointed at these forums. Mostly everybody is acting defensively or aggressively... You can't ask a valid question without getting a dumb answer in return. 
I am getting tired of this. We should all learn from each other... That's what this is about.


----------



## clicstudio (Jun 12, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> messus said:
> 
> 
> > sublime LightWorks said:
> ...



People will get excited about a 12fps camera like I got excited when I got my 1D IV. But the only way my camera can do 10fps is in one-shot focusing. Put the camera in AI servo and there is no way the camera will focus quickly enough to maintain 10fps... Specially if the subject is running towards you... Even with 10 processors, the AF system needs time to accurately focus. You can tell the camera to shoot anyway, but who cares for an out of focus image anyway...
I hope the new AF system on the 1D X will be able to "keep up" with the camera's fps...


----------



## JaxPhotoBuff (Jun 12, 2012)

[/quote]

People will get excited about a 12fps camera like I got excited when I got my 1D IV. But the only way my camera can do 10fps is in one-shot focusing. Put the camera in AI servo and there is no way the camera will focus quickly enough to maintain 10fps... Specially if the subject is running towards you... Even with 10 processors, the AF system needs time to accurately focus. You can tell the camera to shoot anyway, but who cares for an out of focus image anyway...
I hope the new AF system on the 1D X will be able to "keep up" with the camera's fps...
[/quote]

Your observation got me interested in what kind of qualifications Canon put on its "12 frames per second" rating (something that I am looking forward to), so I looked it up in their new online manual, and here is what they say (assuming you can decipher it):

From p. 111 of the manual, "The maximum continuous shooting speed of approx. 12 shots/sec. is attained under the following conditions*: At ISO 25600 or lower, 1/1000 sec. or faster shutter speed, and at the maximum aperture (varies dependin on the lens). The continuous shooting speed may be slower depending on the ISO speed, shutter speed, aperture, subject conditions, brightness, lens type, flash use, etc. *With the AF mode set to One-shot AF and the Image Stabilizer turned off when using the following lenses: EF 300mm f/4L IS USM, EF28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 75-300mm f/2-5.6 IS USM, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM."

More disclaimers than the end of a used car dealership commercial! Can anyone say whether the asterisked text at the end is intended to mean that you only get 12 fps in one shot AF mode AND with those lenses, or whether instead they are saying that those lenses are a special case, and for them you have to use one-shot AF and turn off image stabilization? 

Something got confusing in the translation. Or maybe it's intentionally confusing? :-\


----------



## MarkWebbPhoto (Jun 12, 2012)

Jax, those lenses are extremely slow. They will most definitely shoot at a slower speed since the AF will take longer to lock on. And while I know my 1D MK IV never really gets 10 FPS unless I hit have the camera in one shot, I can use the AF stop button on my super-telephoto lenses to get the max burst speed. This works great for baseball if you want a shot of the ball leaving the bat. 12 FPS just means that I should get at least 10 in AI-Servo. I also noticed a frame rate increase when I updated my 70-200 f/2.8L IS to the newest version. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS II seems to give me an even faster frame rate than my 300 f/2.8 IS or 200 f/2.0 IS but maybe that is just me. 

The buffer should hold around 50 RAW images, the 30 image buffer must have been an early model. Keep in mind we are still dealing with pre-production bodies. Lord knows what is inside those.

People are still comparing the 5D MK III to the 1DX, they are completely different monsters. In my testing I saw only a little more than 1 stop improvement in high ISO with the 5D3 over the 5D2. I've downloaded and played with several 1DX files and they look absolutely phenomenal. The 1DX probably has at least a 3-stop advantage over the 5D2. 

This is a great year for Canon and I'm excited to finally get a camera body that combines my favorite features of the full frame bodies with the pro sports bodies. At one point I almost switched to Nikon but this is truly the year the be a Canon shooter. I'm already in love with the radio capabilities of the 600EX-RT.

I know I'm a noob to the forum but here are my credentials 
http://markwebbphoto.com/


----------



## messus (Jun 12, 2012)

Video file attached shows buffer of 1D X stop after 36 frames using the fastest memory card on the planet as of today. I had to downsize the video file to 480x270 mpeg2 and compress it heavily to be allowed to upload it here with the file size limit of 4096KB. The Lexar Pro UDMA7 card is mine, I am using it on my 5D3. I brought the card with me to a photography show here in Norway where they had the 1DX. I put my Lexar UDMA7 Pro card into the 1DX and my friend filmed while I kept the trigger until the buffer was full.

This means Ron here:
http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/10/hands-on-canon-eos-1d-x-lots-of-photos.html

is probably wrong, since I tested the 1DX with a faster card than him, at a later date than him,
meaning the camera at least should have the same or newer firmware than at the time of him testing.


----------



## messus (Jun 13, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> messus said:
> 
> 
> > sublime LightWorks said:
> ...



1) Ron's numbers are wrong, sadly, check my proof video I posted in this thread. I have used the fastest memory card available, Lexar 128GB CF UDMA7 Pro, which I use daily with my 5D3. The 5D3 Canon also claim to be able to fully utilize any UDMA7 card with up to 167MB/s, which I have found to be wrong.
The 5D3 is capable of almost 100MB/s, about the same as the D4. (tested with speeds which allowed for continous shooting without the buffer stopping)

2) I am capable of shooting 33-34 RAW images at 6fps on my 5D3 with the Lexar UDMA7 card before buffer stops.

3) Seem like I am not entirely correct on the D4, (although I have read several places it could go higher), this guy is achieving 6-7 seconds continous shooting until buffer is full (at 05:45), this should mean 60-70 RAW files:
XQD + Nikon D4 full speed test

I have also done extensive speed testing on my own with the 5D3, 5D2, the D4, D800 and D800E, all with the Lexar 128GB UDMA7 CF Pro 1000x, since I work a lot with stop motion video in the dark, and need the cameras to be able to shoot as fast as possible without the buffer stopping. The 5D3 has about the same write speed as the D4. IMO the D4 is actually slightly disappointing in its computing power, taking into account its fast shutter mechanics. Still its buffer seem to be larger than the 1DX, since RAW files of D4 is actually 33MB compared to 28 on the 1DX.

With the price tag, and the shutter speed and the computing power availbale on the 1DX, I have to say I it is disappointing Canon did not implement a bigger buffer, given also how cheap flash ram is these days, even if it might be enough for many people. 

For my type of work, I am guessing the 1DX will still outperform the D4 (shooting as fast as possible without the buffer interfering), but thats not the only point. Even if my type of work is not what most people do, I also do regular work, such as wildlife and bird photography (BIF), and what If I am shooting an eagle diving down for a fish? This is a moment which could take much more than 3 seconds, sometimes 7-8seconds. But then the buffer on the 1DX is full.. 

And if I have to turn down the shooting speed of the 1DX to not fill up the buffer, then what is the point of me spending 7000 dollars on the 1DX rather than just using my 5D3 ?


----------



## JaxPhotoBuff (Jun 13, 2012)

MarkWebbPhoto said:


> Jax, those lenses are extremely slow. They will most definitely shoot at a slower speed since the AF will take longer to lock on. And while I know my 1D MK IV never really gets 10 FPS unless I hit have the camera in one shot, I can use the AF stop button on my super-telephoto lenses to get the max burst speed. This works great for baseball if you want a shot of the ball leaving the bat. 12 FPS just means that I should get at least 10 in AI-Servo. I also noticed a frame rate increase when I updated my 70-200 f/2.8L IS to the newest version. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS II seems to give me an even faster frame rate than my 300 f/2.8 IS or 200 f/2.0 IS but maybe that is just me.
> 
> The buffer should hold around 50 RAW images, the 30 image buffer must have been an early model. Keep in mind we are still dealing with pre-production bodies. Lord knows what is inside those.
> 
> ...



Mark, thanks for your feedback and input about the likely meaning of the quoted portion of the manual. I had noticed that the referenced lenses were considerably slower than what I'm usually using for sports (70-200 f/2.8L IS), but the way they placed the asterisk in the sentence made me wonder about the meaning. 

I share your enthusiasm for the combination of new features and performance offered by the 1Dx. 

Welcome to the forum!


----------



## messus (Jun 13, 2012)

MarkWebbPhoto said:


> Jax, those lenses are extremely slow. They will most definitely shoot at a slower speed since the AF will take longer to lock on. And while I know my 1D MK IV never really gets 10 FPS unless I hit have the camera in one shot, I can use the AF stop button on my super-telephoto lenses to get the max burst speed. This works great for baseball if you want a shot of the ball leaving the bat. 12 FPS just means that I should get at least 10 in AI-Servo. I also noticed a frame rate increase when I updated my 70-200 f/2.8L IS to the newest version. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS II seems to give me an even faster frame rate than my 300 f/2.8 IS or 200 f/2.0 IS but maybe that is just me.
> 
> The buffer should hold around 50 RAW images, the 30 image buffer must have been an early model. Keep in mind we are still dealing with pre-production bodies. Lord knows what is inside those.
> 
> ...



I am sorry Mark, but your assumption of 50 RAW files until buffer stops on 1DX is wrong, read my post and watch my video. Buffer stops camera from shooting after 35-36 frames. I wish it was twice as big.

Also, I have tested the 1DX and compared it to my 5D3, 5D2, and the D4, D800,D800E.
No way if the 1DX has a two stop advantage on the 5D3 as you claim, the 1DX has maybe 1/2 stop
advantage on the 5D3. And even if this is good, and just as good as the D4, I was hoping for more from the 1DX. I have lots of RAWs from all cameras, even underexposed to try to lift shadows and check DR in post.

Some beautiful photos at your webpage, great work btw!


----------



## ronmart_blogspot_com (Jun 13, 2012)

*Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted (D4 burst mode performance)*

I'm getting 49 frames of RAW (lossless compression) with the D4 using the 95mb/sec Sandisk Extreme Pro 16GB CF card (95mb/sec).

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2012/06/review-nikon-d4-vs-nikon-d800-canon-5d.html 

Ironically if I do RAW+JPEG I get the same result, so it seems that with CF its artifically capped at 49. 

The drop off is brisk where there's zero lag for 49, then what feels like about a 1 second lag for each frame after that. I should have video it, but I just saw this thread and i sent the camera back this morning. 

This could be a marketing ploy to make XQD look better because its uncharactaristic for cameras to go from full blast to single file sputtering. It's usually like full speed, then 80%, 50%, 30%, 20% then single file. 

For my Canon cameras - even the 5D Mark III - the drop off is gradual and not as bad once it starts to lag.

Ron


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Jun 13, 2012)

messus said:


> 1) Ron's numbers are wrong, sadly, check my proof video I posted in this thread. I have used the fastest memory card available, Lexar 128GB CF UDMA7 Pro, which I use daily with my 5D3. The 5D3 Canon also claim to be able to fully utilize any UDMA7 card with up to 167MB/s, which I have found to be wrong.
> The 5D3 is capable of almost 100MB/s, about the same as the D4. (tested with speeds which allowed for continous shooting without the buffer stopping)
> 
> 2) I am capable of shooting 33-34 RAW images at 6fps on my 5D3 with the Lexar UDMA7 card before buffer stops.
> ...



See, now you're going to make me go and buy a Lexar 1000x to get that 33-34 RAW on my 5D3. 8)

I'm assuming the 1Dx you had was a pre-production unit, so perhaps it's still got a firmware update to go before it's at full speed. (Maybe).

It's also kind of weird that the D4 being 16Mpix has a larger RAW file than an 18Mpix 1Dx or a 22Mpix 5D3????

And I totally agree with you on the fact that RAM is cheap....it would be next to nothing to implement a RAW buffer of 60 to 96 RAW images for a 5-8 second burst buffer.


----------



## messus (Jun 13, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> messus said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Ron's numbers are wrong, sadly, check my proof video I posted in this thread. I have used the fastest memory card available, Lexar 128GB CF UDMA7 Pro, which I use daily with my 5D3. The 5D3 Canon also claim to be able to fully utilize any UDMA7 card with up to 167MB/s, which I have found to be wrong.
> ...



Hehe... Those Lexar cards are expensive, but IMO to fully utilize the 5D3 (and the 1DX) you probably need one.

I agree about the file sizes and megapixels on D4/1DX, strange. Let us hope this is not an indication of the 1DX getting crushed by the D4 in DR! Those pics I have done with the cameras does not indicate that, but we need to see more extensive tests done under controlled environment and lightning conditions.

And yes I really hope the model I was using was an early pre-production model, and that the final model is improved a lot. But to be honest I doubt it. But nothing would please me more than my doubts being proved wrong!!


----------



## MarkWebbPhoto (Jun 13, 2012)

messus said:


> MarkWebbPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Jax, those lenses are extremely slow. They will most definitely shoot at a slower speed since the AF will take longer to lock on. And while I know my 1D MK IV never really gets 10 FPS unless I hit have the camera in one shot, I can use the AF stop button on my super-telephoto lenses to get the max burst speed. This works great for baseball if you want a shot of the ball leaving the bat. 12 FPS just means that I should get at least 10 in AI-Servo. I also noticed a frame rate increase when I updated my 70-200 f/2.8L IS to the newest version. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS II seems to give me an even faster frame rate than my 300 f/2.8 IS or 200 f/2.0 IS but maybe that is just me.
> ...



Yeah maybe that is just wishful thinking on my part. Canon often understates their buffer capacities so I was hoping for a higher buffer rating with better cards but maybe since it is a pro body they assume you are using pro-grade memory cards. The-Digital-Picture.com lists it as 180 for JPEG and 38 for RAW and maybe after some firmware updates and some faster CF cards hit the market we may slowly be able to approach 45-50 RAW photos which is still quite wimpy. The JPEG buffer is definitely large enough for me and I never seem to have a problem with the buffer of the 1D MK IV when shooting in RAW or JPEG. If I do fill the buffer, I keep a second body handy! For me, its RAW for weddings and portraits; JPEG for photojournalism and sports.

1DX overview: http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-1D-X-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx


----------



## pwp (Jun 13, 2012)

Check out page 100. This looks like it's identical to the 5D3, just described slightly differently in the manual. There is no mention of the hoped for red selected AF point remaining visible. Damn!


----------



## nikkito (Jun 13, 2012)

my 5D mk II in servo doesnt even show the focus point being used.
well, the servo mode on the 5D is crap anyway


----------



## pwp (Jun 13, 2012)

Has this already been picked up? Rob Galbraith has a link to a PDF paper on the 1DX-AF guide.
http://downloads.canon.com/CDLC/EOS_1DX_AF_Guide_CDLC_Updated_June_2012.pdf

It looks for sure like the red/black AF point issue has been completely addressed. Yay! 
Now the firmware release for the 5D3 needs to ship and we'll all be up to date.

PW


----------



## Zouk (Jun 13, 2012)

pwp said:


> It looks for sure like the red/black AF point issue has been completely addressed. Yay!
> Now the firmware release for the 5D3 needs to ship and we'll all be up to date.
> 
> PW



Maybe I'm just unobservant, but where in the manual does it say a change occurred?


----------



## pwp (Jun 13, 2012)

Zouk said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > It looks for sure like the red/black AF point issue has been completely addressed. Yay!
> ...



Did you look through the 1DX AF Guide? I have had a couple of supervised test drives of pre-production 1DX, and I have a 5D3. What I'm seeing colorfully illustrated in the AF Guide is not what I saw on the test drives or what I use daily with the 5D3. The 5D3 & the 1DX presented as identical in the AF display points GUI.

Besides, Canon are not going to overtly say "this is a change" are they? They'll present the present time reality.

PW


----------



## JaxPhotoBuff (Jun 13, 2012)

pwp said:


> Zouk said:
> 
> 
> > pwp said:
> ...



PW, maybe you could help us out with a reference to the specific page in either the owner's manual or the AF guide that you think clears things up? I have read both the earlier AF guide and the new version you referred to, but it appears I missed where it says that they AF points will stay lit red while shooting. (I don't think the color illustrations were intended to convey that, but maybe I missed something). 

That said, I did see in the owner's manual that there are settings to control when the AF points will light up that seem to include the ability to keep the AF points lit after achieving focus (see p. 100, "AF Point Display During Focus.") However, I have not worked with the 5D Mark III and am currently shooting a 40D, so I don't know if that section is "news" to people concered about the red focus point issue.


----------



## Zouk (Jun 13, 2012)

pwp said:


> Did you look through the 1DX AF Guide? I have had a couple of supervised test drives of pre-production 1DX, and I have a 5D3. What I'm seeing colorfully illustrated in the AF Guide is not what I saw on the test drives or what I use daily with the 5D3. The 5D3 & the 1DX presented as identical in the AF display points GUI.
> 
> Besides, Canon are not going to overtly say "this is a change" are they? They'll present the present time reality.
> 
> PW



I've got the original and the updated version here side-by-side. The illustrations of how the AF points are lit are exactly the same between the two, as far as I can tell.

Are you making inferences based on the selected AF points being in red on the AI Servo pages? Or is there an actual change in the verbage of the manual that indicates to you that the AF points are now lit differently?


----------



## spinworkxroy (Jun 13, 2012)

Anyone saw this?
I took it off the Canon USE update on the AF system.

With the EOS 5D Mark III, a less-complex 63-zone metering system is used, and this is not linked to the AF system for helping with Automatic AF point selection. Both cameras have a separate processor dedicated to AF calculation tasks, such as AI Servo AF focus-tracking, in addition to the DIGIC 4 processor used by the EOS-1D X. 

I noticed it said BOTH cameras have a seperate processor dedicated to AF…Really? I know the 1DX has a Digic4..nit the 5D3 also has a dedicated processor for AF? I think not ya? Just 1 Digic5+for everything am i right?


----------



## kozakm (Jun 13, 2012)

MarkWebbPhoto said:


> People are still comparing the 5D MK III to the 1DX, they are completely different monsters. In my testing I saw only a little more than 1 stop improvement in high ISO with the 5D3 over the 5D2. I've downloaded and played with several 1DX files and they look absolutely phenomenal. The 1DX probably has at least a 3-stop advantage over the 5D2.



I agree that 1D X is completely different monster. But based on my testing of preproduction model of 1D X the difference between 1D X and 5D3 is only about 1/3 EV (together with noisy blotchy-colored shadows, unfortunately). And 5D3 is maybe 1/2 EV over 5D2 at high ISOs. So don't expect any miracles.

Btw, the speed was way faster than my 1D IV even in AI Servo, good job, Canon!


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Jun 13, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> Anyone saw this?
> I took it off the Canon USE update on the AF system.
> 
> With the EOS 5D Mark III, a less-complex 63-zone metering system is used, and this is not linked to the AF system for helping with Automatic AF point selection. Both cameras have a separate processor dedicated to AF calculation tasks, such as AI Servo AF focus-tracking, in addition to the DIGIC 4 processor used by the EOS-1D X.
> ...



Incorrect. Both the 5D3 and the 1DX have identical processors for the AF that are separate from the Digic5+. This is documented in multiple sources and in interviews with Chuck Westfall of Canon.

The 1DX has a dedicated Digic4 for it's meter and those advanced features, it is NOT used for the AF system per se, but does process the metering info for the AF system. The dual Digic5+ processors are handling the rest of the work.

http://blog.planet5d.com/2012/03/questions-answered-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-hdmi-video/



> In the preview meeting, Chuck briefly mentioned something about a “dedicated AF microprocessor” – is that a Digic 4 like on the Canon EOS-1D X?
> CW: The DIGIC 4 in the 1D X is used for that camera’s 100,000 pixel RGB metering sensor. It is not a dedicated AF microprocessor. Both the 1D X and the 5D Mark III use dedicated AF microprocessors; these AF microprocessors are not DIGIC chips.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Jun 13, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> Incorrect. Both the 5D3 and the 1DX have identical processors for the AF that are separate from the Digic5+. This is documented in multiple sources and in interviews with Chuck Westfall of Canon.



Ah…thanks for the info..so in theory, both cameras should AF as fast with the same processor handling AF…except the X has a high volt to make the lens move faster that's all..


----------



## clicstudio (Jun 13, 2012)

*More than half of the manual is identical to 5D III manual...*


----------



## SDsc0rch (Jun 14, 2012)

in answer to the "why" f8 is a limiting aperture, i think i found a satisfactory answer on canon's website

it gets into some basic concepts of how those AF sensors work - pretty interesting actually

basically, the wider the aperture, the more precise your focus - alternatively, the smaller the aperture, the less precision possible

basically, they had to make a design decision - do they tolerate softer images, or stick to their guns and ensure higher quality photos?


these paragraphs are from page 2...



> Where does the term "high precision" come into play? The farther apart the two rows of pixels are, the more finely the system can adjust the focus, and the more accuracy it can apply to determining whether focus is "close" or "dead-on". Slight deviations in where the twin beams are focused, if they are off-center, now can be measured in finer increments. Canon EOS SLRs with high-precision AF sensors simply move the pairs of sensors much farther apart, and accordingly, the AF information can be more finely broken-down and reacted to. So why not simply move all the line sensors farther apart? There's a limit, and that is the widest aperture of the lenses a shooter might use. To adequately cover the entire AF sensor array, every AF sensor requires lenses (or a lens + tele extender combination) that's a certain f/stop or wider in order to assure proper AF operation. Standard-precision AF sensors, positioned relatively closely, can get by with lenses f/5.6 or faster. This is an advantage in some ways, because nearly all AF lenses can be used without limitations.
> 
> *But high-precision AF sensors have traditionally required lenses with f/2.8 or faster apertures, since each high-precision AF line pair is farther apart, and requires a physically larger "cone of light" coming into the AF system to fully cover the rows of pixels. When a lens slower than f/2.8 is used, those line pairs no longer function, and (usually) the camera reverts to another pair of standard-precision AF sensors.* But high-precision AF sensors provide from 2x to 3x the AF accuracy at the sensor of more traditional designs, and that accuracy kicks-in when a wide-aperture lens is mounted. In other words, high-precision becomes available when it's needed most – when lenses with very narrow depth-of-field are mounted and being focused.



http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/1dx_af_precision_crosstype_article.shtml


very interesting article - you should give it a read - they explain it quite well

before this thread though, i had no idea how AF worked


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 14, 2012)

Another resource on Canon AF systems:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 14, 2012)

messus said:


> Page.120.
> 
> The one thing that dissapoints me with the 1DX is the buffer size and the number of RAW frames possible to store during a high burst.
> The 35 frames takes only 3seconds, 3 !!!!! to fill the buffer..
> ...



I can get 35 RAW frames (at ISO 100, lens cap on to minimize file size) with a Lexar 1000x 32GB card on a 5D3 for 5.8s of continuous 6fps. (at ISO3200 with a real image it does drop a lot, down to 20 frames or 3.3s; Canon usually rates buffer at worst case so they might mean 35 RAWs at highest ISO which might mean quite a few more at lower ISOs maybe 50????)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 14, 2012)

MarkWebbPhoto said:


> People are still comparing the 5D MK III to the 1DX, they are completely different monsters. In my testing I saw only a little more than 1 stop improvement in high ISO with the 5D3 over the 5D2. I've downloaded and played with several 1DX files and they look absolutely phenomenal. The 1DX probably has at least a 3-stop advantage over the 5D2.



You do realize that the 1DX would have to violate the laws of physics to be 3 stops better SNR than the 5D2?

And the 5D3 is about almost 2/3rds of a stop better SNR than the 5D2 (and only about 1/3 stop better less if you unfairly compare them at the same ISOs (5D3 applies more gain for each ISO than the 5D2)).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 14, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> messus said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Ron's numbers are wrong, sadly, check my proof video I posted in this thread. I have used the fastest memory card available, Lexar 128GB CF UDMA7 Pro, which I use daily with my 5D3. The 5D3 Canon also claim to be able to fully utilize any UDMA7 card with up to 167MB/s, which I have found to be wrong.
> ...



Here is some more info on a few scenarios:

"The Lexar 1000x honestly didn't really do any better than a Sandisk Extreme Pro 90MB/s card with a 5D2 or 7D (or surely xxD) cam but with the 5D3.... WOW. And it lets the 5D3 deliver best in class buffer and longer contrinuous shooting times than either the 5D2 or 7D.

A few numbers (all tests at 1/800th shutter, no IS, no AF, no NR or any other in cam jpg special processing options, max continuous drive mode selected (7D pointed at a bright light so as to maintain max frame rate)) with the raw number being number of shots before you hear it slow down shooting and timed number is the continuous time you could shoot non-stop at the camera's max frame rate (derived by a simple frames/max fps of camera):

Test 1 (lens cap on or super underexposed near black frames (i.e. with requiring minimum for storage) at ISO100 on 5D3):

14 shots with a slow Lexar 16GB 200x card
17 shots with a 30MB/s SanDisk Extreme III 8GB card
20 shots (3.3s) with a 32GB SanDisk Extreme Pro 90GB/s card
35 shots (5.8s) with a 32GB Lexar 1000x card (whoa! 35! vs 20! 5.8s of continuous shooting vs only 3.3s!)

(so the Lexar 1000x makes a surprisingly large difference on the 5D3 and is well worth the $ if you seriously shoot action with the 5D3, do note that the 16GB 1000x card is said to be slower than the 32GB and larger 1000x cards so the advantage may be less if you go for the 16GB size; with this speed card the 5D3 continuous shooting time easily beats the 5D2 and 7D)

Test 2 (as above but on a 5D2):
16 shots (4.1s) with a SanDisk Extreme Pro 90MB/s card
17 shots (4.3s) with a Lexar 32GB 1000x card

(so the extra $ for the Lexar 1000x makes no difference on a 5D2; with this speed card the 5D3 actually lets you shoot continuously for less long than the 5D2 or 7D)

Test 3 (as above but on a 7D):
29 shots (3.7s) with a SanDisk Extreme Pro 90MB/s card
28 shots (3.5s) with a Lexar 32GB 1000x card

(so the extra $ for the Lexar 1000x makes no difference on a 7D, same result)

Test 4 (these have an actual image being shot and the ISOs are higher so each RAW file is larger, the performance drops considerably, especially above ISO800 and NOTE that the numbers will vary depending upon the scene shot as different scenes and exposures will produce different file sizes and any given scenario may bump all the numbers noticeably up or down; all are on the Lexar 32GB 1000x card):

ISO3200 5D3 - 20 shots (3.3s) - a big drop from the 35 for ISO100 black frame
ISO1600 5D3 - 24 shots (4s)
ISO800 5D3 - 30 shots (5s)

Test 5 (as above only this time a SanDisk Extreme Pro 90MB/s card was used in all cases):

ISO3200 5D3 - 14 shots (2.3s)
ISO1600 5D3 - 20 shots (3.3s)
ISO800 5D3 - 22 shots (3.7s)

Test 6 (as above only this time a SanDisk Extreme III 30MB/s card was used):
ISO800 5D3 - 15 shots (2.5s)

So yeah for most Canon cameras the Lexar 1000x will not be worth the money at all (unless you are want to pay that much for faster transfer speed to your computer and your computer supports USB3 and you have a USB3 card read that also takes full UDMA 7 advantage) but for the 5D3 wow if you are serious about shooting action and dont want to be saddled with a shorter shooting time buffer than the old 5D2 or 7D then get the Lexar 1000x, suddenly you actually can shoot for longer times non-stop than with the 5D2 or 7D and often by a large margin. So for the 5D3 and action it is well worth it."


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 14, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> Anyone saw this?
> I took it off the Canon USE update on the AF system.
> 
> With the EOS 5D Mark III, a less-complex 63-zone metering system is used, and this is not linked to the AF system for helping with Automatic AF point selection. Both cameras have a separate processor dedicated to AF calculation tasks, such as AI Servo AF focus-tracking, in addition to the DIGIC 4 processor used by the EOS-1D X.
> ...



None of them have ever used digic for regular mode AF. It's always been either special dedicated AF CPU or sharing the general CPU that runs the basic body functions and camera controls.

The 1DX is the first to use it at all and it only uses the digic to image process the new fancy meter and to report that data to the AF system for the use all the points and automatically track mode.


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Jun 14, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Here is some more info on a few scenarios:
> 
> "The Lexar 1000x honestly didn't really do any better than a Sandisk Extreme Pro 90MB/s card with a 5D2 or 7D (or surely xxD) cam but with the 5D3.... WOW. And it lets the 5D3 deliver best in class buffer and longer contrinuous shooting times than either the 5D2 or 7D.
> 
> ...



That is a ton of useful data. Your observations on the 5D3 using the SanDisk Extreme Pro (32GB in my case) match well to my own, 20-22 shots in the ISO 800 to 1600 range.

Since I do use the 5D3 in sports situations, the Lexar 1000+ 32GB makes sense for those conditions. I ordered one this morning for that purpose, it should be enough for my typical work, and yes, the slower observed speed of the 16GB model does not make that an option.

Now, if Canon had not capped the damn SD card speed at around 30-40 MB/sec....because that will be a bottleneck if shooting RAW backups to the SD. And it's pretty much a waste to get anything in the SanDisk Extreme Pro SD line as it's never going to reach the 95 MB/sec rate. I picked up a 64GB one on sale for video work, but could have spent less than 1/2 that for a 45MB/sec one.


----------

