# Announcement details on the 1DX Mark III



## canonnews (Dec 19, 2019)

> Overnight we have received both some information on the release of the 1DX Mark III, and a new interesting image.  I apologize for the low quality of the image, I removed the photographer from the image to protect their identity, but what we are seeing in this camera, is certainly not any 1DX series camera I’ve seen (and it looks really cool I might add).  Is this simply a prototype or is Canon thinking of doing something radical for the 1 series lineup and giving it different looks?
> I looked at image given to CR by a source and didn’t think it was a Mark II.  Apparently it was!  I make mistakes at times.
> Another source mentioned to us that the 1DX Mark III will be available for inspection at a major dealer in Australia in February, with a release in April.  This would have Canon doing an official announcement sometime in February, before CP+.  Considering this is the major tradeshow in Japan, and the Olympics are being held later on in 2020 in Japan, this seems like a very likely...



Continue reading...


----------



## HikeBike (Dec 19, 2019)

The two-tone thing going on there kinda reminds me of the ELAN II.


----------



## Nelu (Dec 19, 2019)

Compared to the hand it looks very thick and bulky. Either the photographer is tiny or this camera is going to be huge


----------



## zonoskar (Dec 19, 2019)

HikeBike said:


> The two-tone thing going on there kinda reminds me of the ELAN II.


It looks like unpainted magnesium to me.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Dec 19, 2019)

It's the camera equivalent of a camouflage vehicle mule.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Dec 19, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> It looks like unpainted magnesium to me.


As if a manufacturing prototype?


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

Prototype paint scheme. No way it's going to look like a 7 pt AF film body.


----------



## juststeve (Dec 19, 2019)

Is the lens PS-ed also? It almost resembles the 70-200 RF.


----------



## Sharlin (Dec 19, 2019)

It's just unpainted, and seems to be also missing the plastic antenna cover on top of the viewfinder bump. Otherwise looks just like previous 1D bodies.


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

juststeve said:


> Is the lens PS-ed also? It almost resembles the 70-200 RF.


I was wondering about that lens too - it looks like the EF 100-400 mark II to me. The switches aren't in the right place for the RF 70-200.


----------



## zonoskar (Dec 19, 2019)

amorse said:


> I was wondering about that lens too - it looks like the EF 100-400 mark II to me. The switches aren't in the right place for the RF 70-200.


Maybe the 70-300L?


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> Maybe the 70-300L?


Maybe, I thought that too at first, but I think the size difference between the zoom ring and focus ring more resembles the 100-400. Also, the line through the central white part of the barrel (between the focus and zoom black rubber rings) appears to be pretty close to equidistant between the zoom and focus ring - the 100-400 is pretty close to equidistant, but the 70-300 has that marker closer to the zoom ring. 

It could be though - I don't own either lens so I'm comparing based on crappy google image searches.


----------



## NetMage (Dec 19, 2019)

Or, you know, the knob for the tripod mount only matches one of them.


----------



## ThomsA (Dec 19, 2019)

If I assume this is the same photo I saw (I compared the hand below the lens), the photographer mentions a "homemade" styling where an already existing EF body has received a "sandblast" treatment. The obvious question regarding a 1D X III was answered with "not yet". Sorry to bust the hype. YMMV


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> Maybe the 70-300L?



not maybe, it IS the 100-400 ii, simple to identify, and why do we really care about what lens is on it?


----------



## HikeBike (Dec 19, 2019)

mpmark said:


> not maybe, it IS the 100-400 ii, simple to identify, and why do we really care about what lens is on it?


In case it also happens to be a new lens. Unlikely, but worth examining.


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

mpmark said:


> not maybe, it IS the 100-400 ii, simple to identify, and why do we really care about what lens is on it?


Because the first comment regarding the lens thought it looked like the RF 70-200 which would have been very interesting, but it isn't that lens.


----------



## tron (Dec 19, 2019)

It looks like garbage! But I do not believe they would make it like that! The 1 series have a great look. No need for change. But yes this would be the second surprise (the first being a 20Mpixel camera) !


----------



## juststeve (Dec 19, 2019)

After consulting the pics on the B&H web site, the lens is the 70-300 L. It definitely is not the 100-400. I have one beside me bolted to an R. The zoom ring is longer on the 100-400 otherwise it and the 70-300 are arranged similarly and there is the step down in diameter after the tripod mount.

It seems the camera pictured here does not have the plastic dome or roof over the pentaprism to house the gps and wireless antennas which shows prominently on B&H's 1DXiii photos. Perhaps that roof fell victim to a hurricane or Photoshop.


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 19, 2019)

mpmark said:


> not maybe, it IS the 100-400 ii, simple to identify, and why do we really care about what lens is on it?


Some people care to look at details, some don't. Why do you care that others do?


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

juststeve said:


> After consulting the pics on the B&H web site, the lens is the 70-300 L. It definitely is not the 100-400. I have one beside me bolted to an R. The zoom ring is longer on the 100-400 otherwise it and the 70-300 are arranged similarly and there is the step down in diameter after the tripod mount.
> 
> It seems the camera pictured here does not have the plastic dome or roof over the pentaprism to house the gps and wireless antennas which shows prominently on B&H's 1DXiii photos. Perhaps that roof fell victim to a hurricane or Photoshop.


I don't know, the tripod collar on this image seems to match the 100-400's collar (check out the tightening knob), but the 70-300's collar doesn't seem to match up: 
70-300 tripod collar https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/747346-REG/Canon_4429B001_Canon_Tripod_Mount_Ring.html


----------



## Optics Patent (Dec 19, 2019)

The two-tone raises the question of why a company that made its premium lenses distinctive with white color shouldn't so something similarly bold to make its camera bodies stand apart? Potentially appealing to me. 

If it's bare magnesium it's unexpected to have the logo applied.


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

amorse said:


> Because the first comment regarding the lens thought it looked like the RF 70-200 which would have been very interesting, but it isn't that lens.



its not, it cant be and the RF 70-200 and the lens we see in the pic are WAY different. There is no need to continue discussion on that front.


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

amorse said:


> I don't know, the tripod collar on this image seems to match the 100-400's collar (check out the tightening knob), but the 70-300's collar doesn't seem to match up:
> 70-300 tripod collar https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/747346-REG/Canon_4429B001_Canon_Tripod_Mount_Ring.html



you are looking into this WAY to deep, its the 100-400ii.


----------



## MigueEsteves (Dec 19, 2019)

Optics Patent said:


> The two-tone raises the question of why a company that made its premium lenses distinctive with white color shouldn't so something similarly bold to make its camera bodies stand apart? Potentially appealing to me.
> 
> If it's bare magnesium it's unexpected to have the logo applied.


They make big white lens because they tend to get very hot, white helps with that.


----------



## Joules (Dec 19, 2019)

slclick said:


> Prototype paint scheme. No way it's going to look like a 7 pt AF film body.


Maybe Canon took some inspiration from the Tesla cyber truck


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

juststeve said:


> After consulting the pics on the B&H web site, the lens is the 70-300 L. It definitely is not the 100-400. I have one beside me bolted to an R. The zoom ring is longer on the 100-400 otherwise it and the 70-300 are arranged similarly and there is the step down in diameter after the tripod mount.
> 
> It seems the camera pictured here does not have the plastic dome or roof over the pentaprism to house the gps and wireless antennas which shows prominently on B&H's 1DXiii photos. Perhaps that roof fell victim to a hurricane or Photoshop.



you are wrong, it "IS" the 100-400L II,


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

MigueEsteves said:


> They make big white lens because they tend to get very hot, white helps with that.



The white is specific to science, not a "lets make it white to stand out sorta thing." White reflects sunlight much better then dark colors, dark colors absorb heat, when you have large areas that can heat up the "tub" of the lens (the inside) light rays bend and distort the image. This is the reason it is a mostly white in color.


----------



## Danglin52 (Dec 19, 2019)

Optics Patent said:


> The two-tone raises the question of why a company that made its premium lenses distinctive with white color shouldn't so something similarly bold to make its camera bodies stand apart? Potentially appealing to me.
> 
> If it's bare magnesium it's unexpected to have the logo applied.



If real, I think this is an unfinished prototype. While the distinctive look might be cool on the sidelines, wildlife photographers (myself) would hate this scheme because of reflections. I don't see Canon changing the ergonomics of the 1dx III at this stage of the DSLR lifecycle.


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

mpmark said:


> its not, it cant be and the RF 70-200 and the lens we see in the pic are WAY different. There is no need to continue discussion on that front.


I know, that's effectively what I said to the original poster, though I didn't tell them not to discuss it any further.


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

mpmark said:


> you are looking into this WAY to deep, its the 100-400ii.


I agree with you - it is the 100-400, but when someone suggested it was a different lens I wanted to give them some sort of way of seeing for themselves that it was the 100-400 rather than just saying "you are wrong". Difference in approach to the conversation, but same perspective.


----------



## felipeolveram (Dec 19, 2019)

Hope not, from a design standpoint it’s hideous


----------



## richperson (Dec 19, 2019)

Now that Sony has white lenses, it would help Canon stand out at the Olympics.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Dec 19, 2019)

If the camera is THAT big (seriously, it looks like two bricks taped together) and the sensor is only 20.X I'm going to scream.


----------



## magarity (Dec 19, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> Maybe the 70-300L?


Maybe a 70-300L II


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

Cue the one guy screaming about the lens in 3...2...1...


----------



## R1-7D (Dec 19, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> It looks like unpainted magnesium to me.



Looks like that to me too. It looks like it's also missing the WIFI and GPS module from the top of the pentaprism as well.


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> Looks like that to me too. It looks like it's also missing the WIFI and GPS module from the top of the pentaprism as well.


The shopped job cut off some parts


----------



## tron (Dec 19, 2019)

AccipiterQ said:


> If the camera is THAT big (seriously, it looks like two bricks taped together) and the sensor is only 20.X I'm going to scream.


Well if the camera is that big there is a 3rd surpise (1: 20mp 2: ugly white/black body) It is a medium format camera hence no 1DxIII !!! 

EDIT: Which negates the 2nd surprise because in that super rare (CR0) case it does not correspond to 1DxIII at all! Oh well..


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

AccipiterQ said:


> If the camera is THAT big (seriously, it looks like two bricks taped together) and the sensor is only 20.X I'm going to scream.


I would bet that the 1DXIII will have nearly the exact same ergonomics/size as the 1DXII (which is a chunky camera on purpose), and the image seems to suggest that. If there is one thing the 1DX series isn't made for, it's size!


----------



## tron (Dec 19, 2019)

Or we are seeing a LEGO camera for kids


----------



## boiseblake (Dec 19, 2019)

Maybe it's the 11-24??


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

It's the RF 70-135 f/2L (just for CanonFanBoy)


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 19, 2019)

Joules said:


> Maybe Canon took some inspiration fr





Joules said:


> Maybe Canon took some inspiration from the Tesla cyber truck


Na - a DeLorean. Surely anyone can see it's just a 1DX owned by someone with too much cash and not enough taste ?


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Some people care to look at details, some don't. Why do you care that others do?



generally it leads to wild and silly ideas with no fact and pointless reading, but im still learning to skip through those so my apologies


----------



## Dantana (Dec 19, 2019)

Sporgon said:


> Na - a DeLorean. Surely anyone can see it's just a 1DX owned by someone with too much cash and not enough taste ?


Sure, but what really got cut off in the image was the Mr Fusion on the hot-shoe. Talk about burst mode


----------



## mpmark (Dec 19, 2019)

amorse said:


> I agree with you - it is the 100-400, but when someone suggested it was a different lens I wanted to give them some sort of way of seeing for themselves that it was the 100-400 rather than just saying "you are wrong". Difference in approach to the conversation, but same perspective.



well sorry, I am only reacting to your stated fact "the lens is the 70-300 L. It definitely is not the 100-400 "

I didnt want anyone else reading that and taking it as fact when I clearly know the post you provided is incorrect.


----------



## jvillain (Dec 19, 2019)

While Fuji is able to pull off that 2 tone style, Canon no so much. I think the big take away however is that the IOC should never award Japan the Olympics again.


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 19, 2019)

Dantana said:


> Sure, but what really got cut off in the image was the Mr Fusion on the hot-shoe. Talk about burst mode



 nice connection !


----------



## amorse (Dec 19, 2019)

mpmark said:


> well sorry, I am only reacting to your stated fact "the lens is the 70-300 L. It definitely is not the 100-400 "
> 
> I didnt want anyone else reading that and taking it as fact when I clearly know the post you provided is incorrect.


I think you might have misunderstood my earlier comments, or are quoting someone else - every post I have made on the lens said it was the 100-400 ii. I referenced the knob on the tripod collar to say 70-300 does *not* match while the knob on the 100-400 *does* match. We've been agreeing this whole the whole time, but saying it in different ways. I'm going to leave it here.


----------



## motofotog (Dec 19, 2019)

I think it is an unpainted 1Dx with 100-400II. Why are we debating about the lens, when the topic is about camera body


----------



## Nickhucko (Dec 19, 2019)

The lense looks like the 28-300 to me


----------



## Architect1776 (Dec 19, 2019)

Optics Patent said:


> The two-tone raises the question of why a company that made its premium lenses distinctive with white color shouldn't so something similarly bold to make its camera bodies stand apart? Potentially appealing to me.
> 
> If it's bare magnesium it's unexpected to have the logo applied.



With Sony doing me too white lenses Canon needs to distinguish themselves to the public and this is an excellent way to do so.


----------



## Architect1776 (Dec 19, 2019)

Danglin52 said:


> If real, I think this is an unfinished prototype. While the distinctive look might be cool on the sidelines, wildlife photographers (myself) would hate this scheme because of reflections. I don't see Canon changing the ergonomics of the 1dx III at this stage of the DSLR lifecycle.



Like days of old, comes in basic black or two tone silver and black like the FTb was. Your choice.


----------



## Architect1776 (Dec 19, 2019)

amorse said:


> I think you might have misunderstood my earlier comments, or are quoting someone else - every post I have made on the lens said it was the 100-400 ii. I referenced the knob on the tripod collar to say 70-300 does *not* match while the knob on the 100-400 *does* match. We've been agreeing this whole the whole time, but saying it in different ways. I'm going to leave it here.



OK at this point who cares what lens it is? We are looking at the camera.


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 19, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> OK at this point who cares what lens it is? We are looking at the camera.


Looks like a 40mm pancake to me.


----------



## Jim Corbett (Dec 19, 2019)

The black will be added later via a firmware update.


----------



## criscokkat (Dec 19, 2019)

Jim Corbett said:


> The black will be added later via a firmware update.


For an extra $799 you'll also be able to download more RAM to increase buffer size.


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 19, 2019)

tron said:


> Well if the camera is that big there is a 3rd surpise (1: 20mp 2: ugly white/black body) It is a medium format camera hence no 1DxIII !!!
> 
> EDIT: Which negates the 2nd surprise because in that super rare (CR0) case it does not correspond to 1DxIII at all! Oh well..




--- and MAYBE you are in fact CORRECT that it MIGHT be a large sensor (i.e. greater than Full Frame) camera !!!

Anyways, if it IS a large sensor camera, then DO fix the low-light noise issues. I'd rather have 20-to-24 megapixels with large, super-low-light sensitive photosites on my sensors than have a 30 to 75 megapixel monster!

Soooooo, ..... WHat is Happiness?

A Big Burger and BIGGER PHOTOSITES   

.
P.S. Lunch Today at December 19, 2019 -- VERY TASTY Earl's Bacon and Cheddar Burger! (Across from Bridge Film Studios Burnaby -- near Vancouver, Canada)
.


----------



## tron (Dec 19, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> --- and MAYBE you are in fact CORRECT that it MIGHT be a large sensor (i.e. greater than Full Frame) camera !!!
> 
> Anyways, if it IS a large sensor camera, then DO fix the low-light noise issues. I'd rather have 20-to-24 megapixels with large, super-low-light sensitive photosites on my sensors than have a 30 to 75 megapixel monster!
> 
> ...


Or the one displayed is just what it seems: A big LEGO camera


----------



## Hector1970 (Dec 19, 2019)

They removed HarryFilm from the photograph. I was dying to see what he looked like.


----------



## tron (Dec 19, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> They removed HarryFilm from the photograph. I was dying to see what he looked like.


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> For an extra $799 you'll also be able to download more RAM to increase buffer size.


Nope, the RAM is soldered to the motherboard, sorry. (Hired Apple engineers)


----------



## Act444 (Dec 19, 2019)

I am 98% sure that the attached lens is the 100-400 II...


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 19, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> They removed HarryFilm from the photograph. I was dying to see what he looked like.




Here's a BiiiiiiiiiiiiiG Hint !!!!!

What is TRUE HAPPINESS ???

It's coming REAL SOON NOW !!!!!!!
..

See photo below:


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> Here's a BiiiiiiiiiiiiiG Hint !!!!!
> 
> What is TRUE HAPPINESS ???
> 
> ...


All I see is a lot of dust


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

Act444 said:


> I am 98% sure that the attached lens is the 100-400 II...


You had to keep that going......


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 19, 2019)

slclick said:


> All I see is a lot of dust




It's a test bench and workshop. What do you expect would be there? Canon's Sony A7s3 competitor?! ;-) 


.


----------



## slclick (Dec 19, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> It's a test bench and workshop. What do you expect would be there? Canon's Sony A7s3 competitor?! ;-)
> 
> 
> .


It just looks like your don't take care of your gear. I've been around many test benches and for optical equipment, you should have higher standards or like Neal sings, 'A Man Needs a Maid'.


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 20, 2019)

slclick said:


> It just looks like your don't take care of your gear. I've been around many test benches and for optical equipment, you should have higher standards or like Neal sings, 'A Man Needs a Maid'.



I came from an industrial shoot and haven't finished cleaning the cameras yet. They go through a 99% IsoPropyl Alcohol cleaning on the outside and specialized ultrasonic cleaning chamber for the sensor and interior of body. (we open up the bodies if necessary -- we've got the specialty equipment to do that sort of interior cleaning!) They normally look a lot better than that! And the desk too gets cleaned!

Anyways, who cares about dust and dirt when I've got THIS .... !!!!!

see photo below:


----------



## slclick (Dec 20, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> Who care about dust and dirt when I've got THIS .... !!!!!
> 
> see photo below:


LET ME GET MY READERS....


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 20, 2019)

slclick said:


> Prototype paint scheme. No way it's going to look like a 7 pt AF film body.



Unless Canon decided committing a commercial suicide.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 20, 2019)

Ye


Architect1776 said:


> With Sony doing me too white lenses Canon needs to distinguish themselves to the public and this is an excellent way to do so.


Canon design Lead: Yeah, let’s distinguish ourselves by releasing the ugliest looking pro dslr camera body ever and make a splash of a sales marketing a new design paradigm. Oh, wait... a second... I am fired? Nooooo...


----------



## slclick (Dec 20, 2019)

e·lan | āˈlän, āˈlan | (also élan)
noun
energy, style, and enthusiasm: a rousing march, played with great elan.


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 20, 2019)

tron said:


> Or we are seeing a LEGO camera for kids


No, definitely not the Lego camera. I have one. It is mirrorless and the lenses pop on and off. You can make the lenses longer by just adding elements on the end.


----------



## GoldWing (Dec 20, 2019)

The "more" I hear the less inclined I am to want the MKIII

Also, timing will be preceding all our agency work for the 2020 Games,

I really hope what we're hearing is a hoax.... 20MP is so underwhelming, boring!!!!!


----------



## mclaren777 (Dec 20, 2019)

It doesn't make any sense for Canon to put branding on a prototype.

What's going on?


----------



## geffy (Dec 20, 2019)

looks like shot


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Dec 20, 2019)

juststeve said:


> Is the lens PS-ed also? It almost resembles the 70-200 RF.



The EF has two wide black rings and the photo posted for this topic also shows the two wide black rings. And there's more noticeable white space between the red detail ring and black ring on the EF as shown in this image. But that's if it was a 70-200mm 2.8 ... there's other white lenses in the EF line.


----------



## masterpix (Dec 20, 2019)

The shape looks like 1Dx, it just look as un-painted and un-covered body in my view. It has all the knobs of the 1Dx and the "body lines". 

I wish there was more info in the information, mostly regarding the size of the sensor and IBIS. for that is what interest most still photographers.


----------



## ThomsA (Dec 20, 2019)

mclaren777 said:


> It doesn't make any sense for Canon to put branding on a prototype.
> 
> What's going on?


It is not a prototype. „Just“ a DIY project.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 20, 2019)

Medium format with Ibis and RF adapter.


----------



## domo_p1000 (Dec 20, 2019)

Two images for thought/reference:


Unfinished 1D X MkII body



My 1D X MkII with 100-400 II


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Dec 20, 2019)

Everybody is reading into this waaay too much! 

Clearly a prototype. Will obviously be black. And the lens is the 100-400 ii.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 20, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Everybody is reading into this waaay too much!...



Exactly. I'm tired of the non-rumor rumors designed only to keep people commenting on the same-old same-old. Please Craig, do some digging and get us something we can sink our teeth into.


----------



## slclick (Dec 20, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Exactly. I'm tired of the non-rumor rumors designed only to keep people commenting on the same-old same-old. Please Craig, do some digging and get us something we can sink our teeth into.


Or just silence. Deals of the Day and Industry News are fine for front page as well imo. The industry simply can't have earth shattering headlines everyday, any maroon knows that.


----------



## amorse (Dec 20, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Exactly. I'm tired of the non-rumor rumors designed only to keep people commenting on the same-old same-old. Please Craig, do some digging and get us something we can sink our teeth into.


Tough game to play - I would bet the site needs regularity to generate sufficient revenue, but trying to increase the number of rumours may be tough without decreasing the standard of trust. I'm going to bet he doesn't bother with rumours that are less trustworthy - I'd rather he post other stuff rather than tempt him to pick stuff up off the cutting room floor.


----------



## Russ6357 (Dec 20, 2019)

I’d be willing to patreon a reasonable stipend to get the BS free version of the website.

say 50 bucks a year?

Craig - I presume that’s more per person PA than ad $$$? I know only a small percentage would use it but I’m surely not the only one.


----------



## amorse (Dec 20, 2019)

P.S. the contact who sent this in doesn't seem to be hiding her identity and seems to suggest it is a 1DXII. It's on her instagram and even references this article:


__
http://instagr.am/p/B6R0lavqGnU/


----------



## Architect1776 (Dec 20, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Ye
> Canon design Lead: Yeah, let’s distinguish ourselves by releasing the ugliest looking pro dslr camera body ever and make a splash of a sales marketing a new design paradigm. Oh, wait... a second... I am fired? Nooooo...



What makes it ugly?
I have a Nikon F Photomic that is silver and black, not a peep on how ugly or non-professional it looked.


----------



## slclick (Dec 20, 2019)

amorse said:


> P.S. the contact who sent this in doesn't seem to be hiding her identity and seems to suggest it is a 1DXII. It's on her instagram and even references this article:
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/B6R0lavqGnU/


I think she knows the location of the Stiletto Six warhead as well.


----------



## fox40phil (Dec 20, 2019)

She posted also those two custom mades 5D IV & 1DX II 

__
http://instagr.am/p/BfnxS64Fp_x/
I think it is a big fake!


----------



## unfocused (Dec 20, 2019)

fox40phil said:


> She posted also those two custom mades 5D IV & 1DX II
> 
> I think it is a big fake!



Fake...joke...or someone else jumping to conclusions, hard to say. Looks like they have had a couple of existing models pimped up (There are companies that will do that for you).


----------



## amorse (Dec 20, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Fake...joke...or someone else jumping to conclusions, hard to say. Looks like they have had a couple of existing models pimped up (There are companies that will do that for you).


Regardless, I would bet we can be pretty confident that it isn't a 1Dxiii


----------



## FbPhotoimages (Dec 20, 2019)

__
http://instagr.am/p/B5c91FkFkJf/
Frits is one of the canon tester for the F1...two weeks ago in Abu Dhabi.


----------



## amorse (Dec 20, 2019)

FbPhotoimages said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/B5c91FkFkJf/
> Frits is one of the canon tester for the F1...two weeks ago in Abu Dhabi.


Now that looks more convincing. Odd that he'd tag that as an Ad for a camera that is unreleased...


----------



## canonnews (Dec 20, 2019)

amorse said:


> P.S. the contact who sent this in doesn't seem to be hiding her identity and seems to suggest it is a 1DXII. It's on her instagram and even references this article:



Damnit.. Craig and I both got bamboozled by this.

Modified the post.

Just to comment on some above posts. CR Guy is away on vacation with his misses. So I'm helping out here at the same time as doing CN. So we're both looking at tidbits and deciding on whether or not it is a valid rumor / tidbit of information. Craig does get a lot in, and at times, he simply can't publish the information at well, or there is a lot of sifting through to figure out fact from BS. It sounds like it would be easy.. but there are times you get two sources saying two different things, making even more difficult to choose which one may be the reality.

In this case, Craig passed it over to me, and I should have done a bit more looking into it. Apologies to the community.


----------



## amorse (Dec 20, 2019)

canonnews said:


> Damnit.. Craig and I both got bamboozled by this.
> 
> Modified the post.
> 
> Just to comment on some above posts. CR Guy is away on vacation with his misses. So I'm helping out here at the same time as doing CN. So we're both looking at tidbits and deciding on whether or not it is a valid rumor / tidbit of information. Craig does get a lot in, and at times, he simply can't publish the information at well, or there is a lot of sifting through to figure out fact from BS. It sounds like it would be easy.. but there are times you get two sources saying two different things, making even more difficult to choose which one may be the reality.


It seems like you guys get more right than you get wrong, frankly. I wouldn't worry too much about it - it is a rumours site after all. I still appreciate everything you guys do!


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 20, 2019)

No "Hello Kitty?" Canon is *******.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 20, 2019)

canonnews said:


> Damnit.. Craig and I both got bamboozled by this.
> 
> Modified the post.
> 
> ...


Gives us something to talk about waste time, while waiting. We all respect what you and Craig do. Just impatient for real news. I expect that after the first of the year, you will start getting more reliable rumors.


----------



## slclick (Dec 20, 2019)

NDA be damned?


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 20, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> What makes it ugly?
> I have a Nikon F Photomic that is silver and black, not a peep on how ugly or non-professional it looked.


I had several film cameras that had the same colour scheme....


----------



## FramerMCB (Dec 20, 2019)

domo_p1000 said:


> Two images for thought/reference:
> View attachment 187862
> 
> Unfinished 1D X MkII body
> ...


Ooh! Nailed it!!!


----------



## mclaren777 (Dec 20, 2019)

Here's the real deal...


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 20, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I had several film cameras that had the same colour scheme....


Intentionally ordered my Olympus OM-D E5 Mark II in silver and black. I like the retro look.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 20, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I had several film cameras that had the same colour scheme....


If you check her Instagram, it's pretty clear this and the 5DIV are cameras they had someone customize for themselves. Not Canon jobs.


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 21, 2019)

If that was mentioned before ... just skip to next post

On Canons german web site (https://www.canon.de/cameras/eos-1d-x-mark-iii/)
are some details about the upcoming 1Dx m iii (it  is  looks more Darth Vader than storm trooper):

AF
- 28-times resolution (maybe some DPAFish new sensor fed by partially transflective mirror with own DIGIC 8 processor, why not take some Super 35 lower res sensor doing the AF?)
- Live view: 90% horiz, 100% vertical

Sensor
- new CMOS sensor (no info about res)
- new DIGIC
- 4k up to 60 fps as raw or 10bit video (internally recorded on CFexpress cards (plural!)) no mention of cropped or non-cropped video

Speed etc
- 16 fps view OVF
- up to 20 fps with mechanical and electronic shutter with AE / AF without compromise (whatever that means)
- battery LP-E19
- backlit buttons


----------



## expatinasia (Dec 22, 2019)

mclaren777 said:


> Here's the real deal...



Nice shot! Abu Dhabi F1?


----------



## expatinasia (Dec 22, 2019)

Canon EOS-1D X Mark III - Cameras - Canon UK


Pursue Perfection with the EOS-1D X Mark III - Canon's most advanced DSLR ever.




www.canon.co.uk


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 22, 2019)

motofotog said:


> I think it is an unpainted 1Dx with 100-400II. Why are we debating about the lens, when the topic is about camera body



What is a 1Dx? Do you mean a 1D X? Or possibly a 1D X Mark II?


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 22, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> If that was mentioned before ... just skip to next post
> 
> On Canons german web site (https://www.canon.de/cameras/eos-1d-x-mark-iii/)
> are some details about the upcoming 1Dx m iii (it  is  looks more Darth Vader than storm trooper):
> ...



The iTR in the 1dx was already an image sensor, they just expanded it to 10MP. So no transflective mirror needed, only a real mirror


----------



## tpatana (Dec 22, 2019)

mclaren777 said:


> Here's the real deal...



I first thought that would be BS since the prototype wouldn't have label "Mark III" to help keep it secret.

But there's strange notch next to the drive-af button on top, and if you look the Canon website picture in: https://www.canon.co.uk/cameras/eos-1d-x-mark-iii/

They have the same notch. So I guess that F1 dude actually has real one, albeit it might be one of the versions they are testing.

Regardless, almost certain I'll be ordering one around May-June. There's big sports event in Detroit in July, need one before that.


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 22, 2019)

It will be nice to see how well the illuminated buttons are accepted or not. There were a lot of people on this forum against such an idea on any camera not long ago saying a real pro would have no need because it is all memorized. Of course, that neglects the fact that more than just professionals buy these beasts. Personally, I'd like it if a future R had illuminated buttons.


----------



## felipeolveram (Dec 22, 2019)

FbPhotoimages said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/B5c91FkFkJf/
> Frits is one of the canon tester for the F1...two weeks ago in Abu Dhabi.



We need to ask this man questions! Theres also another user if you search the hashtag


----------



## tpatana (Dec 22, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It will be nice to see how well the illuminated buttons are accepted or not. There were a lot of people on this forum against such an idea on any camera not long ago saying a real pro would have no need because it is all memorized. Of course, that neglects the fact that more than just professionals buy these beasts. Personally, I'd like it if a future R had illuminated buttons.



Agreed. I don't like the illuminated buttons, and hopefully I can turn them off. I understand some like them.


----------



## slclick (Dec 22, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It will be nice to see how well the illuminated buttons are accepted or not. There were a lot of people on this forum against such an idea on any camera not long ago saying a real pro would have no need because it is all memorized. Of course, that neglects the fact that more than just professionals buy these beasts. Personally, I'd like it if a future R had illuminated buttons.


No one should be complaining since you will be able to turn it off and on, possibly even with a dimmer control. THis is hardly an issue.


----------



## FbPhotoimages (Dec 22, 2019)

expatinasia said:


> Nice shot! Abu Dhabi F1?


Yes....abu dhabi f1 race.
I saw Frits in every f1 race or f1 test where i was in the last years....but i don't know him personally. I usually look at his camera body or lens...because they could be something new as it was for the 1dx mk2 in 2016.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 23, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> The iTR in the 1dx was already an image sensor, they just expanded it to 10MP. So no transflective mirror needed, only a real mirror



iTR uses information from both the dedicated PDAF sensor and the RGB+IR light meter that is effectively a small imaging sensor. The color imaging sensor provides color information used to help determine which AF point(s) are active on the PDAF sensor, which is still what provides distance information.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 23, 2019)

slclick said:


> NDA be damned?



Considering Canon has already released an "in development" announcement that reveals far more, how would this be a violation of any NDA agreement?






Canon EOS-1D X Mark III - Cameras - Canon UK


Pursue Perfection with the EOS-1D X Mark III - Canon's most advanced DSLR ever.




www.canon.co.uk


----------



## slclick (Dec 23, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Considering Canon has already released an "in development" announcement that reveals far more, how would this be a violation of any NDA agreement?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


idk that's why I included a question mark due to my inexperience with the documents.I'm always open to being informed by others in the know, seems like you are 'in the know'.


----------



## drama (Dec 23, 2019)

Wow, the quality of the rumors on this site has degraded significantly. You posted some image off instagram and tried to pass it off as a new camera?

Also, Fritz is an ambassador. I would guess that his post using the ad hashtag means he's been asked to post the image.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 23, 2019)

drama said:


> Wow, the quality of the rumors on this site has degraded significantly. You posted some image off instagram and tried to pass it off as a new camera?
> 
> Also, Fritz is an ambassador. I would guess that his post using the ad hashtag means he's been asked to post the image.



The "ad" hashtag is a reference to his location at the time: Abu Dhabi.

Even if he wasn't asked, considering the fact that Canon has already posted images of the 1D X Mark III exterior with the official "in development" announcement, it's not like he's violating an NDA.


----------



## amorse (Dec 23, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It will be nice to see how well the illuminated buttons are accepted or not. There were a lot of people on this forum against such an idea on any camera not long ago saying a real pro would have no need because it is all memorized. Of course, that neglects the fact that more than just professionals buy these beasts. Personally, I'd like it if a future R had illuminated buttons.


I like to think I have my buttons memorized pretty well too, but I'd still love illuminated buttons. If I need them illuminated then it is at least dark out, maybe cold. I find that if I've got gloves on, no-matter how well my memory works, I'm still pawing around for some buttons and occasionally hit the wrong one. I'd love if you could just turn them on or off using the button which lights up the top display right now.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 25, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Considering Canon has already released an "in development" announcement that reveals far more, how would this be a violation of any NDA agreement?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


These are controlled leaks of information. Come on guys, no one in his right mind would post a photo of a unreleased equipment in testing without an explicit vendor’s permission.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 25, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> These are controlled leaks of information. Come on guys, no one in his right mind would post a photo of a unreleased equipment in testing without an explicit vendor’s permission.



Perhaps. But the original post was a fake, not a leak. Someone (other than the owner of the camera in question) tried to pass off a cosmetically modified 1D X Mark II (that's been around for quite some time) as the new 1D X mark III.

In the case of van Eldik, most NDA's have language to the effect that if the holder of the intellectual property or protected information (in this case it would be Canon) publicly reveals anything covered by the NDA, that portion of the NDA dealing with the specific information revealed is no longer in force. Otherwise, signing an NDA to get an advance copy of a camera for revue would mean never being able to publicly discuss anything about a camera, much less publish a revue of the camera, even after it is officially released.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 25, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Perhaps. But the original post was a fake, not a leak. Someone (other than the owner of the camera in question) tried to pass off a cosmetically modified 1D X Mark II (that's been around for quite some time) as the new 1D X mark III.
> 
> In the case of van Eldik, most NDA's have language to the effect that if the holder of the intellectual property or protected information (in this case it would be Canon) publicly reveals anything covered by the NDA, that portion of the NDA dealing with the specific information revealed is no longer in force. Otherwise, signing an NDA to get an advance copy of a camera for revue would mean never being able to publicly discuss anything about a camera, much less publish a revue of the camera, even after it is officially released.


correct. however, the image that was leaked by van Eldik was a very first image of the camera leaked into the public domain and not by Canon.. so.... it is blatantly obvious in this case. Do you recall any images of the camera available at the time of the development announcement? nope, none.. so.. this is indeed a controlled leak in order to keep Canon audience engaged. timely indeed.


----------



## slclick (Dec 25, 2019)

amorse said:


> I like to think I have my buttons memorized pretty well too, but I'd still love illuminated buttons. If I need them illuminated then it is at least dark out, maybe cold. I find that if I've got gloves on, no-matter how well my memory works, I'm still pawing around for some buttons and occasionally hit the wrong one. I'd love if you could just turn them on or off using the button which lights up the top display right now.


This. When working in extreme conditions...cold darkness, precarious positions...any amount of aid can be useful. Also the ability to change from a white to a red illumination would be great for night sky shooting. I love the red bulb on my headlamp so my eyes do not have adjustment issues nor any stray light for long exposures.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> correct. however, the image that was leaked by van Eldik was a very first image of the camera leaked into the public domain and not by Canon.. so.... it is blatantly obvious in this case. Do you recall any images of the camera available at the time of the development announcement? nope, none.. so.. this is indeed a controlled leak in order to keep Canon audience engaged. timely indeed.



It may or it may not be. You have no definitive proof either way.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> It may or it may not be. You have no definitive proof either way.


What proof are you after? Of images of 1Dx III not previously being released or that person released these images being under NDA with Canon? 
Let say, it is highly likely that images were released with a permission of the IP holder.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> What proof are you after? Of images of 1Dx III not previously being released or that person released these images being under NDA with Canon?
> Let say, it is highly likely that images were released with a permission of the IP holder.



Of course they were. The permission is contained in the NDA, though. No additional authorization was needed, so it's not an "authorised leak", for which approval _outside the terms of the NDA _would be needed.

Notice he did NOT post any photos of the back of the camera, which has not appeared yet in any official public announcements from Canon.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Of course they were. The permission is contained in the NDA, though. No additional authorization was needed, so it's not an "authorised leak", for which approval _outside the terms of the NDA _would be needed.
> 
> Notice he did NOT post any photos of the back of the camera, which has not appeared yet in any official public announcements from Canon.


nope, negative. NDA is in a full force until such a time when images of the actual device have been released by IP holder into public domain or explicit permission to do so. they have not been yet. so....


----------



## Joules (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> nope, negative. NDA is in a full force until such a time when images of the actual device have been released by IP holder into public domain or explicit permission to do so. they have not been yet. so....


Do the images on the announcement page not count as such?


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> nope, negative. NDA is in a full force until such a time when images of the actual device have been released by IP holder into public domain or explicit permission to do so. they have not been yet. so....



So exactly what are these images, hosted by Canon since the "in development" announcement, if they're not images of the actual device?






Canon EOS-1D X Mark III - Cameras - Canon UK


Pursue Perfection with the EOS-1D X Mark III - Canon's most advanced DSLR ever.




www.canon.co.uk





As for your "public domain" claim, that demonstrates fairly conclusively you have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> So exactly what are these images, hosted by Canon since the "in development" announcement, if they're not images of the actual device?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I missed these photos and was under impression that Canon have not released any images yet! my sincere apologies. I stand corrected.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> So exactly what are these images, hosted by Canon since the "in development" announcement, if they're not images of the actual device?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It demonstrates fairly conclusive that i was not aware that these images were released and I have apologised for these.
It also demonstrates fairly conclusive that your have no idea what idea I have.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> It demonstrates fairly conclusive that i was not aware that these images were released and I have apologised for these.
> It also demonstrates fairly conclusive that your have no idea what idea I have.



Your original comment directed at me about this was to a comment I made to someone else that included the same link to the same images... (which had appeared on this thread at least four times by then if you also count the link to the german language version)


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Your original comment directed at me about this was to a comment I made to someone else that included the same link to the same images... (which had appeared on this thread at least four times by then if you also count the link to the german language version)


Does that explain why you call someone “no idea” despite I clearly stated that I am not aware of any official images release for the announcement?
Obviously calling someone “no idea” is rude.
I have apologised for being incorrect. I expect you do the same for calling me names.

P.S. here is the post where I clearly stated that I am not aware of any images of Canon 1dx III being released by Canon do date and asked for a clarification if there are any...





__





Announcement details on the 1DX Mark III


Wow, the quality of the rumors on this site has degraded significantly. You posted some image off instagram and tried to pass it off as a new camera? Also, Fritz is an ambassador. I would guess that his post using the ad hashtag means he's been asked to post the image.




www.canonrumors.com





"... Do you recall any images of the camera available at the time of the development announcement? ..."


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Does that explain why you call someone “no idea” despite I clearly stated that I am not aware of any official images release for the announcement?
> Obviously calling someone “no idea” is rude.
> I have apologised for being incorrect. I expect you do the same for calling me names.
> 
> ...



Sorry if you think it is rude to point out that you are wrong when you say no one can take their own picture of something and publish it unless the creator of the photo's subject has released their intellectual property regarding the subject into the public domain. That's blatantly incorrect.

When this conversation began, I wasn't responding to your comment that says, "... Do you recall any images of the camera available at the time of the development announcement? ..."

I was responding to a comment by slclick in which I included the link to Canon's page. You then replied to that comment and that's how this whole thing got started.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

You miss the point. Again. 
The camera was given to a photographer for testing. This is my understanding. he is under NDA and not at liberty to release any information related to its properties: appearance, qualities, functions, price, look, feel, whatever. 
That’s if one is under NDA. However, there is no such a limitation if there is no NDA in place.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> correct. however, the image that was leaked by van Eldik was a very first image of the camera leaked into the public domain and not by Canon.. so.... it is blatantly obvious in this case. Do you recall any images of the camera available at the time of the development announcement? nope, none.. so.. this is indeed a controlled leak in order to keep Canon audience engaged. timely indeed.



Yes, there are images released by Canon of the upcoming camera that continue to be displayed on their web pages with information about the EOS 1D X Mark III, such as the link included in my earlier comment to which you initially responded that led to the conversation including your comment quoted immediately above.






Canon EOS-1D X Mark III - Cameras - Canon UK


Pursue Perfection with the EOS-1D X Mark III - Canon's most advanced DSLR ever.




www.canon.co.uk


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Yes, there are images released by Canon of the upcoming camera that continue to be displayed on their web pages with information about the EOS 1D X Mark III, such as the link included in my earlier comment to which you initially responded that led to the conversation including your comment quoted immediately above.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you trolling? I just explained that I was not aware of the images Released by Canon? What is so difficult to understand. There is no point in discussing this further.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> You miss the point. Again.
> The camera was given to a photographer for testing. This is my understanding. he is under NDA and not at liberty to release any information related to its properties: appearance, qualities, functions, price, look, feel, whatever.
> That’s if one is under NDA. However, there is no such a limitation if there is no NDA in place.



And again, you're totally missing the point that pretty much all NDAs from manufacturers of consumer products will include language that releases the signatory from restrictions about revealing any specific information once it has been publicly revealed by the manufacturer.

Thus anyone who signed an NDA regarding the 1D X Mark III is now free to post images of the parts of the 1D X Mark III that Canon has since published, and they are free to discuss information about the 1D X Mark III that has since been openly published by Canon. They are still restricted only with regard to properties of the 1D X Mark II that Canon has not yet publicly disclosed, such as the sensor resolution, or what the back of the camera looks like, etc.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Are you trolling? I just explained that I was not aware of the images Released by Canon? What is so difficult to understand. There is no point in discussing this further.



Are you trolling? You keep repeating yourself that when you replied to certain comments you didn't know about images that were linked in the very comments to which you were responding.


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 26, 2019)

Where is the "popcorn eating" emogie when you need it?


----------



## Click (Dec 26, 2019)

Here you go, just for you, my friend


----------



## tpatana (Dec 26, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> nope, negative. NDA is in a full force until such a time when images of the actual device have been released by IP holder into public domain or explicit permission to do so. they have not been yet. so....


Depends on the NDA. In theory it could have items:
-allow tester to publish pictures of the device (perhaps only front side as you noticed)
-allow publishing things after certain date
-etc

For such experienced photographer, I'm quite certain the picture wasn't accidental. Especially since the body actually says 1DX3. Most test-bodies don't say that to keep it secret, this time it was obviously intentional, including the post.


----------



## tpatana (Dec 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Thus anyone who signed an NDA regarding the 1D X Mark III is now free to post images of the parts of the 1D X Mark III that Canon has since published, and they are free to discuss information about the 1D X Mark III that has since been openly published by Canon. They are still restricted only with regard to properties of the 1D X Mark II that Canon has not yet publicly disclosed, such as the sensor resolution, or what the back of the camera looks like, etc.



Again, depends on the NDA. I currently hold (non-camera) device under NDA, which has been published about same level (pictures & info) as Canon 1DX3 at the moment, but I'm still not allowed to publish any pictures or talk about any of the features, even the ones that are already out there.


----------



## slclick (Dec 27, 2019)

ENOUGH of the NDA, seriously you guys, you have an unending desire to be right over all other things, it's unhealthy. Let it go, and then go watch Frozen if that doesn't help.


----------



## slclick (Dec 27, 2019)

Click said:


> Here you go, just for you, my friend


These guys must be so fun at parties


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 27, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> And again, you're totally missing the point that pretty much all NDAs from manufacturers of consumer products will include language that releases the signatory from restrictions about revealing any specific information once it has been publicly revealed by the manufacturer.
> 
> Thus anyone who signed an NDA regarding the 1D X Mark III is now free to post images of the parts of the 1D X Mark III that Canon has since published, and they are free to discuss information about the 1D X Mark III that has since been openly published by Canon. They are still restricted only with regard to properties of the 1D X Mark II that Canon has not yet publicly disclosed, such as the sensor resolution, or what the back of the camera looks like, etc.


I have signed NDAs that had a specific date, and I have signed them that said never. Personally, I have yet to see one that said that once someone else blabbed, that I was free to. As to Canon NDAs, none of us know what is in it, and even if one did, they would not be talking.

Pass the popcorn!


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 27, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> And again, you're totally missing the point that pretty much all NDAs from manufacturers of consumer products will include language that releases the signatory from restrictions about revealing any specific information once it has been publicly revealed by the manufacturer.
> 
> Thus anyone who signed an NDA regarding the 1D X Mark III is now free to post images of the parts of the 1D X Mark III that Canon has since published, and they are free to discuss information about the 1D X Mark III that has since been openly published by Canon. They are still restricted only with regard to properties of the 1D X Mark II that Canon has not yet publicly disclosed, such as the sensor resolution, or what the back of the camera looks like, etc.



At the time I made the statement I was not aware that Canon already released images of 1DX III into public domain. Hence my comment has to be viewed with that in mind. And you keep ignoring the fact and try to educate me about things I am professionally aware. 
How difficult to understand that.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 27, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I have signed NDAs that had a specific date, and I have signed them that said never. Personally, I have yet to see one that said that once someone else blabbed, that I was free to. As to Canon NDAs, none of us know what is in it, and even if one did, they would not be talking.
> 
> Pass the popcorn!


They typically say: until either explicitly permitted by IP holder, restricted by date or non withstanding or excluding information already available in public domain. 
But you are correct. Pop corn it is. As there is no point to argue here. I was not aware, overlooked Canon released images of the camera. I would not comment otherwise. And I apologised for being incorrect.Why Michael is keep pressing his point is beyond my understanding.


----------

