# Canon officially announces the development of the EOS-1D X Mark III



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 24, 2019)

> *MELVILLE, N.Y., October 24, 2019 –* Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced that its parent company, Canon Inc. is developing the highly anticipated Canon EOS-1D X Mark III Camera – the successor to the world-renowned and award-winning EOS-1D X Mark II. Ideal for sports and wildlife, the flagship DSLR is being engineered and designed using feedback from the worldwide community of EOS-1D X and EOS-1D X Mark II photographers. Continuing Canon’s rich heritage of creating first-rate optical products, the EOS-1D X Mark III offers an enhanced autofocus system, with dramatically improved still and video image quality and communication. When using this camera, professionals will have the confidence they will get ‘the shot’ and can deliver it at a competitive speed – faster than ever before – ideal for the increasingly fast-paced industry.
> 
> “The innovations put forth by the new EOS-1D X Mark III will set the new standard for professional DSLR cameras...



Continue reading...


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 24, 2019)

Taken from the canon Australia Facebook page


----------



## francomade (Oct 24, 2019)

4k 10bit 4:2:2 with clog. If it's true, I can sell my 1dx ii and EOS R!


----------



## ccapan (Oct 24, 2019)

Canon is *******! Offering a monster kick ass performer like this will certainly send Canon over the edge.


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 24, 2019)

Wait 20fps with mechanical shutter and tracking? That is mad!


----------



## dslrdummy (Oct 24, 2019)

MP's?


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 24, 2019)

Canon has revealed a lot more than what Nikon did with their development announcement. Also best part of this has to be complete dumping of CF/CFast format.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Oct 24, 2019)

for a video of how the whole camera looks


----------



## dlee13 (Oct 24, 2019)

Canon make hundreds of billions of dollars a year, they should be giving putting these specs in a rebel camera not a camera this level.

My microwave from 10 years ago had these specs, get with the times Canon!

Just preparing everyone for the other brand fanboys  seriously though it looks amazing and can’t wait to see what they can do with the 1Dx mirrorless version!


----------



## Jethro (Oct 24, 2019)

What a beast! The IBIS rumour was (predictably) wrong. And a new DIGIC. No word on the sensor specs.

I'm not familiar with the HEIF file format - I'll have to look it up.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 24, 2019)

But but but - does it have IBIS?  Well, the announcement feels almost unreal. To good for what we are used to from the Canon. Now I am scratching my head, as I was 100% sure we will skip the 5DV and go for the next R equivalent instead. Wonder which technologies find its way from the 1D X III down to 5DV ....


----------



## Profit007 (Oct 24, 2019)

The BH video mentions RAW video, but doesn't say at what resolution. Did I miss RAW video in the announcement?


----------



## Pape (Oct 24, 2019)

On army they teach you break your rifle on dark. Just train use buttons when eyes closed and you dont need lighted buttons


----------



## navastronia (Oct 24, 2019)

I bet (hope) we get IBIS in the pro mirrorless in a year or two, since it’s not here.

Good news overall!


----------



## dslrdummy (Oct 24, 2019)

Illuminated buttons. Curious there is mention of the new sensor but nothing about megapixels yet.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 24, 2019)

dslrdummy said:


> MP's?



I suspect it does indeed have some MPs. Just unlikely to be more than the previous model's MPs if they studiously avoid the subject in the release. Remember, when the 1dx2 went to Mark II, they made a super big deal about the 2 extra megapixels.


----------



## Profit007 (Oct 24, 2019)

Where did the BH guy get his Raw video info from? Full frame Raw 4k video would genuinely be a thing.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 24, 2019)

dlee13 said:


> Canon make hundreds of billions of dollars a year, they should be giving putting these specs in a rebel camera not a camera this level.
> 
> My microwave from 10 years ago had these specs, get with the times Canon!
> 
> Just preparing everyone for the other brand fanboys  seriously though it looks amazing and can’t wait to see what they can do with the 1Dx mirrorless version!


And that rebel should be in a kit for less than 350 bucks


----------



## prodorshak (Oct 24, 2019)

Thanks Gordon Laing. He also mentioned internal RAW recording for video.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> Wait 20fps with mechanical shutter and tracking? That is mad!



In Live View mode though. 16fps over the viewfinder. 

But what struck me the most is the “new exciting feature” we we were rumoured by the CRG:

The camera will also offer a new additional control for selecting AF points, built into the AF-ON button, allowing photographers to change AF points on-the-fly for the best composition – further helping to simplify their work.

AF Joystick built in AF-ON button? Wow. So in back button focusing mode one can move AF points around and then engage AF system in one go. Nice.


----------



## dslrdummy (Oct 24, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> I suspect it does indeed have some MPs. Just unlikely to be more than the previous model's MPs if they studiously avoid the subject in the release. Remember, when the 1dx2 went to Mark II, they made a super big deal about the 2 extra megapixels.


I'm predicting a modest increase of a similar magnitude.


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> Wait 20fps with mechanical shutter and tracking? That is mad!




I can just imagine the oil splatter!!!!!!!!


----------



## Profit007 (Oct 24, 2019)

The mirror won't be moving, just the shutter.


----------



## Profit007 (Oct 24, 2019)

It's a given that the new Nikon will offer full frame Raw 4k video via USB to Atomos recorders, maybe Canon does care about the competition now? 
If so, good news.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 24, 2019)

Profit007 said:


> It's a given that the new Nikon will offer full frame Raw 4k video via USB to Atomos recorders, maybe Canon does care about the competition now?
> If so, good news.



Nikon who?


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 24, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> In Live View mode though. 16fps over the viewfinder


I know, it is still impressive as you have to read the sensor to calculate AF. Sony can do 10fps, even Olympus with its smaller shutter can run AF at 10fps although the shutter can do 15fps.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Oct 24, 2019)

Profit007 said:


> Where did the BH guy get his Raw video info from? Full frame Raw 4k video would genuinely be a thing.


the only thing in the way of raw video is storage and speed. i dont see how this would even be a hard thing to do today in a flagship. even the bmpcc 4k has raw I think.


----------



## dlee13 (Oct 24, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> And that rebel should be in a kit for less than 350 bucks



Exactly, anything more and I’ll switch to Pentax!


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 24, 2019)

It was already mentioned on page 1 but I have to repeat it on page 2:
Canon is d.... - no, I won't 

Nice "little" tool. 
Will be interesting to see the full spec and hear about RL AF performance.
The announcement sounds fascinating.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 24, 2019)

For me it is merely a case of curiousity. I can't see me ever having enough money to buy one of these AND the lenses required to get enough pixels on target. So this is just about seeing what Canon is capable of and it seems like they may be offering quite a bit.


----------



## Joules (Oct 24, 2019)

Could it be that resolution and IBIS aren't mentioned because they are not set in stone yet? Although the mention of frame rate implies the resolution somewhat.

If 20 FPS in LiveView is the best they can do, and the total throughput is at least as high as the one from the M6 II (32.5*14) it means the resolution is at least 22.75 MP.


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 24, 2019)

Joules said:


> If 20 FPS in LiveView is the best they can do, and the total throughput is at least as high as the one from the M6 II (32.5*14) it means the resolution is at least 22.75 MP.


Please keep in mind that the latest 1D models always had a double DIGIC x configuration. 
I don't see a reason to return to single processor design here.
So even more calculation power and throughput possible.


----------



## gzroxas (Oct 24, 2019)

Wow! I’m definitely not in the budget for this camera but this looks outstanding!
Higher MPs (even though it’s not mentioned how many)
Higher FPS
Better controls (especially curious about that AF-On button)
Incredible video (maybe with a slight crop considering it’s both 60fps and 4:2:2 10Bit? But very nice nevertheless)
Improved autofocus performance 
And more in store!!
It’s a very nice day for people wanting to upgrade to a Pro DSLR!

For me, I’m curious to see what this is gonna bring to the Mirrorless table! 
(for example, since ML are smaller, they could implement the AF-On + Joystick thing instead of the Touch Bar, or as a complement to a better touchbar)


----------



## Joules (Oct 24, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> Please keep in mind that the latest 1D models always had a double DIGIC x configuration.
> I don't see a reason to return to single processor design here.
> So even more calculation power and throughput possible.


I'm not saying anything about the possible throughput.

I was just pointing out that we know the throuput of the M6 II, and since I would find it weird if the new Canon flagship wouldn't beat this enthusiast mirrorless camera in throughput, I assumed that the 1DX III will have at least the same or greater max throughput.

So if we know the max FPS and assume the throuput, we can calculate the minimum resolution. Of course it could be much higher. The throughput could also be much higher. But resolution should be no less than 22.75 MP if it really does 20 FPS, because otherwise the M6 II would beat the 1DX III in one metric, and I can't see Canon allowing that


----------



## Pape (Oct 24, 2019)

So processers wont be problem for 60mpix sport sensor if readout is just fast enough 
Why would they stay to 25mpixel when they cant make mirror flap faster than 16 fps how ever they try.
And processing power is vastly increased from 1dx2


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 24, 2019)

Joules said:


> I'm not saying anything about the possible throughput.
> 
> I was just pointing out that we know the throuput of the M6 II, and since I would find it weird if the new Canon flagship wouldn't beat this ...


I just wanted to second your thoughts and calculation by my post.
No critics, no know-all intended. Sorry, if that was misunderstood.


----------



## Joules (Oct 24, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> I just wanted to second your thoughts and calculation by my post.
> No critics, no know-all intended. Sorry, if that was misunderstood.


Well, sorry on my part then. Forum Gesprächen fehlen gewisse Nuancen, ohne die gerade am frühen Morgen das Verständnis etwas leidet 

I am personally not interested in the 1DX III but the technology it will bring to the table in terms of focusing and throughput. My personal impression was that the M6 II was just the beginning and we would see far greater performance in upcoming bodies. If even the 1DX III won't go much higher, I would be a bit less optimistic about the high res R. If I ever go FF, that's the camera that would interest me the most if it manages to be both, a nice FF mirrorless and high speed APS-C replacement.


----------



## edoorn (Oct 24, 2019)

Seems to be quite a nice package and upgrade on many fronts! It won’t be a camera that I expect to see ending up in my bag but this will make many 1d shooters quite happy I suppose


----------



## FTb-n (Oct 24, 2019)

Will the "new focus sensor" be usable in live view -- and will a variant of it find a home within a future EOS Rx? 

Now I'm wondering more about the specs for the rumored "pro level" EOS R.

I had hoped for an EOS "Rx" announcement before the 2020 Olympic Games that would become an attractive upgrade from the 1Dx2. The announced 1Dx3 specs in an Rx would be great. But, Canon needs to sell a bunch of 1Dx3 bodies before introducing an Rx that could deflate 1Dx3 sales. 

Will the long awaited "pro level" EOS R be a sports body or a successor to the 5D4? This could be a great wedding body, especially with a truly silent shutter. Or will it be a successor to the 5DS for commercial work -- and for Peter Hurley?

Sony is trying to push the A9 into the sports arena. A pro level EOS R will be measured against the latest A9, so I suspect that it will be positioned as an attractive upgrade from the 1Dx2, but not a true competitor of the 1Dx3. (This does put mean that the EF to RF converter must preserve the image quality and focus performance of existing EF lenses.) I'm still expecting an Rx to make some sort of splash at the 2020 Games. If so, it has to be a sports body.


----------



## Joules (Oct 24, 2019)

FTb-n said:


> Will the "new focus sensor" be usable in live view -- and will a variant of it find a home within a future EOS Rx?


I believe Canon is referring to its iTR sensor here, which is used to aid exposure and subject recognition in view finder mode. In LiveView, this sensor is not necessary because the primary sensor can be used for that. With the EOS R for example, there is no mention of iTR.

With the 1DXII the iTR sensor only has 736 x 496 "Pixel". No idea on what kind of pixels these are, as it is supposed to sense RGB and IR information. Anyway, that's just 0.36 MP, so even if it is increased by a factor of 28 yielding a 10.8 MP sensor, on a mirrorless body you are probably better of using the primary image sensor anyway.

Non the less I guess such a high resolution iTR sensor will allow face and eye detection as well as subject tracking to make great progress, even if the number of AF points remains the same. They write specifically about the resolution being this high in the center. I guess having two high res sensors that cover the whole image is too expensive even for a 1D body?


----------



## navastronia (Oct 24, 2019)

FTb-n said:


> Sony is trying to push the A9 into the sports arena. A pro level EOS R will be measured against the latest A9, so I suspect that it will be positioned as an attractive upgrade from the 1Dx2, but not a true competitor of the 1Dx3. (This does put mean that the EF to RF converter must preserve the image quality and focus performance of existing EF lenses.) I'm still expecting an Rx to make some sort of splash at the 2020 Games. If so, it has to be a sports body.



I remain hopeful that the pro R _will_ be a mirrorless 1DX3 and that Canon doesn't see the need to force people to choose between _either_ the true flagship body or else the best glass (RF), but not both.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Oct 24, 2019)

francomade said:


> 4k 10bit 4:2:2 with clog. If it's true, I can sell my 1dx ii and EOS R!


What will you use your RF glass on


----------



## edoorn (Oct 24, 2019)

navastronia said:


> I remain hopeful that the pro R _will_ be a mirrorless 1DX3 and that Canon doesn't see the need to force people to choose between _either_ the true flagship body or else the best glass (RF), but not both.



the first 'pro' R will probably the high resolution body mentioned quite a few times. It has also been rumoured that somewhere in 2020 we could see a new 5DV + R equivalent and then later (perhaps '21?) the 1D mirrorless equivalent.


----------



## peters (Oct 24, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> AF Joystick built in AF-ON button? Wow. So in back button focusing mode one can move AF points around and then engage AF system in one go. Nice.


If this would be a touch input, I wouldnt be that happy :/


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 24, 2019)

peters said:


> If this would be a touch input, I wouldnt be that happy :/


I would doubt it is a touch bar like the eos r. This is a pro camera and it will have been designed with inputs from hardcore photographers. They would not tolerate a touch input. It will be a second joystick I would think


----------



## Stuart (Oct 24, 2019)

I wonder how this looks in the Canon body Roadmap for 2019/2020


----------



## Canon-Chas (Oct 24, 2019)

Does it have silent shutter like Sony A9 -20FPS ? No use to me if it sounds like a machine gun ...


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 24, 2019)

peters said:


> If this would be a touch input, I wouldnt be that happy :/


Nuh, touch input Button on 1 series body? Not a chance...


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 24, 2019)

peters said:


> If this would be a touch input, I wouldnt be that happy :/



It looks like an optical mouse sensor to me, so I guess you'd slide your finger over it. This would work with regular gloves as well!


----------



## masterpix (Oct 24, 2019)

dlee13 said:


> Canon make hundreds of billions of dollars a year, they should be giving putting these specs in a rebel camera not a camera this level.
> 
> My microwave from 10 years ago had these specs, get with the times Canon!
> 
> Just preparing everyone for the other brand fanboys  seriously though it looks amazing and can’t wait to see what they can do with the 1Dx mirrorless version!


I wish my microwave could do 16FPS in OVF and have 28MP sensor. Unfortunately it does not have it :-(


----------



## edoorn (Oct 24, 2019)

Canon-Chas said:


> Does it have silent shutter like Sony A9 -20FPS ? No use to me if it sounds like a machine gun ...


I believe it's said somewhere 20fps can be done with electronic shutter so yes I suppose that is an option, but only in LV.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Oct 24, 2019)

More camera for the money than the mark 2 and it uses a card format that isn't dead!. It's all win for me, since I think I'll give one last hurrah to EF before shuffling over to RF(which I tried recently and really didn't like for wildlife).


----------



## fox40phil (Oct 24, 2019)

Where are the "illuminated buttons"?! Can't see them at the photos. Maybe they are lighted up around the buttons? I thought maybe they are glowing with transparent buttons^^.

Sounds like Canon is putting everything into this last model!? Bluetooth, wifi, lan, GPS, 16-20fps... 10bit video. But no words about IBIS (don't think this will fit into this rugged machine?!)

what a beast! Now how much MP will it have? 22, 24, 26?! ^^

Haven't heard about this new picture format: *HEIF* ..


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 24, 2019)

This looks like a superb development camera along with them creating more great EOS R lenses announced today. Hope we see an EOS R Pro camera out next year - possibly a dual launch with the EOS 1DX Mark 3.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Oct 24, 2019)

Great news Canon. Next up the replacement for the 5DS / 5DSr. That needs better low light performance, extended DR, and wider metering area. Otherwise leave as is.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 24, 2019)

jeffa4444 said:


> Great news Canon. Next up the replacement for the 5DS / 5DSr. That needs better low light performance, extended DR, and wider metering area. Otherwise leave as is.


Flippy screen is also a must. But the sensor performance is a must must.


----------



## TominNJ (Oct 24, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> And that rebel should be in a kit for less than 350 bucks



terrible marketing. Give the camera away but make it with a new lens mount so everyone has to buy all new crazy expensive glass


----------



## djack41 (Oct 24, 2019)

Really glad to see Canon is improving AF stability!


----------



## overniven (Oct 24, 2019)

The article said 16fps mechanical and 20 with electronic.


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 24, 2019)

ccapan said:


> Canon is *******! Offering a monster kick ass performer like this will certainly send Canon over the edge.



Absolutely. No ability to innovate either. Yes Canon is ******* better switch to that recycled a9II quick.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 24, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Absolutely. No ability to innovate either. Yes Canon is ******* better switch to that recycled a9II quick.


I'm disappointed. I expected a flying pony. I'm switching to Samsung Galaxy.


----------



## PureClassA (Oct 24, 2019)

francomade said:


> 4k 10bit 4:2:2 with clog. If it's true, I can sell my 1dx ii and EOS R!



two different cameras with two different intents. I own both of those as well. Perhaps, like you, I also bought the Eos R for its video feature set (And to replace my aging and moisture damaged 5D3) If all the Dx3 will be (so far as video) is an Eos R in a bigger box, then keep the R. I dunno what sort of video work you do, but mounting and balancing the DX2 on a gimbal (i have the Ronin M) is a PAIN In the butt compared to the R. Even if I were to upgrade to the DX3 from my DX2, I’d still keep the R. Might wanna think on it too.

All that said, There’s a lot of sizzle here in this release with no steak yet (so far as more detailed specifics go). If the sensor goes to 24MP and some sharp improvements in the higher ISOs, then it may be worth the plunge.

otherwise this will be a great upgrade to the original 1DX users out there.

Maybe Neuro finally upgrades?


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 24, 2019)

will follow this closely. 
Just need to know MP level, ISO performance, dynamic range of the sensor and the price.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 24, 2019)

Since I taken loads of crap on this forum for having the gall to suggest that Canon's autofocus system had room for improvement, I'm taking great delight in seeing that the one thing Canon emphasized above all else in this announcement was improvement to its autofocus system.


----------



## peters (Oct 24, 2019)

overniven said:


> The article said 16fps mechanical and 20 with electronic.


I realy hope it got a truely silent shutter. For weddings this is a big downer on the 1DX II, which is realy loud, even in "silent" mode


----------



## nighthawk82 (Oct 24, 2019)

I wonder if they will release any more EF lenses. I would imagine it will deal quite a heavy blow to sales figures of this and the 5D5 if their associated EF lens line is effectively dead. I understand they are probably aimed more at people who already own enough EF lenses but are not ready to jump into mirrorless rather than people starting from scratch, but still it would be a good idea to introduce a couple of updates on some of the older lens designs just to keep the EF mount alive until DSLRs get phased out for good.


----------



## masterpix (Oct 24, 2019)

From the pictures we have at hand, the new body seems a bit thicher than the previous ones to me. both in the front and the back sides. Maybe they included IBIS in it and they don't mention it as yet?


----------



## masterpix (Oct 24, 2019)

peters said:


> I realy hope it got a truely silent shutter. For weddings this is a big downer on the 1DX II, which is realy loud, even in "silent" mode


Most times in weddings one can't hear thmeselves think, so I wonder how a problem it is anyway. All in all, it say it has elecronic shutter as well, so you can use that via the live-view and forget about the mirror clicking.


----------



## cayenne (Oct 24, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> the only thing in the way of raw video is storage and speed. i dont see how this would even be a hard thing to do today in a flagship. even the bmpcc 4k has raw I think.



Yes,
And so does the BMPCC 6K camera.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 24, 2019)

nighthawk82 said:


> their associated EF lens line is effectively dead.


Reminds me of...






Hopefully that won't happen to my TS-E 17 and 100-400 II any time soon.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 24, 2019)

masterpix said:


> Most times in weddings one can't hear thmeselves think, so I wonder how a problem it is anyway. All in all, it say it has elecronic shutter as well, so you can use that via the live-view and forget about the mirror clicking.


The one time I truly wished for a REAL silent mode was when, working for the orchestra, I got chased out of an auditiorium by a freaking classical-music lunatic. I don't think he heard anything, but just seeing a photographer _dressed in black _ slowly making his way down to the railing of the nearly empty balcony sent this guy into an insane rage. I was brought before the theater manager and ordered to take some shots with my 5DIII in silent mode. He concluded I had disrupted the whole theater and I was tossed out on my gear-end.

I really wish I had taken a shot of the guy having a hissy fit. Or a swing at him. Ah, well, that was six years ago. Time to just put it behind me?


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 24, 2019)

nighthawk82 said:


> I wonder if they will release any more EF lenses. I would imagine it will deal quite a heavy blow to sales figures of this and the 5D5 if their associated EF lens line is effectively dead. I understand they are probably aimed more at people who already own enough EF lenses but are not ready to jump into mirrorless rather than people starting from scratch, but still it would be a good idea to introduce a couple of updates on some of the older lens designs just to keep the EF mount alive until DSLRs get phased out for good.



While sales of existing EF lenses are clearly going to continue for years, development of new ones seems doubtful. A few "updates" that might play better with the Rf mount might be all we see.

And, as far as RF lenses go, I don't believe Canon can generate much excitement about any new ones until they release a more well-rounded, pro-level mirrorless (even it that means just better sealing and TWO slots), one that is better suited for action and wildlife--and even lively events. This is only my opinion, but I have the R and have been using it daily for six weeks now. It is great for static or predictably moving subjects, but I'm not bringing it to an outdoor event with dancing, juggling, etc. this weekend because it is not working great for me with such activities.

But wouldn't most photographers and organizations purchasing a 1DXIII already have a nice stable of lenses? Or at least be completely satisfied with the current (and magnificent) catalog?


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 24, 2019)

They have a couple mockup units at Photo Plus Expp NY. So far they won’t let me touch one. Other than the port covers, the only control difference I see is larger more robust AF On buttons which should be an improvement. Looks a little “ergo gripper” but I’d have to hold it to be sure. So far no additional info other than what’s in the press release.

edit: af on are also af point joysticks. Didn’t get that previously. That is a huge improvement for back button focusing.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 24, 2019)

francomade said:


> 4k 10bit 4:2:2 with clog. If it's true, I can sell my 1dx ii and EOS R!


I need a second R. Care to donate?


----------



## ethanz (Oct 24, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Since I taken loads of crap on this forum for having the gall to suggest that Canon's autofocus system had room for improvement, I'm taking great delight in seeing that the one thing Canon emphasized above all else in this announcement was improvement to its autofocus system.



When they mention "Deep Learning" I wonder if that means some kind of machine learning? That requires a lot of processing power, so it sounds like they really upped the power in this thing.


----------



## albron00 (Oct 24, 2019)

It reminds me something....


----------



## masterpix (Oct 24, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> The one time I truly wished for a REAL silent mode was when I got chased out of an auditiorium by a freaking classical-music lunatic. I don't think he heard anything, but just seeing a photographer _dressed in black _ slowly making his way down to the railing of the nearly empty balcony sent this guy into an insane rage. I was brought before the theater manager and ordered to take some shots with my 5DIII in silent mode. He concluded I had disrupted the whole theater and I was tossed out on my gear-end.
> 
> I really wish I had taken a shot of the guy having a hissy fit. Or a swing at him. Ah, well, that was six years ago. Time to just put it behind me?


Well, I was once in a performance, and the anouncer said "no photogarphy during the show", and I wished I have life-view on that camera so I could just put in on my knee, use the 100-300 lens that I had at that time and just shoot un-noticed. many people used cellphones wihtout flash, and that was the ONLY time I envied cellphone photographers.


----------



## masterpix (Oct 24, 2019)

albron00 said:


> It reminds me something....
> 
> View attachment 187207


By the way, those phones had (still has) larger conncetivity range, and therefore, they are banned in a lot of countires now. Beside teh price tag of teh 1Dx3 I don't see any reason not to get one.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 24, 2019)

masterpix said:


> Well, I was once in a performance, and the anouncer said "no photogarphy during the show", and I wished I have life-view on that camera so I could just put in on my knee, use the 100-300 lens that I had at that time and just shoot un-noticed. many people used cellphones wihtout flash, and that was the ONLY time I envied cellphone photographers.


I was the orchestra's photographer!!!


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 24, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> Please keep in mind that the latest 1D models always had a *double* DIGIC x configuration.
> I don't see a reason to return to single processor design here.
> So even more calculation power and throughput possible.


Both 1DXs had triple processors AFAIK.


----------



## albron00 (Oct 24, 2019)

masterpix said:


> By the way, those phones had (still has) larger conncetivity range, and therefore, they are banned in a lot of countires now. Beside teh price tag of teh 1Dx3 I don't see any reason not to get one.



Absolutely! It is a tank. Would you drive a tank on daily basis?


----------



## MadisonMike (Oct 24, 2019)

Before getting too excited, they left out some very important information and hyped some that few use. Live view on a 1D, really?? Rarely used it on my 80D but suddenly it will be a go to function when you want speed or focus points. Not seeing it happen in the real world.


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 24, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> two different cameras with two different intents. I own both of those as well. Perhaps, like you, I also bought the Eos R for its video feature set (And to replace my aging and moisture damaged 5D3) If all the Dx3 will be (so far as video) is an Eos R in a bigger box, then keep the R. I dunno what sort of video work you do, but mounting and balancing the DX2 on a gimbal (i have the Ronin M) is a PAIN In the butt compared to the R. Even if I were to upgrade to the DX3 from my DX2, I’d still keep the R. Might wanna think on it too.
> 
> All that said, There’s a lot of sizzle here in this release with no steak yet (so far as more detailed specifics go). If the sensor goes to 24MP and some sharp improvements in the higher ISOs, then it may be worth the plunge.
> 
> ...





CanonFanBoy said:


> I need a second R. Care to donate?



Haha, awesome. Glad to know Canon still values high quality video, at least in their flagship stills cameras.

Since a ton of people have blown a gasket on here for suggesting that Canon put 4K video in a stills camera, I just have jump the gun and say:

*(*Sarcasm alert*)

"Wait a second- Why would ANY stills camera need 4K 60p and 10-bit? Professional video makers should just use dedicated cinema video cameras for their projects, not stills cameras, cough, cough, vitriol, vitriol...Canon doesn't have the capability anyway...get off this forum, you troll."

(*End sarcasm*)*

Just a reminder: I've been on the forum 8 years. Still not a troll. And glad Canon is still on the 4K video train. This camera should show folks that they do indeed have the capability to put awesome video in a stills camera, when they want to impress.


----------



## hazydave (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> I know, it is still impressive as you have to read the sensor to calculate AF. Sony can do 10fps, even Olympus with its smaller shutter can run AF at 10fps although the shutter can do 15fps.


It's a matter of both shutter speed and image processing performance. The Olympus E-M1 Mark II can do 10fps CAF, 15fps SAF, with the mechanical shutter, 18fps CAF, 60fps SAF with electronic shutter. The mirror + shutter is the physical limit, and while that's slowly increased, they're probably close to the limits for these by now. Canon's unlikely to skimp on image processing power in a flagship camera, of course. And their PDAF sensors are getting huge these days, to allow for some of the mirrorless-camera image processing tricks. `


----------



## masterpix (Oct 24, 2019)

albron00 said:


> Absolutely! It is a tank. Would you drive a tank on daily basis?



I wish! (do you have one for sale?)

The way drivers drive today, with their cellphone at one hand? I would wish I had a tank to drive, at least I won't be worried from those drivers that "sail" on the road while texting!


----------



## hazydave (Oct 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> When they mention "Deep Learning" I wonder if that means some kind of machine learning? That requires a lot of processing power, so it sounds like they really upped the power in this thing.


Probably something like the Olympus OM-D E-M1 X autofocus system. It's got deep learning AI models for various kinds of vehicles. So you're shooting an auto race, you put in "automobile" mode, and the camera basically just knows what a car is and locks on. This is not about the camera itself learning, it's based on an AI model built from analysis of many thousands of images. If it's got that AI processor built-in, it's likely they'll have new deep learning models for additional subjects as the software is improved... at least that what you'd expect from a mirrorless company. Not typical for Canon, but they do need to adapt to the market of today.


----------



## Canon-Chas (Oct 24, 2019)

edoorn said:


> I believe it's said somewhere 20fps can be done with electronic shutter so yes I suppose that is an option, but only in LV.


Better than no silent shutter but not sure I would buy it.......


----------



## edoorn (Oct 24, 2019)

Well electronic shutter could be fully silent, we’ll have to see. I wouldn’t buy one either but I’m not the target market.


----------



## padam (Oct 24, 2019)

When the 1DC was originally announced, they were telling customers that Raw video would be coming in the future when the technology is ready for it.
Looks like this was the camera they were actually talking about, a true 1DC replacement.


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> Both 1DXs had triple processors AFAIK.


Correct! 

But only two of them are for picture processing and therefor relevant for throughput. The third is for AF.


----------



## preppyak (Oct 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Just a reminder: I've been on the forum 8 years. Still not a troll. And glad Canon is still on the 4K video train. This camera should show folks that they do indeed have the capability to put awesome video in a stills camera, when they want to impress.


The 1D line seems to be the one place Canon does that. The 1DXII had 4k60 and 1080_120, which is something that 3.5 years later still hasnt trickled down to their other cameras. If this is shooting RAW internally, even at 1080, that'd be a damn impressive upgrade too


----------



## RunAndGun (Oct 24, 2019)

Jethro said:


> What a beast! The IBIS rumour was (predictably) wrong. And a new DIGIC. No word on the sensor specs.
> 
> I'm not familiar with the HEIF file format - I'll have to look it up.



It’s been a shooting option on the iPhone for a few years, now. It’s a compressed image file format, that’s supposed to be better than JPEG and more efficient.


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 24, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> But only two of them are for picture processing and therefor relevant for throughput. The third is for AF.


Hey be careful! You're basically implying that without the third processor they wouldn't do any AF/AE calculations.


----------



## Sharlin (Oct 24, 2019)

overniven said:


> The article said 16fps mechanical and 20 with electronic.



I quote the press release:


> The camera will support significantly faster frame rates with full AF and AE, using [--] Live View (up to approximately 20fps mechanical or electronic shutter)


----------



## Sharlin (Oct 24, 2019)

RunAndGun said:


> It’s been a shooting option on the iPhone for a few years, now. It’s a compressed image file format, that’s supposed to be better than JPEG and more efficient.



I think it's the default setting, even.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> Wait 20fps with mechanical shutter and tracking? That is mad!


It is probably even more amazing: "up to approximately 20fps ... electronic shutter"! If this works truely with active AF and full resolution, Canon has really made a huge leap in developing very fast read-out of sensor data. So, the electronic shutter would be mature - finally. Now, throw out every mechanical parts including camera supersizing IBIS from a future ML body (with electronic IS implemented like in a smartphone) and you get the first true digital camera with a big sensor.


----------



## Sharlin (Oct 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> When they mention "Deep Learning" I wonder if that means some kind of machine learning? That requires a lot of processing power, so it sounds like they really upped the power in this thing.



It's machine learning, yes, the deep convolutional/recurrent/whatever neural nets that have been all the rage for a couple years now. Beating humanity in Go and Starcraft and hallucinating shoggoths and now powering Google Translate and what have you.

But it is almost certain that the network in the camera is not going to be learning anything; it's been pre-taught and is basically just a big spreadsheet that you pass image data in and get some sort of feature classification data out that you can then use to figure out which part of the image the AF needs to track.


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 24, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> It is probably even more amazing: "up to approximately 20fps mechanical or electronic shutter"! If this works truely with active AF and full resolution, Canon has really made a huge leap in developing very fast read-out of sensor data. So, the electronic shutter would be mature - finally. Now, throw out every mechanical parts including camera supersizing IBIS from a future ML body (with electronic IS implemented like in a smartphone) and you get the first true digital camera with a big sensor.


I somehow feel that it won't be quite as fast as you hope (or it has other limitations, like only 12-bit readout (or even lower, say 10-bit)), and that's why the mechanical is mentioned separately.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

dslrdummy said:


> Illuminated buttons. Curious there is mention of the new sensor but nothing about megapixels yet.


Surely it will not boost the adrenaline levels of Megapixel fans. The 1D series was always dedicated to fast performance, not to highest possible resolution.


----------



## magarity (Oct 24, 2019)

I wonder if the lighted buttons are a nice non-dark-vision-ruining red or the noxious bright blue that has infected almost all modern electronic things.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> I somehow feel that it won't be quite as fast as you hope (or it has other limitations, like only 12-bit readout (or even lower, say 10-bit)), and that's why the mechanical is mentioned separately.


What you are talking about is the "reality vs marketing" thing, and I fear that you are right. But right now there is still room to dream a bit


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

magarity said:


> I wonder if the lighted buttons are a nice non-dark-vision-ruining red or the noxious bright blue that has infected almost all modern electronic things.


Pretty sure there will be an option to switch it off, maybe via a customized button.


----------



## Joules (Oct 24, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> I somehow feel that it won't be quite as fast as you hope (or it has other limitations, like only 12-bit readout (or even lower, say 10-bit)), and that's why the mechanical is mentioned separately.


I don't get what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that a mechanical shutter could deliver higher throughput than purely electronic one? That sounds like something worth elaborating, because it should be the other way around.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I'm disappointed. I expected a flying pony. I'm switching to Samsung Galaxy.


Galaxy sounds much better than Onedeeex, indeed


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

albron00 said:


> It reminds me something....
> 
> View attachment 187207


Yeah, but it reminds us that there is something missing in Canon's 1D series: the phone option.


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 24, 2019)

Joules said:


> I don't get what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that a mechanical shutter could deliver higher throughput than purely electronic one? That sounds like something worth elaborating, because it should be the other way around.


I'm saying that the readout speed at full bit depth is too slow to fully replace the mechanical shutter. For example it could take 1/50s to read the sensor, plenty of time (well "plenty" in this case is quite subjective) to run at 20fps but highly susceptible to rolling shutter artifacts.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> The one time I truly wished for a REAL silent mode was when, working for the orchestra, I got chased out of an auditiorium by a freaking classical-music lunatic. I don't think he heard anything, but just seeing a photographer _dressed in black _ slowly making his way down to the railing of the nearly empty balcony sent this guy into an insane rage. I was brought before the theater manager and ordered to take some shots with my 5DIII in silent mode. He concluded I had disrupted the whole theater and I was tossed out on my gear-end.
> 
> I really wish I had taken a shot of the guy having a hissy fit. Or a swing at him. Ah, well, that was six years ago. Time to just put it behind me?


The nice thing about the 1D series is that you can use it as a club, at least with a tele lens attached, and silence such a guy. That said, I would have sent him a letter apologizing for his inconvenience and attach a Manowar concert ticket


----------



## Pape (Oct 24, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Surely it will not boost the adrenaline levels of Megapixel fans. The 1D series was always dedicated to fast performance, not to highest possible resolution.


First time they are on situation where they dont need get it shoot faster ,16fps is kind of max what mechanical shutter can do.
Autofocus uses different sensor and own processor for it .
So megapixel amount wont affect to speed camera works


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> For me it is merely a case of curiousity. I can't see me ever having enough money to buy one of these AND the lenses required to get enough pixels on target. So this is just about seeing what Canon is capable of and it seems like they may be offering quite a bit.


The pixels are not the problem, since the pixel pitch of the 1D series is always moderate. Much cheaper Canon cameras offer more pixels. The main offering of the 1D's is speed, Canon's best video implementation (not crippled), and ruggedness.


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 24, 2019)

preppyak said:


> The 1D line seems to be the one place Canon does that. The 1DXII had 4k60 and 1080_120, which is something that 3.5 years later still hasnt trickled down to their other cameras. If this is shooting RAW internally, even at 1080, that'd be a damn impressive upgrade too



Yup, it seems it's the only place they're willing to incur the expense and risk cannibalizing their dedicated cinema cameras in order to provide pros with this video capability. I assume that the bigger body and higher asking price makes this both easier and more economically feasible for them. 

Still, I am always amazed that they don't let many of those features trickle down to at least the 5D / EOS R series as they could sell a ton of cameras.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> When they mention "Deep Learning" I wonder if that means some kind of machine learning? That requires a lot of processing power, so it sounds like they really upped the power in this thing.


The certainly upped the processing power, and now users have to hope that this machine can learn something useful. Hopefully, the AI in such a camera does not start a debate whether your actual framing and motif selection needs improvement


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Still, I am always amazed that they don't let many of those features trickle down to at least the 5D / EOS R series as they could sell a ton of cameras.


Well, Sony is always ready to take over this job, but not for Canon cameras.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 24, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> The pixels are not the problem, since the pixel pitch of the 1D series is always moderate. Much cheaper Canon cameras offer more pixels. The main offering of the 1D's is speed, Canon's best video implementation (not crippled), and ruggedness.


I and others have expressed disappointment in the 1DX2 coming out with 20 MPs. After using it primarily for bird photography I am loath to lose the FPS but am well aware of there being a significant benefit to some more resolution provided good high ISO performance remains. I'd be hesitant to spring for a 1DX3 unless it had at least 24 MPs. For hand held shooting much greater focal length means too much weight so more MPs can be very helpful for FL limited situations and smaller birds.

Jack


----------



## preppyak (Oct 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Still, I am always amazed that they don't let many of those features trickle down to at least the 5D / EOS R series as they could sell a ton of cameras.


Especially when Panasonic pretty much just made a full-frame line out of that premise.


----------



## Pape (Oct 24, 2019)

yeah would be fun if camera takes own framings and shows how his picture is better what you tooked


----------



## AlanF (Oct 24, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> I and others have expressed disappointment in the 1DX2 coming out with 20 MPs. After using it primarily for bird photography I am loath to lose the FPS but am well aware of there being a significant benefit to some more resolution provided good high ISO performance remains. I'd be hesitant to spring for a 1DX3 unless it had at least 24 MPs. For hand held shooting much greater focal length means too much weight so more MPs can be very helpful for FL limited situations and smaller birds.
> 
> Jack


24 Mpx represents only a 10% increase in resolution over 20 Mpx, like having a 440mm rather than a 400mm lens. Better than nothing but not a game changer.


----------



## Jan van Holten (Oct 24, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> I can just imagine the oil splatter!!!!!!!!


The improvement can be okay, but what I'll really like to see is the total lack of oil splattering. I'am getting more then sick of that, 400+ spots in a single image. Evening after evening cleaning the images. We have a company in Holland that is capable of cleaning the sensor completly, but after only two trips it is as bad as before. For me no 1DX anymore if they don't solve this problem. And I'll use these type of camera's for a very long time already. Very frustrating!!


----------



## Viggo (Oct 24, 2019)

preppyak said:


> The 1D line seems to be the one place Canon does that. The 1DXII had 4k60 and 1080_120, which is something that 3.5 years later still hasnt trickled down to their other cameras. If this is shooting RAW internally, even at 1080, that'd be a damn impressive upgrade too


Are we forgetting the April 2012 release of the 1dc?


----------



## navastronia (Oct 24, 2019)

Jan van Holten said:


> The improvement can be okay, but what I'll really like to see is the total lack of oil splattering. I'am getting more then sick of that, 400+ spots in a single image. Evening after evening cleaning the images. We have a company in Holland that is capable of cleaning the sensor completly, but after only two trips it is as bad as before. For me no 1DX anymore if they don't solve this problem. And I'll use these type of camera's for a very long time already. Very frustrating!!


What generates the oil splatter? The mirror or the shutter? Is it a problem in mirrorless bodies? I don’t know anything about this issue.


----------



## richperson (Oct 24, 2019)

AlanF said:


> 24 Mpx represents only a 10% increase in resolution over 20 Mpx, like having a 440mm rather than a 400mm lens. Better than nothing but not a game changer.



DPR's report mentioned that the emphasis might be on low light performance rather than a big mp jump. I'd be very happy with 24mp if it came with an extra stop or two of low light capability. Given number of mp and pixels size on a full frame are diametrically opposed, I have no problem with them making high ISO a priority.


----------



## GoldWing (Oct 24, 2019)

Not one word about COLOR


----------



## dcm (Oct 24, 2019)

Sharlin said:


> It's machine learning, yes, the deep convolutional/recurrent/whatever neural nets that have been all the rage for a couple years now. Beating humanity in Go and Starcraft and hallucinating shoggoths and now powering Google Translate and what have you.
> 
> But it is almost certain that the network in the camera is not going to be learning anything; it's been pre-taught and is basically just a big spreadsheet that you pass image data in and get some sort of feature classification data out that you can then use to figure out which part of the image the AF needs to track.



Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning has been used in cameras to determine exposure for some time. Remember “fuzzy logic”? The algorithm is trained from a portfolio of sample shots during development. The camera just applies what it has learned when you are using it. It doesn’t learn anything new from the pictures you take or adjust it’s algorithm. That would take quite a bit more processing power.

Improvements in computational resources (memory, processor) allow us to apply Machine Learning to harder problems, such as autofocus. It will be trained with a range of examples Canon constructed. How well it works for you will depend on how close their examples match your use and the ability of the algorithm to generalize what it has learned to address cases the examples didn’t address.

BTW: My AI experience started in the 1980s and ML about 10 years ago, not related to cameras. I am working on improvements to machine learning algorithms for performance and generalization in addition to teaching these days.


----------



## peters (Oct 24, 2019)

masterpix said:


> Most times in weddings one can't hear thmeselves think, so I wonder how a problem it is anyway. All in all, it say it has elecronic shutter as well, so you can use that via the live-view and forget about the mirror clicking.


Oh, in my experience its quite the opposite - in the church or in the "register office" (where the legal part of a wedding takes placei n germany) its VERY silent and every click feels like one click to much. Especialy with a strict pastor or small register office, its very annoying to have such a loud shutter.
I once saw one photographer with a Sony a9 with completely silent shutter, and it was like a charm. Many guests commented on the fact that the photographer was incredible silent and not noteable. =) 
I like the fact very much that the new 1D got a electronical shutter =)


----------



## DBounce (Oct 24, 2019)

francomade said:


> 4k 10bit 4:2:2 with clog. If it's true, I can sell my 1dx ii and EOS R!



I already parted with my 1DX Mk2, but I’m keeping my EOS R. I do wish that the new RF lenses were compatible with the new camera. Are we supposed to buy duplicate focal lengths for EF and RF? Not liking that part.


----------



## DBounce (Oct 24, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> Thanks Gordon Laing. He also mentioned internal RAW recording for video.
> 
> View attachment 187200



Canon, it’s 2019, can we lose the1980s LCD screens and replace them with OLED displays?


----------



## richperson (Oct 24, 2019)

DBounce said:


> I already parted with my 1DX Mk2, but I’m keeping my EOS R. I do wish that the new RF lenses were compatible with the new camera. Are we supposed to buy duplicate focal lengths for EF and RF? Not liking that part.



I have tried to avoid duplicating focal lengths at this point. I did get the RF 28-70mm as it works great in my low light theater environments, which the R also does a good job in. I really want the 85mm f/1.2 (I have the EF version), as it fits with they primary use of my R (theater and portrait), but otherwise, I am trying to hold off on any new RF lenses. Spending money for the 1DXiii will use up all my discretionary spend anyway. 

Once a sports R comes out, then I will probably be selective as I would assume I would use it side by side with the 1DX, so maybe use the R for wider angles and the 1DX for the long telephotos. The Canon R adapters have worked so well it's not super compelling to duplicate unless it's one of the f/2 lenses or you really need that extra half stop or sharpness of the R primes.


----------



## jhpeterson (Oct 24, 2019)

GoldWing said:


> Not one word about COLOR


From what I've seen, all indications are it will be black again.


----------



## mpmark (Oct 24, 2019)

Joules said:


> Could it be that resolution and IBIS aren't mentioned because they are not set in stone yet? Although the mention of frame rate implies the resolution somewhat.
> 
> If 20 FPS in LiveView is the best they can do, and the total throughput is at least as high as the one from the M6 II (32.5*14) it means the resolution is at least 22.75 MP.



No, at this point the camera would be already made, a small group of photographers have already shot with it. You cant be at the stage of deciding what still goes in it or design and expect a release months from now. It doesnt work that way, they have to get production lines and stock established before a release date.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 24, 2019)

Jan van Holten said:


> The improvement can be okay, but what I'll really like to see is the total lack of oil splattering. I'am getting more then sick of that, 400+ spots in a single image. Evening after evening cleaning the images. We have a company in Holland that is capable of cleaning the sensor completly, but after only two trips it is as bad as before. For me no 1DX anymore if they don't solve this problem. And I'll use these type of camera's for a very long time already. Very frustrating!!



So true. Maybe they should invent some blue-goo type stuff to put on there so they don't need oil.


----------



## mpmark (Oct 24, 2019)

peters said:


> If this would be a touch input, I wouldnt be that happy :/



from the photo it looks elevated like a joystick/button combo


----------



## BillB (Oct 24, 2019)

MadisonMike said:


> Before getting too excited, they left out some very important information and hyped some that few use. Live view on a 1D, really?? Rarely used it on my 80D but suddenly it will be a go to function when you want speed or focus points. Not seeing it happen in the real world.


Live View can be very useful on a tripod


----------



## TominNJ (Oct 24, 2019)

BillB said:


> Live View can be very useful on a tripod



live view is awesome with tilt shift. I don’t think I could use the tilt function without it.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> I and others have expressed disappointment in the 1DX2 coming out with 20 MPs. After using it primarily for bird photography I am loath to lose the FPS but am well aware of there being a significant benefit to some more resolution provided good high ISO performance remains. I'd be hesitant to spring for a 1DX3 unless it had at least 24 MPs. For hand held shooting much greater focal length means too much weight so more MPs can be very helpful for FL limited situations and smaller birds.
> 
> Jack


Yes it is a trade-off, I am a birder, too. That's why I frequently use a crop 7D Mk II for birding, despite its underwhelming AF performance (phase AF). I think there are still some people missing the former crop 1D series therefore, on an up-to-date level. The 7D series would fill this gap if Canon would improve its AF system substantially, but the question is if Canon will bring out a 7D Mk III. Not sure about that.


----------



## SV (Oct 24, 2019)

Surely they must know the sensor size/MP at this stage, but not telling...is very telling. Probably low twenties to get those "blistering fast" frames per second


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 24, 2019)

navastronia said:


> What generates the oil splatter? The mirror or the shutter? Is it a problem in mirrorless bodies? I don’t know anything about this issue.


Obviously you never used a Nikon DSLR  The oil splashes out of a badly sealed mirror mechanics, as far as I know.


----------



## padam (Oct 24, 2019)

SV said:


> Surely they must know the sensor size/MP at this stage, but not telling...is very telling. Probably low twenties to get those "blistering fast" frames per second


The rumour with IBIS and 28MP was false, but it will be at least 24MP and of course the size is FF.


----------



## Sparky (Oct 24, 2019)

Looks great. I won’t upgrade my 1DXii, as it suits my needs fine. But, I am curious about what will filter from this into the 5D5?


----------



## richperson (Oct 24, 2019)

padam said:


> The rumour with IBIS and 28MP was false, but it will be at least 24MP and of course the size is FF.



Do we know that for sure? I'm assuming no IBIS because they didn't announce it, but could also see that they have prototypes with and without IBIS (turning on and off could be software), and maybe each has a different sensor, which could be why they haven't announced the mp either.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 24, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> The pixels are not the problem, since the pixel pitch of the 1D series is always moderate. Much cheaper Canon cameras offer more pixels. The main offering of the 1D's is speed, Canon's best video implementation (not crippled), and ruggedness.



That is kind of my point. Lower mp mean longer and better quality lenses are required to overcome focal length limitations. So where with say a 5dsr and a $4000 400mrm lens might be sufficient in a particular circumstance, with a 1dx2 you would also need a 12000 600mm lens. So the cost goes up exponentially.


----------



## padam (Oct 24, 2019)

richperson said:


> Do we know that for sure? I'm assuming no IBIS because they didn't announce it, but could also see that they have prototypes with and without IBIS (turning on and off could be software), and maybe each has a different sensor, which could be why they haven't announced the mp either.


The hardware is final (why would they show it otherwise), they just haven't released the full specs yet.
IBIS has more heat emission and it does not have that much use for sports shooters anyway, so it would make sense to left it out in favour of internal raw recording, better battery life and a faster mechanical shutter.
Maybe the mirrorless equivalent will have it in a smaller body, smaller battery, but it will not have internal raw recording. And it will come later as they need more time to develop IBIS.


----------



## richperson (Oct 24, 2019)

padam said:


> The hardware is final (why would they show it otherwise), they just haven't released the full specs yet.
> IBIS has more heat emission and it does not have that much use for sports shooters anyway, so it would make sense to left it out in favour of internal raw recording, better battery life and a faster mechanical shutter.
> Maybe the mirrorless equivalent will have it in a smaller body, smaller battery, but it will not have internal raw recording. And it will come later as they need more time to develop IBIS.



I don't disagree that no IBIS in a 1DX would be okay. My point is that there is not necessarily anything on the outside of the body that would show if it did or did not have IBIS. I agree it is unlikely, but I don't think we can be 100% certain about it. 

I would guess it is more likely not there because it creates one more thing that could break down on a body that absolutely cannot break down.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 24, 2019)

richperson said:


> DPR's report mentioned that the emphasis might be on low light performance rather than a big mp jump. I'd be very happy with 24mp if it came with an extra stop or two of low light capability. Given number of mp and pixels size on a full frame are diametrically opposed, I have no problem with them making high ISO a priority.


You are not going to get a stop or two of low light capability unless you find a way of breaking the laws of physics. The low light capabilities are already pretty close to the maximum allowed by the statistics of photon noise.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 24, 2019)

AlanF said:


> 24 Mpx represents only a 10% increase in resolution over 20 Mpx, like having a 440mm rather than a 400mm lens. Better than nothing but not a game changer.


24 is a 120% of 20. Therefore 480mm over 400mm in your terms. It does not work as simple as in your example though.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 24, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> 24 is a 120% of 20. Therefore 480mm over 400mm in your terms. It does not work as simple as in your example though.


Resolution varies as the square root of the number of pixels, and the sqrt of 1.20 is close to 1.1. Resolution is measured in lp/mm, not lp^2/mm^2. A 480mm lens vs a 400mm lens will cover (480/400)^2 more pixels and be equivalent to a 28.8Mpx sensor relative to a 20Mpx one, not a 24Mpx one.


----------



## MadisonMike (Oct 24, 2019)

I disagree with your statement that "IBIS has more heat emission and it does not have that much use for sports shooters anyway" Any movement of the camera will negatively affect the image. I am pretty sure sports shooters are moving to keep their subject in frame, especially with longer focal length lenses. These lenses usually have IS, but adding IBIS with that helps even more to stabilize the camera and lens. IBIS is definitely on my list of wants for my next sports shooter.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 24, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Resolution varies as the square root of the number of pixels, and the sqrt of 1.20 is close to 1.1. Resolution is measured in lp/mm, not lp^2/mm^2. A 480mm lens vs a 400mm lens will cover (480/400)^2 more pixels and be equivalent to a 28.8 Mpx sensor relative to a 20Mpx one.


That’s correct. However the OP was referring to 24mp being a 10% increase over 20mp. Maths are off. On another note, I mentioned that it isn’t as simple as just resolution percentage. 
But again, you are correct.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 24, 2019)

MadisonMike said:


> I disagree with your statement that "IBIS has more heat emission and it does not have that much use for sports shooters anyway" Any movement of the camera will negatively affect the image. I am pretty sure sports shooters are moving to keep their subject in frame, especially with longer focal length lenses. These lenses usually have IS, but adding IBIS with that helps even more to stabilize the camera and lens.


I'm not so sure. On a stationary handheld camera, maybe - but why would it be handheld if it's stationary? On a panning camera, poorly tested IBIS may introduce much heavier problems than it tries to solve. So, it's unlikely that Canon's first generation of IBIS would be introduced on a pro sports body.


----------



## dslrdummy (Oct 24, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Surely it will not boost the adrenaline levels of Megapixel fans. The 1D series was always dedicated to fast performance, not to highest possible resolution.


Doesn't have to be "the highest possible resolution". But as someone who shot with the 1dxii for over two years, I would welcome at least a modest boost in resolution because unlike pros with their 600mm f4 lenses, I generally need to crop. 24 to 26 would be perfect.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 24, 2019)

I am going t take back what I said about there being no way the AF on button will implement some sort of touch function. seeing more photos suggests that is exactly what it is. Maybe they have improved it or maybe they felt that also having the joystick meant that anyone who doesn't like it would just turn it off.


----------



## NorskHest (Oct 24, 2019)

All in all this is what the 1dxmkii should have been. I can almost guarantee that canon has been sitting on loads of tech including this camera for a while now, as for this lovely little new camera I for one hope this 1dxmkiii stays at or around 20mp's, seeing that they have improved ISO which most likely means better dynamic range in addition is the exciting thing to me. On the video side this camera should be fantastic as long as they have focus peaking and no record limit. This is canon so it will be limited somewhere. I hope the tracking will be close to as good as the Sony's and yes the Sony's are incredible if you don't thinks so you haven't used one. I am a birder and i have lots of misses with my 1dc and 1dxmkii so i hope i don't have to keep using ans adapted A9 to getting good tracking and shots with my canon glass. cant wait to see the real world comparisons between this and the mkii and all the other new cameras coming out.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> 24 Mpx represents only a 10% increase in resolution over 20 Mpx, like having a 440mm rather than a 400mm lens. Better than nothing but not a game changer.



True, but of course I'd prefer a little more than 24. However, my observations of my situations and cropping suggest to me that I'm a person who would benefit quite a bit from 10%. Going 18 to 20 with better ISO performance had a reasonably significant benefit in my case but if I hadn't gone from 600mm to 800mm I would have had remorse, although my 800 does represent a compromise on speed and IQ. My main point is that I'm addicted to the higher FPS, seeing how ms can make quite a difference to a pose in a burst. Those not having the FPS may not realize this and I'm not just talking BIF. Of course it's all relative. 

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

SV said:


> Surely they must know the sensor size/MP at this stage, but not telling...is very telling. Probably low twenties to get those "blistering fast" frames per second


Is it conceivable they could have two modes allowing a choice? I'm not holding my breath.

Jack


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Oct 25, 2019)

Why wasn't the sensor resolution announced, any good reason they hid that? Surely it's locked in and how surprising could it be, somwhere between 21-24MP I would think. Given some of the juicy details they did give away why not sensor spec.


----------



## Valvebounce (Oct 25, 2019)

Hi justaCanonuser. 
With a bit of luck it will be like my 10 yr old Alpine head unit in my car, I can choose red, orange, that annoying blue and a half and half combination of any of them! 

Cheers, Graham. 



justaCanonuser said:


> Pretty sure there will be an option to switch it off, maybe via a customized button.


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2019)

Looking forward to RGB lighting


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 25, 2019)

The demo units at Photo Expo were operational, badged as 1DX Mark III's and looked mechanically and cosmetically finished to me. I suspect it's mostly a question of nailing down the chips and firmware at this point. I guess they could still change a few things internally but I'm guessing the chassis is final. It either has IBIS or it doesn't and since the body is practically identical to the Mark II I don't think you could physically fit a robust IBIS unit in the body I saw.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Since I taken loads of crap on this forum for having the gall to suggest that Canon's autofocus system had room for improvement, I'm taking great delight in seeing that the one thing Canon emphasized above all else in this announcement was improvement to its autofocus system.


I never had an issue with saying it could use improvement, all I ever said was it is comparable to the other manufacturers best at this point in time and people that said it had “a problem” we’re talking crap. Heck every metric can be improved, FPS, viewfinder blackout, etc etc.


----------



## wilsoncraft (Oct 25, 2019)

Pape said:


> On army they teach you break your rifle on dark. Just train use buttons when eyes closed and you dont need lighted buttons


Lighted buttons is awesome for night time photography of the sky. Really miss that feature that was on my D500.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 25, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> I am going t take back what I said about there being no way the AF on button will implement some sort of touch function. seeing more photos suggests that is exactly what it is. Maybe they have improved it or maybe they felt that also having the joystick meant that anyone who doesn't like it would just turn it off.



My guess is that little hole looking part on the button is some kind of sensor that tracks your finger moving over it, instead of actually moving the whole button.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I never had an issue with saying it could use improvement, all I ever said was it is comparable to the other manufacturers best at this point in time and people that said it had “a problem” we’re talking crap. Heck every metric can be improved, FPS, viewfinder blackout, etc etc.



Scott, do you see yourself upgrading? What would be things you'd like improved? Other than my typical focal length limited situations and wanting more MPs I've been pretty happy.

Jack


----------



## ethanz (Oct 25, 2019)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Why wasn't the sensor resolution announced, any good reason they hid that? Surely it's locked in and how surprising could it be, somwhere between 21-24MP I would think. Given some of the juicy details they did give away why not sensor spec.



Maybe they want a big surprise to withhold until the actual announcement?


----------



## ethanz (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I never had an issue with saying it could use improvement, all I ever said was it is comparable to the other manufacturers best at this point in time and people that said it had “a problem” we’re talking crap. Heck every metric can be improved, FPS, viewfinder blackout, etc etc.



I think the people he was referring to were those saying that it was vastly outdated and the competition was so much better. Not what you were saying.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Scott, do you see yourself upgrading? What would be things you'd like improved? Other than my typical focal length limited situations and wanting more MPs I've been pretty happy.
> 
> Jack



Don't upgrade Jack. I can't upgrade, so don't leave me behind.

P.S. Glad to see you posting again


----------



## TracerHD (Oct 25, 2019)

100/20*24=120
120=20% more
20%=0,2
Proof:
20+20*0,2=24

So 20 to 24 wild be 20% more

Not 120% and not 10%


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Don't upgrade Jack. I can't upgrade, so don't leave me behind.
> 
> P.S. Glad to see you posting again


Can't afford or justify so I'd better not tell my wife there is an upgrade or she'll be on my case to do so! 

Jack


----------



## nonac (Oct 25, 2019)

Bring it! I'm ready to pre-order.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 25, 2019)

TracerHD said:


> 100/20*24=120
> 120=20% more
> 20%=0,2
> Proof:
> ...



You have some beautiful math here, but when going from 20Mp to 24Mp, the spatial resolution increase will be sqrt(24/20) = 1.095, which can be rounded to 10%.
The resolution in terms of the pixel count will be 20%.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Maybe they want a big surprise to withhold until the actual announcement?


There are likely multiple sensor prototypes in testing now. The final verdict has not arrived yet. 

I would totally expect some resolution related surprises there. Say, 28MP. 
It is almost where R and 5D IV sits at the moment. 
I would happily upgrade my 5D IV to a 28MP 1 series Canon body. 
That would be a smart move by Canon, I thought.


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 25, 2019)

Jan van Holten said:


> The improvement can be okay, but what I'll really like to see is the total lack of oil splattering. I'am getting more then sick of that, 400+ spots in a single image. Evening after evening cleaning the images. We have a company in Holland that is capable of cleaning the sensor completly, but after only two trips it is as bad as before. For me no 1DX anymore if they don't solve this problem. And I'll use these type of camera's for a very long time already. Very frustrating!!



I know what you mean. Canon Canada does a great job of cleaning the sensor, but after an outing or two the sensor goes back to being a filthy mess. 

I won't be purchasing another 1D DSLR after now having had both the 1DX and 1DX2. I've had more problems with the 1D series than I ever have had with the 5D series. 

Once a mirrorless version is ready for prime time I'll re-examine the situation. I won't be an early adopter, though.


----------



## analoggrotto (Oct 25, 2019)

Does Canon typically do Development Announcements? It always seems like rumor rumor rumor Boom: Product Launch, retail in a few weeks maybe less.


----------



## Pixel (Oct 25, 2019)

What the heck is autofocus resolution? I've been in this business for a long time and I've never heard of that term.


----------



## Jordanf1 (Oct 25, 2019)

And i bet most of us will buy one  oh well DX2 will become my spare lol


----------



## Jordanf1 (Oct 25, 2019)

Pixel said:


> What the heck is autofocus resolution? I've been in this business for a long time and I've never heard of that term.



No idea, maybe its Autofocusing each frame for best resolution, thatll be interesting at 20fps shooting sports


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2019)

Pixel said:


> What the heck is autofocus resolution? I've been in this business for a long time and I've never heard of that term.


This is in reference to dedicated AF sensor resolution increase. Meaning More pixels for phase detection AF sensor. This allows for a better Metering and focusing in a very low light settings.


----------



## Joules (Oct 25, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> This is in reference to dedicated AF sensor resolution increase. Meaning More pixels for phase detection AF sensor. This allows for a better Metering and focusing in a very low light settings.


The Phase Detection sensors are separate sensors and not affected by an increase of the iTR sensor, I believe. The iTR sensor resolution increase will likely aid getting some LiveView features like face and eye AF and improved subject tracking. The number of AF points is something else though.


----------



## Pape (Oct 25, 2019)

I believe if sensor size would stayed about same they would already told. Now they can make sony and nikon sweat half year. 
If they release something like 35-60mpix then nikon and sony can throw their plans for next sport camera to trash bin.
Half year wasted planning.


----------



## masterpix (Oct 25, 2019)

peters said:


> Oh, in my experience its quite the opposite - in the church or in the "register office" (where the legal part of a wedding takes placei n germany) its VERY silent and every click feels like one click to much. Especialy with a strict pastor or small register office, its very annoying to have such a loud shutter.
> I once saw one photographer with a Sony a9 with completely silent shutter, and it was like a charm. Many guests commented on the fact that the photographer was incredible silent and not noteable. =)
> I like the fact very much that the new 1D got a electronical shutter =)


That differ Europe from teh rest of the world. I was once in India, and there was a wedding, somethign like 1km from where I was, and you could not hear yourself thinking already.


hazydave said:


> Probably something like the Olympus OM-D E-M1 X autofocus system. It's got deep learning AI models for various kinds of vehicles. So you're shooting an auto race, you put in "automobile" mode, and the camera basically just knows what a car is and locks on. This is not about the camera itself learning, it's based on an AI model built from analysis of many thousands of images. If it's got that AI processor built-in, it's likely they'll have new deep learning models for additional subjects as the software is improved... at least that what you'd expect from a mirrorless company. Not typical for Canon, but they do need to adapt to the market of today.


I would liek to mention that many times, action photographers did mentuon that the AF is "lost" sometimes due to the system lack of understanding the way the action goes. For example, the car in the race can come toward you but then turn to the side (you don't want to in it its way after all), so the AF will continue to monitor it getting close and will loose the exact shots when it turned to the side. having AI will notice the changes in the car position, and then use the already given algorithm to "expect" the car to have a differnt AF position, not just based on its advance toward you.


----------



## littleB (Oct 25, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I wish my microwave could do 16FPS in OVF and have 28MP sensor. Unfortunately it does not have it :-(


Your microwave is certainly *******, unless it is Sony-made.


----------



## francomade (Oct 25, 2019)

DBounce said:


> I already parted with my 1DX Mk2, but I’m keeping my EOS R. I do wish that the new RF lenses were compatible with the new camera. Are we supposed to buy duplicate focal lengths for EF and RF? Not liking that part.


I use my 1dx ii mainly for slowmo purposes only (120p) sadly.


----------



## Sparky (Oct 25, 2019)

masterpix said:


> That differ Europe from teh rest of the world. I was once in India, and there was a wedding, somethign like 1km from where I was, and you could not hear yourself thinking already.
> 
> Wow, that must have been a loud 1DXii!


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2019)

I do wonder if those with the most issues with this body will buy this brand new.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Scott, do you see yourself upgrading? What would be things you'd like improved? Other than my typical focal length limited situations and wanting more MPs I've been pretty happy.
> 
> Jack


Hi Jack not too sure yet, for me it depends entirely on the resolution. If it is in the 24mp range then I won’t be in any kind of a rush, if it is 28 or higher then yes I’d get one sooner.

I am very interested in the built in WiFi and wonder why it needs a WFT as well! And I could have used Bluetooth yesterday on a shoot. Personally for the stuff I do I am not finding the AF or anything else lets me down, I would like a way to run the camera silently even if that is just electronic shutter in live view as the 1’s have never been silent even in Live View.

interesting that they moved the remote release back to its traditional spot, which I think is a shame as working with an L plate the MkII’s position is nicer.

personally I’m not happy they moved to yet another card type but very pleased they are both the same type. Although it is nice they kept the same battery and I already have a mains adapter to power the camera for long sessions inside.

I can see me moving from 2 x 1DX MkII’s to a single 1DX MkIII and a high resolution R and get a lot more functionality and capabilities.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2019)

Pape said:


> On army they teach you break your rifle on dark. Just train use buttons when eyes closed and you dont need lighted buttons


When the camera is in your hand that is an easy way to work. Illuminated buttons are incredibly helpful at night/in the dark when the camera is set up on a tripod where you don’t have the muscle memory and you don’t want to mess with your night vision for framing by putting on a light. Once you have used illuminated buttons you wonder why they aren’t standard!


----------



## nonac (Oct 25, 2019)

This HEIF format sounds like a space saver that may speed up my workflow. I hope Camera Bits (Photo Mechanic) and Adobe (Lightroom) work on the comparability since they are both in my workflow for quickly editing sports shots.


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Hi Jack not too sure yet, for me it depends entirely on the resolution. If it is in the 24mp range then I won’t be in any kind of a rush, if it is 28 or higher then yes I’d get one sooner.
> 
> I am very interested in the built in WiFi and wonder why it needs a WFT as well![..]



The builtin wifi seems to be 2.4GHz (b/g/n) only while the WFT supports 5GHz (ac, b/g/n) and at least one video said "WFT for more range", so I guess it has a beefier radio and antenna than the builtin.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Hi Jack not too sure yet, for me it depends entirely on the resolution. If it is in the 24mp range then I won’t be in any kind of a rush, if it is 28 or higher then yes I’d get one sooner.
> 
> I am very interested in the built in WiFi and wonder why it needs a WFT as well! And I could have used Bluetooth yesterday on a shoot. Personally for the stuff I do I am not finding the AF or anything else lets me down, I would like a way to run the camera silently even if that is just electronic shutter in live view as the 1’s have never been silent even in Live View.
> 
> ...



Scott, your comments are precisely what has gone around in my head. You may recall I bought the R for the Costa Rica trip but it was always just to try and then my daughter would take it. We were both shooting and my setup was too heavy for her so I scarcely got a handful of shots with the R. I sit with a useless R ND filter adapter at the moment. I helped her use the R on a tripod shooting a water fall with my 11-24 and I was thoroughly pleased with that functionality.

However, I'm getting older and I don't earn money with photography and it seems so senseless to spend such big bucks in this way when there are other worthy demands on limited finances. I know some young readers think folks like me have the finances but that's not always true. I forego many other purchases to afford camera gear. 

Jack


----------



## felipeolveram (Oct 25, 2019)

Gah, i’m in a dilemma here, I have an R and just picked up the RF 24-70 and they announce my dream camera! Should I sell/return my 24-70mm get the ef version? Lately been questioning the materials thay these lenses are made out of they’re not as smooth plastic as the ef versions more matte plastic? I would love get the 1dx iii but dont need all the fps. I just wish this was a R mount camera!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

felipeolveram said:


> Gah, i’m in a dilemma here, I have an R and just picked up the RF 24-70 and they announce my dream camera! Should I sell/return my 24-70mm get the ef version? Lately been questioning the materials thay these lenses are made out of they’re not as smooth plastic as the ef versions more matte plastic? I would love get the 1dx iii but dont need all the fps. I just wish this was a R mount camera!



If you gravitate to shooting wildlife, you'll soon come to appreciate the FPS. Do remember this is a big, heavy, noisy beast.  And it tends to garner (unwanted) attention.

Jack


----------



## padam (Oct 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> If you gravitate to shooting wildlife, you'll soon come to appreciate the FPS. Do remember this is a big, heavy, noisy beast.  And it tends to garner (unwanted) attention.
> 
> Jack


With a fast readout on the sensor and advanced DPAF, it will gain a usable silent mode, although the fixed screen will make it awkward to use.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 25, 2019)

padam said:


> With a fast readout on the sensor and advanced DPAF, it will gain a usable silent mode, although the fixed screen will make it awkward to use.


Truly silent?? Right now, silent is not silent. That would be acceptable. Oh, oh I'm starting to feel GAS.

Jack


----------



## mak9000 (Oct 25, 2019)

MadisonMike said:


> Before getting too excited, they left out some very important information and hyped some that few use. Live view on a 1D, really?? Rarely used it on my 80D but suddenly it will be a go to function when you want speed or focus points. Not seeing it happen in the real world.


Unless there is an optional evf add-on !


----------



## padam (Oct 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Truly silent?? Right now, silent is not silent. That would be acceptable. Oh, oh I'm starting to feel GAS.
> 
> Jack


I see no reason why it wouldn't have it when it records raw video as well, keeping the dynamic range (as I said, the true 1DC successor)

Taken from the announcement: "What is interesting is In Live View shooting, you can shoot with both mechanical shutter and electronic shutter. "

The M6 Mark II also has the 30fps silent RAW burst in crop mode, and the sensor, card and processor are both much slower and a with higher megapixel count. EOS R also has a more or less usable silent mode, and that is with a much older , higher MP sensor.
To be honest, even the 1DX II was probably fully capable of it, just like with the C-Log.
Since it has almost the same exact body, and with that, many of the exact same drawbacks as its predecessor, they simply need to unlock these technology-related features to make sure it sells during the next 4 years.


----------



## mpmark (Oct 25, 2019)

Where did all the Sony boys run off too? LOL!!!


----------



## rikstir (Oct 25, 2019)

Since this camera will have some pretty cool live view features, what if you could use an external EVF like on the M6MKII? That might make it a nice bridge between DSLR's and the pro-mirrorless whenever that arrives.


----------



## slclick (Oct 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Since I taken loads of crap on this forum for having the gall to suggest that Canon's autofocus system had room for improvement, I'm taking great delight in seeing that the one thing Canon emphasized above all else in this announcement was improvement to its autofocus system.


You get a lot of crap due to all your logic and intelligent thought, no room for that nonsense here.


----------



## amorse (Oct 25, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> The builtin wifi seems to be 2.4GHz (b/g/n) only while the WFT supports 5GHz (ac, b/g/n) and at least one video said "WFT for more range", so I guess it has a beefier radio and antenna than the builtin.


I'm pretty sure it was for distance - the B&H announcement suggested that here. 

I could have sworn it said the WFT would give wifi transfer ranges up to a football field's length away (though I'm really struggling to remember where I saw that so I may be crazy). 

Beefier antenna indeed!


----------



## navastronia (Oct 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Truly silent?? Right now, silent is not silent. That would be acceptable. Oh, oh I'm starting to feel GAS.
> 
> Jack



If you care about a usable silent mode, I really wouldn't buy the Mark III until someone tests the speed of the sensor readout. Every modern digital camera except the X-T3 and the A9 have readouts too slow for all but the stillest subjects.


----------



## padam (Oct 25, 2019)

navastronia said:


> If you care about a usable silent mode, I really wouldn't buy the Mark III until someone tests the speed of the sensor readout. Every modern digital camera except the X-T3 and the A9 have readouts too slow for all but the stillest subjects.


It will be a lot faster than the R, which in itself is usable in burst mode, of course not all shots will be artifact-free, but it can be utilised, it might be close to the X-T3.


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 25, 2019)

navastronia said:


> If you care about a usable silent mode, I really wouldn't buy the Mark III until someone tests the speed of the sensor readout. Every modern digital camera except the X-T3 and the A9 have readouts too slow for all but the stillest subjects.


It's not really that bad for other than the stillest subjects, slowly walking people are often not a problem for example. Do you have a source for X-T3 readout speed, I was looking for it a while back but couldn't really find anything other than "X-T2 is x% faster than X-T1" and "X-T3 is x% faster than X-T2". A good amount of mft cameras have readout speed of 1/60s and IIRC X-T3 was slower than those.

Side note: those mfts and A9 all shoot 12bit files with that highest speed.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 25, 2019)

mpmark said:


> Where did all the Sony boys run off too? LOL!!!











Surprise from Canon! The new Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will record 4K 4:2:2 10-bit & RAW video internally! - sonyalpharumors


Well, I suppose that’s good news for Alpha shooters: Canon finally became serious with video and today they announced their Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will record 4K 4:2:2 10-bit & RAW video internally! That’s the new benchmark the future A7sIII has to beat!




www.sonyalpharumors.com


----------



## navastronia (Oct 25, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> It's not really that bad for other than the stillest subjects, slowly walking people are often not a problem for example. Do you have a source for X-T3 readout speed, I was looking for it a while back but couldn't really find anything other than "X-T2 is x% faster than X-T1" and "X-T3 is x% faster than X-T2". A good amount of mft cameras have readout speed of 1/60s and IIRC X-T3 was slower than those.
> 
> Side note: those mfts and A9 all shoot 12bit files with that highest speed.



I could find it at one point, but I'm coming up short today. I won't make up a number, but I do know that I saw no rolling shutter artifacts when I was shooting motion with an X-T3 in-store, but I did see them when I was shooting with an EOS R (shooting both with electronic shutter, of course).

YMMV.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Oct 25, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Surprise from Canon! The new Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will record 4K 4:2:2 10-bit & RAW video internally! - sonyalpharumors
> 
> 
> Well, I suppose that’s good news for Alpha shooters: Canon finally became serious with video and today they announced their Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will record 4K 4:2:2 10-bit & RAW video internally! That’s the new benchmark the future A7sIII has to beat!
> ...


That was a nuclear bomb for sony fan boys... check out the arguments guys... that is slaughtering!! That time no matter what would be coming soon... they gave all the innovation they had with many issues ofc like overheating for example on their bodies and now they ran out! You can't beat a company which is in so many years from the top ones in a matter of last 4-5 years. Common sense the result... and its just the beginning!


----------



## sanj (Oct 25, 2019)

Does anyone know the crop factor on video? Thx.


----------



## sanj (Oct 25, 2019)

From Canon Website: "The EOS-1D X Mark III features a brand-new AF sensor with 28 times more resolution than its predecessor" Can someone please educate me on what resolution has to to with better focus. What am I missing, please?


----------



## sanj (Oct 26, 2019)

sanj said:


> From Canon Website: "The EOS-1D X Mark III features a brand-new AF sensor with 28 times more resolution than its predecessor" Can someone please educate me on what resolution has to to with better focus. What am I missing, please?



I think I understand. It is not pixel resolution but AF sensor resolution. Right?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 26, 2019)

sanj said:


> From Canon Website: "The EOS-1D X Mark III features a brand-new AF sensor with 28 times more resolution than its predecessor" Can someone please educate me on what resolution has to to with better focus. What am I missing, please?



AF sensor that's used for auto focusing when the mirror is down, not the actual sensor.


----------



## expatinasia (Oct 26, 2019)

As an owner of a 1DX Mark I and Mark II I think we need to know a little more.

1) Glad that it takes the same batteries, but as I have quite a few I would like to know what impact using Mark I and Mark II batteries in the camera will have and whether the new charger will handle all three versions the same way? The batteries are amazing and if they have improved them further, then wow.

2) Love the illuminated buttons. This will be very useful in some circumstances, and I hope that it can be turned off, and the brightness dimmed etc. too.

3) Lots of fancy words about the AF flying about. It's not going to be worse than previous versions, so will be great to learn more about this.

4) They say it has WiFi and Bluetooth but there are pictures of it with the WiFi adapter, so am looking forward to learning exactly what this means. Would be truly fantastic if I can send RAW pictures directly to the cloud and / or my phone without too much battery drain.

5) New cards. Ouch, if you shoot video - especially 4K - you are going to spend quite a bit of money to get cards big enough to fit your work. Add in a second or third for redundancy and that's a fair bit of change. I liked the dual system on the 1DX Mark II as it meant I could still use my old CF cards when the primary card was full without spending more money. Plus, there's no way of knowing whether these CF Express cards will be in the 1DX Mark IV. Personally I would have liked to have a CF card slot as well as a CF Express slot.

6) The body has hardly changed at all so that's good.

7) FPS - I have never locked my mirror in place to take advantage of the Mark I or Mark II's fastest FPS when using viewfinder. Will be good to learn more about the FPS and the viewfinder too.

I can't help but wonder why Canon has made this development announcement? From memory, don't they normally just release ?


----------



## melgross (Oct 26, 2019)

hazydave said:


> It's a matter of both shutter speed and image processing performance. The Olympus E-M1 Mark II can do 10fps CAF, 15fps SAF, with the mechanical shutter, 18fps CAF, 60fps SAF with electronic shutter. The mirror + shutter is the physical limit, and while that's slowly increased, they're probably close to the limits for these by now. Canon's unlikely to skimp on image processing power in a flagship camera, of course. And their PDAF sensors are getting huge these days, to allow for some of the mirrorless-camera image processing tricks. `



of course, the 4/3 is a much smaller format, so the mass of the shutter is much less, and it has to travel a shorter distance. Considering that, makes these new Canon specs look even more impressive.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 26, 2019)

mariosk1gr said:


> That was a nuclear bomb for sony fan boys... check out the arguments guys... that is slaughtering!! That time no matter what would be coming soon... they gave all the innovation they had with many issues ofc like overheating for example on their bodies and now they ran out! You can't beat a company which is in so many years from the top ones in a matter of last 4-5 years. Common sense the result... and its just the beginning!



It can't be a bomb because the camera hasn't been released yet and we don't know all the specs. Also A9II's usage isn't fully overlapping with 1DXIII, the former is mirrorless, the later is mirrorful. Slightly different target customers.

Also most of the people here and most of the people on Sony rumors will never buy or use neither 1DXIII nor A9II. I'll probably never buy one as they're not landscape cameras. So it's fun to watch Canon fanboys vs Sony fanboys battle but not practical at all.


----------



## analoggrotto (Oct 26, 2019)

mariosk1gr said:


> That was a nuclear bomb for sony fan boys... check out the arguments guys... that is slaughtering!! That time no matter what would be coming soon... they gave all the innovation they had with many issues ofc like overheating for example on their bodies and now they ran out! You can't beat a company which is in so many years from the top ones in a matter of last 4-5 years. Common sense the result... and its just the beginning!


Canon clearly waited to develop the hardware to handle the stress of the software. They have a reputation of function and reliability that must be upheld. 

The sensor tech of this camera will surely form the basis of an EOS R, Canon did not develop that superlative glass for the EOS R. We are on the eve of an exciting and expensive time. 

This is the company that gave us the AE-1 Program!


----------



## dlee13 (Oct 26, 2019)

I wonder if this body will feature Quad Pixel AF considering there was patents for it quite some time ago.


----------



## Pape (Oct 26, 2019)

I doubt ibis on this . Canon wants make ibis what works together with lens IS. so need to be RF mount.
Without RF too much added weight and unreliability with too few gain.
Sport peoples use nearly always IS lenses and when they use wide angle ,there is enough light without ibis.


----------



## padam (Oct 26, 2019)

expatinasia said:


> I can't help but wonder why Canon has made this development announcement? From memory, don't they normally just release ?


They've already did that multiple times with the EOS R system as well.


----------



## Joules (Oct 26, 2019)

sanj said:


> From Canon Website: "The EOS-1D X Mark III features a brand-new AF sensor with 28 times more resolution than its predecessor" Can someone please educate me on what resolution has to to with better focus. What am I missing, please?



I explained what I understood that to mean here:




__





Canon officially announces the development of the EOS-1D X Mark III


MELVILLE, N.Y., October 24, 2019 – Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced that its parent company, Canon Inc. is developing the highly anticipated Canon EOS-1D X Mark III Camera – the successor to the world-renowned and award-winning EOS-1D X Mark II. Ideal for...




www.canonrumors.com





The focusing itself should still rely on phase detection, but finding out where faces and eyes are in the frame and where a subject has moved relative to the previous frame should be far easier with such a separate image sensor. Of course it will also require a lot of processing power to handle that.


----------



## jd7 (Oct 26, 2019)

Joules said:


> I explained what I understood that to mean here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Would be interesting if they could they could use that high resolution AF sensor to AF like a mirrorless camera for accuracy but keeping the best of DSLR AF as well. Perhaps even have the imaging sensor doing some AF too when the mirror is up? I don't know much about how AF systems work, so I don't know what's possible and what's not, but it sounds like it would be good ...!


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 26, 2019)

I wonder if the inclusion of HEIF means that we are going to see a 10 bit HEVC "MJPEG style" proprietary codec for video. I think those codecs are typically hard-coded into the processor. 10 bit HEIF/HEVC would allow a better version of C Log and have more DR than MJPEG but it may have all of the same issues that make MJPEG a pain to work with. I don't know too much about the new format. I guess it will replace 8 bit JPG's for stills as well.

Personally, I don't see myself going back to DSLR's for video. No EVF and a fixed rear display are just too much of a hassle. I guess that could be overcome with an external recorder but so far that's something Canon has resisted.


----------



## expatinasia (Oct 26, 2019)

padam said:


> They've already did that multiple times with the EOS R system as well.


 I was talking about Canon's 1 series.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 26, 2019)

jd7 said:


> Would be interesting if they could they could use that high resolution AF sensor to AF like a mirrorless camera for accuracy but keeping the best of DSLR AF as well. Perhaps even have the imaging sensor doing some AF too when the mirror is up? I don't know much about how AF systems work, so I don't know what's possible and what's not, but it sounds like it would be good ...!



Congratulations, you've just invented DPAF!


----------



## raptor3x (Oct 26, 2019)

sanj said:


> From Canon Website: "The EOS-1D X Mark III features a brand-new AF sensor with 28 times more resolution than its predecessor" Can someone please educate me on what resolution has to to with better focus. What am I missing, please?



I could certainly be wrong but my suspicion is that they're using a much higher resolution metering sensor in order to get mirrorless-like subject recognition and tracking through the OVF.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 27, 2019)

http://thenewcamera.com/canon-1dx-mark-iii-to-feature-28mp-dpaf-sensor-and-ibis-rumor/ Kind of hard to believe what's being promoted.

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> http://thenewcamera.com/canon-1dx-mark-iii-to-feature-28mp-dpaf-sensor-and-ibis-rumor/ Kind of hard to believe what's being promoted.
> 
> Jack



Unfortunately Jack I think they are just after clicks. This is an old rumor that circulated here a while ago but we know the fps are 20, we know the screen isn't any bigger because we have seen the images. IBIS is a pipe dream and I doubt 28mp is going to happen, I suspect it will be closer to 24/25mp.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 27, 2019)

If Canon comes with a 24/25Mp sensor, but without 6K RAW video, people will claim that Canon has intentionally crippled the camera to "protect" C500 II.


----------



## gsealy (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Unfortunately Jack I think they are just after clicks. This is an old rumor that circulated here a while ago but we know the fps are 20, we know the screen isn't any bigger because we have seen the images. IBIS is a pipe dream and I doubt 28mp is going to happen, I suspect it will be closer to 24/25mp.



If they wanted to do something really great it would be to have a slower full sensor mode with 30mp, and then a high speed cropped mode with 22-24mp.


----------



## melgross (Oct 27, 2019)

gsealy said:


> If they wanted to do something really great it would be to have a slower full sensor mode with 30mp, and then a high speed cropped mode with 22-24mp.


Eh!


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

Kit. said:


> If Canon comes with a 24/25Mp sensor, but without 6K RAW video, people will claim that Canon has intentionally crippled the camera to "protect" C500 II.


It doesn't matter if it is gold plated and comes with a free photo tour of wherever you'd dream of going and had IBIS, 16 stops of DR, 1,000,000FPS and a cuddly toy the bitches will find something to bitch about.

I'm sure there will be a CODEC, "issue" or a "crippled" crop in some modes, or the new AF button will be a "deal breaker", meanwhile creatives will be creating with it. Its funny how the differences on the talking heads on YouTube are reading it, from a _"why bother DSLR's are dead"_ to a _"wow I am super excited as this is a real upgrade to my 1DC and I can only imagine the stuff I am going to be able to shoot with it", _if I hear one more pundit say_ "but it can't take the new RF lenses"_ I might just take a YouTube moratorium....


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

gsealy said:


> If they wanted to do something really great it would be to have a slower full sensor mode with 30mp, and then a high speed cropped mode with 22-24mp.


I would hate a crop mode. I hated the 1D-1D MkIV, I buy FF cameras to be FF cameras not overpriced APS-C cameras or worse, why would I pay over $2,000 for an 11-24 that is heavy as a brick doesn't have IS and I can't filter for it to become a modest 16mm lens I can get in a better design in the 16-35 f4 IS?


----------



## unfocused (Oct 27, 2019)

gsealy said:


> If they wanted to do something really great it would be to have a slower full sensor mode with 30mp, and then a high speed cropped mode with 22-24mp.


I don't think your math works. A full frame 30 mp cropped to 22 mp would be less than a 1.2 crop. Not particularly beneficial.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 27, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> http://thenewcamera.com/canon-1dx-mark-iii-to-feature-28mp-dpaf-sensor-and-ibis-rumor/ Kind of hard to believe what's being promoted.
> 
> Jack


28 mp is consistent with what Craig has posted and seems totally believable. The rest. Not so much.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 27, 2019)

expatinasia said:


> As an owner of a 1DX Mark I and Mark II I think we need to know a little more.
> 
> 4) They say it has WiFi and Bluetooth but there are pictures of it with the WiFi adapter, so am looking forward to learning exactly what this means. Would be truly fantastic if I can send RAW pictures directly to the cloud and / or my phone without too much battery drain.
> 
> ...



The WiFi adapter will be faster and geared to pros who have a big support network to receive and process the files during professional sports and NCAA games. The built in WiFi is for us mere mortals.

On the cards, it looks like CF Express will be a little cheaper than CFast. I'm not happy about it, but I understand why they are doing it. Unfortunately, the Mark II was released at a time when card technology was in transition.

FPS -- For me, the only number that counts is the FPS through the viewfinder *without *mirror lockup. Everything else is impractical for my use.


----------



## jd7 (Oct 27, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Congratulations, you've just invented DPAF!


Fair enough. What I’m thinking of - and I think a few other posters in this thread are saying something similar - is the AF sensor being a combination of a DPAF sensor and phase detect system so you get the benefits of both including things like eye detect AF while the mirror is down, and when the mirror goes up the DPAF imaging sensor contributes AF data too when the mirror is up. To me, the idea of AF accuracy at shallow DOF and things like eye detect AF from the R system coupled with an OVF and the DSLR's ability to track fast moving things sounds good - even if it means no RF lenses for me (and at their current pricing, I’m not sure how many I’d buy even if I had an R system camera - but no doubt the price will go down over time).


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

unfocused said:


> 28 mp is consistent with what Craig has posted and seems totally believable. The rest. Not so much.


If it's 28 then I will move sooner, I think it will be in the 24 range so I'm not quite as keen but will get there eventually.

I've been trying to do a reasonable extrapolation from the current specs of the MkII and the known specs of the MkIII.

MkII: 70 frame buffer with 20mp and 14fps.
MkIII: 5 times the buffer size and 20fps.

But I can't get a reasonable margin of error down low enough to indicate where in the 20's it might be. Besides the buffer is really just a road block that is negated by faster cards so it doesn't really help.

However if you take the C500 II pixel density and extrapolate a 135 format sensor you get just over 21mp. If I had to take a guess, though I'd be disappointed in the number and feel it would appeal to fewer stills shooters, I'd guess at that 21mp.


----------



## expatinasia (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> MkII: 70 frame buffer with 20mp and 14fps.
> MkIII: 5 times the buffer size and 20fps.



We do not know what the 20fps is right? That might be jpeg only. I would be very surprised if the Mark III can shoot RAW at 20fps.

For me personally I only want to know the max fps looking through the viewfinder and without locking the mirror up. The other fps stats mean very little to me, though am sure they may be important to others and certainly look good on paper.

Also, once you pass a certain point - which I think the 1 series has already - then the frame buffer doesn't matter so much either ( i know you were mentioning both trying to calculate the mps).


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

expatinasia said:


> We do not know what the 20fps is right? That might be jpeg only. I would be very surprised if the Mark III can shoot RAW at 20fps.
> 
> For me personally I only want to know the max fps looking through the viewfinder and without locking the mirror up. The other fps stats mean very little to me, though am sure they may be important to others and certainly look good on paper.
> 
> Also, once you pass a certain point - which I think the 1 series has already - then the frame buffer doesn't matter so much either ( i know you were mentioning both trying to calculate the mps).


Yep, for me the one number worth a darn at this point is the mp. 

The interesting thing for me for shooting via Live View/with the mirror up is the electronic shutter and the possibility we might have a silent camera, that would be very useful to me on occasions, though getting the mirror up and the mechanical shutter out of the way won't be silent...


----------



## Valvebounce (Oct 27, 2019)

Hi pbd. 
From experience it will still be much quieter than when it comes back down again! 

Cheers, Graham. 



privatebydesign said:


> though getting the mirror up and the mechanical shutter out of the way won't be silent...


----------



## Joules (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> MkII: 70 frame buffer with 20mp and 14fps.
> MkIII: 5 times the buffer size and 20fps.


Maybe another way of looking at it is throughput. Here are the products of max FPS and resolution for the outgoing generation of DSLR:

1DX II 323
5Ds 253
5D IV 210
7D II 202
6D II 170
80D 169

So the 1DX II has 191% the throuput of the 80D. One could assume this stays true with the 1DX III and 90D, which has the same throughput as the 1DX II. In that case the 1DX III could end up at 621 MP/s (That's Sony territory). With 20 FPS that would require a 31 MP sensor.

It seems more likely that Canon don't feel like they have to distance their flag ship so far from the other models and that they will go with something in the 20s. Although, with the lossy RAW option, how much space does it save? Could the resolution go up by 50% while the file size remains comparable to the 1DX II one? File size is the most legitimate reason I've read for keeping the resolution low in the 1 series.


----------



## heheapa (Oct 27, 2019)

Does it support the RF mount?


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 27, 2019)

heheapa said:


> Does it support the RF mount?


NO


----------



## Joules (Oct 27, 2019)

heheapa said:


> Does it support the RF mount?


As the material mentions an optical viewfinder, the mount is basically guaranteed to be EF.

RF is to short to allow space for a mirror.


----------



## BillB (Oct 27, 2019)

Joules said:


> Maybe another way of looking at it is throughput. Here are the products of max FPS and resolution for the outgoing generation of DSLR:
> 
> 1DX II 323
> 5Ds 253
> ...


Another reason has been to get higher fps for a given throughput, but if the throughput constraints have gone away, then we might see a higher mp sensor.


----------



## Pape (Oct 27, 2019)

No processor problem anymore .
Its more about read out speed and about how much they can raise megapixel and keep high iso peformance same.
Peoples here say downscaled 5ds high iso resolution is as good as 5div,so not imposible raise megapixels i guess.
and we dont know what new generation sensors can do.
How many M lenses they released this year 0 i believe and 3 RF lense. So if they equally put bigger effort to full frame sensor than to 32mpixel crop sensor,it should be awesome.
m62 does 448 throughput and focus same time , 1dx3 does have extra processor for focusing probably , so with 2 digig 9 i would think throughput is somewhere around 1500.
About missing 6k video. Also possible sensor is too small for 6k could be just 12mpixel, to make possible perfectly working electronic shutter.
Then lame 20fp burst is plausible cause canon just except peoples use video capture for more faster burst.
Sport pictures anyway used on internet so 12mpixel is just big enough.
So my guess for sensor size is 12-80 mpixel 
Worst explanation to more worse readout speed than M6ii and no 6k video would be they reuse old 1DX2 sensor  .


----------



## Kit. (Oct 27, 2019)

expatinasia said:


> We do not know what the 20fps is right? That might be jpeg only.


If Canon really wants to troll everyone, 20fps will be animated GIF only.



expatinasia said:


> I would be very surprised if the Mark III can shoot RAW at 20fps.


Why? Every digital photo camera shoots RAW at any frame rate. They may record the results in lossy compressed formats if the recording medium is not fast enough, but in these particular cameras, that's what the frame buffer is for.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I would hate a crop mode. I hated the 1D-1D MkIV, I buy FF cameras to be FF cameras not overpriced APS-C cameras or worse, why would I pay over $2,000 for an 11-24 that is heavy as a brick doesn't have IS and I can't filter for it to become a modest 16mm lens I can get in a better design in the 16-35 f4 IS?


 Seems that's like saying I'd hate to have a race car that was capable of being driven in a parade, on occasion. The 1D4 was very nice, in size and functionality. I loved it except as a dated camera it had too few MP and did not have good high ISO like the 6D that was in my possession at the time. FF for wide and crop for long is potentially useful, to me. Easily filtering the 11-24 is a big deal and I give Canon full credit for giving the ring adapters for the R series.

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Seems that's like saying I'd hate to have a race car that was capable of being driven in a parade, on occasion. The 1D4 was very nice, in size and functionality. I loved it except as a dated camera it had too few MP and did not have good high ISO like the 6D that was in my possession at the time. FF for wide and crop for long is potentially useful, to me. Easily filtering the 11-24 is a big deal and I give Canon full credit for giving the ring adapters for the R series.
> 
> Jack


 Good analogy Jack, to which I would say _'are you a parade poser or a real racer?' _  If its a race car I want a non existent clutch and I can do without the cooling capacity to run it at idle for longer than the start line dictates...


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> I know what you mean. Canon Canada does a great job of cleaning the sensor, but after an outing or two the sensor goes back to being a filthy mess.
> 
> I won't be purchasing another 1D DSLR after now having had both the 1DX and 1DX2. I've had more problems with the 1D series than I ever have had with the 5D series.
> 
> Once a mirrorless version is ready for prime time I'll re-examine the situation. I won't be an early adopter, though.


I've owned 1D, 1D MkIIn, 1Ds MkII, 1Ds MkIII and 1DX MkII. Far and away the worst for oil were the 1Ds MkIII's, my 1DX MkII's I don't have any oil issues with.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I've owned 1D, 1D MkIIn, 1Ds MkII, 1Ds MkIII and 1DX MkII. Far and away the worst for oil were the 1Ds MkIII's, my 1DX MkII's I don't have any oil issues with.



People like Art Moris were looking for oil like they were explorers in the Gulf of Mexico. I have the odd spot that sometimes shows in the sky and if it/they do I blot them out in short order. Mind you I only have about 55k activations. 

Jack


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 27, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> People like Art Moris were looking for oil like they were explorers in the Gulf of Mexico. I have the odd spot that sometimes shows in the sky and if it/they do I blot them out in short order. Mind you I only have about 55k activations.
> 
> Jack



I doubt this. I’ve seen Results from over 40 different Mark II’s and every single one of them has atrocious oil splatter.

In my experience, those that claim that there’s no oil on their sensors are either in denial, or don’t stop down often enough to notice.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 28, 2019)

I view my photos on a quality 30"4K monitor and am pretty fussy. Not a big problem at all. I don't shoot much landscape, which would tend to be more problematic. Of course you're welcome to doubt.

Jack


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 28, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> I view my photos on a quality 30"4K monitor and am pretty fussy. Not a big problem at all. I don't shoot much landscape, which would tend to be more problematic. Of course you're welcome to doubt.
> 
> Jack



I will continue to doubt! 

Especially since, by admission, you don’t shoot much landscape.


I've kept my 1DX2 because it's an awesome camera in every other regard, from focus speed to durability. However, it isn't without its glaring flaws (namely, the oil splatter). I hope the 1DX3 addresses the problem, but I'm not holding my breath. I won't be another early adopter -- I was with the 1DX2. I had the CFast corruption issue, and I found sensor problems on early production units of the camera, prompting Canon to replace sensors where strange sensor lines were present on final images. 

I'll look at the 1DX3 after it's been out for half a year or so, and any kinks are worked out.


----------



## felipeolveram (Oct 28, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I've owned 1D, 1D MkIIn, 1Ds MkII, 1Ds MkIII and 1DX MkII. Far and away the worst for oil were the 1Ds MkIII's, my 1DX MkII's I don't have any oil issues with.




What is the root cause of the oil splatter and is it cured by a sensor cleaning?


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 28, 2019)

felipeolveram said:


> What is the root cause of the oil splatter and is it cured by a sensor cleaning?



I assume the root cause is the mirror mechanism is flinging oil as it moves up and down rapidly. 

The sensors can be cleaned. The oil returns after a few hundred frames, however. The amount of accumulation can be minimized by not shooting at the full burst speed of 14 fps. If you tend to be a single shot shooter, you likely won't notice the problem for some time.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 28, 2019)

In my experience you have to stop down quite a bit and then crank the presence on a blue sky to see oil spots with 1DX Mark II. Price you pay for 14 fps in my opinion. The few times I've noticed it I didn't have any problem correcting. Hardly a major issue for me but YMMV.

edit; I guess if I was shooting air shows with slow or stopped down lenses I'd probably get tired of cleaning up the spots. I expect Canon would have elimited the oil by now if they could so it's probably not getting much better in the Mark III at 16 FPS. If Air Shows were my main thing I might consider a mirror-less instead.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 28, 2019)

Kit. said:


> If Canon really wants to troll everyone, 20fps will be animated GIF only.



No, if Canon REALLY wanted to troll everyone, they'd offer 23.5p and 24.5p, _but not 24p._


----------



## ethanz (Oct 28, 2019)

Jack, my camera gets lots of oil spots. Not as bad as R7 D1. I sent my camera off to CPS for the CMS before my big France trip recently and like the second or third day I noticed the spots were appearing. There are so many spots in my trip pictures now that I'm pretty upset. Even f5.6 pictures have them. After I got back I sent it back to CPS and had them clean it again. It seems better now...


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2019)

felipeolveram said:


> What is the root cause of the oil splatter and is it cured by a sensor cleaning?


The root cause seems to be the lubrication they put on the mirror mechanism. It seems that it was occasionally over applied in the factory and generally isnt stable enough for the job. But it is inconsistent, some cameras seem to be badly impacted by it and some dont seem to have any issues at all. Having said that nothing Canon have ever done or I have ever seen comes close to the issues Nikon has had in the past with the D600 being so bad it was banned from being sold in China!

Sensor cleaning is nothing but a short term ‘fix’ especially for cameras that seem prone to the problem. The solution is to send it in to Canon who will clean out the lubricant and reinstall it to factory specs.


----------



## Jim Corbett (Oct 28, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> I will continue to doubt!
> 
> Especially since, by admission, you don’t shoot much landscape.
> 
> ...


Man, this is bad! You've just killed my GAS for the mkIII.
Just like A9II, and very likely D6, there is a big chance 1DxIII is just a copy of mkII - rushed and redressed with bells and whistles for the Olympics. I, like you, am not going to be the lab mouse.
If the AF of the 5DmkV will at least be 90% the accuracy of the upcoming 1Dx, I'm going with it.


----------



## LDS (Oct 28, 2019)

BillB said:


> Live View can be very useful on a tripod



It also works like a charm on these:









Canon Announces The Development Of An Innovative Photography Solution For Live Events


The solution will Enable Remote Operation of Canon’s Interchangeable Lens Cameras in Inaccessible Locations for Photographers MELVILLE, NY, September 19, 2019



www.canonrumors.com


----------



## miken (Oct 28, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> I will continue to doubt!
> 
> Especially since, by admission, you don’t shoot much landscape.
> 
> ...


I get exactly the same mess on my images. It's horrendous and the camera has been back to Canon three times. I give up on sending it back now and have learned to clean it myself.


----------



## Warrenl (Oct 28, 2019)

Oil splatter is a major issue. 95% of what I shoot is wide open, but I do shoot airshows where it is a nightmare. Both my 1DX11 bodies have the issue...


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2019)

Warrenl said:


> Oil splatter is a major issue. 95% of what I shoot is wide open, but I do shoot airshows where it is a nightmare. Both my 1DX11 bodies have the issue...


How long was it since you cleaned it? Are we going to blame Canon for the hair on there too?

You do know the difference between dust spots and hair (Canon not responsible for) and oil spots (Canon are responsible for)?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 28, 2019)

If I had that situation I would either accept that there is maintenance, like car oil changes, or I'd not buy the product, as stated. My burst shooting is typically 4 or 5 at a time and never over 10, maybe that makes a difference. BTW, how cropped are these?

Jack


----------



## $winter (Oct 28, 2019)

Order  ... my commitment to canon..


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 28, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Jack, my camera gets lots of oil spots. Not as bad as R7 D1. I sent my camera off to CPS for the CMS before my big France trip recently and like the second or third day I noticed the spots were appearing. There are so many spots in my trip pictures now that I'm pretty upset. Even f5.6 pictures have them. After I got back I sent it back to CPS and had them clean it again. It seems better now...


You have to crank up camera raw "clarity" to 100 to get an image like R7D1's first image and the "Dehaze" to something similar to get a result like the second. Presumably he is doing that in an honest attempt to illustrate the oil splatter but the pictures would be completely unusable with that much presence added. I suspect they don't look anything like that at normal editing values but obviously if you shoot a lot of blue sky photos those spots would be a pain to deal with. I don't have that issue personally but I empathize if it's causing you some aggravation. I guess it's possible Canon caused it by over lubricating when you had it in for service.


----------



## dcm (Oct 29, 2019)

Guess I'm fortunate. I do shoot continuously for BIF on occasion. My favorite was a 60 shot 10 fps sequence of a bald eagle fishing in a lake.

Recently, I noticed a couple of spots in the sky of images taken with my 1DXII. I'm pretty careful when I swap lenses and the spots weren't noticeable in prior images. I'm not a pixel peeper, but I usually preview at 1:2 so it was quite noticeable.

So I finally had the sensor cleaned after nearly 3.5 years and around 40K images. Images are clean again.


----------



## Raptors (Oct 29, 2019)

dcm said:


> Guess I'm fortunate. I do shoot continuously for BIF on occasion. My favorite was a 60 shot 10 fps sequence of a bald eagle fishing in a lake.
> 
> Recently, I noticed a couple of spots in the sky of images taken with my 1DXII. I'm pretty careful when I swap lenses and the spots weren't noticeable in prior images. I'm not a pixel peeper, but I usually preview at 1:2 so it was quite noticeable.
> 
> So I finally had the sensor cleaned after nearly 3.5 years and around 40K images. Images are clean again.


DCM, just curious how many of the 60 shot 10 fps sequence of a bald eagle fishing in a lake were sharp?


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 29, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> You have to crank up camera raw "clarity" to 100 to get an image like R7D1's first image and the "Dehaze" to something similar to get a result like the second. Presumably he is doing that in an honest attempt to illustrate the oil splatter but the pictures would be completely unusable with that much presence added. I suspect they don't look anything like that at normal editing values but obviously if you shoot a lot of blue sky photos those spots would be a pain to deal with. I don't have that issue personally but I empathize if it's causing you some aggravation. I guess it's possible Canon caused it by over lubricating when you had it in for service.




First, those weren't my images. They were images from two different users' cameras over at Fred Miranda. I have images from 40+ different cameras, all exhibiting similar or worse splatter.

Second, yes, you're correct -- the dehaze was meant to highlight the issue, and just how much splatter accumulates. However, with that said, go try that with any other camera, including that 7D Mark II which shoots at 10 fps, and see the difference, even when dehaze is boosted to 100%.

Third, even without excessive dehaze added, the issue still can, and does, present problems for a lot of normal use cases.


There's no point in trying to either defend the indefensible, or make excuses for a glaring problem. It's a problem, and even if it doesn't immediately affect your work or images, just imagine that junk accumulating en mass on your sensor. You'll have to clean it eventually, even if you shoot at f/2.8 all the time. I know that with my particular copy of the 1DX Mark II I can start seeing spots at f/5.6 once there's enough accumulation.

Again...the 1D series are fantastic. But they aren't without their issues. I've chosen to live with it for the sake of the other benefits of owning the camera. That said, I doubt I'll be spending big bucks again without thoroughly vetting the new model and allowing other early adopters to be the lab rats.


----------



## GoldWing (Oct 29, 2019)

jhpeterson said:


> From what I've seen, all indications are it will be black again.


 ROFL


----------



## Jordanf1 (Oct 29, 2019)

Has anyone here heard of price point ? for this


----------



## Jordanf1 (Oct 29, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Taken from the canon Australia Facebook page
> View attachment 187198



I can only imagine what we will be paying in AUD mate


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2019)

This is my image. This 1DX MkII has well over 10,000 actuations since its last clean. 

If I play with the Visualize Spots slider in Lightroom I can make it seem horrific




in reality I can't see the smaller number 





even in an even toned image at f22.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 29, 2019)

Once again it reminds me of Art Moris when he was trying to get Canon to replace his 1DX2 ... and his intention was to sell it with all his Canon gear. He was soliciting everyone's photos and directed just how to make the spots most visible. He was on a mission. I actually sent my sample to him and fretted that I had the dreaded oil spots ... until PBD suggested ... guess what ... if they are not showing in your photos just forget about them. And I've never fretted since, although probably it's time for a cleaning at over 50K shots.

Others have much worse and they have my sympathy but I'm not going to fret it.

Jack


----------



## dcm (Oct 29, 2019)

Raptors said:


> DCM, just curious how many of the 60 shot 10 fps sequence of a bald eagle fishing in a lake were sharp?



Here's most of the sequence from June 2016: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-TznRGL/. It was the first time I'd shot anything like this - literally my first BIF. I left a few out that weren't interesting, but all had similar focus/sharpness. The AF tracked well, even when I didn't keep the eagle in the 9pt AF expansion. 

For some context, I had purchased the 1DXII and a 100-400L II a few weeks before vacation to try my hand at BIF. The 1DXII and the 100-400 was an improvement over the Tamron 150-600 I had used with the 6D for wildlife, not BIF. Had only shot for a couple of days before this sequence and and only a few short bursts of some Osprey around their nest. Was still learning about the camera and settings and didn't expect to get much. 

While shooting the osprey from a turn out along the highway, a guy pulled up and asked if I was interested in shooting bald eagles nesting on his property. He was hoping for a few images for himself. I said sure and dropped by the next day on my way out of town, unfortunately about midday due to his schedule. Figured I'd scope it out and see what I could get in my limited time before several hours of driving.

I was perched on the upper deck of his yacht about 50 ft out in the lake for the shot, so not exactly stable platform. The eagles were known to drop out of a tree to my right to snatch a fish in front of me and circle around my left to reach the nest behind me about 100 ft. After a 30 minute wait I saw the eagle drop from the tree and got the 9pt AF expansion on it just as it reached the water. I held on for dear life as the shutter machine gunned away while I tried to track the eagle. It happened so quick I didn't even think about zooming as the eagle closed the distance. And a funny thing happened - it turned into me and then circled in front of me back to the tree. As I saw later it missed its catch. And there are a few frames where we are eye to eye. All in all a great first experience.

I haven't mastered the 1DXII yet. Can't see me splurging on the III unless it offers some new surprising ability, not really expecting that. But, never say never.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 29, 2019)

Jordanf1 said:


> I can only imagine what we will be paying in AUD mate


Bout 10.5k I would imagine. Certainly way out of my price range in the foreseeable future. TBH though, as awesome a camera as it is sure to be it is waaaay more than I would ever want. Bloody difficult bit of gear to travel with and as I mentioned elsewhere, once you get a camera with that pixel pitch then you also have to get the 12k plus lens to use on it for wildlife photography to be effective. I could sell my wife I suppose.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 29, 2019)

dcm said:


> Here's most of the sequence from June 2016: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-TznRGL/. It was the first time I'd shot anything like this - literally my first BIF. I left a few out that weren't interesting, but all had similar focus/sharpness. The AF tracked well, even when I didn't keep the eagle in the 9pt AF expansion.
> 
> For some context, I had purchased the 1DXII and a 100-400L II a few weeks before vacation to try my hand at BIF. The 1DXII and the 100-400 was an improvement over the Tamron 150-600 I had used with the 6D for wildlife, not BIF. Had only shot for a couple of days before this sequence and and only a few short bursts of some Osprey around their nest. Was still learning about the camera and settings and didn't expect to get much.
> 
> ...


Nice sequence


----------



## mariosk1gr (Oct 29, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It can't be a bomb because the camera hasn't been released yet and we don't know all the specs. Also A9II's usage isn't fully overlapping with 1DXIII, the former is mirrorless, the later is mirrorful. Slightly different target customers.
> 
> Also most of the people here and most of the people on Sony rumors will never buy or use neither 1DXIII nor A9II. I'll probably never buy one as they're not landscape cameras. So it's fun to watch Canon fanboys vs Sony fanboys battle but not practical at all.


Hmmm a [email protected] 
I think you got the message, why you get into thinking to respond when there is no need... it's a statement as you can figure out! Can you?


----------



## analoggrotto (Oct 29, 2019)

I do like the idea of the A9's intent versus it's size. Canon could offer a 5D sized 1D.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 29, 2019)

mariosk1gr said:


> Hmmm a [email protected]
> I think you got the message, why you get into thinking to respond when there is no need... it's a statement as you can figure out! Can you?



A statement about what? Around 2003-2006 I had a Sony tape mini DV camcorder. Never had any Sony cameras ever since. Only had Canons. But again neither 1DXIII not A9II are on my wishlist. I'm after a high-mpix version. What Sony fanboys think about 1DXIII is totally irrelevant to my future purchase decisions.


----------



## venusFivePhotoStudio (Oct 29, 2019)

Personally I didn't like the 1Dx II update, not many differences. But I think canon did a good job with 5D IV. 
Let's hope that 5D V (or it's mirrorless replacement) will be also a good camera.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 29, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> First, those weren't my images. They were images from two different users' cameras over at Fred Miranda. I have images from 40+ different cameras, all exhibiting similar or worse splatter.
> 
> Second, yes, you're correct -- the dehaze was meant to highlight the issue, and just how much splatter accumulates. However, with that said, go try that with any other camera, including that 7D Mark II which shoots at 10 fps, and see the difference, even when dehaze is boosted to 100%.
> 
> ...


Those examples are not demonstrating oil spots on the sensor. Clarity and dehaze work by creating structure based on minute variations in the raw file. If you take an input, like a small oil spot in an otherwise clear blue field, and apply a massive amount of structure to it then of course it will look terrible. My standard setting for clarity is -10.

100% Clarity and 100% Dehaze aren't allowing you to see the problem. They are creating the problem. What you see in those example are pixels created by camera raw and is not an indication of how much oil is on the sensor.

I'm sure there are instances where oil splatter causes problems. But if you are waiting for a perfect camera to come along you might be waiting a while. Complex systems have complex problems.


----------



## Raptors (Oct 29, 2019)

dcm said:


> Here's most of the sequence from June 2016: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-TznRGL/. It was the first time I'd shot anything like this - literally my first BIF. I left a few out that weren't interesting, but all had similar focus/sharpness. The AF tracked well, even when I didn't keep the eagle in the 9pt AF expansion.
> 
> For some context, I had purchased the 1DXII and a 100-400L II a few weeks before vacation to try my hand at BIF. The 1DXII and the 100-400 was an improvement over the Tamron 150-600 I had used with the 6D for wildlife, not BIF. Had only shot for a couple of days before this sequence and and only a few short bursts of some Osprey around their nest. Was still learning about the camera and settings and didn't expect to get much.
> 
> ...


DCM, really nice sequence. It's really great to see the species make a major comeback. The Bald Eagle had disappeared from Southern Ontario (and many other places) due largely to DDT. 
There is a breeding pair on the Grand River, that I have been photographing for the last 5 years. Photographing Bald Eagles, as with all birds, come with unique challenges. Over the years, I have learned about their natural behaviour which makes it easier to predict their actions.
I have the 1DX and the 1DX2, but like you, I will wait to see what the III has to offer.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 29, 2019)

Raptors said:


> Photographing Bald Eagles, as with all birds, come with unique challenges. Over the years, I have learned about their natural behaviour which makes it easier to predict their actions.



And photographing them, as with other birds, lets us see the amazing beauty and awesomeness they have as creatures.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 29, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Those examples are not demonstrating oil spots on the sensor. Clarity and dehaze work by creating structure based on minute variations in the raw file. If you take an input, like a small oil spot in an otherwise clear blue field, and apply a massive amount of structure to it then of course it will look terrible. My standard setting for clarity is -10.
> 
> 100% Clarity and 100% Dehaze aren't allowing you to see the problem. They are creating the problem. What you see in those example are pixels created by camera raw and is not an indication of how much oil is on the sensor.
> 
> I'm sure there are instances where oil splatter causes problems. But if you are waiting for a perfect camera to come along you might be waiting a while. Complex systems have complex problems.



I've attached a picture from my aforementioned recent trip. It was taken three weeks after a CMS cleaning. I had not taken that many frames since the CMS. The picture is f6.3 and is un-edited. I think it just shows that it is easy for the sensor to get dirty from oil even after a cleaning.


----------



## Nelu (Oct 29, 2019)

venusFivePhotoStudio said:


> Personally I didn't like the 1Dx II update, not many differences. But I think canon did a good job with 5D IV.
> Let's hope that 5D V (or it's mirrorless replacement) will be also a good camera.


Same thoughts here but do you remember how much bitching around the poor 5D Mark IV had?
I postponed the purchase for more than one year, just because of that and I was sorry; it is a great camera, the best I've ever had!


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 29, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Those examples are not demonstrating oil spots on the sensor. Clarity and dehaze work by creating structure based on minute variations in the raw file. If you take an input, like a small oil spot in an otherwise clear blue field, and apply a massive amount of structure to it then of course it will look terrible. My standard setting for clarity is -10.
> 
> 100% Clarity and 100% Dehaze aren't allowing you to see the problem. They are creating the problem. What you see in those example are pixels created by camera raw and is not an indication of how much oil is on the sensor.
> 
> I'm sure there are instances where oil splatter causes problems. But if you are waiting for a perfect camera to come along you might be waiting a while. Complex systems have complex problems.




This has to be one of the most willfully blind and in-denial posts I've ever seen. Yeah righttttttt...so those spots then...then aren't oil; they're just artifacts from dehaze turned up too high... 

Apparently, then, by your logic, the 1DX Mark II has an artifact problem since NO OTHER CAMERA DOES THIS!

Ironic that your name has "artifacts" in it. Apparently that's all you see.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 29, 2019)

Ethan, that's a good example of a bad example and not fun to correct. I think my style/type of photo tends not to accentuate oil spatter but now I won't be able to relax for fear one of those dreaded spots is going to show. In your case I'd be pressing Canon, and maybe you have and they are not budging??

I think a simple unedited photo makes for a better case.

Jack


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 29, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> This has to be one of the most willfully blind and in-denial posts I've ever seen. Yeah righttttttt...so those spots then...then aren't oil; they're just artifacts from dehaze turned up too high...
> 
> Apparently, then, by your logic, the 1DX Mark II has an artifact problem since NO OTHER CAMERA DOES THIS!
> 
> Ironic that your name has "artifacts" in it. Apparently that's all you see.


If you want to talk about the actual problem post an original unedited file that demonstrates it. As it is you have only posted files from an unknown source that grossly exagerates (i.e. willfully misrepresents) the extent of problem. I'm going out of my my way to try and be polite and give you the benefit of the doubt but you are making it difficult. Some people are only happy when they have big dramatic issue even if they have to imagine one.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> ...... since NO OTHER CAMERA DOES THIS!



Er, that's not true.

This is an image from my EOS-M in Lightroom with Visualize Spots turned on at a very mild setting. This is after 216 images from new.




To be sure I am not saying your 1DX MkII doesn't have a problem, but I am saying mine doesn't so it isn't a camera wide issue, therefore saying things like 'the 1DX MkII is bad' is incorrect, you can only say 'my 1DX MkII is bad, or here are images from one that is bad (but I don't know what they actually did to illustrate how bad'. Further, I post images equally bad from different cameras to disprove the statement "NO OTHER CAMERA DOES THIS!" as it simply isn't true.

See also:








Nikon D600 Dust and Oil Damnation


200 + marks on sensor (visible dust and oil) after last round of shooting. This was amongst the last of the shots taken recently with my Nikon D600 which has had 3 shutter replacements in 14 months…




garypoulton.com












Nikon D600 – Dust on the sensor after 10k cycles.


You probable know that the fist production of Nikon D600 have had a serious dust-on-the-sensor issue. This is the status of my sensor after 9866 cycles: How I performed my test I just took a pictur…




portfolio.lucasartoni.com


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 29, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> If you want to talk about the actual problem post an original unedited file that demonstrates it. As it is you have only posted files from an unknown source that grossly exagerates (i.e. willfully misrepresents) the extent of problem. I'm going out of my my way to try and be polite and give you the benefit of the doubt but you are making it difficult. Some people are only happy when they have big dramatic issue even if they have to imagine one.



Why waste my time? You've already confirmed they're artifacts!

Some people are only happy when they're in in-denial. 

Look, as I've said before...the 1D series are an awesome line. I've kept mine and work around the issue. But it's an issue nonetheless. I'm not about to switch brands or anything, but I'm also not about to let Canon off the hook for missteps either.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 29, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Ethan, that's a good example of a bad example and not fun to correct. I think my style/type of photo tends not to accentuate oil spatter but now I won't be able to relax for fear one of those dreaded spots is going to show. In your case I'd be pressing Canon, and maybe you have and they are not budging??
> 
> I think a simple unedited photo makes for a better case.
> 
> Jack



I sent it back to them after my trip for another CMS and it is fine now. They either didn't clean it well or put too much oil on the mirror? lol I'm dreading editing all these trip pictures because of it. My CMS cleans are free, so it's not like they could give me anything. 

Don't live in fear of it Jack, just keep shooting. I use my mirror a lot, especially for lots of bursts for sports.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Oct 29, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Those examples are not demonstrating oil spots on the sensor. Clarity and dehaze work by creating structure based on minute variations in the raw file. If you take an input, like a small oil spot in an otherwise clear blue field, and apply a massive amount of structure to it then of course it will look terrible. My standard setting for clarity is -10.
> 
> 100% Clarity and 100% Dehaze aren't allowing you to see the problem. They are creating the problem. What you see in those example are pixels created by camera raw and is not an indication of how much oil is on the sensor.



From my experience, +100 dehaze does allow to see the dust spots and dirt marks on the sensor. Clarity has a similar effect but I use dehaze as it's stronger. The proof is very simple, I take test shots before and after sensor cleaning and dehaze shows much less or no spots after a proper cleaning.
If you have -10 clarity by default, you're actually hiding the problem.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 29, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> The proof is very simple, I take test shots before and after sensor cleaning and dehaze shows much less or no spots after a proper cleaning.



That is a good test. I should probably start doing that with mine.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 29, 2019)

OK here is my sample since it's been implied that I'm a denier. I don't deny reality and when my shortcomings are pointed out I take them like an adult. I virtually never shoot these kind of shots but looked back for this one, taken at about 40k - I'm now at around 55k. It was underexposed so I've brightened it about 2/3 stop,

otherwise it's just my usual full size 16:9. Should I be losing sleep over oil spots?

Jack


----------



## R1-7D (Oct 29, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Er, that's not true.
> 
> This is an image from my EOS-M in Lightroom with Visualize Spots turned on at a very mild setting. This is after 216 images from new.
> View attachment 187297
> ...




Fair enough. Perhaps, my "NO OTHER CAMERA DOES THIS" comment was overly broad. I'll grant you that. Ironically, the D600 links you posted showed that model's problem in exactly the same way as in the images I posted -- by turning up the dehaze or clarity, or by going to black and white. The main difference between the D600 and its splatter problem and the 1DX Mark II's is that the D600 was recalled and eventually replaced. 

From my experience, and from working with Canon USA and Canon Canada to diagnose the problem, this splatter issue happens far more to the 1DX Mark II than to any of their other products. Canon USA and Canon Canada admitted to me that they saw "something" but would never go as far as to confirm what was causing the problem. 

Your M is a mess. I'll check my original M when I get home, but I doubt it's that bad. What I can say, however, is that every single 1DX Mark II I've tried has the issue. Every single one -- this includes the loaners Canon send me when I send my own in for cleaning several times a year, as well as show room models from Vistek and The Camera Store. 

The collection of files I have from over 40 different 1DX Mark II's speak for themselves. 


At the end of the day, though, like you and others have said...if the problem doesn't bother or affect you, then don't worry about it. I argue that the oil splatter should still not occur with the frequency that it does, and that it's a flaw. But, to each their own. I've still kept my 1DX and 1DX2; I work around it, knowing that it's a problem. However for me, going forward, I won't make another large purchase where I have to worry about such things. I'll look at other offerings from Canon as they come out and see if they meet my needs.

What gets me is the denial that there's not an issue. It's a camera, all of them have flaws in one way or another. The 1DX Mark II's just happens to be oil splatter. There's no point in being tribal about this (not saying you are PBD -- just saying in general for those claiming it's not a flaw).


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 29, 2019)

Looks fine to me Jack. I used an Original 5D as my primary for 7 years and the sensor on that thing must have been made of velcro. It would have taken an hour to clean the spots of a blue sky image like that one. And we didn't even have dehaze or clarity back then.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 29, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> From my experience, +100 dehaze does allow to see the dust spots and dirt marks on the sensor. Clarity has a similar effect but I use dehaze as it's stronger. The proof is very simple, I take test shots before and after sensor cleaning and dehaze shows much less or no spots after a proper cleaning.
> If you have -10 clarity by default, you're actually hiding the problem.


IMO there is a difference between using dehaze to check for dirt on your sensor and posting max dehaze/clarity images on line to say all 1DX2's have an oil problem. I took a look at Ethanz's image and it's obvious that he's got an issue which he has every right to be unhappy about. I don't see anything that couldn't be corrected but obviously that's certainly not the best use of anyone's time.

BTW. I like negative clarity as I think it improves tonality in the middle values. I make up for the reduced apparent sharpness using other methods.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2019)

R1-7D said:


> Fair enough. Perhaps, my "NO OTHER CAMERA DOES THIS" comment was overly broad. I'll grant you that. Ironically, the D600 links you posted showed that model's problem in exactly the same way as in the images I posted -- by turning up the dehaze or clarity, or by going to black and white. The main difference between the D600 and its splatter problem and the 1DX Mark II's is that the D600 was recalled and eventually replaced.
> 
> From my experience, and from working with Canon USA and Canon Canada to diagnose the problem, this splatter issue happens far more to the 1DX Mark II than to any of their other products. Canon USA and Canon Canada admitted to me that they saw "something" but would never go as far as to confirm what was causing the problem.
> 
> ...


The point with the D600 is that Nikon refused to acknowledge it had an issue until they were banned from selling the camera in China! They didn't accept the issue, which was very bad on a large proportion of the camera run, until they were legally forced to.

In my experience the 1Ds MkIII (I had 2) was much worse than the 1DX MkII but there were factory recalls on both the 1D MkIII and the 1Ds MkIII for oil splatter, I can clean my own sensor so never sent them in for that specific recall.

My M might look a mess, but in real world use I never saw anything worth bothering with.

I have 2 1DX MkII's, I have two friends who have one each so I have a very small sample size, but of those four none have any kind of oil or dust 'issue', certainly nothing more or less than other bodies irregular use.

And again, I'm not saying your camera doesn't have a problem or that it should be ignored, all I have tried to say is it isn't all 1DX MkII's and while it is no comfort to people who do own one with a problem other camera models have proven to be much worse.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 29, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> BTW. I like negative clarity as I think it improves tonality in the middle values. I make up for the reduced apparent sharpness using other methods.



Yeah, sometimes depending on the image I may turn down clarity and boost contrast or vice versa. All different tools to use


----------



## dcm (Oct 30, 2019)

Raptors said:


> DCM, really nice sequence. It's really great to see the species make a major comeback. The Bald Eagle had disappeared from Southern Ontario (and many other places) due largely to DDT.
> There is a breeding pair on the Grand River, that I have been photographing for the last 5 years. Photographing Bald Eagles, as with all birds, come with unique challenges. Over the years, I have learned about their natural behaviour which makes it easier to predict their actions.
> I have the 1DX and the 1DX2, but like you, I will wait to see what the III has to offer.



Thanks. I am fortunate to live in northern Colorado and vacation in northern Idaho where there seem to be year-round bald eagle populations. There is an annual winter eagle watch in northern Idaho where I vacation in the summer (previous photos). One year I have to visit in the winter. 

There is a smaller population around the nearby reservoirs here in Colorado in the winter. My first eagle photos and BIF were shot locally with a 6D and a first generation Tamron 150-600. It was interesting to see bald eagles in an urban habitat.

Much better results perched than in flight. It was hard to maintain the AF center point on target and the 6D/Tamron combo struggled to keep up when I did. Less than 10% keepers my first time out between AF and exposure challenges with late day sun - lots of noise.

This is what prompted me to get the 1DXII and 100-400L II a year later. It was well worth the upgrade. I almost waited for the 5DIV but I'm glad I went for the 1DXII - no second guessing if I made the wrong choice. More interesting than the III to me is the next high megapixel body. I think that may afford more capabilities than replacing the 1DXII with a 1DXIII.


----------



## Jan van Holten (Feb 23, 2020)

navastronia said:


> What generates the oil splatter? The mirror or the shutter? Is it a problem in mirrorless bodies? I don’t know anything about this issue.


It is a shutter problem. Very well known from the 1DXmark2 to.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 23, 2020)

Jan van Holten said:


> It is a shutter problem. Very well known from the 1DXmark2 to.


I actually thought it was from the mirror assembly.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Feb 24, 2020)

Are we talking about oil splatter? 

Well, I have good news, the 1DX3 has oil splatter hahaha... it's not funny I know, and mine is minimal (maybe 6-10 or so fairly small spots) compared to my old container ship the Mk2, buts it's there, and there from 100 images. I wont check for it again unless I see it wide open, and even then I'll probably ignore that too.


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 24, 2020)

arthurbikemad said:


> Are we talking about oil splatter?
> 
> Well, I have good news, the 1DX3 has oil splatter hahaha... it's not funny I know, and mine is minimal (maybe 6-10 or so fairly small spots) compared to my old container ship the Mk2, buts it's there, and there from 100 images. I wont check for it again unless I see it wide open, and even then I'll probably ignore that too.


I am sorry to hear about that. I do not have a substantial experience shooting with 1dx II body.. MU understanding is that shooting in a silent mode, should slow mirror actuation speed down, undoubtedly... would that reduce (if not eliminate completely) oil splatter?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 24, 2020)

arthurbikemad said:


> Are we talking about oil splatter?
> 
> Well, I have good news, the 1DX3 has oil splatter hahaha... it's not funny I know, and mine is minimal (maybe 6-10 or so fairly small spots) compared to my old container ship the Mk2, buts it's there, and there from 100 images. I wont check for it again unless I see it wide open, and even then I'll probably ignore that too.


My unscientific idea is that one should not fire away at max too much during "brake-in" since lube tends to firm up with time. I have not had a serious problem with the 1DX2 and what I have is seldom showing on photos. When it does, it's simple to fix. So, in more than 30k shots (admittedly, not a big number) I haven't bothered with a cleaning.

If I really search for it like Artie did and encouraged me to do, then it appears to be so bad I'd never feel confident in even using the camera.

Jack


----------



## unfocused (Feb 24, 2020)

I had pretty much forgotten about this issue. My Mark II was sufficiently bad that I pretty much quit using it for anything with lots of sky in it once I got the 5DIV. For most subjects it's not a problem, but I wouldn't recommend a 1Dx for people who like to shoot landscapes. Clearly, it varies from camera to camera and also depends on what you shoot and what your tolerance is. I've never had a sports shot ruined by dust/splatter, so I guess that's a good thing.

It did cause me to buy some sensor cleaning tools and I do try and remember to periodically clean the sensor. 

I'm a bit disappointed if they haven't made any progress with the 1Dx III.

Some people say it's an unavoidable side product of the high fps of the shutter. My understanding is that mirrorless still use a mechanical shutter, so I wonder if there will be problems with the R5 if it has the rumored high fps. Or, will not having a mirror reduce the risk? What's the consensus here?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Feb 24, 2020)

I should say it's a lot better imo. The splatter is much smaller blobs, I'm happy with it, after all it's a mechanical device with moving parts, talking of moving parts they travel at such speed you are bound to get something, dust, fibres, oil and anything else that finds it's way into the mirror box and prism housing and so on. One of those things, I used my old OM10 last week, the viewfinder even has small mushrooms haha


----------

