# Canon EOS-1D X Mark III Summary



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 2, 2020)

> The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will be announced on Monday, and we are just posting a summary of the known features and specifications for the new camera. There are still some questions to be answered, specifically what processors the camera is going to use. We suspect the camera will have at least dual DIGIC 9 processors. The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III is going to need a lot of processing power to match its RAW video and buffer specifications.
> *Will it have DPAF?*
> Yes, it will, with a caveat. You will get DPAF in 1080p and 4K at 23p/24p/30p. You will not get DPAF in 4K 50p/60p or RAW video shooting.
> The WFT-E9 wireless transmitter is all-new for the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III and will be announced alongside the new flagship Canon DSLR. Canon is boasting industry-leading file transfer speeds and reliability.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## slclick (Jan 2, 2020)

Oh boy...here we go.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 2, 2020)

What a disappointment if this is true. And how is 525 AF areas using the Dual Pixel CMOS AF *relevant to the OVF??*


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 2, 2020)

20mpx? I know that for the purpose given it might be still OK, but, really? Oh, and dual Digic 6+? A typo?


----------



## H. Jones (Jan 2, 2020)

Is the first spec list not just literally the 1Dx mark II specs? The list with 20 megapixels even says Cfast 2.0 and 16 fps, and the mark III definitely uses CF Express. Also says no log recording. I cant find anything in the first "leaked" list that isn't from the 1DX mark II. The other spec list that says pixels not specified looks much more accurate.

Edit: as Pekr also just pointed out, Dual Digic 6+ is also the same as 1Dx mark II.


----------



## Canon-Chas (Jan 2, 2020)

Very disappointed.... I have lots of Canon prime MKII lenses waiting for something by Canon on a par with Sony A9II which I also own.... I just hope the EOS PRO version doesn't disappoint  https://canoncamerarumors.com/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-iii-specifications-leaked/


----------



## padam (Jan 2, 2020)

They are just posting anything again without verifying anything just to get more views.

Those are not the real specs, except the few that are on the end which were already presented with the development announcement.

People are already out shooting with the production version of the camera, so it is not that far off.


----------



## michoristo (Jan 2, 2020)

This article is just embarrasing. Did anyone even bother to actually look at specs before reposting this?


----------



## pixel8foto (Jan 2, 2020)

As others above, this deffo isn't the correct final spec. I can imagine retailers etc preparing the product page, creating a copy of the older model and editing from there in readiness. You want the page up and indexed by Google, even if final detail isn't ready for public view.


----------



## xps (Jan 2, 2020)

Hmmm.... I do not think Canon would dare to make such an mini-evolution of their flag-ship. Not in an Olymic year in Japan. Alkso keep in mind the 24MP of the A9....
Cannot believe this are the final specs.
Where do they have these specs? Maybe someone wrot older specs into "specs sheets" as an placeholder

bhphotovideo writes: CFexpress


----------



## reef58 (Jan 2, 2020)

I am surprised they are using dual digic6 processors. You would think after 4 years they could have done a bit better. I suspect this may contain some erroneous info.


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 2, 2020)

Already confirmed on Twitter - specs are from the 1DX II.


----------



## erickmoreno (Jan 2, 2020)

This is plain wrong. The specs does not include HEIC support and this is already a known feature,


----------



## ethanz (Jan 2, 2020)

I think someone leaked the 1dx2 specs four years late.


----------



## dak3 (Jan 2, 2020)

*First reaction: Oh, come on Canon! Why? What's up with the mediocre spec advancements for another $5,500?*



*10 minutes later after considering all options: Well, I can't switch systems and lenses after spending all that money, and Canon did give me a few more fps and more focal points in live-view than the previous model, so...




But then yet, the real specs haven't been released yet, so there is still hope!....maybe.


*


----------



## Nelu (Jan 2, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


That's totally wrong!
Those are the specs for Mark II, not Mark III...


----------



## jvillain (Jan 2, 2020)

CW is reporting that BH and Adorama both have product pages up now.


----------



## dak3 (Jan 2, 2020)

jvillain said:


> CW is reporting that BH and Adorama both have product pages up now.


Good point! 
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1512601-REG/canon_eos_1d_x_mark_iii.html/specs
However, reading through the specs, Canon is still holding back on the sensor resolution size for now!


----------



## Nelu (Jan 2, 2020)

jvillain said:


> CW is reporting that BH and Adorama both have product pages up now.


Not really:

PixelsNot Specified by Manufacturer


----------



## reef58 (Jan 2, 2020)

Nelu said:


> Not really:
> 
> PixelsNot Specified by Manufacturer



Those specs have been up for weeks. I stumbled upon them while combing through holidays specials


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 2, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> Is the first spec list not just literally the 1Dx mark II specs? The list with 20 megapixels even says Cfast 2.0 and 16 fps, and the mark III definitely uses CF Express. Also says no log recording. I cant find anything in the first "leaked" list that isn't from the 1DX mark II. The other spec list that says pixels not specified looks much more accurate.
> 
> Edit: as Pekr also just pointed out, Dual Digic 6+ is also the same as 1Dx mark II.



I agree. I just pulled out my 1DXMKII specs and you can just l*ay them over these*, with a few exceptions. Could this be a *joke?*

61 AF points?
Digic 6?????

The big draw for me and the vast majority of the sports shooters I know and work with *is the OVF.*

All the enhancement to focus with the LCD mean virtually *NOTHING* to us. 

With all the fanfare and fireworks about video "and no LOG on the fire" (bad joke) but you can get a better video camera for *less than half the price *with so many more features and better ergonomics for video.

Why go to CFExpress for 20MP's ???? This makes no sense. 

On the credibility scale I give this a "3" out of "10"

If this is true "who the heck" on the pro/agency level is going to buy *a bunch of stock *to replace all their MKII's ??? 

Canon can not be this stupid. I don't believe the specs and think it's just "*Click Bait*"


----------



## unfocused (Jan 2, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> I agree. I just pulled out my 1DXMKII specs and you can just l*ay them over these*, with a few exceptions. Could this be a *joke?...*



I saw this on PhotoRumors last night, then reading the comments, it was clear that Adorama had just done a cut and paste of the 1DxII specs. So, move along, nothing to see here. But, it does indicate that we are getting close to announcements from both Nikon and Canon.


----------



## dlee13 (Jan 2, 2020)

I don't believe the specs are correct as nokishita hasn't posted anything on Twitter and they are the most reliable.


----------



## padam (Jan 2, 2020)

They are currently testing it out in Spain (I guess still under NDA, of course)


----------



## slclick (Jan 2, 2020)

You had to say NDA....


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 2, 2020)

Damnit!!!! I am so curious to find out what this will have. I won't be buying it but it will give us a great idea of what may filter down over the next few years. Oh well. Soon enough.


----------



## slclick (Jan 2, 2020)

slclick said:


> Oh boy...here we go.


*bump* for sheer ridiculousness sake


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 2, 2020)

padam said:


> They are currently testing it out in Spain (I guess still under NDA, of course)


On a monopod with a 200-400 on a set track where you KNOW where the cars are going to be and moving! Not a great test. How about football or kitesurfing where you have to swing for the stars in 360 degrees!!!! ?????


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> On a monopod with a 200-400 on a set track where you KNOW where the cars are going to be and moving! Not a great test. How about football or kitesurfing where you have to swing for the stars in 360 degrees!!!! ?????


Pish Posh...try kittens or a brick wall. If you have the cajones.


----------



## Dantana (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> Pish Posh...try kittens or a brick wall. If you have the cajones.


Or, a kitten swinging at a brick wall with a monopod


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

Dantana said:


> Or, a kitten swinging at a brick wall with a monopod


Now that is Pro level!


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> Why go to CFExpress for 20MP's ???? This makes no sense.


actually CFExpress would allow for faster buffer clearing which means with the same software code, your buffer is alot larger. it's going to either be 20MP or 24MP. don't expect much more than that. From my understanding, there was push back from pros about even using 20MP, they don't want that many MP's.

Buffer clearing is backed up by what we know - the buffer on the Mark III is five times deeper than that of the Mark II.



GoldWing said:


> With all the fanfare and fireworks about video "and no LOG on the fire" (bad joke) but you can get a better video camera for *less than half the price *with so many more features and better ergonomics for video.



Also I'm not exactly aware of any full frame video cameras that can shoot raw video internally for under the price of the Mark III other than the SIgma FP, which can't really be used as a stills camera at all (no mechanical shutter at all). and has less ergonomics of the Mark III. Canon LOG is supported btw, that's been stated already in the specs, as well as 10 bit recording, with very few ILC cameras do.

Yes the specs are wrong btw, but not these points.


----------



## SereneSpeed (Jan 3, 2020)

Hmmm... did the specs just get updates? I just read the list and noticed a bunch of logical improvements.

I use the 1Dxii professionally and see lots of differences here.

191 (151 cross type) AF points
Illuminated buttons
5x buffer depth
RAW video
Expanded iso range
No more CF card
Longer battery life
AF point controller on AF-on button
AF deep learning (I.e. probably a bit better than it already is)

Seems like a rather standard 1D update.

And as much as I love more megapixels, 20 has always been enough for anything I’d chose the 1D for...


----------



## Joules (Jan 3, 2020)

The specs have been updated. CR guy should have opened a new thread, as now the first two pages are just outrage about something that's irrelevant.

It looks like they most noticeable change will be the AF performance? With such a big bump in AF points and the hugely increased iTR sensor resolution I guess the have made some big strides on the processing side of things to get an improvement in AF. I hope we haven't reached the limit of what Canon's new sensors can handle in terms of throughput yet though. It's kinda weird that the M6 II is still the champ.


----------



## domo_p1000 (Jan 3, 2020)

Good morning CanonRumors. Please might you add some clarification...

Last night the published 'specs' were undoubtedly those of the 1Dxii. Now the list is edited, removing (but not replacing) some of the clear 1Dxii details (Processor: Dual Digic 6+, etc.). It seems odd that these new 'full specs' do not include the all-important processor specs.

Has this re-published list been ratified at all, or has someone simply edited the originally published 1Dxii specs to include the known 1Dxiii specs and preclude those that are so clearly four years old?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 3, 2020)

If the rumous of 5.9k video trials are correct then that implies at least a 23mpx sensor, you can't get 5.9k video from a 20mpx sensor (at least not without cheating)


----------



## Joules (Jan 3, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> If the rumous of 5.9k video trials are correct then that implies at least a 23mpx sensor, you can't get 5.9k video from a 20mpx sensor (at least not without cheating)


Canon likely has different hardware configurations in circulation and the rumors about 'considering' this or that config came from this. This rumor here suggests 20 MP though, maybe Canon truly got better feedback from the guys using that and ditched the higher resolution video in favor of slightly smaller file sizes for stills.

At one point there was a rumor claiming that high DR was a priority for the 1DX III, maybe the smaller resolution allows Canon to do something cool in that regard, even though pixel size hasn't mattered for this traditionally. 

If these specs are correct, I'm hoping we'll hear more about the high res R soon. That one at least has the potential to be a bit more aggressive in terms of pushing new features into the market.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

I was really looking forward to this release and even planned to fly to NY to pick one up in person. You know make a day of it. Now I am really considering selling my 1dx and getting the mk2 and waiting for an upgraded R. I guess I will wait to see the official announcement from Canon .


----------



## Foxeslink (Jan 3, 2020)

EOS 1DX Mark III (nokishita leaked specs)

STILLS: 5472 x 3648 = 19,961,856 pixels (3:2)
6.56 um pixel size
Maximum number of continuous shots (BUFFER):
• JPEG Large: 1,000 or more
• HEIF Large: 1,000 or more
• RAW: 1,000 or more
• RAW + JPEG Large: 1,000 or more
• RAW + HEIF Large: Approx. 350 images
* Using a Canon test standard 325GB card
Viewfinder shooting with Canon test standard 325GB card
* Shooting conditions
(subject, Memory card maker, ISO sensitivity, Picture Style, custom function, shooting conditions , and so on)
RAW movie 5.472k DCI
Canon Log (OFF / ON)
Recording format RAW (12bit)
Audio Linear PCM
Movie recording Image quality
RAW (5472 x 2886) DCI (15,792,192 pixels Cinema 2600Mbps 1:1 straight-read)
4K DCI (4096 x 2160)
4K DCI crop (4096 x 2160)
4K UHD (3840 x 2160)
Full HD (1920 x 1080)
Frame rate
119.9p / 59.94p / 29.97p / 24.00p / 23.98p (NTSC)
100.0p / 50.00p / 25.00p / 24.00p (PAL)
*High-speed frame Rate video: 119.9p / 100.0p
■ 1000+ 19.96mp RAW 14-bit CR3 BUFFER (STILLS)
BLACKOUT-FREE (Mechanical + Electronic Shutter) LCD
@ 20fps Live-View Actual-Capture e-REVIEW-Display LIVE
+
BLACKOUTS:
@ 16fps Optical TTL OVF Preview
■ FF 5.472k60p DCI 12-bit RAW Movie 2600Mbps 1:1 Straight-Read 
= this is WAY BETTER than 30fps 14-to-12-bit RAW BURST ROLL Mode + Optional Pre-Capture


----------



## xps (Jan 3, 2020)

Of course, pro´s are the target for selling this body. But as an amatuer, I´m disapointed by the 20MP. For my needs, 20Mp are much to less if you shoot birds.
Even the Sony 7R version 4 is able to do 10fps at 61MP. And this body is much lesser priced.

I´ll save my money and wait for the pro version of the R. Maybe, they recycle the 32MP sensor and make it a lot faster in shutter and AF.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

If they are really killing DPAF for raw video, then , we'll have to see what Nikon offers. I could live with 20mp, but not raw video wtihout DPAF.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> If they are really killing DPAF for raw video, then , we'll have to see what Nikon offers. I could live with 20mp, but not raw video wtihout DPAF.



You can't live without a feature that no other camera offers (in camera raw recording with phase detection AF) and you can probably count on one hand or less how many professional grade video cameras can pull it off?


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

Other cameras offer FF 4k raw (ie Sigma FP) but don't have DPAF either. So why stick with Canon when their main video selling point is disabled for raw?

To be clear, unless something dramatic is changing here, their phase detection AF is next to useless for video, that's why it isn't even included in their Cinema line. Canon have one great video feature, in that they can match Sony's video AF, but they (apparently) want you to pay for a C500 to get it & FF 4k raw together. 
Sony are going to stay the leaders and kill this camera with a new release before this is 1/3 of the way though it's product life. Yes it takes time, but the tide is turning because Canon still have a monopoly mentality when Sony is taking away their past dominance one product line at at time.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> Other cameras offer FF 4k raw (ie Sigma FP) but don't have DPAF either. So why stick with Canon when their main video selling point is disabled for raw?



The sigma is also only 8 bit RAW - it's quasi raw. using only UHS-II rated cards, so that gives you an idea on the bit rate.

The sigma also doesn't have a mechanical shutter and can't really be used as anything but a video camera.

You mentioned cameras? Which other ones offer it?

I mean in case you didn't see it, there's a whole bunch of specs dealing with things like stills shooting that is the 1DX Mark III's primary purpose. The video specs while important, are still secondary to the main use cases of this camera.

IMO, and probably rightly so, anyone investing in shooting RAW video is probably also focusing their cini lenses on the camera manually.

Anyways, my main curiosity was the fact that you couldn't live without a feature that basically hasn't existed before.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

The main lower cost video offerings are Sony (with awesome video AF but no raw) and Black Magic 6k with raw, a traditional S35 crop factor but no AF. Panny are in between with their S1H, FF 6k, no raw but some AF. 
Meanwhile, Sony's FX9 will offer FF 4k raw with excellent AF later this year, and Nikon are yet to spill the beans on their new body, even though good video AF isn't expected at the moment.
I'm after a hybrid camera, you can get decent stills from quality 4k raw video, 5.4k would be even better if it was in focus...


----------



## Treyarnon (Jan 3, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> If they are really killing DPAF for raw video, then , we'll have to see what Nikon offers. I could live with 20mp, but not raw video wtihout DPAF.


If the above specs are correct, then DPAF is only disabled for 4K 50p and 60p. This suggests that will be active for 30p?


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

Yes, like the current 1Dx II, but not raw.


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

WTF. This sounds great, but the MAIN feature in my opinion for videographers is the DPAF. If they realy remove this, it would be a total Dealbreaker for me. If they would do this, I don't see any important advantage over my Lumix S1H which at least has IBIS and great codec options and beautiful colors.
This cant be real. PLEASE Canon, PLEASE. This would be the perfect camera for me.... but without DPAF (and IBIS) its truely disapointing.
This 5,4k RAW would be a nice addition - but DPAF is 1000000x more important. Higher resolutions are not realy that important. But the worls best AF certainly is!


----------



## cpreston (Jan 3, 2020)

Personally, I use regular video cameras, but I generally have a SLR around for gimbals, or hard to mount locations, or bad weather Without DPAF, the stills camera is mostly useless for those purposes. If the 1dx iii had DPAF in RAW video, I would be extremely tempted to buy it to replace my R that I currently for those purposes. Of course, the 1D series has always been so heavy that it generally doesn’t work great for those purposes anyway. But for that small group of professionals that like to shoot with hybrid cameras as their primary camera, they don’t want to be stuck guessing on focus without DPAF.


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

cpreston said:


> Personally, I use regular video cameras, but I generally have a SLR around for gimbals, or hard to mount locations, or bad weather Without DPAF, the stills camera is mostly useless for those purposes. If the 1dx iii had DPAF in RAW video, I would be extremely tempted to buy it to replace my R that I currently for those purposes. Of course, the 1D series has always been so heavy that it generally doesn’t work great for those purposes anyway. But for that small group of professionals that like to shoot with hybrid cameras as their primary camera, they don’t want to be stuck guessing on focus without DPAF.


Exactly. no DPAF would be HUGE step back in my opinion. One step forward (5,4k RAW video) but than SUCH a big step back? thats crazy... Though not unheard of at Canon...


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

canonnews said:


> You can't live without a feature that no other camera offers (in camera raw recording with phase detection AF) and you can probably count on one hand or less how many professional grade video cameras can pull it off?


Its their biggest advantage right now. Without that I dont see why I wouldnt stick to my Lumix S1h. I love the 1DXII and the RAW feature on the Mark III is certainly great. But dismissing such an INCREDIBLE great and usefull feature... that would be a dealbreaker for me. I allreay hesitate to say if I like DPAF or IBIS more... but if will offer NEITHER of these, than I am out. 
I cant realy belive it though.


----------



## Go Wild (Jan 3, 2020)

I believe you are missunderstanding the lack of DPAF in raw recording and also I didn´t read anything about raw video recording internally. If, and if the camera allows raw recording will be externally and of course int that situation you will loose dpaf capability. 
From what I have understand, the camera wil record 10 bit 4:2:2 4k 50fps internally. And this is awesome! If you want to record raw must be externally, witch makes sense. Please correct me if i am wrong. Now....what is extremely awkward is the lack of DPAF in 4k 60fps!! What?? The 1dx mkII has it!!! And what i didnt hear nothing is about crop (is 4k cropped?) although for me is not important. I can live good with crop. And nothing about the codec. What codec uses? Do they abandon the motionjpeg or it will have the same codec? Does it have C-log?

About the camera...As i said, it will have really great upgrade in video features. Being able to record 10bit, 4:2:2 4k50fps will be great.You can already record 4k50fps (im in PAL region) with the MKII but with 8bit and 4:2:0 (if i recall correctly) so this will be a good upgrade. For stills though the camera is a little bit disappointing.... 20MP is some kind of low spec as we expected a bump in resolution to the 24mp at least. Good to have some improved autofocus but hard to see someone moving from Mkii to Mkiii just because of that...I will certainly not....Hope Canon can give us a little bit more, otherwise it will be hard to upgrade....


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

So not a birding camera... Unless it focuses superfast and accurately with 2xIII teleconverters (with f/4 super teles)….


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

I did not want to believe this and initially thought the 20mp rumor as total BS but if I recall correctly CR forum gets it right when we are very close to announcement days.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

peters said:


> WTF. This sounds great, but the MAIN feature in my opinion for videographers is the DPAF. If they realy remove this, it would be a total Dealbreaker for me. If they would do this, I don't see any important advantage over my Lumix S1H which at least has IBIS and great codec options and beautiful colors.
> This cant be real. PLEASE Canon, PLEASE. This would be the perfect camera for me.... but without DPAF (and IBIS) its truely disapointing.
> This 5,4k RAW would be a nice addition - but DPAF is 1000000x more important. Higher resolutions are not realy that important. But the worls best AF certainly is!



there's DPAF in 4k30p, just not RAW and 4K 60p.

it's not a case of "removing it" .. the problem is the processing of the sensor with DPAF. it's .. just a crazy amount of processing to do when the sensor is running flat out as it is. to do 4k60p and DPAF the sensor is actually running flat out at 120+ fps.


----------



## pauloancarvalho (Jan 3, 2020)

This can't be true... No DPAF in 4k50? So, the 1d x ii has it but the iii does not? I really hope this is an error the the rumor specs. If it's not an error, then I guess I will be keeping my 1d x ii. For raw video with no AF already have blackmagic pocket with internal raw or the panasonic s1h with ibis. Let's wait to see if it's really true. Maybe it's a mistake and it's supposed to say "no DPAF in RAW", but "no DPAF in RAW + 4k60/50p" is too much to ask for. HUGE step backwards.


----------



## Trey T (Jan 3, 2020)

I guess we all know now that the EOS R for sport will have same specs minus the mirror.


----------



## Mark3794 (Jan 3, 2020)

pauloancarvalho said:


> This can't be true... No DPAF in 4k50? So, the 1d x ii has it but the iii does not? I really hope this is an error the the rumor specs. If it's not an error, then I guess I will be keeping my 1d x ii. For raw video with no AF already have blackmagic pocket with internal raw or the panasonic s1h with ibis. Let's wait to see if it's really true. Maybe it's a mistake and it's supposed to say "no DPAF in RAW", but "no DPAF in RAW + 4k60/50p" is too much to ask for. HUGE step backwards.



The 1dx mark ii has DPAF in 4k60 but it's cropped. It's not a step back, name another camera that can do full frame 4k60 with autofocus


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

Irrespective of how good this camera will be, embrace for sony troll impact


----------



## pauloancarvalho (Jan 3, 2020)

Mark3794 said:


> The 1dx mark ii has DPAF in 4k60 but it's cropped. It's not a step back, name another camera that can do full frame 4k60 with autofocus



DPAF for me is much more important than the no crop. I can compensate crop with a wider lens, simple as that. But having no DPAF oh boy. Then the only FF option with DPAF is the Canon C500. Other than that you have the Panasonic S1H Full Frame that has Auto-focus in 4k60. Not as good as DPAF but very usable.


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

Oh come on Canon, not even a full frame 4K 240p with DPAF? I am switching to Sony! 

Oh wait I don't shoot video!


----------



## Mark3794 (Jan 3, 2020)

pauloancarvalho said:


> DPAF for me is much more important than the no crop. I can compensate crop with a wider lens, simple as that. But having no DPAF oh boy. Then the only FF option with DPAF is the Canon C500. Other than that you have the Panasonic S1H Full Frame that has Auto-focus in 4k60. Not as good as DPAF but very usable.



Yes but the S1h has a super 35 crop in 4k60. Maybe the 1dx iii has both 4k60 full frame with no DPAF or 4k60 cropped with DPAF


----------



## MadisonMike (Jan 3, 2020)

Trey T said:


> I guess we all know now that the EOS R for sport will have same specs minus the mirror.


You know Canon, it cannot be the same, it will have to be less... unfortunately. They have the tech to make a killer EOS R (Pro or Sport). But they will be holding back till there is no one left to buy the gear. We are in the rarefied atmosphere still shooting real cameras. Not exactly a dying breed, just a reduced footprint of a breed.


----------



## $winter (Jan 3, 2020)

just 20mp is a littel bit disappointing. but i guess it's more important how good they are..


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 3, 2020)

MadisonMike said:


> You know Canon, it cannot be the same, it will have to be less... unfortunately. They have the tech to make a killer EOS R (Pro or Sport). But they will be holding back till there is no one left to buy the gear. We are in the rarefied atmosphere still shooting real cameras. Not exactly a dying breed, just a reduced footprint of a breed.


This could be a "Make one last upgrade for the Pros that have huge EF investments, then wow them with a R sport with better features so they re-invest in all new RF lenses"

3 months ago we knew the MKIII was coming, and the High Rez R - but the fact that there is not just one, but 2-3 R mount cameras being announced in the first half of 2020? My guess (hope) is that Canon is sandbagging, and will unveil the specs for the Canon R sport soon.


----------



## pauloancarvalho (Jan 3, 2020)

Mark3794 said:


> Yes but the S1h has a super 35 crop in 4k60. Maybe the 1dx iii has both 4k60 full frame with no DPAF or 4k60 cropped with DPAF


That would be perfect for me. I don't really care about full frame that much for video as long as I have DPAF. For photos yes, Full Frame I like it. But for video, DPAF > Full Frame. Let's wait to see what are the final specs. After all this is a rumours site.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


*The post has been updated with fresh translated specifications. Since Craig is on the road, I got stuck doing the updates 

You're all welcome *


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

criscokkat said:


> This could be a "Make one last upgrade for the Pros that have huge EF investments, then wow them with a R sport with better features so they re-invest in all new RF lenses"
> 
> 3 months ago we knew the MKIII was coming, and the High Rez R - but the fact that there is not just one, but 2-3 R mount cameras being announced in the first half of 2020? My guess (hope) is that Canon is sandbagging, and will unveil the specs for the Canon R sport soon.



"sport" assuming you mean the 1 series RF is not coming next year according to pretty reliable sources.


----------



## geffy (Jan 3, 2020)

I thought this was 2020


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

geffy said:


> I thought this was 2020


Right. It is isn't it? lol. okay, it IS coming next year as in 2021. we're definately not going to see the specs,etc soon though.


----------



## masterpix (Jan 3, 2020)

Somehitng is not right in the spec, image processor dual digic 6+ is.. the MK2 sme as the 20.1MP which is also the MK2. Maybe better to wait for official anouncement.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 3, 2020)

I 


canonnews said:


> "sport" assuming you mean the 1 series RF is not coming next year according to pretty reliable sources.


I bet an R sport version is 2 or maybe even 3 years away. Sony really has a big lead in mirrorless camera technology and FF mirrorless market share. Making the R&D investments to match the AF performance of the A92 simply may not be possible for Canon in the near future, especially when the camera market is in freefall. Sony is big and tough. Canon is facing a steep hill. 

Glad to see any rumor that the 1DX3 has improved AF tracking! For BIF, AF tracking in the 1DX2 is unstable in certain circumstances and falls short when compared to the AF tracking of the D5 or A92.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 3, 2020)

canonnews said:


> "sport" assuming you mean the 1 series RF is not coming next year according to pretty reliable sources.


I've had the personal opinion that the 1 series RF camera will be the the dual RF/EF hybrid viewfinder with the movable sensor. I was surprised the new sensor is the same resolution, it seems to me that they just applied the same upgrades that were performed on the 5d IV sensor for the R. The 1d Sensor already had very fast output, on the existing 1dx II. Just optimizing and producing it on a smaller process will make it slightly faster, and more importantly won't take as extensive design time.

Like I said, I suspect Canon is sandbagging and the new R series cameras this year will match or exceed it in FPS and video capability, and the RF 1 series next year will blow this one away. That doesn't mean a dedicated mirrorless sports camera might not come out before that. Something in full frame that more or less fills the role of the 7d2 without the aps-c part. They really want to push all this excellent RF glass, and having a EF pro camera that is better than everything on the RF side is not the way to do this.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

masterpix said:


> Somehitng is not right in the spec, image processor dual digic 6+ is.. the MK2 sme as the 20.1MP which is also the MK2. Maybe better to wait for official anouncement.
> 
> ​


I'm not sure where you see that now.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 3, 2020)

djack41 said:


> I
> 
> I bet an R sport version is 2 or maybe even 3 years away. Sony really has a big lead in mirrorless camera technology and FF mirrorless market share. Making the R&D investments to match the AF performance of the A92 simply may not be possible for Canon in the near future, especially when the camera market is in freefall. Sony is big and tough. Canon is facing a steep hill.


not that steep. Canon is currently doing AF tracking at 30 fps on DPAF, exceeding even that of the A9 II. Also, compare EOS R 1.0 to EOS R 1.4 - that was 11 months from ship date, and consider a 1 series RF will probably be similar to size and function of the 1 series EF camera, which means it can support quite a few DIGIC's with one dedicated to AF processing, something the EOS R cannot. Canon came a long way with the R in 10-11 months with firmware updates and AF speed and tracking. and that's nothing to what a 1 series RF camera could do.

WHile it won't be easy, looking at the AF capabilities and speed of the M6 II / 90D in liveview and thet EOS R running 1.4 .. Canon has made great strides in very little time. Sony's lead *used *to be quite large, it's not anymore. Most comparison videos showing updated EOS R versus Sony A7 series cameras, isn't much of a difference. the big difference right now is animal AF.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 3, 2020)

MadisonMike said:


> You know Canon, it cannot be the same, it will have to be less... unfortunately.


Tell it to M6 Mark II buyers. Of course it will be less in some areas, more in other areas. Every camera mfg., car mfg., does it... not just Canon. Different choices at different price points.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 3, 2020)

djack41 said:


> I
> 
> I bet an R sport version is 2 or maybe even 3 years away. Sony really has a big lead in mirrorless camera technology and FF mirrorless market share. Making the R&D investments to match the AF performance of the A92 simply may not be possible for Canon in the near future, especially when the camera market is in freefall. Sony is big and tough. Canon is facing a steep hill.
> 
> Glad to see any rumor that the 1DX3 has improved AF tracking! For BIF, AF tracking in the 1DX2 is unstable in certain circumstances and falls short when compared to the AF tracking of the D5 or A92.


While it might have an improved AF tracking, that's not all that matters for birding; resolution is also important and 20MP is pretty lame, if you consider the need for crop and all bird photographers have that need.
So lets see if I got this right; currently, as a Canon bird photographer I can have:

excellent AF and speed, with the 1DX series, but not enough resolution
acceptable resolution, OK AF but not enough burst speed with the 5D Mark IV
excellent AF, acceptable resolution but terrible EVF blackout with the EOS-R
This is in 2020; really, Canon?


----------



## mpmark (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> Oh boy...here we go.



we live in an era of entitled people, demanding they need to be served the best, 20mp was good yesterday but its not good today in their minds everything must keep getting better, here to read all the angry entitled comments as well


----------



## raptor3x (Jan 3, 2020)

pauloancarvalho said:


> This can't be true... No DPAF in 4k50? So, the 1d x ii has it but the iii does not? I really hope this is an error the the rumor specs. If it's not an error, then I guess I will be keeping my 1d x ii. For raw video with no AF already have blackmagic pocket with internal raw or the panasonic s1h with ibis. Let's wait to see if it's really true. Maybe it's a mistake and it's supposed to say "no DPAF in RAW", but "no DPAF in RAW + 4k60/50p" is too much to ask for. HUGE step backwards.



That seems like a massive f-up on Canon's part if true. For a cinema camera it wouldn't be a big deal, but for a camera targeted to sports/press/wildlife photographers not having DPAF makes the 4K60 pretty much useless.


----------



## raptor3x (Jan 3, 2020)

mpmark said:


> we live in an era of entitled people, demanding they need to be served the best, 20mp was good yesterday but its not good today in their minds everything must keep getting better, here to read all the angry entitled comments as well



How dare people ask for improvements. I mean Canon gives us these cameras completely free out of the goodness of their hearts, it's not like they're trying to get people to pay large sums of money for these cameras.


----------



## sebasan (Jan 3, 2020)

But the marvelous sony A9 XIII has 24mpx and 4K30fps


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

mpmark said:


> we live in an era of entitled people, demanding they need to be served the best, 20mp was good yesterday but its not good today in their minds everything must keep getting better, here to read all the angry entitled comments as well



To be fair there seems to be a pretty big segment of shooters looking for 10fps and the 30mp range with top notch autofocus. It certainly seems like that is more than achievable. I would be interested in that rig as well. It is not being entitled I don't think. It just seems like a reasonable spec list. Maybe it is not that much in demand, but it seems like it.


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

canonnews said:


> there's DPAF in 4k30p, just not RAW and 4K 60p.
> 
> it's not a case of "removing it" .. the problem is the processing of the sensor with DPAF. it's .. just a crazy amount of processing to do when the sensor is running flat out as it is. to do 4k60p and DPAF the sensor is actually running flat out at 120+ fps.


Jeah thats probably true. But sadly these are VERY bad news for me :-( The combination of 60fps and DPAF on the 1DX II is nothing but amazing. Using it on a gimbal is nothing but a dream. A true fullframe and Canon RAW would have been a dream of a camera. But this is now a tight spot for me. I may as well keep my 1DX II and S1H... :-(


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

pauloancarvalho said:


> DPAF for me is much more important than the no crop. I can compensate crop with a wider lens, simple as that. But having no DPAF oh boy. Then the only FF option with DPAF is the Canon C500. Other than that you have the Panasonic S1H Full Frame that has Auto-focus in 4k60. Not as good as DPAF but very usable.


Jeah I agree. The 1,8 crop of the 5D is unnacaptable though (and the rolling shutter is even way more of a problem). The 1,3 crop on the 1D is just fine. No DPAF on the 1DX III would be a real disapointment. I was hoping for IBIS... what I got is no DPAF AND no ibis... 

Do you realy find the AF on the S1H okay? I currently only use it with adapted canon lenses and the AF is realy realy terrible, even for photography... What lenses do you use?


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 3, 2020)

Nelu said:


> While it might have an improved AF tracking, that's not all that matters for birding; resolution is also important and 20MP is pretty lame, if you consider the need for crop and all bird photographers have that need.
> So lets see if I got this right; currently, as a Canon bird photographer I can have:
> 
> excellent AF and speed, with the 1DX series, but not enough resolution
> ...


Don't forget about 1dx level autofocus and tracking, but with an aps-c body with awkward handling once you add adapters, and more or less the same EVF blackout as the EOS-R while capturing at much higher frame rates for short buffer filling bursts with the M6II.

I've read all sorts of people who have had wonderful experiences using the m6ii for birding, except for the fact that you can't take it out in inclement weather and/or rough conditions, and the awkward handling because of the small size. That's why I suspect Canon is sandbagging this years first half releases - I wouldn't be surprised if the RII and maybe even the R High Rez had modes that meet or exceed the 1dxIII, with the exception of being rugged. They want to sell high end RF glass, and artificially keeping the (potentially) last 1d series ef camera better than the RF versions is not the way to do that. Next years 1d hybrid viewfinder ef/rf monster will blow this one away too.


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

mpmark said:


> we live in an era of entitled people, demanding they need to be served the best, 20mp was good yesterday but its not good today in their minds everything must keep getting better, here to read all the angry entitled comments as well


Well, its a NEW camera for probably nearly 7000$ (+another 1000$ you will need for new cards). So why would these "entitled people" not expect some noteable improvements over yesterday? 
In the resolution and the missing DPAF I see a step back, certainly not a step forward...


----------



## pauloancarvalho (Jan 3, 2020)

peters said:


> Jeah I agree. The 1,8 crop of the 5D is unnacaptable though (and the rolling shutter is even way more of a problem). The 1,3 crop on the 1D is just fine. No DPAF on the 1DX III would be a real disapointment. I was hoping for IBIS... what I got is no DPAF AND no ibis...
> 
> Do you realy find the AF on the S1H okay? I currently only use it with adapted canon lenses and the AF is realy realy terrible, even for photography... What lenses do you use?



It depends on what you consider ok. I wouldn't use S1H's autofocus for weddings or for filming an interview, but but behind the scenes stuff and other run and gun scenarios where the final product is intended for behind the scenes it's ok. I've been using the 1d x ii in 2019 and now the EOS R. If 1d x iii has no DPAF in 4k60/50 then there's no reason to upgrade.


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

pauloancarvalho said:


> It depends on what you consider ok. I wouldn't use S1H's autofocus for weddings or for filming an interview, but but behind the scenes stuff and other run and gun scenarios where the final product is intended for behind the scenes it's ok. I've been using the 1d x ii in 2019 and now the EOS R. If 1d x iii has no DPAF in 4k60/50 then there's no reason to upgrade.


Hm okay, what lenses do you use on the S1H? 

Oh, realy, you moved from the 1DXII to the EOS R? I found the EOS R to be quite nice for photos, but for videos the rolling shutter was pretty insane... didnt you find that to be a huge problem?


----------



## mclaren777 (Jan 3, 2020)

These new specs sound pretty good.

I'm really curious to see how the AF points are selected and I'm hoping for touchpad-esque functionality from the AF-On button, or the amazing screen-touching feature from the EOS R.


----------



## pauloancarvalho (Jan 3, 2020)

peters said:


> Hm okay, what lenses do you use on the S1H?
> 
> Oh, realy, you moved from the 1DXII to the EOS R? I found the EOS R to be quite nice for photos, but for videos the rolling shutter was pretty insane... didnt you find that to be a huge problem?



I didn't move from 1dx ii to the EOS R. I just need to have multiple cameras for jobs that require multi-camera shooting and I rely on autofocus because I film a lot of dancing videos and musical concerts, and believe me, DPAF is your best friend in these case scenarios. I do use two additional GH5's in MF when I know there's going to be a lot of action in a fixed position of the stage, but for tracking shots, Canon is the best. So I use the best of both worlds.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 3, 2020)

Users: The silent shooting mode on the 1Dx II is a joke. 

Canon: You are absolutely right. We fixed it on the 1Dx III. It's now called "soft shooting."


----------



## pauloancarvalho (Jan 3, 2020)

peters said:


> Hm okay, what lenses do you use on the S1H?
> 
> Oh, realy, you moved from the 1DXII to the EOS R? I found the EOS R to be quite nice for photos, but for videos the rolling shutter was pretty insane... didnt you find that to be a huge problem?



Sorry, I forgot that last question. I don't find the rolling shutter a problem at all.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 3, 2020)

Does anyone else feel like this is the perfect upgrade to go with the 70-200 f2.8 III. [/sarcasm]


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jan 3, 2020)

Did somebody get April 1st mixed up with January 1st ?


----------



## djkraq (Jan 3, 2020)

I used the EOS R for the dancing scenes in the main hall and also used it as the main camera. 



I used the 5D Mark IV as well as a b-cam


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

pauloancarvalho said:


> I didn't move from 1dx ii to the EOS R. I just need to have multiple cameras for jobs that require multi-camera shooting and I rely on autofocus because I film a lot of dancing videos and musical concerts, and believe me, DPAF is your best friend in these case scenarios. I do use two additional GH5's in MF when I know there's going to be a lot of action in a fixed position of the stage, but for tracking shots, Canon is the best. So I use the best of both worlds.


Ah okay, I see, that makes sense.
We too use the GH5 alongside the 1DX II and I must say, the colors match realy great. The colors of the GH5 are realy beautiful (especialy compared to the sony, which is still a mess :-D) I am already excited for the next projects with the S1H  The DPAF indeed is an incredible great tool, thats why I am so shocked that the new 1DX III is said to not have it... still hard to belive for me an a dealbreaker.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 3, 2020)

I think the no DPAF in 4K60 is only in RAW or Full frame. If the 1dx2 could do it in crop mode I can't see why this wouldn't be able to do it in crop mode.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 3, 2020)

While it is certainly disappointing to not see more than 20mp, it is a brand new sensor, so if they were able to improve the image quality a lot, then that is great.

It is also great that there wouldn't be any GAS for me to upgrade...


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

mpmark said:


> we live in an era of entitled people, demanding they need to be served the best, 20mp was good yesterday but its not good today in their minds everything must keep getting better, here to read all the angry entitled comments as well


20MP was never enough. We wanted more 3 years ago.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

$winter said:


> just 20mp is a littel bit disappointing. but i guess it's more important how good they are..


Like dating the ugly girl and you tell your friends she has a great personality


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

peters said:


> Well, its a NEW camera for probably nearly 7000$ (+another 1000$ you will need for new cards). So why would these "entitled people" not expect some noteable improvements over yesterday?
> In the resolution and the missing DPAF I see a step back, certainly not a step forward...


Yesterday's Technology. It's obsolescence is guaranteed out of the box.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> Yesterday's Technology. It's obsolescence is guaranteed out of the box.



I would prefer more MP, however I disagree 100% with this statement. It sounds like it is going to be pretty sweet just on the lower side for resolution.


----------



## Tom W (Jan 3, 2020)

I'm a little bit surprised at the 20 mpx, but form follows function and for its purpose, perhaps 20 is the right amount.

Anxious to see how it performs!


----------



## Go Wild (Jan 3, 2020)

Seeing the new specs. I maintain what i have said. In stills terms there is not much of an improvement.... (EDIT: HEIF new format is an improvement!! ) but we still need to see what AF can offer. In video terms....what a different story. This camera have huge improvements. 5.4k raw internally?? Wow. I believe it will only be 25fps and maybe limited recording time, but is a big jump. Bitrate is insane! From a videographer perspective it will only lack the 4k120fps or 1080hd 240fps but..you cant have it all! However, nice move from Canon to video/stills (hybrid users).
The dpaf is something that you could ask of course, but i can´t see that this comes with big disadvantage if you dont have it. And I still believe you will have dpaf at 4k50fps crop.
Now...shooting raw will make gigantous files!! Like 128gb will give you for 3/4 minutes of video!  (just a number, not anything cientific.)
Happy to see that the cripple hammer of canon didn´t make too much damage this time, and it allows 4k signal output, making the hope of 4k120fps recording externally! Hope so.

Let´s see what comes, but the camera is promising, despite not too much exciting for stills only


----------



## Tom W (Jan 3, 2020)

Just as a caveat, I'm not a pro sports shooter. If I'm ever on the sideline of an NFL game, it's because I fell out of the stands in a drunken stupor, celebrating a Browns super bowl win. Which means "ain't gonna happen". 

The 20 wouldn't be good for my bird photography (where 'pixels-per-duck' rules), I really like what the 5D4 (and now R) does for me with its 30. I'm also experimenting with the M6 II and it shows promise, though it's a tradeoff of very high pixel density vs the cleaner high-ISO of the full frame bodies.


----------



## djkraq (Jan 3, 2020)

It really sucks if its true no 4k60p af. This is insane especially when they talked about it having DPAF in 4k. Looks like the Canon Cripple hammer is at it again


----------



## Tom W (Jan 3, 2020)

djkraq said:


> It really sucks if its true no 4k60p af. This is insane especially when they talked about it having DPAF in 4k. Looks like the Canon Cripple hammer is at it again



Needs clarification, but I think that it will have autofocus at 4K/60, but just not DPAF. The amount of data being processed is insane at that level.

It appears that it does DPAF at 4K/30 as well as all the 1080 modes, but I'd wait until the official announcement and specs are released to be sure.

EDIT: From looking at another site, it appears that there's no AF at 4K/60 or RAW/60. Not even a lessor mode of AF.


----------



## Eersel (Jan 3, 2020)

So Dual CFast slots are the exciting feature.


----------



## felipeolveram (Jan 3, 2020)

Need clarification on the 40k/60fps DPAF if in cropped mode. Why would the 1dxii have it but not the 1dx miii? Also for 120fps mode I see an all-i option and a high frame rate option, does this mean we finally get sound recording in 120fps? Always found it weird how the 1dx mark ii had 120fps but no sound recording.


----------



## Eersel (Jan 3, 2020)

The thirst is real for retailers posting product pages with no confirmed specs


----------



## unfocused (Jan 3, 2020)

My personal perspective (because it's all about me. )

Had it had 24-30 mp I know I would have upgraded. At 20 mp I want to see what else it offers.

Canon is promising significant improvements in autofocus. In my opinion, the 1Dx II autofocus had the greatest need for improvement, so I will be very carefully studying reviews and likely checking the camera out through CPS to see for myself. The autofocus improvements I want to see are very specific to sports shooting (better tracking of one player moving fast and erratically across a field or court while surrounded by others). 

Higher frame rates are nice, but I've not seen much practical advantage in most situations beyond 10 fps. 

Fast file transfer rates are meaningless to me, because as a one-man band I don't have anyone to transfer the files to. I get why this is important to a small group of elite photographers at the professional sports level, but I don't see that it is going to sell a lot of cameras. Frankly the 1DxII should have had wireless and bluetooth.

I seldom shoot video, so that's not a motivating factor for me. 

So, I'm not ruling it out, but I'm not counting the days until its release either. I have to think there are a lot of other photographers who will take a similar wait and see attitude.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 3, 2020)

Man, every single thread is just on and on with complaining and trolling. It’s why I don’t contribute much anymore. I finally have working gear, you know the atrocious, horrible let down of a camera, the R. And I like to engage in light fun positive conversations, not this endless [email protected]


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 3, 2020)

criscokkat said:


> Don't forget about 1dx level autofocus and tracking, but with an aps-c body with awkward handling once you add adapters, and more or less the same EVF blackout as the EOS-R while capturing at much higher frame rates for short buffer filling bursts with the M6II.
> 
> I've read all sorts of people who have had wonderful experiences using the m6ii for birding, except for the fact that you can't take it out in inclement weather and/or rough conditions, and the awkward handling because of the small size. That's why I suspect Canon is sandbagging this years first half releases - I wouldn't be surprised if the RII and maybe even the R High Rez had modes that meet or exceed the 1dxIII, with the exception of being rugged. They want to sell high end RF glass, and artificially keeping the (potentially) last 1d series ef camera better than the RF versions is not the way to do that. Next years 1d hybrid viewfinder ef/rf monster will blow this one away too.


We've been hearing for a couple years how the NEXT canon camera will SURELY blow away their current offerings.....


----------



## Joules (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> We've been hearing for a couple years how the NEXT canon camera will SURELY blow away their current offerings.....


And with the M6 II / 90D specs, there's no reason to believe it won't.


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

Just could come to fruition that this new 20 mp sensor is nothing like the old sensors. Canon knows it's base for the 1D line, they may just change of few complainers minds on this forum when bodies are in hands. That is, are these folks are actual customers and not just spec sheet keyboard 'Pro's'.

This happens quite often with Canon..., nothing but whining in the beginning, a short period of silence outside of particular youtuber reviews filled with glaring holes and lack of understanding, followed by glowing accolades by actual users who have photograpghs (gasp!) to back it up.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 3, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Man, every single thread is just on and on with complaining and trolling. It’s why I don’t contribute much anymore. I finally have working gear, you know the atrocious, horrible let down of a camera, the R. And I like to engage in light fun positive conversations, not this endless [email protected]



People are disappointed...what do you want?


----------



## gsealy (Jan 3, 2020)

It's just a non-starter for me. I was hoping for 28 MP, then I would be looking at it seriously. I still have a perfectly working 1DsIII which shoots 21.1MP. Yes, it is only 5 frame/s, but then I am not a professional sports photo guy. I can take what I get. As for the video, it is pretty cool with the RAW capability. But there are other alternatives that are cheaper. We should see a number of cameras hit the market this year with some really great video capabilities.


----------



## fox40phil (Jan 3, 2020)

"20MP" and "(No DPAF in 4K 60p or 4K RAW)"

no way Canon is doing as much as they could..... what a shame! I thought it will be a REAL beast and last phoenix of DSLR-Pro bodys with everything you can put into.... like [email protected] etc...


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 3, 2020)

OK, so all complaining aside, who exactly is this camera aimed at? 

Bird / Nature Photographers that shoot full-frame? You have the FPS, but then you have way less ability to crop than say the A9ii. So that's a no to me.

Sports photographers? Similar to the bird/nature photographers, but the cropping issue is lessened. So maybe that's who this is aimed at? But why would you upgrade over the Mk ii? 

Videographers? There's some great features (5.xK)...but then at the highest levels you remove DPAF, or even it appears ANY autofocus from 4k60/raw60. This from a flagship camera. You can point out that other brands don't have DPAF...but that was Canon's _advantage. _So they're removing that from the highest levels of shooting.

Studio shooters? Again, super low MP count...in a controlled environment with controlled lighting the high-ISO capabilities are negated somewhat. 

Those waiting for the pro-body R? Maybe people that need to upgrade now (or just want to) but don't want to wait 2 years for a pro-body R? That seems the most likely to me.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 3, 2020)

fox40phil said:


> "20MP" and "(No DPAF in 4K 60p or 4K RAW)"
> 
> no way Canon is doing as much as they could..... what a shame! I thought it will be a REAL beast and last phoenix of DSLR-Pro bodys with everything you can put into.... like [email protected] etc...




I was hoping for the same, go out, dump everything into the final DSLR pro-body ever to be made. Get one last push/surge in the market, make all those customers happy for a few years, and in the meantime work on and then release a BEAST pro-body R that we can move on to.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> OK, so all complaining aside, who exactly is this camera aimed at?
> 
> Bird / Nature Photographers that shoot full-frame? You have the FPS, but then you have way less ability to crop than say the A9ii. So that's a no to me.
> 
> ...


This!
I could not have put it a better way...


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> We've been hearing for a couple years how the NEXT canon camera will SURELY blow away their current offerings.....


Well, in terms of autofocus speed and accuracy the M6II did blow away anything that came before and met or exceeded the 1dxmii in many scenarios. the sensor also seems to be best in class for DR as well, among aps-c competitors. The only problem is that it wasn't a pro camera, so no one cared. 

We will see those gains to be translated to a full frame version of that sensor. We haven't seen it in action yet, but I'll bet the 1dxmiii live view is very similar to what we see in the m6ii, with the addition of even more processing power and a buffer that goes on seemingly forever. I'm quite certain that the RII and high rez are will be similar, excepting buffer size and fps. The interesting thing to me on the specs is that they say no blackout with live view, which means they now have the bandwidth to not black out a viewfinder display on future mirrorless cameras. I suspect the only reason we see that on the m6ii is not sensor readout speed but throughput with the digic 8 processor. Even then on the m6ii it's not as bad as it is on the R, more of a flicker than a slideshow.


----------



## padam (Jan 3, 2020)

ethanz said:


> I think the no DPAF in 4K60 is only in RAW or Full frame. If the 1dx2 could do it in crop mode I can't see why this wouldn't be able to do it in crop mode.


It doesn't seem so complicated looking at the product range and what each model does.

You either have 4k60p with DPAF and 8-bit codec with limited dynamic range, or you have RAW or 10-bit codec with Canon Log. You can't have both at the same time if it is not a Cinema camera (at least for now). They still want to keep the C200 (and other upcoming relatives) and record S35mm 4k60p DPAF with 8-bit 4:2:0 or with RAW.
Maybe the camera will be priced a bit less because of these inherent limitations. After the A9 (and A9II) it seems pretty clear that other manufacturers could start doing this as well (or offer it as a paid software upgrade, etc.)
And yes, the mirrorless R equivalent will probably have similar limitations, which is unfortunate.


----------



## retro (Jan 3, 2020)

Not to add to the noise, but no DPAF in 4k doesn't make sense. My 1dx Mkii has DPAF in 4k, why in the world would they take that feature away, especially since its one of the most distinguishing features that Canon offers for video? The $1700 EOS R offers DPAF in 4k, the 5D mkIV offers it for 4k, I just can't believe this top of line camera would remove such a baseline feature.

If this is true, it's a pathetic move by Canon. I guess I can understand if it's lacking for RAW shooting, but fully featured 4k became the standard YEARS AGO.


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 3, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Man, every single thread is just on and on with complaining and trolling. It’s why I don’t contribute much anymore. I finally have working gear, you know the atrocious, horrible let down of a camera, the R. And I like to engage in light fun positive conversations, not this endless [email protected]


Well said, I'm fed up too with this constant whining about imaginary features of a not yet existing camera !


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> I was hoping for the same, go out, dump everything into the final DSLR pro-body ever to be made. Get one last push/surge in the market, make all those customers happy for a few years, and in the meantime work on and then release a BEAST pro-body R that we can move on to.


Why would they want to do this, really?

They want to push something out for all of the professional companies to refresh their equipment now that depreciation is wearing down, make sure the sideline to published pipeline is working well, and provide something to all of their CPS premium customers that have invested heavily in years of ef lenses so that they get maximum usage out of them.

But they don't want to make it so good that people do not want to upgrade to RF. That's where the real money is, and so that's (IMHO) why they want it to be an incremental upgrade, not a revolutionary one. I've stated before in this thread that Canon is sandbagging. I suspect that some of the mirrorless offerings this year will meet or exceed this camera in stills and/or video, and include IBIS to boot. The rumored 2021 RF/EF hybrid body is what I suspect the 1D mirrorless offering will be. Probably in a mirrorless only for slightly cheaper, hybrid for more configuration.


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> People are disappointed...what do you want?


Did you actually see, touch, test the camera?
Disappointed by a phantom?


----------



## padam (Jan 3, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> Well said, I'm fed up too with this constant whining about imaginary features of a not yet existing camera !


Nokishita is a very reliable source, so the 17-page document provided by them (in Japanese or Korean) contains the exact specs of the camera.


----------



## Jack Jian (Jan 3, 2020)

retro said:


> Not to add to the noise, but no DPAF in 4k doesn't make sense. My 1dx Mkii has DPAF in 4k, why in the world would they take that feature away, especially since its one of the most distinguishing features that Canon offers for video? The $1700 EOS R offers DPAF in 4k, the 5D mkIV offers it for 4k, I just can't believe this top of line camera would remove such a baseline feature.
> 
> If this is true, it's a pathetic move by Canon. I guess I can understand if it's lacking for RAW shooting, but fully featured 4k became the standard YEARS AGO.


The updated specs mentioned "...AF is not available when recording RAW or 4K 59.94 p / 50.00 p (NTSC / PAL) movies ..." So in normal, 4K 30p, it may be available, but yes, at least in 60p will be great, but then, it's still a rumor, so let's wait.


----------



## padrepaul (Jan 3, 2020)

My hope is just that autofocus works well for birds. I shoot with the 800 5.6 and also have the 1.4 extender III, used the 800 alone on the 7DII, and now own the 5DIV. Overall the 7DII was fine, just a touch noisy so I went full frame. I could care less about video. If this camera works well with my 800 with and without the extender, and if it can track well an owl or raptor taking off, or a warbler, and if it works well in lower light situations with clean files, that's all I really want. The specs look good to me so far. I'll just be curuious how it does for tracking subjects.


----------



## gunship01 (Jan 3, 2020)

Love the new specs!!!
Means my Mark 2 just had its life extended by years!!! Sweet!

Funny thing is the Mark 3 Project Manager put the specs sheet up and briefed higher management saying "This is great for us", and they replied "Yep, it sure is. Great job pushing the boundaries on this development!!! Now let's plan out the Olympic support tent for this summer..... next slide......"


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 3, 2020)

I don't believe the 1DX line was ever really targeted at the hybrid crowd. FWIW, pro level still bodies have terrible ergos for video work. You still have to juggle an OVF vs LCD, is exceptionally heavy/large for single handed gimbal work and fixed screens are not very versatile either. The video specs reach status quo for 2020 in the video dept, and it is expected that it will be rapidly surpassed this year. Not the target market anyhow. I feel the upcoming RF products will really show Canon's direction in the hybrid market rather than using the 1DXIII as the yardstick. 

However, 1 comment I'd like to add is that I no longer feel DPAF is Canon's killer app. Originally, I fell in love with it shooting on the 5DIV and C200, but since moving to Sony, the mk.3 (after the A7R3) and mk.4 Sony bodies have really leveled the playing field. I've shot entire weddings where I've left it in AF mode all day long, and tapping the screen when I needed to switch targets or needed to do a manual focus pull. It works very well to the point where I don't feel I am really giving up DPAF anymore w/ Sony.


----------



## cpreston (Jan 3, 2020)

It should be mentioned for the video people- a 1DX actually weighs more than the Canon C200B and they cost approximately the same. Even if the 1DX had RAW recording with DPAF, it's hard to argue that it is a better choice for video than a C200 unless your primary concern is sensor size and resolution. And build quality.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> Bird / Nature Photographers that shoot full-frame? You have the FPS, but then you have way less ability to crop than say the A9ii. So that's a no to me.



Yeah. 24MP is so much more than 20MP...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 3, 2020)

I was watching with interest, like how could I justify a 1DX3. Not anymore, as presently rumoured, it's not for me.

Jack


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

Mikehit said:


> Yeah. 24MP is so much more than 20MP...



20% or so, which is decent. I think what frustrates people is Canon is basically saying you cannot have a pixel dense sensor, with great auto focus and good frames rates.

Mega Pixels, Frame Rate Auto Focus, Canon says pick two.


----------



## Joules (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Mega Pixels, Frame Rate Auto Focus, Canon says pick two.


I'd say at the moment they say pick an M6 II. If you had thrown FF into the mix, they don't have an answer currently, but in a few more months they'll likely first say High Res R and later R II / 5D IV.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

Joules said:


> I'd say at the moment they say pick an M6 II. If you had thrown FF into the mix, they don't have an answer currently, but in a few more months they'll likely first say High Res R and later R II / 5D IV.



So you think Canon wants to steer their professional customers to a tiny camera without a built in viewfinder and no weather sealing? I haven't used the m62, and it looks like a nice little camera, but is it usable for birds in flight photography? I thought the auto focus was suspect for fast erratic action. 

I was on the verge of buying the m6, but settled on the m50 as a travel rig due to the viewfinder.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 3, 2020)

gunship01 said:


> Love the new specs!!!
> Means my Mark 2 just had its life extended by years!!! Sweet!
> 
> Funny thing is the Mark 3 Project Manager put the specs sheet up and briefed higher management saying "This is great for us", and they replied "Yep, it sure is. Great job pushing the boundaries on this development!!! Now let's plan out the Olympic support tent for this summer..... next slide......"


It saved me a ton of money!

I was looking to get an M5 MkII, two 1D X MkIII's and a high resolution R this year so around $20,000. Canon have blown the first two so only the high resolution R remains, so maybe $3,000 in June? If that R is a dud I'll get a 5Ds for <$1,300. I'll pick up another M5 for $449 before the B&H offer finishes.

Basically Canon are going to be getting pennies off me in 2020 instead of a comparative windfall, I'm sure they have factored that in but I'm sure I'm not alone in my thinking.


----------



## padam (Jan 3, 2020)

cpreston said:


> It should be mentioned for the video people- a 1DX actually weighs more than the Canon C200B and they cost approximately the same. Even if the 1DX had RAW recording with DPAF, it's hard to argue that it is a better choice for video than a C200 unless your primary concern is sensor size and resolution. And build quality.


Each has its place. For starters, the C200 cannot record in 10-bit 4:2:2, only RAW or 8-bit 4:2:0


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> So you think Canon wants to steer their professional customers to a tiny camera without a built in viewfinder and no weather sealing? I haven't used the m62, and it looks like a nice little camera, but is it usable for birds in flight photography? I thought the auto focus was suspect for fast erratic action.
> 
> I was on the verge of buying the m6, but settled on the m50 as a travel rig due to the viewfinder.


You laugh, I am doing more and more paid work with my M5, my other cameras are 1DX MkII's. You don't need durability when you can afford to throw the cameras away!


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> You laugh, I am doing more and more paid work with my M5, my other cameras are 1DX MkII's. You don't need durability when you can afford to throw the cameras away!



I am not laughing. I am really curious. I do dog photography for a few clients. Dogs in action doing dog like things. If an M62 is a good tool for that type of photography I am all ears. I would still wait for a model with built in viewfinder.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

Mikehit said:


> Yeah. 24MP is so much more than 20MP...


20%. If of no consequence then drop it to 16MP.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> 20% or so, which is decent. I think what frustrates people is Canon is basically saying you cannot have a pixel dense sensor, with great auto focus and good frames rates.
> 
> Mega Pixels, Frame Rate Auto Focus, Canon says pick two.


It's really perplexing. SONY makes amazing sensors for Hasselblad. 24mp at 15fps RAW with an OVF cant be impossible.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 3, 2020)

Canon should offer the 1 series features in an R type camera with high(er) resolution. The days of a single "flagship camera" are gone, IMHO. 

Jack


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Canon should offer the 1 series features in an R type camera with high(er) resolution. The days of a single "flagship camera" are gone, IMHO.
> 
> Jack


"Flagship at 20MP's in 2020" The sky is green.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jan 3, 2020)

I'm not in the market for such a body. Overall, it sounds like solid specifications. Almost everything is improved, but nothing is new. No new features that make you think the camera is innovative in any regards.

Will Canon throw something really cool in their next 5D? Let's hope so. IBIS and a solution (they exist) to get rid of AFMA once and for good would be nice. But I also think that such features would make 1DXIII owners upset. So, I don't have my hope too high.

My dream DSLR would be a D850 [replacement] with EF mount.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I am not laughing. I am really curious. I do dog photography for a few clients. Dogs in action doing dog like things. If an M62 is a good tool for that type of photography I am all ears. I would still wait for a model with built in viewfinder.


I used to shoot sheep dog trials, I could easily do 90% of that with my M5, 100% with an M5 II assuming it had all the specs of the M6 II with built in viewfinder.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 3, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Canon should offer the 1 series features in an R type camera with high(er) resolution. The days of a single "flagship camera" are gone, IMHO.
> 
> Jack


I was telling you that back when you were wondering about the 1D X II and the 5D IV Jack


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I used to shoot sheep dog trials, I could easily do 90% of that with my M5, 100% with an M5 II assuming it had all the specs of the M6 II with built in viewfinder.



But no M5mk2 coming right? 

I will wait and see the announcement. Maybe the files will be beautiful. I really am looking for one camera body to do it all.


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I am not laughing. I am really curious. I do dog photography for a few clients. Dogs in action doing dog like things. If an M62 is a good tool for that type of photography I am all ears. I would still wait for a model with built in viewfinder.



I use my M6 mk II for semi pro motorsport and for paid other sports work. Best camera I have, abeit I really wish I could get it in a fully weather sealed body.The clip on viewfinder doesnt bother me. Dog photography will be a total breeze


----------



## scyrene (Jan 3, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> OK, so all complaining aside, who exactly is this camera aimed at?



Well... who has been buying the 1Dx and 1Dx2? Those are the people it'll be aimed at.



AccipiterQ said:


> I was hoping for the same, go out, dump everything into the final DSLR pro-body ever to be made. Get one last push/surge in the market, make all those customers happy for a few years, and in the meantime work on and then release a BEAST pro-body R that we can move on to.



It was never going to be that. There's never been a unicorn product, from any producer of any type of tool. If it's called a 1Dx3, it's always going to be like the 1Dx2 with some improvements. That's how it works. The world hasn't miraculously changed just because 40% of people are buying mirrorless cameras now (or whatever the real figures are).


----------



## scyrene (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> 20% or so, which is decent.





GoldWing said:


> 20%. If of no consequence then drop it to 16MP.



No, it's less than 10%. You're forgetting that MPs represent an area, but the 'reach' is a linear measurement, so you have to take the square root of the difference. So √24/20=1.095, or a 9.5% increase - so the difference between using a 500mm lens and a ~548mm lens.

This is why going from the 5D3 to the 5Ds which I did a few years ago wasn't a more than doubling of equivalent reach (22MP>50MP) but only an increase of ~50% "reach" (ignoring diffraction etc). You get diminishing returns. I like resolution, but the 1 series was never going to offer that, although 20MP sounds to be at the bottom end of the range of predictions.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

scyrene said:


> No, it's less than 10%. You're forgetting that MPs represent an area, but the 'reach' is a linear measurement, so you have to take the square root of the difference. So √24/20=1.095, or a 9.5% increase - so the difference between using a 500mm lens and a ~548mm lens.



I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?


----------



## scyrene (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?



I don't print, I'm not sure how to answer the question.


----------



## WillT (Jan 3, 2020)

> As for Imaging Systems, although we expect sales and profit decline for interchangeable-lens cameras due to market contraction and a worsening of the competitive environment, we are focusing on redistributing resource to mirrorless cameras, where we are steadily increasing sales by enhancing our lineup of cameras and lenses



If they are redistributing resources to mirrorless camera they should at least have a pro body to go with all that nice glass.


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> 20% or so, which is decent. I think what frustrates people is Canon is basically saying you cannot have a pixel dense sensor, with great auto focus and good frames rates.
> 
> Mega Pixels, Frame Rate Auto Focus, Canon says pick two.


It's that way with many things, take bicycle frames. Light, Strong, cheap. Pick 2.


----------



## LensFungus (Jan 3, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> It saved me a ton of money!
> 
> I was looking to get an M5 MkII, two 1D X MkIII's and a high resolution R this year so around $20,000. Canon have blown the first two so only the high resolution R remains, so maybe $3,000 in June? If that R is a dud I'll get a 5Ds for <$1,300. I'll pick up another M5 II for $449 before the B&H offer finishes.
> 
> Basically Canon are going to be getting pennies off me in 2020 instead of a comparative windfall, I'm sure they have factored that in but I'm sure I'm not alone in my thinking.


I don't think the high resolution R will be a dud but I guess it will be more expensive than most people thought. Personal guess: $3.500 in the USA and 4.000€ in Germany.


----------



## dlee13 (Jan 3, 2020)

Now I’m wondering if this is like the EF 70-200 III. It was a very basic incremental update over its predecessor and turns out the RF version was the major upgrade.

Maybe not long after the 1DXII announcement, we get the RF version which will blow us away.

Is CES before the Olympics?


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

Once again for me, the incremental improvements of the R and 5D4 over my 5D3 alongside with the minor changes in the 1Dx3 and lack of 7D3 & M52 paint an impressionistic picture whereas I desired a realistic roadmap. Trickle down and up and all that jazz....*SWWYH* philosophy, status quo.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Jan 3, 2020)

So for sports... why wouldn't you just shoot 5.4k at 60p? Rolling shutter typically isn't an issue for most human sports. 

Also have to admit a 20mp sensor leaves a bit to the competitors. 

Hope the "pro" R is a resolution monster than can use the resolution of the current lens offerings.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 3, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Man, every single thread is just on and on with complaining and trolling. It’s why I don’t contribute much anymore. I finally have working gear, you know the atrocious, horrible let down of a camera, the R. And I like to engage in light fun positive conversations, not this endless [email protected]


While I generally agree with your comment, I think this is a little different. Most of those expressing disappointment seem to be actual buyers of the 1D series. These are not the folks who whine "if it doesn't have IBIS and 8K video I'm switching to Sony." These are people who have bought and would continue to buy the 1 series, but are questioning whether the III will have sufficient improvements to justify the cost of upgrading. 

There is still a lot we don't know about the camera and that we won't know until it is actually in users' hands. But, it strikes me that Canon (and Nikon -- which is also apparently going with a 20mp sensor) have made it more difficult, rather than easier, to convince users to upgrade.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> It's that way with many things, take bicycle frames. Light, Strong, cheap. Pick 2.



But I am not looking for cheap. I am willing to pay for all three.


----------



## padam (Jan 3, 2020)

Busted Knuckles said:


> So for sports... why wouldn't you just shoot 5.4k at 60p? Rolling shutter typically isn't an issue for most human sports.


Besides the 1.9:1 aspect ratio and the AF being disabled in this mode, the 2600 Mbps bitrate is insanely high.

It does shoot 20fps RAW stils with live-view, although the Servo-AF is probably not in its best mode.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> While I generally agree with your comment, I think this is a little different. Most of those expressing disappointment seem to be actual buyers of the 1D series. These are not the folks who whine "if it doesn't have IBIS and 8K video I'm switching to Sony." These are people who have bought and would continue to buy the 1 series, but are questioning whether the III will have sufficient improvements to justify the cost of upgrading.
> 
> There is still a lot we don't know about the camera and that we won't know until it is actually in users' hands. But, it strikes me that Canon (and Nikon -- which is also apparently going with a 20mp sensor) have made it more difficult, rather than easier, to convince users to upgrade.



Unfocused hit the nail on the head. I have been going crazy waiting for info on this camera. I was even planning to cash in some airline points and fly to New York and buy one in store. I don't think this is going to be a bad camera. Only these specs have deflated my party ballon a bit. I may still get one I am just not dying to get in line.


----------



## mangobutter (Jan 3, 2020)

In the future, imagine cameras had the power to just take full 20mp+ video and you just pick the screen grabs as the photos you want. Photography wouldn't exist. you'd just take a video and pick your photos later.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

mangobutter said:


> In the future, imagine cameras had the power to just take full 20mp+ video and you just pick the screen grabs as the photos you want. Photography wouldn't exist. you'd just take a video and pick your photos later.



They would still exist, but their daily task and work detail would be different.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 3, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> It saved me a ton of money!
> 
> I was looking to get an M5 MkII, two 1D X MkIII's and a high resolution R this year so around $20,000. Canon have blown the first two so only the high resolution R remains, so maybe $3,000 in June? If that R is a dud I'll get a 5Ds for <$1,300. I'll pick up another M5 II for $449 before the B&H offer finishes.
> 
> Basically Canon are going to be getting pennies off me in 2020 instead of a comparative windfall, I'm sure they have factored that in but I'm sure I'm not alone in my thinking.


My reaction is fairly similar. My personal purchase road map had been a 1DxIII and then eventually replacing my 5DIV with the next generation RII. (Using the R and RII as my main cameras and the 1DXIII for sports.) Now, I'm wondering what the 5DV will offer. If the next generation 5D offers 9-10fps, I'm not sure I need the 1Dx.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> My reaction is fairly similar. My personal purchase road map had been a 1DxIII and then eventually replacing my 5DIV with the next generation RII. (Using the R and RII as my main cameras and the 1DXIII for sports.) Now, I'm wondering what the 5DV will offer. If the next generation 5D offers 9-10fps, I'm not sure I need the 1Dx.



You hit the nail on the head again. For now I have a 1dx, 5d4 and recently acquired m50. My plans were 1dx3, EosR2, and m5 or 50 2. I may skip the 1dx3 pick up a 1dx2 used, and wait for the 5d5 or R2. Not sure at this point. I really don't need 20fps. I would be happy with 10.


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> But I am not looking for cheap. I am willing to pay for all three.


The analogy is not for cameras sake word for word, it's for analogy sake. Cheap isn't part of the 1DX equation, never has been, the post which first made the pick two statement had a point, you missed it. Oh and I'm glad you are flush with cash, credit and hubris.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> But I am not looking for cheap. I am willing to pay for all three.


Bravo. Those of us willing to pay are dissatisfied. Those of us who use the camera to make a living are dissatisfied. Canon has stumbled here tactically and strategically.

Our agency will wait until we get an OVF with 24+ MP


----------



## reef58 (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> The analogy is not for cameras sake word for word, it's for analogy sake. Cheap isn't part of the 1DX equation, never has been, the post which first made the pick two statement had a point, you missed it. Oh and I'm glad you are flush with cash, credit and hubris.



It is a common saying and cheap is one leg of the triangle. It applies to backpacking gear, telescopes bicycles. You name it. That being said if you remove cheap from the triangle there is usually a product for you. You just have to pay for it.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> You hit the nail on the head again. For now I have a 1dx, 5d4 and recently acquired m50. My plans were 1dx3, EosR2, and m5 or 50 2. I may skip the 1dx3 pick up a 1dx2 used, and wait for the 5d5 or R2. Not sure at this point. I really don't need 20fps. I would be happy with 10.


You're like my brother from another mother!
I also have the 1DX, the 5D Mark IV and fairly recently I purchased the EOS-R. I was really looking at the 1DX3 but for me the 20MP resolution is a major letdown. I'll probably get a used 1DX2, sell my 5D Mark IV and the original 1DX.
I have too much and too expensive Canon glass, so the Sony A9 would not work for me.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> It's that way with many things, take bicycle frames. Light, Strong, cheap. Pick 2.


Who is calling the 1DXIII cheap? It would be like an expensive carbon fiber frame that is not light or strong.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> The analogy is not for cameras sake word for word, it's for analogy sake. Cheap isn't part of the 1DX equation, never has been, the post which first made the pick two statement had a point, you missed it. Oh and I'm glad you are flush with cash, credit and hubris.


Its business. We want 24+ MP with an OVF at 15fps RAW. And yes... we are willing to pay for what we need. $8K per body and my shop buys a lot of bodies.


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?


Since Mpixels refer to the whole area 20% larger (or 1.20 ) is about 9.5 larger each side (1.095 * 1.095). So of course you can print but a little less than 10% each size. Still better of course. I would prefer it 24mpixel too although I do not know If I would buy it since I own 5DsR 5DIV and R (Oh and a forgotten 7D2!). If it was c28Mpixel it could replace my 5DIV.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> While I generally agree with your comment, I think this is a little different. Most of those expressing disappointment seem to be actual buyers of the 1D series. These are not the folks who whine "if it doesn't have IBIS and 8K video I'm switching to Sony." These are people who have bought and would continue to buy the 1 series, but are questioning whether the III will have sufficient improvements to justify the cost of upgrading.
> 
> There is still a lot we don't know about the camera and that we won't know until it is actually in users' hands. But, it strikes me that Canon (and Nikon -- which is also apparently going with a 20mp sensor) have made it more difficult, rather than easier, to convince users to upgrade.


Yes, for those people I agree with you, and I’ve seen a few of those comments also, not knocking that. It’s just all the other noise all the time that’s harder to ignore.

I could’ve been in the market for a 1dx3 also, but kind of felt that the great things with the 1dx2 wasn’t a match for the great things with the R and made the switch. And looking at how “easy” is to sell a mint 1dx2 for anything more than pocket change I say the choice was right for me.


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> My reaction is fairly similar. My personal purchase road map had been a 1DxIII and then eventually replacing my 5DIV with the next generation RII. (Using the R and RII as my main cameras and the 1DXIII for sports.) Now, I'm wondering what the 5DV will offer. If the next generation 5D offers 9-10fps, I'm not sure I need the 1Dx.



That was exactly my plan. 
I allready got a Lumix S1H because the 1DX II felt a bit dated for video work and the way better codec options are a charme to work with. 
I realy like the fullframe look and I realy love the 4k60 on the 1DX II. Together with DPAF its a perfect combo on a gimbal.
But now, if they truly offer NO DPAF in 4k60, I dont think I can justify another 7000€ to upgrade to the mark III. The RAW video is an incredible feature, but the DPAF is more important in the everyday work.


----------



## NorskHest (Jan 3, 2020)

So most of you on here are complaining about a camera that next to none of you will own. And most of you have never worked with a raw workflow for video let alone in such a small form factor hell none of us really have. Whether this camera write 4K raw internally or 6K to mitigate all that heat that will be generated and have to do the auto focus is a feat I can’t comprehend and none of you probably can. This is a rumor site and we all have to wait. If this is the final spec list. A 1dxmkii is still a great camera


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

Of course 1DxII is a great camera an dI assume 1DxIII will be a better one. I for one don't care about video (but I respect other's needs of course). Judging from the improvements in the previous incarnations of 1D series and the 5DIV quality I would assume that a higher megapixel 1DxIII would be possible without compromising quality or speed (1DxII is very fast anyway).

There is maybe the possibility that Canon did with 1DxIII what they did with 5DIII. Both were the cameras the previous versions should be (assuming the rumor is correct of course).

We will see.

Now where is a superfast birding camera?


----------



## peters (Jan 3, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> So most of you on here are complaining about a camera that next to none of you will own. And most of you have never worked with a raw workflow for video let alone in such a small form factor hell none of us really have. Whether this camera write 4K raw internally or 6K to mitigate all that heat that will be generated and have to do the auto focus is a feat I can’t comprehend and none of you probably can. This is a rumor site and we all have to wait. If this is the final spec list. A 1dxmkii is still a great camera


I realy cant get over the fact they ditched DPAF. 
There HAS to be a 4k mode with DPAF or I will not get this camera. I was 99% sure I would upgrade from my 1DX II and sell the Lumix S1H... I was hoping we would maybe get IBIS... but thats okay if its missing. But removing DPAF is absolutely NOT okay. Thats the biggest advantage the 1DX II got over all other cameras (that, and the nice colors out of the box). 
The RAW Video is certainly beautiful on the 1DXIII, but the workflow is certainly quite demanding on the editing hardware. Which would have been okay. But no DPAF is incredible. If this is true. I am pretty sure I will go with Panasonic, which build a realy great camera with the S1H.


----------



## Southstorm (Jan 3, 2020)

A quick hack job, but this is what 191 af points could look like...


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

That is a camera that I could use for birding if it supported 2XII as if it didn't exist at all (speedwise for F/4 lenses)!!!


----------



## tron (Jan 3, 2020)

On the other hand I would welcome a 30Mpixel 5DMkV. There are areas where the already very very good 5DMkIV could be improved a little (DR/Low light areas, one ot two more fps, UHS-II SD support at full speed for the second card, better autofocus speed with teleconverters)


----------



## Nelu (Jan 3, 2020)

tron said:


> Now where is a superfast birding camera?


You mean the "Canon superfast birding camera"? Nowhere; keep on waiting...


----------



## AlanF (Jan 3, 2020)

Southstorm said:


> A quick hack job, but this is what 191 af points could look like...
> 
> View attachment 188010


Well done! 191 is a prime number, just right for DxO PL 3.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 3, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> So most of you on here are complaining about a camera that next to none of you will own...



I don't think that's true at all. Looking at who is posting in this thread, there are a lot of people who use the 1D line, myself included. As I said in an earlier post, I think that's the difference with this thread. And, I get the feeling that many of those posting aren't ruling out the 1DxIII, they are simply feeling that what was once an easy decision, is now a bit more difficult to justify. We will all have to wait and see how the actual camera performs.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 3, 2020)

The feedback for the current specs is pretty bad, not just here but also on the site starting with fred, ending in miranda. Just look at the forum and you'll see people are equally pissed off there as well. In a good way though; not just bitching and asking for unrealistic things, but expressing disappointment towards the resolution and the lack of 4k 60p AF, mainly.
Again, this is all based on the current "leaked" specs, which unfortunately might be the final ones though.
Canon, in the press release: "Power to dominate"...I don't think so! Dominate what, exactly?


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 3, 2020)

Personally I'd still be surprised if Canon don't increase the MP's on the camera. While many of the professional users don't particularly want the extra MP it's a key selling point and a key distinguishing point between a 1DX II and 1DX III. You can reduce file size by changing your settings but you can't add MP's.
I think Canon need to be careful between what some of their key users want and what would make them upgrade. 

"The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will be blisteringly fast – offering exceptional precision, reliability, high-performance autofocus, and subject tracking – providing photographers with a tool that will help to capture the shot they are chasing. The camera’s new autofocus algorithm will improve stability and tracking when using both the Optical Viewfinder and in Live View shooting mode, using Deep Learning Technology and adapting to help facilitate accurate focus tracking for every shot. When using the optical viewfinder the camera will use a new autofocus sensor, with approximately 28 times the resolution in the center of the EOS-1D X Mark II. Offering the ability to autofocus in even brighter and darker situations than before and with greater precision, the camera will have a range of autofocus capabilities, which will enable the photographer to get their shot. "

This seems to be the only reason for a photographer to upgrade but would need to seen in tests to completely outperform the 1DX II on focusing.


----------



## PiezoSwitch (Jan 3, 2020)

Someone uploaded some images and documentation of the new camera. Unfortunately the written stuff is in Korean.





__





canon - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> Its business. We want 24+ MP with an OVF at 15fps RAW. And yes... we are willing to pay for what we need. $8K per body and my shop buys a lot of bodies.


Yes yes we know, you remind us of your professional business every post.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 3, 2020)

Southstorm said:


> A quick hack job, but this is what 191 af points could look like...
> 
> View attachment 188010



I would be very surprised if still photography was able to AF at the extremes like that - my guess is that they will be more like Nikon in that they will have many more AF points more densely packed within pretty much the same area as currently configured, with the AF point density improving focus tracking as the subject moves within the frame.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 3, 2020)

slclick said:


> Yes yes we know, you remind us of your professional business every post.


It's business.


----------



## Russ6357 (Jan 3, 2020)

In the immortal words of Blackadder:

“...bugger...”


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

So the romored KILLER FEATURE canon had wasn't to wow 1DxIII buyers, the 1DxIII 'killer feature' was to keep C500II owners feeling elite.

After seeing the 90D's killer feature (PDAF disabled for all 4k) I should have known.

1) As for all you guys saying 'who else offers FF 4k 60p with really great AF?' just watch this space. Only the Sony FX9 today, but 1/3 of the way though the 1DXIII's product life there will be several other options that will probably also offer IBIS to boot. This is a camera for yesterday, not a camera for tomorrow.

2) 'Why all the crazy sad faces, why can't we all just sing happy Canon camp fire songs?" The people asking this don't appear to be the people who make their living with a camera in their hand, and who have large $$ of canon glass they dread selling. We would rather stay with Canon, we like Canon. but there is only so much under-specing and performance crippling we can handle when our career is at stake. New photographers are almost universally buying Sony, it's us older loyal guys who were hoping for a flagship camera that would still be relevant 3-4 years from now.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 3, 2020)

dear lord. What is it about wannabe video shooters whinging that the rumoured specs do not include a feature that NO THER CAMERA HAS. There are obviously technical limitations and if you are ignorant of the facts you should probably stick to the default position of keeping your mouth shut and not making yourself look stooped. As for it being 20mp. If that is the case it was obviously an intentional decision to give the majority of the real customers what they want.


----------



## Matthew19 (Jan 3, 2020)

I use three 1dxII for filming weddings. Autofocus in all recording modes is great, and I can't imagine losing it at 4k 60. Thats when you're shooting faster moving subjects with the intent to slow down and AF is even more usefull.

If these specs are correct you trade DPAF 4k 60 for Canon Log, and a more efficient codec. Thats about it. I can transcode 1dxII MJPEG just fine on my own and expose for the highlights when needed.


----------



## dba101 (Jan 3, 2020)

2) 'Why all the crazy sad faces, why can't we all just sing happy Canon camp fire songs?" The people asking this don't appear to be the people who make their living with a camera in their hand, and who have large $$ of canon glass they dread selling. We would rather stay with Canon, we like Canon. but there is only so much under-specing and performance crippling we can handle when our career is at stake. New photographers are almost universally buying Sony, it's us older loyal guys who were hoping for a flagship camera that would still be relevant 3-4 years from now.
[/QUOTE]
Assuming you've had a career with a camera, why is it suddenly 'at stake now'?


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 3, 2020)

dlee13 said:


> Now I’m wondering if this is like the EF 70-200 III. It was a very basic incremental update over its predecessor and turns out the RF version was the major upgrade.
> 
> Maybe not long after the 1DXII announcement, we get the RF version which will blow us away.
> 
> Is CES before the Olympics?


CES is going on right now. The next show that matters is CPP at the end of Feb. That's when the R High Rez was speculated as being unveiled (that rumor and timeframe has been around forever) and more recently rumors of another camera or two to be unveiled there too.The speculation on the 2nd two is the R II and 5DV. Which in hindsight makes more sense - 1dxiii not being the star of the show, so it has a quiet release. new R cmeras, big splashy ones along with lots of new lenses.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

Aussie shooter said:


> dear lord. What is it about wannabe video shooters whinging that the rumoured specs do not include a feature that NO THER CAMERA HAS. There are obviously technical limitations and if you are ignorant of the facts you should probably stick to the default position of keeping your mouth shut and not making yourself look stooped. As for it being 20mp. If that is the case it was obviously an intentional decision to give the majority of the real customers what they want.



REALLY!!!? 

* So why doesn't the old 1DxII with it's slower CPUs have any trouble running DPAF @ 4k 60p? It only has a modest 1.3 crop while doing it.
* You maybe ignorant of this, but the world is changing and hybrid shooting is the future. It was 9-10 years ago that the press industry started asking their stills shooters to also capture video. Vincent Laforet was one of your 'wannabe video shooters' back then, look where he is now. Many of us have and are transitioning to tomorrow's growing hybrid world.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 3, 2020)

Can't believe so many complaints about 20MP. How many people on here actually own this sort of rig? Seriously. 20MP is fine for who/what this camera is built for. And in keeping it at 20MP, it looks like they were able to get even more high ISO performance out of it and presumably lower noise in low light. Now we get Full Frame 4k too with internal RAW, and that further begs the question will it be able to perhaps accommodate ProRes Raw externally to an Atomos like the Nikon MILCs do. And look at the AF upgrades. I use my DX2 for a lot of low light fast action and shooting at high ISOs. I've loved it so much it's become my go-to all arounder size aside. 

I bought an EOS R mainly for video (and to replace an aging 5D3) because it allows me to record externally which is a huge deal for me and why I try not to use the DX2 for that. I think this DX3 camera looks brilliant on paper so far based on the updated confirmations today. I may look to sell my 1DX2 and upgrade once I see some real world info.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

dba101 said:


> 2) 'Why all the crazy sad faces, why can't we all just sing happy Canon camp fire songs?" The people asking this don't appear to be the people who make their living with a camera in their hand, and who have large $$ of canon glass they dread selling. We would rather stay with Canon, we like Canon. but there is only so much under-specing and performance crippling we can handle when our career is at stake. New photographers are almost universally buying Sony, it's us older loyal guys who were hoping for a flagship camera that would still be relevant 3-4 years from now.


Assuming you've had a career with a camera, why is it suddenly 'at stake now'?
[/QUOTE]
Every new young punk has Sony cameras that out perform Canon in the most important ways (ie lower noise, AF, resolution, video capability), and as a result the market segments where Canon still rules are small and shrinking.

The 1DxIII as leaked will only keep a narrow share of hisorical 1 series customers happy. There is a market for this camera and certain shooters will love it. But the market this new camera will appeal to is just not as wide as it was for the MKII, orginal X, 1DMKIV, etc. Hence all the frown faces here.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 3, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I was telling you that back when you were wondering about the 1D X II and the 5D IV Jack


More like I think we all just know it intuitively but Canon refuses to give it. My idea was and still is a second camera given the present situation, and it won't be the 1DX3.

Jack


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Can't believe so many complaints about 20MP.



I agree with you in that hybrid abilities are more important to me than >20mp. However, if Canon wanted a broad range of people to like/buy this camera, rather than just sports event shooters, 24-26mp would have given it broad appeal.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 3, 2020)

mangobutter said:


> In the future, imagine cameras had the power to just take full 20mp+ video and you just pick the screen grabs as the photos you want. Photography wouldn't exist. you'd just take a video and pick your photos later.


This camera could have been that future. Sony will do it instead.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 3, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> REALLY!!!?
> 
> * So why doesn't the old 1DxII with it's slower CPUs have any trouble running DPAF @ 4k 60p? It only has a modest 1.3 crop while doing it.
> * You maybe ignorant of this, but the world is changing and hybrid shooting is the future. It was 9-10 years ago that the press industry started asking their stills shooters to also capture video. Vincent Laforet was one of your 'wannabe video shooters' back then, look where he is now. Many of us have and are transitioning to tomorrow's growing hybrid world.


I don't know what the difference is. I am not an electronic engineer. But I am guessing you aren't either and you actually have no idea what you are complaining about. Or am I wrong? Are you some friggen genius that could easily implement it given 5 mnutes of your sapre time?


----------



## Viggo (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> I agree with you in that hybrid abilities are more important to me than >20mp. However, if Canon wanted a broad range of people to like/buy this camera, rather than just sports event shooters, 24-26mp would have given it broad appeal.


Why would anyone sacrifice high iso performance to have fraction higher res on paper?
I hardly notice the 10 mp increase from the 1dx2 to the R, but noise bothers me when shooting higher ISO’s.


----------



## Russ6357 (Jan 4, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Can't believe so many complaints about 20MP. How many people on here actually own this sort of rig? Seriously. 20MP is fine for who/what this camera is built for. And in keeping it at 20MP, it looks like they were able to get even more high ISO performance out of it and presumably lower noise in low light. Now we get Full Frame 4k too with internal RAW, and that further begs the question will it be able to perhaps accommodate ProRes Raw externally to an Atomos like the Nikon MILCs do. And look at the AF upgrades. I use my DX2 for a lot of low light fast action and shooting at high ISOs. I've loved it so much it's become my go-to all arounder size aside.
> 
> I bought an EOS R mainly for video (and to replace an aging 5D3) because it allows me to record externally which is a huge deal for me and why I try not to use the DX2 for that. I think this DX3 camera looks brilliant on paper so far based on the updated confirmations today. I may look to sell my 1DX2 and upgrade once I see some real world info.



I do, as a serious amateur who invests much of my disposable income on wildlife photography I’d have hoped we, as a segment, would be better served.

late 20s to 30 MP is in my experience the sweet spot. Even a lowly 15% improvement in pixels on target makes my 500 more like a 600 and with a 1.4 my 700 more like 800. It would I’m fact have made it likely I would have bought a new 400 f2.8.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Why would anyone sacrifice high iso performance to have fraction higher res on paper?
> I hardly notice the 10 mp increase from the 1dx2 to the R, but noise bothers me when shooting higher ISO’s.


Start a poll here and see what people want. Canon clearly didn't. BTW, Sony offers both higher res and lower noise. Just saying.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 4, 2020)

Autofocus and high ISO better be spectacular. But I'm not in this market segment anyway so don't pay attention to me.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 4, 2020)

Well I'm buying for sure. Leaves me with couple questions though...

How good is the eye-AF compared to Sony, or Eye-AF-quality in general compared against PDAF.

Is HEIF still worse than RAW? I assume yes?

Maximum burst RAW-mode: 1000 or more (= as long as you could ever shoot)

Video goes up to 120fps on FullHD. Does is to DPAF on that, or disable DPAF like they did on 5D4 (which they didn't clearly advertise, and for which I'm still mad about.)

Hope the memory price comes down too.


----------



## Warrenl (Jan 4, 2020)

As a 1dx11 shooter with 2 bodies, both over 1.5 million actuations, I am definitely ok with higher ISO and better dynamic range. 90% of my photos are shot as M2 (9 MP), so 20 MP is not an issue. In terms of focus, the big thing I want to see is better tracking on subjects wearing black clothing.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Warrenl said:


> As a 1dx11 shooter with 2 bodies, both over 1.5 million actuations, I am definitely ok with higher ISO and better dynamic range. 90% of my photos are shot as M2 (9 MP), so 20 MP is not an issue. In terms of focus, the big thing I want to see is better tracking on subjects wearing black clothing.


Curious, what do you shoot? I would have guessed school photos but you don't need tracking for that.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 4, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Why would anyone sacrifice high iso performance to have fraction higher res on paper?
> I hardly notice the 10 mp increase from the 1dx2 to the R, but noise bothers me when shooting higher ISO’s.



I think it has to do with the 1d being the flagship. You want to see higher megapixels and good noise management. This is a 6k dollar rig after all.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

EOSHD has a leak about the Sony A7SIII sensor. Full frame 4.8K video oversampled from 60 million 7.52um photosites. There is a 3840 x 2160 @ 90fps mode (uncropped I presume, could be wrong) , and by switching off the over sampling, a 61 megapixel readout mode at frame rates up to 15fps.

Next Canon = 16fps @20mp
Next Sony = 15fps @60mp


----------



## reef58 (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> EOSHD has a leak about the Sony A7SIII sensor. Full frame 4.8K video oversampled from 60 million 7.52um photosites. There is a 3840 x 2160 @ 90fps mode (uncropped I presume, could be wrong) , and by switching off the over sampling, a 61 megapixel readout mode at frame rates up to 15fps.
> 
> Next Canon = 16fps @20mp
> Next Sony = 15fps @60mp



I don't think Canon has a speed issue. This is apple and oranges.


----------



## Dantana (Jan 4, 2020)

mangobutter said:


> In the future, imagine cameras had the power to just take full 20mp+ video and you just pick the screen grabs as the photos you want. Photography wouldn't exist. you'd just take a video and pick your photos later.


And give up control of my shutter speed on a per image basis? No thanks


----------



## shawn (Jan 4, 2020)

90% of the people complaining wouldn't buy this camera anyway. If you really NEED 4k RAW output because the production is costing hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars and you need every guarantee that your footage is golden then please tell me why you didn't hire a professional focus puller? 4k RAW is pointless for youtube videos. Heck, its pointless for most streaming platforms....


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

shawn said:


> 90% of the people complaining wouldn't buy this camera anyway.


If you took the time to read this entire thread, you'd see that's not true. People are upset because they want/wanted to buy this camera, and feel ripped by what it doesn't offer.


----------



## Go Wild (Jan 4, 2020)

So seems like the 20mp is giving different reactions. And its normal because they only count to people who actually needs higher MP. For a sports shooter or a photojornalist we dont care about MP so much, i normally shoot about 9mp anyway and thats about what editors want. No one have time to shoot raw, so this segment of users tend to care more to great jpeg compression than anything else...For this works 20MP is stellar! 

However....If I want a camera for wildlife and nature....that´s another question....It´s not only the crop capability, it´s also the possibility of printing bigger without compromising quality. 1Dx mkII is a huge camera and I love mine, but...I came recently from Antarctica andguess what...1dxmkII stayed at home and replaced her with the Sony A7r3. Why? Because sony gives me 42MP at 10FPS with a decent buffer (although i hate the processing time). So for this job what i wanted was a camera that gives me great resolution for the massive icebergs, great sharpness and also could give me the possibility of shooting fast for wildlife. Now...don´t get me wrong, i love my 1dx2 and i dont see myself selling it! As a matter off fact, despite i am having great results with sony, i am just waiting that canon puts inthe market a good resolution EOS R camera to sell the Sony. I just love Canon and Sony+adapters...well....mehhh...not to good at least for fast autofocusing. 

So in this situation of course MP matters!! And thats why guys like me, tend to get a little disappointed having a new camera getting out with same resolution sensor....Now i know that of course thats not the only thing it matters....but is important so dont be "offended" when someone gets disappointed with this spec! Perfectly normal. 

From video perspective i´ve said it some posts behind, camera is huge! I am on the market for the new upcoming EOS R pro with good resolution...or maybe selling also the 1dx2 for the new action eos R. Having a big hope that they are around the corner....This 1dx3 despite the really good specs....just didn´t convinced me to get it. At least yet, as we do know that specs is not real life use! And this camera still could surprise me even more! ; ) We´ll see!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 4, 2020)

I don't complain as I'm not buying it anyway. But I realise the specs are disappointing for many prospective users. Downgrading and not having a DPAF in 4K looks strange. Looks like this camera only shines in fps.

What I do worry about now is whether Canon is able to deliver a good high-MP camera this year. It looks like they're cutting the corners, reducing R&D costs and aren't catching up with Sony.


----------



## Southstorm (Jan 4, 2020)

I really question what the "no DPAF in 4k60" actually means. Surely there is more to be clarified on this point.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jan 4, 2020)

Interesting. I was sure they'd move up to the 5.9K sensor in the C500 Mark II. I guess the processing still isn't there so they went for RAW and higher framerates at lower resolution. Sure, there are some aspects that aren't perfect like DPAF at RAW and full frame 60P but I'll wait for the final specs to see how that shakes out.

That being said, I'm guessing this thing is going to crank out some pretty nice video. Certainly comparable with many of the cinema cameras out there and with DPAF at most of the commonly used frame-rates. It will be a plus if the AF tracking is a little more like what we've seen in the R's rather than the 1DX2 which is still pretty much a tap to focus operation.

Stills shooters didn't get much. I'm guessing this is going to be an "i'll upgrade when my 1DX2 needs to be replaced" but who knows? Maybe the AF and the new AF/On gizmo will be a major step up in AF. Can't wait to see it in action.

I wonder if it will finally have a built in intervalometer?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 4, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I don't complain as I'm not buying it anyway. But I realise the specs are disappointing for many prospective users. Downgrading and not having a DPAF in 4K looks strange. Looks like this camera only shines in fps.
> 
> What I do worry about now is whether Canon is able to deliver a good high-MP camera this year. It looks like they're cutting the corners, reducing R&D costs and aren't catching up with Sony.


There is dpaf in 4k. Just not in 4k60.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> What I do worry about now is whether Canon is able to deliver a good high-MP camera this year. It looks like they're cutting the corners, reducing R&D costs and aren't catching up with Sony.


Canon could have made this camera fast with a higher pixel count (perhaps just not quite as fast), and the DPAF cripple is probably just in firmware, but it's true that Canon can not compete with Sony R&D. Sony's sensor research is funded by being the world's largest phone camera sensor manufacturer, who are currently apologizing to their giant phone customers that this billion $ division of Sony just can't keep up with the damand for what they're producing.


----------



## tron (Jan 4, 2020)

Russ6357 said:


> I do, as a serious amateur who invests much of my disposable income on wildlife photography I’d have hoped we, as a segment, would be better served.
> 
> late 20s to 30 MP is in my experience the sweet spot. Even a lowly 15% improvement in pixels on target makes my 500 more like a 600 and with a 1.4 my 700 more like 800. It would I’m fact have made it likely I would have bought a new 400 f2.8.


For now I use 5DsR for that reason. It's decent enough.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I wonder if it will finally have a built in intervalometer?


This is listed in the Japanese leak, so it sounds like yes. Meanwhile, you're right, there's no question it will produce beautiful video @ 4k 24/25 fps.


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Jan 4, 2020)

TBH the 20MP doesnt bother me either, I usually dont crop - It'll be a huge upgrade to my 1D mk IV. All the AF upgrades are right up my alley. 

(Given that the M6 II got a 32MP sensor, it does seem odd to stay at 20MP. But I guess if dynamic range is superb....... I'll go with it?)

This isnt an amateur camera and looking at the specs and thinking about it......... I could well see my existing 1D being replaced. Events sports photo people who do 20,000 shots a day are going to lap the 1D X III up biiiig time


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> TBH the 20MP doesnt bother me either, I usually dont crop - It'll be a huge upgrade to my 1D mk IV.


[Off topic] I had my old 1d IV out last week as a back up camera that ended up being used, and when editing I was surprised by just how sharp those 16 million pixels are. It really was a truely great camera. [/Off Topic]


----------



## navastronia (Jan 4, 2020)

If I were making a poll, I'd ask Canon Rumors readers which they'd prefer: a 1DX mk III with 1) 4K video and 24mp, or 2) 5.9K video and 20mp. I would bet my gear bag the majority would want the former, but Canon is apparently producing the latter. Strange times.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 4, 2020)

PS - the EF mount is dead, especially for pro users. Judging from the gorgeous RF glass already available, it's clear that major innovation, from this point forward, is coming almost exclusively to RF bodies, and I bet that when the real RF pro body debuts, it's gonna make a big splash, for the right reasons (gorgeous sensor, enough mp, great autofocus).


----------



## unfocused (Jan 4, 2020)

Serious Question: Does anyone know if HEIF files "bake in" the white balance like jpgs or perform more like a raw file, where you can totally adjust the white balance after exposure. The main reason I shoot in raw is to have the flexibility to change the white balance in post-processing. Very important to me since I shoot a lot of sports under artificial lights with a crazy mix of ambient colors.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I bet that when the real RF pro body debuts, it's gonna make a big splash, for the right reasons (gorgeous sensor, enough mp, great autofocus).



Maybe. Meanwhile Sony have apparently developed a FF A7SIII sensor that offers 60mp @ 15 FPS with outstanding low light and 4K @ 90fps, and they're calling it a consumer sensor. What will Sony's next pro camera sensors feature?


----------



## navastronia (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> Maybe. Meanwhile Sony have apparently developed a FF A7SIII sensor that offers 60mp @ 15 FPS with outstanding low light and 4K @ 90fps, and they're calling it a consumer sensor. What will Sony's next pro camera sensors feature?



They can call it whatever they want - it doesn't really matter. Sony just debuted the a9II (their sole "professional" mirrorless camera) with the same sensor as the original a9, so it's not immediately evident that they have some world-beating tech waiting in the wings.

And, aside from the fact that what you've posted here is an unconfirmed rumor, even if it were true, it wouldn't make any sense, since the A7SIII is a video camera first and will not have a 60mp sensor.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> it wouldn't make any sense, since the A7SIII is a video camera first and will not have a 60mp sensor.


 It's a 15mp sensor with 4 sub pixels per 'pixel unit'. This quad bayer designs is different to the way we're used to counting pixels so it is confusing.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Southstorm said:


> I really question what the "no DPAF in 4k60" actually means. Surely there is more to be clarified on this point.


It means the same as 'No DPAF at all in 4k for the 90D' Zero, zilch, nada.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Well I'm buying for sure. Leaves me with couple questions though...
> 
> How good is the eye-AF compared to Sony, or Eye-AF-quality in general compared against PDAF.
> 
> ...



I think the HEIF format was listed for HDR shooting (in camera processing). Not a RAW replacement.

And yes the 120fps is a big question of mine. On the 1DX2, not only did you not have AF or sound, but the 120FPS was baked in IN camera. I'd like to see a bit more clarification on certain video specs. I still scratch my head at no DPAF on 4k 60 at all. Maybe it's an error and it only means "while recording RAW" at 4k60. The specs also dont seem to specify if it will let 4k ProRes RAW out of the HDMI to an external. 

I could not care one ounce less what codec Canon chooses. I would much rather let my Ninja V do that work and record directly to ProRes and save myself a ton of time in post.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

Southstorm said:


> I really question what the "no DPAF in 4k60" actually means. Surely there is more to be clarified on this point.


 Yeah, I'm fuzzy on this. The DX2 I'm 99% sure has this although I haven't shot video at 4k60 on mine in a while and can't recall right now but pretty sure I've done it with AF. I'm thinking this is perhaps no Intelligent Eye tracking at 4k60 in full frame? No DPAF in RAW at 4k60. Etc... Something to that effect. Losing that ability in the new camera would seem odd and if so, I'm thinking Canon would make a fix shortly after release considering how fast they were to react to the "no 24p in the EOS RP" issue.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 4, 2020)

ethanz said:


> While it is certainly disappointing to not see more than 20mp, it is a brand new sensor, so if they were able to improve the image quality a lot, then that is great.



Remember that Canon has not released a camera in the past nine years where it didn't consider the sensor to be "all new," even when it was plainly a warmed over upgrade. Any modifications made to allow the chip to work with new firmware, differently configured microlenses, etc., make it "all new" in the language of Canon. This isn't to say that sometimes they do launch great upgrades on occasion, but I wouldn't put stock in that particular phrasing.

The mention of better image quality was said in the same breath as the new chip, which may indicate that the attempt at better image quality has more to do with how they cook the file, rather than the raw data gathered at the sensor. 

We have to wait until we see the real specs, but so far this doesn't appear to be the body I was waiting for.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

Is the same exact sensor as the DX2? I've seen things that suggest yes and others say no. Same dimensions but a new sensor, new design. Or just an upgraded ADC? I dont know. Has there been any clarity on this?


----------



## photo212 (Jan 4, 2020)

WOOHOO! Now, my hunt is on for someone trying to sell their low mileage 1DX Mk II for a great low price.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

__





Product Showcases | Canon U.S.A., Inc.







www.usa.canon.com


----------



## Peer (Jan 4, 2020)

Again, the spec for this camera is too little too late - i.e., if Canon would've offered (which I know they can) a short (say 1 minute) burst-mode of 30/fps at 8k (with high shutter speed) to use both for still and video - such camera would kill any competitor. But sadly, what Canon lacks is someone at the helm similar to Steve Jobs, Allan Kay, Jim Jannard, Elon Musk, etc. Sadly, nowadays Canon has turned into Hewlett Packard - a company with the most brilliant engineers but with a leadership of anti visionaries. 

-- peer


----------



## frankchn (Jan 4, 2020)

Peer said:


> Again, the spec for this camera is too little too late - i.e., if Canon would've offered (which I know they can) a short (say 1 minute) burst-mode of 30/fps at 8k (with high shutter speed) to use both for still and video - such camera would kill any competitor.



The cameras that can do what you specify are things like the RED Monstros 8Ks, and those run $80k. Unrealistic for Canon, Sony, or anyone else to put that in a camera that has to cost at most $6 or 7k.

Beyond that, those 8K systems also require active cooling with fans and openings. I don't think sports photographers and journalists will appreciate their cameras suddenly not being water resistant any more.


----------



## frankchn (Jan 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> If I were making a poll, I'd ask Canon Rumors readers which they'd prefer: a 1DX mk III with 1) 4K video and 24mp, or 2) 5.9K video and 20mp. I would bet my gear bag the majority would want the former, but Canon is apparently producing the latter. Strange times.



I would bet that most Canon Rumors readers are not in the target market for this camera. Reuters, AP, AFP, SI, etc... probably told Canon that 20mpx is plenty -- and those organizations are buying thousands of cameras.

20 megapixels is enough to fill a double spread in Sports Illustrated at 300 dpi, and even then it is the rare photo that gets the double spread treatment. Most photos gets thrown out immediately, and most of the selected ones will just end up on Twitter feeds / web galleries at 2 or 3 mp, so why process 30 megapixel files?


----------



## navastronia (Jan 4, 2020)

frankchn said:


> I would bet that most Canon Rumors readers are not in the target market for this camera. Reuters, AP, AFP, SI, etc... probably told Canon that 20mpx is plenty -- and those organizations are buying thousands of cameras.
> 
> 20 megapixels is enough to fill a double spread in Sports Illustrated at 300 dpi, and even then it is the rare photo that gets the double spread treatment. Most photos gets thrown out immediately, and most of the selected ones will just end up on Twitter feeds / web galleries at 2 or 3 mp, so why process 30 megapixel files?



Sure, you're absolutely right about sports spreads, but I don't think there's a print outlet alive that wouldn't want images large enough to crop, if they wanted. A few hundred pixels can be the difference between a good composition and a great one, and that's what going from 20 to 24 mp would have afforded, in situations like that (which happen all the time in sports and events work, not to mention birding and wildlife).

To address the elephant in the room, it's also just kinda . . . weird . . . to not increase the mp of the 1D series, at this point. Makes me view the camera suspiciously, what can I say.


----------



## frankchn (Jan 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Sure, you're absolutely right about sports spreads, but I don't think there's a print outlet alive that wouldn't want images large enough to crop, if they wanted. A few hundred pixels can be the difference between a good composition and a great one, and that's what going from 20 to 24 mp would have afforded, in situations like that (which happen all the time in sports and events work, not to mention birding and wildlife).
> 
> To address the elephant in the room, it's also just kinda . . . weird . . . to not increase the mp of the 1D series, at this point. Makes me view the camera suspiciously, what can I say.



Perhaps in practice they are not seeing enough cropping issues to override other concerns or wishes they want (lower noise, higher DR, etc...)? Or Canon cheaped out and reheated the 1DX2 sensor to save some coin. We'll know soon enough.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

@frankchn, first of all, the 2.6Gbps (or 320MB/s) data processing and write speed of this camera's 5.4k raw IS MORE THAN the 300mb/s of a Red DSMC2 brain. It's all about what options Canon is choosing to give to us at various price points, and US$6500 apparently isn't enough for a whole lot of options that wouldn't cost Canon an extra cent in production costs.

Second, you put down a lot of Canon Rumors readers and posters. There are numerous press photographers posting here (me for example), not to mention the other types of full time pro photographers who have a strong interest in this new camera, and have posted their feelings about it.


----------



## expatinasia (Jan 4, 2020)

Mmmm. I am looking forward to more real articles on the final specs to come out in media. I had been thinking of selling my Mark I or Mark II to get the Mark III but my initial reaction is that it may not be worth it. I like the idea of illuminated buttons, though I would only use them for personal use and only a few times a year. The improved AF would be nice, but the Mark I and II are very good anyway. I very rarely use 4K video and still shoot in 1080p so the upgrade in video is of little interest, right now at least - and I doubt it will be over the next four years. If I were to buy the new one I would also have to invest in new cards (sufficient for video, back up etc) which would be a considerable amount. Not decided yet, but if I were a betting man I would imagine the contents of my camera bag will look the same as it does now this time next year.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

frankchn said:


> Perhaps in practice they are not seeing enough cropping issues to override other concerns or wishes they want (lower noise, higher DR, etc...)? Or Canon cheaped out and reheated the 1DX2 sensor to save some coin. We'll know soon enough.


I personally think this is a new BSI sensor. A major historical issue with Canon's sensor tech has been their read speeds, but the rumours were that they'd built production facilities capable of fabricating BSI (stacked) sensor tech. The major advantage of this is being able to get data off the sensor faster without needing to reduce photo-site size to fit in on-chip processing.


----------



## frankchn (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> @frankchn, first of all, the 2.6Gbps (or 320MB/s) data processing and write speed of this camera's 5.4k raw IS MORE THAN the 300mb/s of a Red DSMC2 brain. It's all about what options Canon is choosing to give to us at various price points, and US$6500 apparently isn't enough for a whole lot of options that wouldn't cost Canon an extra cent in production costs.
> 
> Second, you put down a lot of Canon Rumors readers and posters. There are numerous press photographers posting here (me for example), not to mention the other types of full time pro photographers who have a strong interest in this new camera, and have posted their feelings about it.



Hold on, I might be misunderstanding what the DSMC2 "Brain" does vs the sensor box, but how can the Monstro 8K VV or the Helium 8K S35 do 8Kp60 (8192 x 4320 x 60 = 2.12 Gpixels/second -- even at 8bit RAW that is 2.12 GBytes/second), much more than 300 MBytes/second.

The 1DX Mark III will do 5472 x 2886 x 60 fps = 947 Mpixels/second. If we scale out to 8K, then that results in a framerate of 27 fps. I guess it is close, but it is discounting the additional heat, etc... the sensor will output with the additional photosites. I still think that they could probably not their engineering goals and price point if they included an 8K-capable sensor (8192 x 5641 for 3:2, which means 46 megapixels instead of 20).

I'm sorry if I came across as putting folks down, but there is a reason that all the rumors for the 1DX3 and D6 point to 20-24 megapixels, and Sony (despite going after lots of tech/megapixels/whatever in every other market) decided that 24mp is good enough for the A9 Mark II going into an Olympics year in Tokyo.

I don't believe that this is coincidental and their largest customers must be telling them that the resolutions of the current generation of cameras are good enough.


----------



## sanj (Jan 4, 2020)

Aussie shooter said:


> There is dpaf in 4k. Just not in 4k60.


Not in 4k RAW either.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> I personally think this is a new BSI sensor. A major historical issue with Canon's sensor tech has been their read speeds, but the rumours were that they'd built production facilities capable of fabricating BSI (stacked) sensor tech. The major advantage of this is being able to get data off the sensor faster without needing to reduce photo-site size to fit in on-chip processing.



If they've managed to fix their read speed issues, that would be tremendous.


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 4, 2020)

Strange situation - geek inside of me yells - 20mpx is bad, Canon does not want to innovate. But then you have to think - Canon uses some data, ambassadors, end they surely have asked - guys, what bothers you most with the recent model? And maybe the mpx count was the last thing mentioned, at least for the particular focus group? So while the resolution stays the same, new camera gets faster in transfers, faster in focusing, which means potentially more keepers, etc.

On the other hand, I can see also prospective buyers complaining, so maybe camera like 1DX-III have more targets, than just a sports? Or maybe there is a market gap to a higher mpx, a bit slower one? Who knows ....

Next stir (including myself) there is going to be is imo around the next R model, if it is a high mpx one. Once again one might have a feeling like - Canon, another camera noone realy asked for - give us 5DV in an R form instead, in a sense of not probably more than 40mpx and better high ISO performance.

All that means, that there are many of us, with different usage scenarios. I will patiently wait for the 5DV in an EOS-R form, because doing weddings, we care about high iso, focusing and only a reasonable (if at all) resolution bump. But once again - that's just us, guy next door might have quite different needs


----------



## edoorn (Jan 4, 2020)

Not sure if this has been answered already here, but is it the same old mark II sensor or a completely new one?


----------



## padam (Jan 4, 2020)

edoorn said:


> Not sure if this has been answered already here, but is it the same old mark II sensor or a completely new one?


It's a new sensor, it had been told in the development announcement.


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 4, 2020)

edoorn said:


> Not sure if this has been answered already here, but is it the same old mark II sensor or a completely new one?



I bet it is a completly new one, just identical resolution. Old sensor tech was not able to get reasonable read-out speeds. First speed burst we could see was with the 90D and M6-II. Dunno how it was achieved, if it was/is BSI or not, but those two releases might mean new sensor tech generation. I am eager to see, if the new 1DX-III sensor brings in even some more innovation ....


----------



## edoorn (Jan 4, 2020)

That makes sense, and I missed that in the development announcement. Thanks guys.


----------



## Jim Corbett (Jan 4, 2020)

The questions that concern me are: 
- does it have the oil splatter problem?; 
- is the AF tracking at the D5 leve?l; 
- does it drop the FPS in servo?; 
- is AFMA automatic like D5?
20 megapixels is good enough for me, since I won't shoot small (or any) birds, and would crop very conservatively. 
Don't care about DPAF either since it's designed for shooting humans.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I think it has to do with the 1d being the flagship. You want to see higher megapixels and good noise management. This is a 6k dollar rig after all.



This is rather silly. First, as others have said, the idea that there is one true flagship model is a bit flawed - the 1Dx series is for a particular segment of customers. Second, the 1-series hasn't been the highest res of the Canon lineup for over a decade, indeed it's been the lowest or equal lowest resolution of the FF sensors for most of that time. And the idea that the most expensive body must be the best at everything is a pretty simplistic view - some of the price reflects the ruggedness, durability, etc (even if 'best' could be objectively defined; for resolution more is not always thought of as better). As has been said every time a new camera is released, it's all very well chasing spec sheet stats, but that doesn't necessarily make a camera better. Canon's bodies are always criticised on that basis, but then they outperform expectations; Sony has sparkling specs but often with caveats and then people find problems in other areas during use (though this is a simplification and I gather they are getting better in that regard).


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> If you took the time to read this entire thread, you'd see that's not true. People are upset because they want/wanted to buy this camera, and feel ripped by what it doesn't offer.



Without wanting to second guess people's motivations, I'd just point out that we have no way of knowing which of the people here are in the market for this camera, whatever they claim. No reason to take what people say at face value on an internet forum. I would hope that professionals had a more balanced/realistic view of things, but perhaps I have an unduly high opinion of human nature.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Looks like this camera only shines in fps.



Erm what about autofocus? That's the thing that seems to have been complained about most here in regard to the 1Dx2 (contentious though the issue has been), and that looks to be the thing they're making the biggest fuss about. This reminds me of the 6D2 - Canon improved the things people had moaned about the most, in that case number of AF points, so people started moaning about a totally different thing (the precise design of the sensor, the *spread* of the AF points), as if every aspect of every new body had to be changed with every iteration. It was even cheaper on release than its predecessor, but people still complained about the price!


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

Peer said:


> Again, the spec for this camera is too little too late - i.e., if Canon would've offered (which I know they can) a short (say 1 minute) burst-mode of 30/fps at 8k (with high shutter speed) to use both for still and video - such camera would kill any competitor. But sadly, what Canon lacks is someone at the helm similar to Steve Jobs, Allan Kay, Jim Jannard, Elon Musk, etc. Sadly, nowadays Canon has turned into Hewlett Packard - a company with the most brilliant engineers but with a leadership of anti visionaries.



Actually a lot of successful business is about boring decisions. A visionary, or worse a maverick, can be of use - but not always. There are far too many on these forums who think that the way to victory is releasing the bells-and-whistles unicorn camera of their dreams - but Canon's past success has been based on a quite different strategy (large volume sales of low end bodies, a high profile with professionals, etc). It may or may not work in the future, but I can see why they think tried and tested is better than starting from scratch. PS no camera they release would 'kill any competitor'. That's apparently what Sony has been doing for years (if we believe their faithful), and nobody has been killed. Get some perspective.


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 4, 2020)

To all my beloved haters... 
Like I said.. all came true: just a minor upgrade from the mk II. 
It’s over for Canon.


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 4, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> To all my beloved haters...
> Like I said.. all came true: just a minor upgrade from the mk II.
> It’s over for Canon.



I don't think that in a sensor IQ area, read-out and transfer speed, buffering and AF it is going to be a minor update, quite the opposite ....


----------



## canonnews (Jan 4, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> To all my beloved haters...
> Like I said.. all came true: just a minor upgrade from the mk II.
> It’s over for Canon.



sure if you ignore the buffer depth, card write speed to both slots, video functionality greatly enhanced from pedestrian MJPEG and crop factor, AF points, AF-ON joystick control, eyeAF, better liveview AF, greater AF sensitivity in both AF and liveview,etc,etc.

if you ignore all that and look I guess at 20MP.. then yes, it's a minor update


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 4, 2020)

canonnews said:


> sure if you ignore the buffer depth, card write speed to both slots, video functionality greatly enhanced from pedestrian MJPEG and crop factor, AF points, AF-ON joystick control, eyeAF, better liveview AF, greater AF sensitivity in both AF and liveview,etc,etc.
> 
> if you ignore all that and look I guess at 20MP.. then yes, it's a minor update



EXACTLY! A minor upgrade, but hey, go ahead and spend your 13.000 dollars for two mk III bodies pal! Enjoy your AF-ON joystick!


----------



## tron (Jan 4, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> EXACTLY! A minor upgrade, but hey, go ahead and spend your 13.000 dollars for two mk III bodies pal! Enjoy your AF-ON joystick!



Allow me to quote you



Cyborx said:


> CANON IS DOING EVERYTHING WRONG HERE...
> 
> All we are waiting for is a crispy sharp and silent (mirrorless) camera with eye-AF, a reasonable amount of megapixels (*20 is fine)* and built-in WiFi.
> ...
> ...


OK not mirrorless and not saying that some things couldn't be different (assuming the rumor is correct) but you seem comfortable with the 20Mpixels!


----------



## tron (Jan 4, 2020)

The 1DxII -> 1DxIII seems like a 5D2 -> 5D3 kind of upgrade to me

The camera as it should have been the first time.


----------



## tron (Jan 4, 2020)

What is your favorite new feature of the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III


We won't get the official announcement of the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III until Monday, but we do know most of what is in store when it finally does get announced.




www.canonrumors.com





I look at the list and the new features do look impressive. So it seems like a 1DxII as it should to be.

Now I hope that this AF sensor gets to 5DMkV


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 4, 2020)

raptor3x said:


> That seems like a massive f-up on Canon's part if true. For a cinema camera it wouldn't be a big deal, but for a camera targeted to sports/press/wildlife photographers not having DPAF makes the 4K60 pretty much useless.


you cannot be serious. Right???


----------



## reef58 (Jan 4, 2020)

scyrene said:


> This is rather silly. First, as others have said, the idea that there is one true flagship model is a bit flawed - the 1Dx series is for a particular segment of customers. Second, the 1-series hasn't been the highest res of the Canon lineup for over a decade, indeed it's been the lowest or equal lowest resolution of the FF sensors for most of that time. And the idea that the most expensive body must be the best at everything is a pretty simplistic view - some of the price reflects the ruggedness, durability, etc (even if 'best' could be objectively defined; for resolution more is not always thought of as better). As has been said every time a new camera is released, it's all very well chasing spec sheet stats, but that doesn't necessarily make a camera better. Canon's bodies are always criticised on that basis, but then they outperform expectations; Sony has sparkling specs but often with caveats and then people find problems in other areas during use (though this is a simplification and I gather they are getting better in that regard).



I don't think it is silly at all. First I never said it should be the highest resolution sensor. I also never said it should be the best at everything. I understand the durability and ruggedness as I own a 1D. I am surprised there was not a resolution bump. That's all. It is rare in this day and age a new camera gets introduced without a resolution bump. I guess you can define flagship however you want, however this camera will probably be priced at nearly 2 times the costs of the next most expensive camera. To me that defines flagship. That is the context I am using.

I am not chasing spec sheet stats or whatever that means. I am surprised they remained at 20mp. I had all plans to buy the 1dx3, and I still may. I am just not as excited about the release as I was a week ago. Some doubt has crept in, such as should I just buy a gently used 1dx2 instead as they are going for $3500 or so. Is the auto focus improvement worth 3k. It probably is, but if this was a 30mp release I would be hitting f5 looking to preorder. Now I may still get one, but there is no rush.

I am coming from the point of view of a stills camera owner. I am starting to do more video, and the specs looks great for that. Probably better than I will ever be as an operator. I am not a technical guy, so I don't get into the weeds with those, but again the video specs look great.


----------



## Warrenl (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> Curious, what do you shoot? I would have guessed school photos but you don't need tracking for that.


Gymnastics


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 4, 2020)

> The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will be announced on Monday, and we are just posting a summary of the known features and specifications for the new camera. There are still some questions to be answered, specifically what processors the camera is going to use. We suspect the camera will have at least dual DIGIC 9 processors. The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III is going to need a lot of processing power to match its RAW video and buffer specifications.
> *Will it have DPAF?*
> Yes, it will, with a caveat. You will get DPAF in 1080p and 4K at 23p/24p/30p. You will not get DPAF in 4K 50p/60p or RAW video shooting.
> The WFT-E9 wireless transmitter is all-new for the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III and will be announced alongside the new flagship Canon DSLR. Canon is boasting industry-leading file transfer speeds and reliability.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## wyotex43n (Jan 4, 2020)

The new 1D would be a reach for me, but I will probably rent one once they become available to make a final decision. I took advantage of Lens Rentals 9 day for the price of 2 and just finished a 9 day rental of a Sony A9ll with the sony 100-400. Very interesting camera but did not blow me away. 
Is it fast yes. Is the auto focus good yes. The animal eye af needs to be close and is not nearly as good as the human eye af. Can you configure all the buttons yes and you will need to. With a glove on I kept moving the Joystick when hitting the AF-on button. 
Its a spec sheet queen. I shoot wildlife and BIF and I live in cold climate. With gloves on the camera is difficult to operate. 
You really need the grip or add on battery pack to shoot with a large lens. Shooting from the same distance with my 7Dmkll and EF100-400ll image quality was not very different mostly due to not having to crop Was the noise better yes but not as much as I would have thought.


----------



## tron (Jan 4, 2020)

wyotex43n said:


> The new 1D would be a reach for me, but I will probably rent one once they become available to make a final decision. I took advantage of Lens Rentals 9 day for the price of 2 and just finished a 9 day rental of a Sony A9ll with the sony 100-400. Very interesting camera but did not blow me away.
> Is it fast yes. Is the auto focus good yes. The animal eye af needs to be close and is not nearly as good as the human eye af. Can you configure all the buttons yes and you will need to. With a glove on I kept moving the Joystick when hitting the AF-on button.
> Its a spec sheet queen. I shoot wildlife and BIF and I live in cold climate. With gloves on the camera is difficult to operate.
> You really need the grip or add on battery pack to shoot with a large lens. Shooting from the same distance with my 7Dmkll and EF100-400ll image quality was not very different mostly due to not having to crop Was the noise better yes but not as much as I would have thought.


Thanks for the mini review. It is nice to hear from people who use various camera vendor/lenses combinations.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Warrenl said:


> Gymnastics


Thanks for sharing. That's a LOT of gymnastics pics! And a testiment to how long the 1Dx series can last. Do you alternate between the bodies, have help, automation? Cheers.


----------



## Warrenl (Jan 4, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> Thanks for sharing. That's a LOT of gymnastics pics! And a testiment to how long the 1Dx series can last. Do you alternate between the bodies, have help, automation? Cheers.


Yes, I have help. We typically use the 1DX11's on the floor, and take between 80-150 pics per kid. We also have competitions with 2 or 3 floors.... so lots of pics per weekend. As mentioned, black gym suits are particularly difficult for the AF. No issues with the durability of the cameras. They are built like tanks. Hopefully less oil splatter issues for the mark 3 version. FYI one of my bodies, the shutter went to 1.35 million actuations before it died!


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Jan 4, 2020)

You say that with confidence
why?



-pekr- said:


> I don't think that in a sensor IQ area, read-out and transfer speed, buffering and AF it is going to be a minor update, quite the opposite ....


----------



## 12Broncos (Jan 4, 2020)

Look on the bright side! It won't fill up your 1TB External HD in thirty seconds. The downside is I feel like I would be buying a dinosaur. I'd like a T-Rex please!


----------



## Mark3794 (Jan 4, 2020)

I don't get the hate this camera is getting all over the internet. People calling this camera crippled for the lack of DPAF in 4k60fps: what other camera can do full frame 4k60 10bit log with DPAF internally without exhaust vents and full weather sealing? No one has seen the autofocus at work and people are already saying that the a9ii has a better autofocus. And the difference between 20 and 24 is like 10% resolution, the nikon d6 is rumored to have a 20mpx sensor too. Just get an a9ii if you think 4 more megapixel will help in bird photography but please stop bashing whatever Canon does just because it's a trend now. Canon sometimes really cripples the products (no 24fps, removal of center hot shoe pin, no log in lower tier cameras, strange codecs) but this time the sensor would literally melt with a 4k readout at 60 frame plus autofocus.
And if you think dsrl are dinosaurs you are right, i think this too, but this camera was needed and is perfect for the target audience.

Edit: We still don't know if the camera offers autofocus in the cropped 4k60 mode like the 1dx mark ii so just wait the camera launch before sentencing


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 4, 2020)

Personally, having used 4K60 with DPAF I simply do not fancy losing it. No hate, I'll simply pass on the purchase given my type of shooting which involves wildlife with significant cropping.

Jack


----------



## xps (Jan 4, 2020)

Did you hear something about pricing in _Europe_?
Read, it would be around 6999€. True? Can this confirm somebody?


----------



## Act444 (Jan 4, 2020)

HEIF format? Assuming this is true - I wonder if this means future version(s) of DPP will gain the ability to export in this format (currently the only options are JPG and TIF)


----------



## reef58 (Jan 4, 2020)

Mark3794 said:


> I don't get the hate this camera is getting all over the internet. People calling this camera crippled for the lack of DPAF in 4k60fps: what other camera can do full frame 4k60 10bit log with DPAF internally without exhaust vents and full weather sealing? No one has seen the autofocus at work and people are already saying that the a9ii has a better autofocus. And the difference between 20 and 24 is like 10% resolution, the nikon d6 is rumored to have a 20mpx sensor too. Just get an a9ii if you think 4 more megapixel will help in bird photography but please stop bashing whatever Canon does just because it's a trend now. Canon sometimes really cripples the products (no 24fps, removal of center hot shoe pin, no log in lower tier cameras, strange codecs) but this time the sensor would literally melt with a 4k readout at 60 frame plus autofocus.
> And if you think dsrl are dinosaurs you are right, i think this too, but this camera was needed and is perfect for the target audience.
> 
> Edit: We still don't know if the camera offers autofocus in the cropped 4k60 mode like the 1dx mark ii so just wait the camera launch before sentencing



I haven't seen any posts here proclaiming the auto focus is better in the a9. I have no idea. With the attention they have given the auto focus on this I am sure it will be adequate. I am not saying Canon is ******* and I have no intentions on buying a Sony. I just expected a bit more from this release, and now I am second guessing whether I will buy one. As primarily a stills shooter I am not getting a ton of incentive to upgrade over a 1dx2. Thats okay. Canon is not *******, and my bank account may come out the better. This is a discussion forum after all.


----------



## Mark3794 (Jan 4, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I haven't seen any posts here proclaiming the auto focus is better in the a9. I have no idea. With the attention they have given the auto focus on this I am sure it will be adequate. I am not saying Canon is ******* and I have no intentions on buying a Sony. I just expected a bit more from this release, and now I am second guessing whether I will buy one. As primarily a stills shooter I am not getting a ton of incentive to upgrade over a 1dx2. Thats okay. Canon is not *******, and my bank account may come out the better. This is a discussion forum after all.



Yes here the discussion is not that bad buy if you read some other forum it's like they out a 1dx badge on a Rebel, people just love complaining i guess


----------



## JPB (Jan 4, 2020)

I do understand the frustration with Canon, but, I think we should give them the benefit of a doubt. I always buy 1D when they release it and use the old 1D as back up and as the second angle when filming. I haven't been disappointed yet. The leap from 1DX to 1DX mk ii was huge. The leap from 1 dx mk ii to 1 dx mk iii seems to be even bigger. If it's true with 5.4 k raw 12 bit, it is almost double the resolution with about 4000 times more possible colors than the 1 dx mk ii. And this is only one of the upgrades. So, hey, I will surely keep the amazing mk ii, but I really long for the mk iii.


----------



## Inspired (Jan 4, 2020)

I love the idea of HEIF files as an option to jpeg but I wish it was 24mp and an articulating screen for when I do portraits from low, like the 6d (I'm a photographer I care nothing for vlogging)


----------



## sanj (Jan 4, 2020)

Dear experts. Does DPAF make a huge difference?


----------



## unfocused (Jan 4, 2020)

reef58 said:


> ...I am not chasing spec sheet stats or whatever that means. I am surprised they remained at 20mp. I had all plans to buy the 1dx3, and I still may. I am just not as excited about the release as I was a week ago. Some doubt has crept in, such as should I just buy a gently used 1dx2 instead as they are going for $3500 or so. Is the auto focus improvement worth 3k. It probably is, but if this was a 30mp release I would be hitting f5 looking to preorder. Now I may still get one, but there is no rush.
> 
> I am coming from the point of view of a stills camera owner. I am starting to do more video, and the specs looks great for that...



Agreed.

I was looking for two things in the 1DxIII: improved autofocus and higher resolution. One of those things is now off the table, so I have one less reason to upgrade. That puts much more pressure on the promised autofocus improvements to deliver. 

If the 1DxIII greatly improves high ISO performance, then it will be worth the lower resolution. But I have significant doubts that will be possible. I say that because I shoot the 1DxII side by side with the 30mp sensors in the 5DIV and R. There simply is not that much difference in low light performance. At least not in what I can see when processing raw files from both sensors. I am skeptical that the newest 20mp sensor will produce more than a fraction of stop improvement in high ISO performance. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not expecting it. 

So, like Reef58 and others, it's not that I am rejecting the 1DxIII, it's just that Canon will now have a steeper hill to climb to get my money and I have to wonder if that was a good move on their part in a time of shrinking market demand.

The good news is my 1DxII will hold its value longer and I expect the $6,500 price for the 1DxIII will drop sooner rather than later.


----------



## padam (Jan 4, 2020)

The 5D Mark V will probably receive a similar AF system that is superior to the 1DX II and of course it will have the higher megapixel count that some users may want in a smaller, lighter body.
So yes, keeping the same megapixels may not be a big deal overall, the value of these older models will be going down sooner or later.


----------



## Dexter75 (Jan 4, 2020)

Canon-Chas said:


> Very disappointed.... I have lots of Canon prime MKII lenses waiting for something by Canon on a par with Sony A9II which I also own.... I just hope the EOS PRO version doesn't disappoint  https://canoncamerarumors.com/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-iii-specifications-leaked/



this will blow the A9 II out of the water, which is why you will see this dominating the Olympics this year and not the A9 II


----------



## Dexter75 (Jan 4, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I was looking for two things in the 1DxIII: improved autofocus and higher resolution. One of those things is now off the table, so I have one less reason to upgrade. That puts much more pressure on the promised autofocus improvements to deliver.
> 
> ...



professional sports and wildlife shooters do not want or need high resolution cameras. Do you people still not get that yet? You want to chase megapixels, there are plenty of other cameras uselessly dumping tons of megapixels on to small 35mm sensors and degrading image quality,


----------



## AdamBotond (Jan 4, 2020)

No DPAF in 4K 60 fps, while stucking at 20 MPs. Am I missing something here, or it really does not make sense as the mark II can do that with older processors? How about 120 fps?
I guess will have to wait until Monday.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 4, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> Do you people still not get that yet? You want to chase megapixels, there are plenty of other cameras uselessly dumping tons of megapixels on to small 35mm sensors and degrading image quality,


Where the hell is the “Not like” button on the page when you need it?


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Personally, having used 4K60 with DPAF I simply do not fancy losing it. No hate, I'll simply pass on the purchase given my type of shooting which involves wildlife with significant cropping.
> 
> Jack



Jack, I'm still not convinced we are losing that DPAF in 4k60 yet altogether. That would be unusual considering our 1DX2s can do it. I still think maybe something was lost in translation. No DPAF in RAW, ok fine. But none at all in 4k60?? sounds too Weird. And again, I think if it's missing, it's something Canon may react to as they did the "no 24p issue" and restore the feature.x. Gonna wait til Monday with the official release to see what's what in there


----------



## reef58 (Jan 4, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> professional sports and wildlife shooters do not want or need high resolution cameras. Do you people still not get that yet? You want to chase megapixels, there are plenty of other cameras uselessly dumping tons of megapixels on to small 35mm sensors and degrading image quality,



I didn't know I didn't want more megapixels or need them. Thanks for reminding me. My wife keeps saying my memory is getting bad.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I was looking for two things in the 1DxIII: improved autofocus and higher resolution. One of those things is now off the table, so I have one less reason to upgrade. That puts much more pressure on the promised autofocus improvements to deliver.
> 
> ...


 Amen to all that. I was hoping to see 22-24MP on this new one to make my upgrade decisions along with AF. Like you, the AF is going to have to show significant jumps for me. But the Full Frame 4K thing is a wonderful surprise for me and that throws another carrot at me. We will see soon enough!


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

sanj said:


> Dear experts. Does DPAF make a huge difference?



In video, absolutely. The DPAF tracking during shooting is very helpful. Even if you are filming an interview shot, it's nice when using really short DoF cuz it can keep tracking the face that might move back and forth naturally during a normal conversation, which shooting at f1.4 or f2 on a crop sensor yo can get out of that perfect focal plane real quick.


----------



## Lenscracker (Jan 4, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


 Canon, please show us something for the future. Show us something that will surpass any of Sony's new cameras.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 4, 2020)

sanj said:


> Dear experts. Does DPAF make a huge difference?



I can answer this. Yes, it does.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 4, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> professional sports and wildlife shooters do not want or need high resolution cameras. Do you people still not get that yet? ...



Thank you so much. Since about 90% of my paid work is sports photography, I really appreciate people like you telling me what I do and don't want or need. I don't know how I have gotten along without you and others who so confidently can tell me my own needs.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 4, 2020)

canonnews said:


> sure if you ignore the buffer depth, card write speed to both slots, video functionality greatly enhanced from pedestrian MJPEG and crop factor, AF points, AF-ON joystick control, eyeAF, better liveview AF, greater AF sensitivity in both AF and liveview,etc,etc.
> 
> if you ignore all that and look I guess at 20MP.. then yes, it's a minor update


Who runs into buffer depth issues with the MkII?
Who runs into card write speed issues with the MKII even with awful MJPEG CODEC in 4K at 60?
Agree the CODECs needed updating but mainly of interest to primarily video/crossover shooters.
I don’t struggle with AF point with the MkII, do you?
Wow yet another way of fiddling with the AF, sure it might be nice if you dedicate the time to overcome your muscle memory.
It has been well established that eye AF is firmware related and could be added to the MkII if there wwas the desire.
How many people struggle with LiveView AF now? I find it very good.
Greater sensitivity? Most people refuse to delve into the settings enough to use the current sensitivity adjustments...

I am not one to dismiss Canon‘s releases but this, as the blue ribbon (probable) last hurrah of the best of the best DSLR is a dud. Nothing is compelling for the vast majority of users unless your focus is video.


----------



## padam (Jan 4, 2020)

Lenscracker said:


> Canon, please show us something for the future. Show us something that will surpass any of Sony's new cameras.


It's been four years - and still no sign of a 4k60p Sony


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Amen to all that. I was hoping to see 22-24MP on this new one to make my upgrade decisions along with AF. Like you, the AF is going to have to show significant jumps for me. But the Full Frame 4K thing is a wonderful surprise for me and that throws another carrot at me. We will see soon enough!



I respect you guys as regular conributors to the forum, and I've no doubt you're speaking from an honest and considered position, but not everybody is. I'd just reiterate that while more is often better (and I love high resolution), 22MP is only <5% more reach, and as discussed above, 24MP is <10% more reach than 20MP. The idea that such fine margins make the difference between a world beater and a dud, as some here are implying, is frankly bizarre.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I don't think it is silly at all. First I never said it should be the highest resolution sensor. I also never said it should be the best at everything. I understand the durability and ruggedness as I own a 1D. I am surprised there was not a resolution bump. That's all. It is rare in this day and age a new camera gets introduced without a resolution bump. I guess you can define flagship however you want, however this camera will probably be priced at nearly 2 times the costs of the next most expensive camera. To me that defines flagship. That is the context I am using.
> 
> I am not chasing spec sheet stats or whatever that means. I am surprised they remained at 20mp. I had all plans to buy the 1dx3, and I still may. I am just not as excited about the release as I was a week ago. Some doubt has crept in, such as should I just buy a gently used 1dx2 instead as they are going for $3500 or so. Is the auto focus improvement worth 3k. It probably is, but if this was a 30mp release I would be hitting f5 looking to preorder. Now I may still get one, but there is no rush.
> 
> I am coming from the point of view of a stills camera owner. I am starting to do more video, and the specs looks great for that. Probably better than I will ever be as an operator. I am not a technical guy, so I don't get into the weeds with those, but again the video specs look great.



Fair enough. I'm also surprised they didn't increase the resolution, but it was never going to be by a lot.


----------



## Russ6357 (Jan 4, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I respect you guys as regular conributors to the forum, and I've no doubt you're speaking from an honest and considered position, but not everybody is. I'd just reiterate that while more is often better (and I love high resolution), 22MP is only <5% more reach, and as discussed above, 24MP is <10% more reach than 20MP. The idea that such fine margins make the difference between a world beater and a dud, as some here are implying, is frankly bizarre.



I’d hoped for 28-30 and expected 24...silly me. This would give a circa 15-20% more pixels on the bird which is half a 1.4 Converter with much less IQ/AF impact on big glass and could allow the use of a 400 2.8 (close to 500s reach on 1Dx) but with a full extra stop if light to play with.

That’s a big deal.

I sincerely hope the new R is 30ish 10fps+


----------



## ethanz (Jan 4, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Jack, I'm still not convinced we are losing that DPAF in 4k60 yet altogether. That would be unusual considering out 1DX2s can do it. I still think maybe something was lost in translation. No DPAF in RAW, ok fine. But none at all in 4k60?? sounds too Weird. And again, I think if it's missing, it's something Canon may react to as they did the "no 24p issue" and restore the feature.x. Gonna wait til Monday with the official release to see what's what in there



As I posted earlier, I have to think they would keep DPAF for 4k60 cropped. To drop a feature like that just doesn't make sense when the processors are so much faster now. 4k60 FF with no DPAF? sure


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 4, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?



I won't get into the megapixel "debate" as far as how much is or is not necessary for any given application, but to directly answer your factual question, if you're gauging a 20% increase as a 20% increase in the height and a 20% increase in the width of the print, then correct, you cannot print 20% larger with a bump from 20mp to 24mp. As someone else mentioned, 20mp to 24mp is less than a 10% increase in the height and width. If you're interested, here's the math:

20mp = 5480 x 3653 pixels. At 300 pixels per inch print, that's an 18.27 x 12.18" print
24mp = 6000 x 4000 pixels. At 300 pixels per inch print, that's a 20 x 13.3" print.

So the print is a little over 9% larger in height and width dimensions.

To get 20% larger print, you'd need about 28.7 megapixels:
6560 x 4373 pixels. That would get you a 21.87 x 14.5" print which is 20% larger than the 20 megapixel print in height and width.

For visualization, here is a 100% crop of a bird. The left is 20mp, the right is 24mp. That's the different in "reach" you would see between a 20mp and a 24mp image. I posted both bird photos a single image so that both photos will scale together no matter what device you're looking at, like a phone, iPad, or laptop screen.




Don't get me wrong, I like to crop a lot. I appreciate more megapixels. I just wanted to point out that the difference between 20mp and 24mp is not as significant as it might seem.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 4, 2020)

Just think what Canon could give a current 1DX2 user via a firmware upgrade!

Jack


----------



## ethanz (Jan 4, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Just think what Canon could give a current 1DX2 user via a firmware upgrade!
> 
> Jack



Let's go abduct some Canon engineers and force a firmware upgrade...


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

ethanz said:


> As I posted earlier, I have to think they would keep DPAF for 4k60 cropped. To drop a feature like that just doesn't make sense when the processors are so much faster now. 4k60 FF with no DPAF? sure


Exactly what Im inclined to think as well. DPAF still available at least in the current 1.3x crop factor of that sensor dimension at 4k60 like the current DX2.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 4, 2020)

ethanz said:


> As I posted earlier, I have to think they would keep DPAF for 4k60 cropped. To drop a feature like that just doesn't make sense when the processors are so much faster now. 4k60 FF with no DPAF? sure


Let me also add that even with Canon’s history of giving us a dedicated CPU for AF in the 1DX line, there are still limits. While it may be able to handle servo AF at a crop In 4K60, it may not be able to as faithfully do that over the entire sensor plane at (full frame) at 60FPS in 4k. Then again, im not sure the difference between doing 1080p60 with servoAF/DPAF that is also a FF readout On the same dedicated CPU. Canon may have simply left that feature off at FF 4K60 to create space between this and the Cinema Line


----------



## Nelu (Jan 4, 2020)

Russ6357 said:


> I’d hoped for 28-30 and expected 24...silly me. This would give a circa 15-20% more pixels on the bird which is half a 1.4 Converter with much less IQ/AF impact on big glass and could allow the use of a 400 2.8 (close to 500s reach on 1Dx) but with a full extra stop if light to play with.
> 
> That’s a big deal.
> 
> I sincerely hope the new R is 30ish 10fps+


Right on! My thoughts,exactly.
Now, if the AF is going to be that much better to allow me to actually use the 2x TC with the 600 mm lens then I might even consider this camera. Otherwise is just a waste of money for a birder.
For almost any kind of sports photography 20mp should be enough. Sure, more is better but I don’t think Canon can deliver more, not without other compromises.
I sincerely hope the new R is 30ish 10fps+ ...and an EVF usable for fast action.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 4, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I respect you guys as regular conributors to the forum, and I've no doubt you're speaking from an honest and considered position, but not everybody is. I'd just reiterate that while more is often better (and I love high resolution), 22MP is only <5% more reach, and as discussed above, 24MP is <10% more reach than 20MP. The idea that such fine margins make the difference between a world beater and a dud, as some here are implying, is frankly bizarre.



It's not that I think it will be a dud. My reaction is mostly that I am perplexed by the decision and I am more than a little frustrated by fools that insist on telling me what I need or don't need for my work. 

Both Canon and Nikon have landed on 20mp. So, Canon is not an outlier. But, what perplexes me is why. 

As I've said, I've used the 1Dx beside the 5DIV and R and not seen much if any penalty for the higher resolution, so I am curious as to what benefits Canon and Nikon see to less resolution. For years, people on this forum who understand technology better than I do have said that there is really no benefit in terms of noise control. So, I wonder, if I am not going to get significantly less noise at high ISO with a 20mp sensor, what is the advantage? For me personally, transfer speed and file size are irrelevant because I don't have any staff to transfer the files to during a game. 

Again, based on the 30mp sensor Canon already has, it seemed to me that a 24-28 mp sensor would have made more sense. So now, I am curious why both companies choose not to up the resolution. 

Autofocus improvements have always been my main interest, so if the 1DxIII delivers on my very specific autofocus needs for sports, I will still upgrade, just not as quickly as I would have had they given me a bit more flexibility in resolution for cropping. 

What does set me off though is not the specs from Canon and Nikon, but instead the fools who take it upon themselves to lecture actual 1DX users on our needs. Many of these people have a very narrow concept of what constitutes a sports photographer (mostly gained from sitting in their armchairs in front of the television eating Doritos). That is the source of most of my frustration.

As for the camera itself, I'm taking a wait and see attitude and I think that's what many other users on this forum are doing as well.


----------



## padrepaul (Jan 4, 2020)

Very anxious to see what it can do, but I've shot the 7DII for years, then moved to the 5D IV recently. I tried the 90D and was very let down by it; it had a higher MP count, but I found it bad in low light and autofocusing wasn't what I'd hoped.

As a bird/wildlife/landscape guy, I'm excited. Ill be using it with the 800 5.6 which I've enjoyed, and hopefully it will do well too with the 1.4 III extender. If it's good at higher ISOs for low light and birds in flight especialy raptors at sunrise and sunset I'll be happy if it will provide good 8 x 10 and 11 x 14 prints and does good tracking the bird.


----------



## Todd (Jan 4, 2020)

As a Canon 1DX Mark II photographer (and other Canon bodies as well) assuming the released specs are accurate, I for one would be disappointed because the Mark II has been lagging behind for a while, especially with the autofocus system. The Mark III version sounds like we're just catching up to where the Mark II should have been. Canon claimed to have such a wonderful autofocus system when the Mark II was released, but it wasn't. Finally, asking me to shell out $6500 for a Mark III with no bump in resolution and very few other enhancements is evidence that they simply don't have the knowledge and skill to make something better. Canon is much larger than Nikon, yet they always are playing catch up, never leading with new technology. It's terribly disappointing. The Nikon autofocus system has been better for many years, but they have far fewer engineers. It doesn't make sense. If they have new innovations, then prove it. They haven't, so it is only logical to assume that they don't. DSLRs are dying, and with this lack luster release Canon is asking us to hold on for 4-5 more years until they have something really good. Sorry, but that's insulting and disrespectful to their customer base, you know, the people that buy stuff so that they can put food on the table. It really feels like Canon has the same arrogance that Sony had years ago when they thought the beta-max was going to take over the world. Canon shouldn't assume that people are going to pay $6500 every few years forever.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

Nelu said:


> Right on! My thoughts,exactly.
> Now, if the AF is going to be that much better to allow me to actually use the 2x TC with the 600 mm lens then I might even consider this camera. Otherwise is just a waste of money for a birder.



I've used the 2x TCs with the 500L (which is functionally the same as the 600) a lot, and with 'lesser' cameras (the 5D3 and 5Ds). From what I've heard, AF has always been faster with the 1-series, so I'd expect this combination to already be usable with the 1Dx2, even more so with the newest one.


----------



## Foxeslink (Jan 4, 2020)

You want 4k60 with af?
Go for X-T3. 1500€ for that is out of this world. Yes it has some crop but I can live with that.


----------



## peters (Jan 4, 2020)

sanj said:


> Dear experts. Does DPAF make a huge difference?


The "old" af is completely unusable. It takes up to 10 seconds for the hunting focus to find something, IF it finds anything. There is no possibility for continous focus pull. It just keeps on hunting and hunting. 

DPAF is without much doubt the best AF in the industry and incredible smooth and reliable. If looks like pulled by hand. It tracks smooth and completely quiet, without ANY pumping or hunting.

Its like the difference between analog and digital.


----------



## peters (Jan 4, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> you cannot be serious. Right???


I totaly agree. For any work on a gimbal its REALY nice to have DPAF like on the 1DXII.
I would ABSOLUTELY prefer the small crop over this ******* idiotic idea to leave out DPAF...


----------



## slclick (Jan 4, 2020)

peters said:


> The "old" af is completely unusable. It takes up to 10 seconds for the hunting focus to find something, IF it finds anything. There is no possibility for continous focus pull. It just keeps on hunting and hunting.
> 
> DPAF is without much doubt the best AF in the industry and incredible smooth and reliable. If looks like pulled by hand. It tracks smooth and completely quiet, without ANY pumping or hunting.
> 
> Its like the difference between analog and digital.


The 'old af'...which bodies are you referring to? 10 seconds? I've got to hear this response.


----------



## koch1948 (Jan 4, 2020)

I have read many comments saying 20 MP is not large enough. No one will know how this EOS-1D Mark III camera body will perform until it goes it goes on the market and out into the field. 

Hopefully, this EOS-1D Mark III camera body in combination with Canon EF "L" lenses will provide super sharp images, fantastic color, and require little or no post processing. If that is the case, everyone will be happy to work with a compact 20 MP file instead of having these large MP files that strain your camera, computer hardware, and wi-fi/Internet file transfer speeds.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 4, 2020)

sanj said:


> Not in 4k RAW either.


True. But there is 4k with dpaf. Anyone saying there isnt is wrong


----------



## scyrene (Jan 4, 2020)

unfocused said:


> It's not that I think it will be a dud. My reaction is mostly that I am perplexed by the decision and I am more than a little frustrated by fools that insist on telling me what I need or don't need for my work.
> 
> Both Canon and Nikon have landed on 20mp. So, Canon is not an outlier. But, what perplexes me is why.
> 
> ...



I suppose what I find odd is, the 1Dx and 1Dx2 were relatively low resolution when they came out - compared to the other FF bodies available at the time. So this was always an issue, it's something known, and I wouldn't have expected a big bump in MP any more than a major change to form factor. I concede that the gap has widened as other bodies have increased their resolution, so perhaps it stands out more now. People used to say you could crop harder with the 1Dx than the 5D3, say, because the IQ was 'better' but I don't know how true that was.

As for why, well there's a couple of possibilities. Maybe consultation with the user base showed they didn't need to increase the resolution. Maybe they couldn't do that at the same time as significantly improving other aspects like speed, for technical reasons. Or maybe they're saving the best for the RF mount in a bid to tempt people across, as they have done with some of the new lenses. Time will tell.


----------



## degos (Jan 4, 2020)

koch1948 said:


> If that is the case, everyone will be happy to work with a compact 20 MP file instead of having these large MP files that strain your camera, computer hardware, and wi-fi/Internet file transfer speeds.



What nonsense. Any computer from the past 10 years will chomp a 30MP file without breaking sweat. Do you think that the average mid-tier buyer of a 32MP M6-2 is also upgrading their computing hardware at the same time? Of course not. So why would it be a problem to pros?

20MP is abysmal in 2020. Quite often I reach for the 21MP 1Ds3 to get a minor resolution bump and a bit more cropability. That camera was announced in August *2007*. But it was also the last of the stills-only 1D line, before videography starting screwing with the specifications. 

I'd bet that a 30MP 1DX3 would be possible if they removed all that video processing overhead and left that to the EOS C line. After all we're constantly told on this forum that the 1DX is for sports shooters uploading JPEGs in real-time to their editors, so why bother with video?


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 4, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> I won't get into the megapixel "debate" as far as how much is or is not necessary for any given application, but to directly answer your factual question, if you're gauging a 20% increase as a 20% increase in the height and a 20% increase in the width of the print, then correct, you cannot print 20% larger with a bump from 20mp to 24mp. As someone else mentioned, 20mp to 24mp is less than a 10% increase in the height and width. If you're interested, here's the math:
> 
> 20mp = 5480 x 3653 pixels. At 300 pixels per inch print, that's an 18.27 x 12.18" print
> 24mp = 6000 x 4000 pixels. At 300 pixels per inch print, that's a 20 x 13.3" print.
> ...



Thank you for the comparison and example. This helps better to visualize and understand the difference especially explanation of print sizes in inches. So it does appear that the difference between 20 and 24 mp would be a pixel peeper or spec chaser issue and a real user would not see a difference, especially if color and DR is superior with the 20 mp sensor.


----------



## serhatakbal (Jan 4, 2020)

all they do is update the product software
!!! disappointment !!!
even Magic Lantern could do better..


----------



## Ethan S (Jan 4, 2020)

As a photojournalist, the built in wifi is a huge added benefit for faster filing.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 4, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I've used the 2x TCs with the 500L (which is functionally the same as the 600) a lot, and with 'lesser' cameras (the 5D3 and 5Ds). From what I've heard, AF has always been faster with the 1-series, so I'd expect this combination to already be usable with the 1Dx2, even more so with the newest one.


Of course it’s faster on my 1DX than on my 5D Mark, no doubt about it. The problem is that 18 mp is not enough when you need to crop, even with the 600mm and the 2x TC. Also, on the 1DX (the original one), the AF with the 2x TC is way slower than even with the 1.4TC, not to mention the bare lens.
If the Mark III actually brings something better on the AF side, I’ll give it a thought, even I profoundly dislike the 20mp resolution. To be determined.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 4, 2020)

Ethan S said:


> As a photojournalist, the built in wifi is a huge added benefit for faster filing.


The faster wifi is via a paid accessory, just vanilla wifi is included. Still, worthwhile in the right situation. I'd want it if I was going to Tokyo this year.


----------



## $winter (Jan 4, 2020)

What's about silent shooting? Any info?


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 5, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Thank you so much. Since about 90% of my paid work is sports photography, I really appreciate people like you telling me what I do and don't want or need. I don't know how I have gotten along without you and others who so confidently can tell me my own needs.


I want 30MP's if I can have them. Who are these people telling us what we want? Real arrogance and ignorance. I'm a sports shooter and 20MP CoulD use a kick for my magazine work and when we crop. THAT EXTRA 20% GOES A LONG WAY


----------



## raptor3x (Jan 5, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> you cannot be serious. Right???



Not at all, if you're shooting 4K60 it's very often for moving subjects and Canon's contrast based video AF is completely useless. It's similar to the 120p modes many other cameras offer than don't include AF. It makes them almost worthless unless you have a subject that doesn't change distance from the camera.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 5, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> Thank you for the comparison and example. This helps better to visualize and understand the difference especially explanation of print sizes in inches. So it does appear that the difference between 20 and 24 mp would be a pixel peeper or spec chaser issue and a real user would not see a difference, especially if color and DR is superior with the 20 mp sensor.



The examples you quote account for printing differences, but not for what you gain in cropping ability and being able to adjust the composition.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 5, 2020)

raptor3x said:


> Not at all, if you're shooting 4K60 it's very often for moving subjects and Canon's contrast based video AF is completely useless. It's similar to the 120p modes many other cameras offer than don't include AF. It makes them almost worthless unless you have a subject that doesn't change distance from the camera.



You obviously haven't shot 4K60 with the 1DX2. Useless.

Jack


----------



## Romain (Jan 5, 2020)

$winter said:


> What's about silent shooting? Any info?


Silent shooting? EOS R!.. Kalachnikov shooting? 1DX III haha...


----------



## navastronia (Jan 5, 2020)

peters said:


> The "old" af is completely unusable. It takes up to 10 seconds for the hunting focus to find something, IF it finds anything. There is no possibility for continous focus pull. It just keeps on hunting and hunting.
> 
> DPAF is without much doubt the best AF in the industry and incredible smooth and reliable. If looks like pulled by hand. It tracks smooth and completely quiet, without ANY pumping or hunting.
> 
> Its like the difference between analog and digital.



I mean, I wouldn't rave about it in those exact terms, but yeah, it's certainly better than any other Canon AF option. My experience is that DPAF does sometimes lose focus for seemingly no reason, and it won't replace a professional focus puller on a film set anytime soon. It's (probably) the best video AF consumers have (for now).


----------



## navastronia (Jan 5, 2020)

slclick said:


> The 'old af'...which bodies are you referring to? 10 seconds? I've got to hear this response.



The RP will do this when it isn't using DPAF. That body is 10 months old.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jan 5, 2020)

Tom W said:


> Needs clarification, but I think that it will have autofocus at 4K/60, but just not DPAF. The amount of data being processed is insane at that level.
> 
> It appears that it does DPAF at 4K/30 as well as all the 1080 modes, but I'd wait until the official announcement and specs are released to be sure.
> 
> EDIT: From looking at another site, it appears that there's no AF at 4K/60 or RAW/60. Not even a lessor mode of AF.


the c200 did it years ago. this camera will actually cost more than a c200 and is like 3 years newer. that makes no sense


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 5, 2020)

peters said:


> I totaly agree. For any work on a gimbal its REALY nice to have DPAF like on the 1DXII.
> I would ABSOLUTELY prefer the small crop over this ******* idiotic idea to leave out DPAF...



why I bought the EOS R. Gimbal run and gun with the DX2 was an upperbody workout and was much harder to balance properly since its so tall. No 4k60 on the R but ok


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 5, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> you want 30 megapixel photos that will just slow down your camera and your workflow and make ZERO difference in photo quality there genius? Move on to a 5Div then. Bye


That isnt necessary.

Unfocused, like all of us, have varying requirements for pro work. And 30MP vs 20MP does make a difference in the real world. I have a DX2 and an EOS R. That’s 20 vs 30. I can crop down a fair bit more, faithfully, on my EOS R than I can my DX2. I can crop out 30% of the pixels and still have 20 on my subject.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> The examples you quote account for printing differences, but not for what you gain in cropping ability and being able to adjust the composition.



I'm not sure what you mean. The images below are specifically to show cropping ability and composition. What you see in the photo below is it. That's what you gain going from 20 megapixels to 24 megapixels in cropping ability and composition. The photo on the left is what you would get at 20mp. The photo on the right is what you would get at 24mp. Cropping would get you no difference in size than what you see from the left image to the right image. If that difference in image size is a showstopper for some people, I'm totally fine with that. It's not a showstopper for me.

All this debate about no increase in megapixels in summarized in the simple photo of the bird below. The difference between the left photo and the right photo is what all the chat about megapixels is about. Nearly 350 comments, many about the lack of megapixel increase. And we're talking about the size of the bird on the left compared to the right. Seems pretty minimal to me.


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

slclick said:


> The 'old af'...which bodies are you referring to? 10 seconds? I've got to hear this response.


I mean for example the Canon 5D III. I think its phase detect if its not DPAF? This applies to pretty much every canon camera with Phase detect. Its ultra slow, IF it gets focus at all. Maybe not 10 seconds, but COMPLETELY not usable, even for photos.


----------



## Dexter75 (Jan 5, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> That isnt necessary.
> 
> Unfocused, like all of us, have varying requirements for pro work. And 30MP vs 20MP does make a difference in the real world. I have a DX2 and an EOS R. That’s 20 vs 30. I can crop down a fair bit more, faithfully, on my EOS R than I can my DX2. I can crop out 30% of the pixels and still have 20 on my subject.



Then use your R or a 5Div. The 1DX series is about speed, not megapixels.


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> I'm not sure what you mean. The images below are specifically to show cropping ability and composition. What you see in the photo below is it. That's what you gain going from 20 megapixels to 24 megapixels in cropping ability and composition. The photo on the left is what you would get at 20mp. The photo on the right is what you would get at 24mp. Cropping would get you no difference in size than what you see from the left image to the right image. If that difference in image size is a showstopper for some people, I'm totally fine with that. It's not a showstopper for me.
> 
> All this debate about no increase in megapixels in summarized in the simple photo of the bird below. The difference between the left photo and the right photo is what all the chat about megapixels is about. Nearly 350 comments, many about the lack of megapixel increase. And we're talking about the size of the bird on the left compared to the right. Seems pretty minimal to me.
> 
> View attachment 188045


Very nice comparison and pretty much stops the discussion with this simple and perfect example  4mpixel is simply not relevant.


----------



## canonnews (Jan 5, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> That isnt necessary.
> 
> Unfocused, like all of us, have varying requirements for pro work. And 30MP vs 20MP does make a difference in the real world. I have a DX2 and an EOS R. That’s 20 vs 30. I can crop down a fair bit more, faithfully, on my EOS R than I can my DX2. I can crop out 30% of the pixels and still have 20 on my subject.



The 1DX Mark III was never going to be 30mp.

that would have significantly added to both the video processing and the stills processing.

assuming the ratio between fps and MP's is linear, that would have forced the 1DX Mark III to shoot at around 11 fps .. that was never going to happen.

with Sony hitting the spec sheet 20fps, it should have been no surprise that Canon as well would have wanted to match.

Supporting full with 4K is far more of a burden on the system than with the 1DX Mark II that only supported it via a crop mode. DPAF doesn't come without a cost - and that cost is at least one sensor read per frame. So a 4K full width video - has to read and process approximately 40MP x 60 per second or around 30Gbps of data. That is kind of .. well. huge.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 5, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> Then use your R or a 5Div. The 1DX series is about speed, not megapixels.


Listen dude, you'd better stop telling people what cameras to use! Nobody was asking for your opinion on that.
You have a really nasty habit, keep it in your basement, for God sake!


----------



## slclick (Jan 5, 2020)

peters said:


> I mean for example the Canon 5D III. I think its phase detect if its not DPAF? This applies to pretty much every canon camera with Phase detect. Its ultra slow, IF it gets focus at all. Maybe not 10 seconds, but COMPLETELY not usable, even for photos.


Most idiotic thing I've ever heard. So for the past 7 years I've been using a completely unusable AF system. What planet are you even living on?


----------



## unfocused (Jan 5, 2020)

Nelu said:


> Listen dude, you'd better stop telling people what cameras to use! Nobody was asking for your opinion on that.
> You have a really nasty habit, keep it in you basement, for God sake!


Mr. Dexter seems to be some kind of troll. Joined the forum last month and just wants to pick a fight with people. He's not contributing anything.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 5, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most idiotic thing I've ever heard.


That's a pretty high standard for this forum. Lots of other competition for that honor.


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

canonnews said:


> Supporting full with 4K is far more of a burden on the system than with the 1DX Mark II that only supported it via a crop mode. DPAF doesn't come without a cost - and that cost is at least one sensor read per frame. So a 4K full width video - has to read and process approximately 40MP x 60 per second or around 30Gbps of data. That is kind of .. well. huge.


Which is understandable, but I REALY wished they would have included a crop mode with 1:1 pixel readout (which would be 1,3) and DPAF with 60fps.
4k60 with DPAF It is truely a beautiful tool. Especialy on a gimbal it works like a charme and works perfect for stuff like image videos, event promos etc. 
It was the most important feature on the 1DXII - 4k60 on a big sensor and a perfect working AF - its just beautiful. Though I realy wished for a better codec, better Dynamic range and maybe fullframe. Which they delivered on the Mark III - but no AF..... brrr :-( :-( :-( :-( :-(


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most idiotic thing I've ever heard. So for the past 7 years I've been using a completely unusable AF system. What planet are you even living on?


Dude, in live view, not through the viewfinder. Read what the discussion is about...


----------



## slclick (Jan 5, 2020)

peters said:


> Dude, in live view, not through the viewfinder.


Dude?

Are you 19? Listen son, you should state your case clearly from the onset if you wish you make outlandish claims. Omitting certain key words and needing to backtrack does not lend any credence to your earlier posts, just adds ridicule. Futhermore, Live View in the 5D3 has contributed to 100's of thousands of remarkable landscape images. Sorry your technique is lacking with phase detect. I know, I just got back from a fantastic shoot an hour ago. All Live View, ~ 125 of 146 keepers.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 5, 2020)

slclick said:


> Dude?
> 
> Are you 19? Listen son, you should state your case clearly from the onset if you wish you make outlandish claims. Omitting certain key words and needing to backtrack does not lend any credence to your earlier posts, just adds ridicule. Futhermore, Live View in the 5D3 has contributed to 100's of thousands of remarkable landscape images. Sorry your technique is lacking with phase detect. I know, I just got back from a fantastic shoot an hour ago. All Live View, ~ 125 of 146 keepers.


Live view AF uses contrast detection, not phase detection. It’s a bit slower than phase detection but it’s more accurate.
I would say it’s as accurate as the manual focus, that’s why you have so many keepers.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 5, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> . . . That's what you gain going from 20 megapixels to 24 megapixels in cropping ability and composition. The photo on the left is what you would get at 20mp. The photo on the right is what you would get at 24mp. Cropping would get you no difference in size than what you see from the left image to the right image . . . All this debate about no increase in megapixels in summarized in the simple photo of the bird below. The difference between the left photo and the right photo is what all the chat about megapixels is about. Nearly 350 comments, many about the lack of megapixel increase. *And we're talking about the size of the bird on the left compared to the right. Seems pretty minimal to me.*
> 
> View attachment 188045



The bird on the left and the bird on the right, these are two very different compositions. Aside from that, what I'm saying is that more megapixels equates to more ability to crop and adjust the composition without sacrificing maximum usable size in print. You may be one of those shooters who "doesn't crop," and so, yeah, the difference in mp is negligible to you (and without cropping and recomposing taken into account, sure, it's not that many pixels). However, in my experience as a freelance photographer, magazine editors crop the hell out of photos for all kinds of reasons when an issue goes to layout. Because of this, they want the highest resolution images they can get, and in 2020, 20mp looks a little skimpy.

Hey, maybe that's why it's 20 mp. It's the 1DX mk. III _2020_ edition! Get it?!


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

slclick said:


> Dude?
> 
> Are you 19? Listen son, you should state your case clearly from the onset if you wish you make outlandish claims. Omitting certain key words and needing to backtrack does not lend any credence to your earlier posts, just adds ridicule. Futhermore, Live View in the 5D3 has contributed to 100's of thousands of remarkable landscape images. Sorry your technique is lacking with phase detect. I know, I just got back from a fantastic shoot an hour ago. All Live View, ~ 125 of 146 keepers.


Jeah, Phase detect in Live view is great. Realy comparable with DPAF. Wake up oh holy father.


----------



## expatinasia (Jan 5, 2020)

There are plenty of strange comments on this forum.

1DX II lagging behind in AF - LOL
Sports photographers do not need/want more MP - LOL
1DX to 1DX II was a massive upgrade - LOL
Comments about the buffer - LOL the buffer on the 1DX and II is sufficient and I doubt few have filled it.

The 1DX is still an amazing camera, still one of the best on the market. The Mark II is very similar, the biggest difference, for me at least, was DPAF being added to the new version. The DPAF is absolutely invaluable for the video work I do. For stills, I shoot a lot of sport and yes I want as many MP as possible. Using a 400 f/2.8 ii is great, but that doesn't mean the players on a pitch are all exactly where I want them to be. Cropping is great as it allows me to capture more images, in better quality, than would otherwise be possible. So as long as FPS is not negatively affected I do want more MP for stills. For video, I rarely shoot at 4K, every video I do is normally at 1080p.

I will wait for proper reviews to come out, but looking at these specs I think I probably will not be selling my Mark I or II to get the Mark III, which is what I would have done if it had been more interesting for my needs. This is not a negative about Canon, just shows how great the 1DX I and II are.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 5, 2020)

peters said:


> Jeah, Phase detect in Live view is great. Realy comparable with DPAF. Wake up oh holy father.


Live view has nothing to do with shooting sports and needing an OVF. The 1DXMKIII was supposed to be


navastronia said:


> The bird on the left and the bird on the right, these are two very different compositions. Aside from that, what I'm saying is that more megapixels equates to more ability to crop and adjust the composition without sacrificing maximum usable size in print. You may be one of those shooters who "doesn't crop," and so, yeah, the difference in mp is negligible to you (and without cropping and recomposing taken into account, sure, it's not that many pixels). However, in my experience as a freelance photographer, magazine editors crop the hell out of photos for all kinds of reasons when an issue goes to layout. Because of this, they want the highest resolution images they can get, and in 2020, 20mp looks a little skimpy.
> 
> Hey, maybe that's why it's 20 mp. It's the 1DX mk. III _2020_ edition! Get it?!


Both images are of poor quality. The one supposed to be 24MP has better color and the shadows are more defined. I can clearly see the difference between my 1DX and MKII shots. An extra 4MP's in the hands of a skilled photographer and editor who has used the camera for years would be substantial. The key words being professional and skilled.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jan 5, 2020)

Todd said:


> As a Canon 1DX Mark II photographer (and other Canon bodies as well) assuming the released specs are accurate, I for one would be disappointed because the Mark II has been lagging behind for a while, especially with the autofocus system. The Mark III version sounds like we're just catching up to where the Mark II should have been. Canon claimed to have such a wonderful autofocus system when the Mark II was released, but it wasn't. Finally, asking me to shell out $6500 for a Mark III with no bump in resolution and very few other enhancements is evidence that they simply don't have the knowledge and skill to make something better. Canon is much larger than Nikon, yet they always are playing catch up, never leading with new technology. It's terribly disappointing. The Nikon autofocus system has been better for many years, but they have far fewer engineers. It doesn't make sense. If they have new innovations, then prove it. They haven't, so it is only logical to assume that they don't. DSLRs are dying, and with this lack luster release Canon is asking us to hold on for 4-5 more years until they have something really good. Sorry, but that's insulting and disrespectful to their customer base, you know, the people that buy stuff so that they can put food on the table. It really feels like Canon has the same arrogance that Sony had years ago when they thought the beta-max was going to take over the world. Canon shouldn't assume that people are going to pay $6500 every few years forever.


canon is stingy. we have been seeing this for awhile. some peopel will defend this by calling it being "more profitable." why make the best when you can make more money by giving us less.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 5, 2020)

peters said:


> Very nice comparison and pretty much stops the discussion with this simple and perfect example  4mpixel is simply not relevant.


Bullsh!t. If 20 isn't enough then 24 might be, 24 isn't as useful as 28 but it is a damn sight more useful than 20. My 1Ds MkIII's had 21MP 13 YEARS AGO!


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 5, 2020)

djkraq said:


> It really sucks if its true no 4k60p af. This is insane especially when they talked about it having DPAF in 4k. Looks like the Canon Cripple hammer is at it again



Why do 1DX owners need 4K 60fps w/ AF?

Last I've heard, The Hobbit was shown on the silver screen at 48 fps, and the audience *didn't* like it.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

Todd said:


> , I for one would be disappointed because the Mark II has been lagging behind for a while, especially with the autofocus system.



I'm curious on this since so many people complain about the Mk2 autofocus. I'm shooting with Mark1, and my sports is very challenging. Poorly lit gyms (usually ISO6400 1/400 F2.8, then ~0.5stop add on post for proper exposure) with randomly moving competitors wearing dark indigo robes (and usually more colorful background with spectators that are easier for the AF system to catch on). And I think Mark1 does stellar job there, nothing short of magic.

So is Mark2 worse than that, because I can't really imagine being better than what the Mark1 does.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> The faster wifi is via a paid accessory, just vanilla wifi is included. Still, worthwhile in the right situation. I'd want it if I was going to Tokyo this year.



Right, the 2.4GHz .11n can probably do some 100Mbps give or take. If you're shooting RAW, that's some 3 seconds per picture.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 5, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Why do 1DX owners need 4K 60fps w/ AF?
> 
> Last I've heard, The Hobbit was shown on the silver screen at 48 fps, and the audience *didn't* like it.



Canon Rumors: "Come for the discussion, stay for the discussion that's indistinguishable from trolling."


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> The bird on the left and the bird on the right, these are two very different compositions. Aside from that, what I'm saying is that more megapixels equates to more ability to crop and adjust the composition without sacrificing maximum usable size in print. You may be one of those shooters who "doesn't crop," and so, yeah, the difference in mp is negligible to you (and without cropping and recomposing taken into account, sure, it's not that many pixels). However, in my experience as a freelance photographer, magazine editors crop the hell out of photos for all kinds of reasons when an issue goes to layout. Because of this, they want the highest resolution images they can get, and in 2020, 20mp looks a little skimpy.
> 
> Hey, maybe that's why it's 20 mp. It's the 1DX mk. III _2020_ edition! Get it?!





GoldWing said:


> Live view has nothing to do with shooting sports and needing an OVF. The 1DXMKIII was supposed to be
> 
> Both images are of poor quality. The one supposed to be 24MP has better color and the shadows are more defined. I can clearly see the difference between my 1DX and MKII shots. An extra 4MP's in the hands of a skilled photographer and editor who has used the camera for years would be substantial. The key words being professional and skilled.



This is comical. PEOPLE: I took ONE PHOTO, the SAME PHOTO, and resized it twice in software to show the exact difference in megapixels and cropping ability you would get between 20mp and 24mp. IT'S THE SAME PHOTO. Better color and shadows? IT'S THE SAME PHOTO. 

I opened my laptop and found some random bird photo. I resized it in software to make it exactly 20 megapixels. I then took the exact same photo and resized it to be exactly 24 megapixels. I then put both images, side-by-side on the screen, and used the image viewer to ensure each was being viewed at "100%". I then took a screenshot. The "composition" may be different because of where I happened to scroll the image to position it on my screen. Zero relevance. Each photo, side-by-side, viewed at 100%, represents the exact difference a photographer would get had they photographed that bird (1) with a 20 megapixel camera and (2) with a 24 megapixel camera. The purpose of the comparison is so that someone can look at the size of the eye of the birds, or look at the size of the beak of the bird, or any other part of the bird, and THAT IS THE SIZE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 20MP AND 24MP. That's it. THERE IS NO MORE CROPPING ABILITY THAN WHAT YOU SEE IN THOSE TWO BIRD PHOTOS. I don't know how to further make it understandable. That is the cropping ability. I have already done it for you. It is already cropped and being viewed at 100% for each of the two megapixel sizes. The bird photo on the right is the extra reach you get from the extra 4 megapixels. The increase in the size of the eye, that you see in those two photos, IS ALL YOU GET with an extra four megapixels. The increase in the size of the beak is ALL YOU GET. That's it. It may be frustrating to realize how little it is, but THAT IS IT. If you had an editor that wanted a large photo of the bird, and you owned a 20 megapixel camera, and a photographer who was your competitor had a 24 megapixel camera, and the editor said they wanted a bigger, higher resolution photo of the bird, the difference that editor would get between you and your competitor is the difference between the bird on the left and the bird on the right. That is the sum total of size increase between the two cameras.

As far as the "skilled photographer" comment, stop being patronizing. I'm a professional commercial photographer and have my photos in countless magazines. This is the first time I've mentioned that on this forum and hopefully the last. Personally I don't find it relevant to having fun on these forums, so I don't say it. But I don't need the attitude. I literally opened my laptop and grabbed the first random photo that popped up on the screen (I was testing a telephoto lens if you must know) and used it as an example. Your statement about 4 megapixels being 'substantial" in the hands of a skilled photographer is, quite honestly, preposterous.

To sum up, the difference between 24 megapixels and 20 megapixels in practicality is very, very small. It just is. It can easily be seen by looking at the two bird photos. That's the difference. If someone wants to look at the two bird photos and say they see a very significant difference in the size of the eye, or the beak, great. Go for it. I don't see such a material difference that it would possibly affect anything. If any of my clients saw this discussion about the size of the bird in each phto, they would laugh and have no idea what we were talking about. They'd probably see no difference whatsoever.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 5, 2020)

tpatana said:


> I'm curious on this since so many people complain about the Mk2 autofocus. I'm shooting with Mark1, and my sports is very challenging. Poorly lit gyms (usually ISO6400 1/400 F2.8, then ~0.5stop add on post for proper exposure) with randomly moving competitors wearing dark indigo robes (and usually more colorful background with spectators that are easier for the AF system to catch on). And I think Mark1 does stellar job there, nothing short of magic.
> 
> So is Mark2 worse than that, because I can't really imagine being better than what the Mark1 does.


Hmmm. Try fast moving birds in flight against contrasty backgrounds. The 1Dx2 underperforms the hit rate of the D5 or A92. Canon announced that the 1DX3 will have improvements in AF tracking and stability . So Canon saw the need to improve the AF.


----------



## degos (Jan 5, 2020)

The bird photo "comparison" is a red herring. In practise the zoomed-out composition would be the same ( pixel density doesn't change FoV ) but the difference would be found when the editor says "I want it cropped to the eye and head only". Ooops megapixels.

Just to illustrate how far behind the 1DX3's pixel density will be: 2.34 per sq cm versus 9.81 for the 90D.

I've been using the 1D series since the 1D3 but I'm about to add a tiny M6-2 for static and slower shooting since the sheer pixel density gives so many post-processing options. Depending how the AF functions it might also be used for faster purposes.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 5, 2020)

degos said:


> The bird photo "comparison" is a red herring. In practise the zoomed-out composition would be the same ( pixel density doesn't change FoV ) but the difference would be found when the editor says "I want it cropped to the eye and head only". Ooops megapixels.



Agreed, which is exactly what I simulated. Here is the original photo:





The two photos in the megapixel comparison are exactly what you describe, a simulation of an editor asking for a crop, from this photo, of just the head and eyes. That's precisely what I showed: the difference the editor would receive between a 20 megapixel camera and a 24 megapixel camera. Each "head and eye" photo in my side-by-side would be at native resolution. So the difference the editor would see is the difference in size in you see in the side-by-side below. To me, that is minimal.


----------



## koenkooi (Jan 5, 2020)

scyrene said:


> [..]Or maybe they're saving the best for the RF mount in a bid to tempt people across, as they have done with some of the new lenses. Time will tell.



I was about to suggest that same theory, but it feels way too cynical for Canon. Then again, looking at what the 32MP M6II can do with a Digic 8, an 26MP R1 could easily do 20fps.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 5, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> Agreed, which is exactly what I simulated. Here is the original photo:
> 
> View attachment 188047
> 
> ...



I think we're talking past each other.

Going from a 24 mp sensor down to a 20 mp sensor, you lose about 530 pixels on the horizontal axis and 350 on the vertical axis.

That doesn't sound like much, but if I crop a 24 mp image down to 20 mp, it looks like this (24 mp on the left, 20 mp on the right)




Losing resolution means that an editor has less room to crop while still maintaining the quality necessary for print (for argument's sake, at 300 DPI). When an editor has a problem using an image because they _need_ to crop it, but there isn't enough resolution to use it at the size they want, in layout, it means they have to use a different image. This could mean the difference between you making the cover of a magazine or not!

All this to say, yeah, it would be better if the 1DX mk. III had a higher resolution sensor, because having one would make the camera more versatile. This is inarguable even if one's own specific usage will not benefit from increased resolution.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 5, 2020)

degos said:


> The bird photo "comparison" is a red herring. In practise the zoomed-out composition would be the same ( pixel density doesn't change FoV ) but the difference would be found when the editor says "I want it cropped to the eye and head only". Ooops megapixels.
> 
> Just to illustrate how far behind the 1DX3's pixel density will be: 2.34 per sq cm versus 9.81 for the 90D.
> 
> I've been using the 1D series since the 1D3 but I'm about to add a tiny M6-2 for static and slower shooting since the sheer pixel density gives so many post-processing options. Depending how the AF functions it might also be used for faster purposes.



Well another way of looking at it is, as mentioned a few pages ago, it's like going from a 500mm lens to a ~548mm lens. If it had been 28MP then the equivalent would be 592mm. That's a measurable difference, but is it a substantial one? Comparing it to the 90D and M6II is a bit beside the point, as the 1Dx was never going to approach those pixel densities. (Caveat: I appreciate some people object to the idea of 'equivalent reach', but I think it's helpful in situations like this).

My style of shooting very much favours cropping ability, and I've chased MPs more than many. I went from the 5D3 to the 5Ds, and now I'm likely to get the 90D. So I totally get where people are coming from on this. But we mustn't lose sight of reality. PBD is correct above in saying that sometimes 24 vs 20 would make the difference - but for most people, in most situations, I'd argue that difference, of less than 10%, is marginal and can be covered by slightly wider cropping or intelligent upscaling, things people have been doing for years. If you want to crop a lot, then the 1 series as it currently stands (and has since the 1Dx came out) is not the optimum choice. I know that's a bummer when Canon only offers certain features (larger size, big battery, top of the line ruggedness, etc) in those bodies. But that's how it has been for nearly a decade. Why the wailing and gnashing of teeth now? Because people got ahead of themselves and dreamed of a major change with the mark III. But the chances of anything more than the high 20s was negligable.

A new high MP FF camera will come out, but of course it won't be a 1 series, and it'll almost certainly be RF mount. And then (different) people will complain that the resolution is too high, that it harms image quality (myths we see perpetuated even now about the 5Ds(R)). A one-size-fits-all camera body is not possible. And each person's 'sweet spot' is in a different place. I genuinely don't get why the discussion gets so heated. It's not personal.

A genuine question, as I've never worked for publishing - would an editor care whether the crop was a tiny bit different? Whether there was a bit more of the background around the edge, whether the subject was slightly smaller in the frame? I've been imagining the fine margins/boundary pushing is more for fine art, than magazines or websites, but perhaps I'm mistaken?


----------



## scyrene (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I think we're talking past each other.
> 
> Going from a 24 mp sensor down to a 20 mp sensor, you lose about 530 pixels on the horizontal axis and 350 on the vertical axis.
> 
> ...



This is helpful, thanks. A followup question then, has there been a clamour amongst pros using the 1Dx2 for more resolution generally? How often does this come up? I'm not pushing an agenda, I have no experience in this, but trying to understand the reasoning behind Canon's decisions, I'd be surprised if they'd ignore a major complaint/desire from their cherished user base. In which case the motivation would either be technical (can't be done for some reason), or strategic (the RF 'pro' body is the one they want you guys to start using).


----------



## Joules (Jan 5, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> The two photos in the megapixel comparison are exactly what you describe, a simulation of an editor asking for a crop, from this photo, of just the head and eyes. That's precisely what I showed: the difference the editor would receive between a 20 megapixel camera and a 24 megapixel camera.


I just want to applaud you for actually demonstrating differences. In this thread, letting the reader make up their mind based on evidence, instead of pushing some opinion as if it was a fact, is really valuable I think.

I absolutely understand that people need to vent if they are so invested in the gear and their anticipation has turned to disappointment, even though it may not seem justified to feel this way at the moment. Canon have a way of taking away a few things that make an otherwise perfect looking product appear unattractive to some people.

But the camera isn't even out yet, and all the screaming in the world won't change the specs at this point. Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised once it is actually released and we know the finer details of how the AF performance looks in the real world and how the image quality looks. And maybe some people could just find happiness and spare us their negative comments by finally making the switch, to Sony or where ever the grass is greenest.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 5, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> This is comical. PEOPLE: I took ONE PHOTO, the SAME PHOTO, and resized it twice in software to show the exact difference in megapixels and cropping ability you would get between 20mp and 24mp. IT'S THE SAME PHOTO. Better color and shadows? IT'S THE SAME PHOTO.
> 
> I opened my laptop and found some random bird photo. I resized it in software to make it exactly 20 megapixels. I then took the exact same photo and resized it to be exactly 24 megapixels. I then put both images, side-by-side on the screen, and used the image viewer to ensure each was being viewed at "100%". I then took a screenshot. The "composition" may be different because of where I happened to scroll the image to position it on my screen. Zero relevance. Each photo, side-by-side, viewed at 100%, represents the exact difference a photographer would get had they photographed that bird (1) with a 20 megapixel camera and (2) with a 24 megapixel camera. The purpose of the comparison is so that someone can look at the size of the eye of the birds, or look at the size of the beak of the bird, or any other part of the bird, and THAT IS THE SIZE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 20MP AND 24MP. That's it. THERE IS NO MORE CROPPING ABILITY THAN WHAT YOU SEE IN THOSE TWO BIRD PHOTOS. I don't know how to further make it understandable. That is the cropping ability. I have already done it for you. It is already cropped and being viewed at 100% for each of the two megapixel sizes. The bird photo on the right is the extra reach you get from the extra 4 megapixels. The increase in the size of the eye, that you see in those two photos, IS ALL YOU GET with an extra four megapixels. The increase in the size of the beak is ALL YOU GET. That's it. It may be frustrating to realize how little it is, but THAT IS IT. If you had an editor that wanted a large photo of the bird, and you owned a 20 megapixel camera, and a photographer who was your competitor had a 24 megapixel camera, and the editor said they wanted a bigger, higher resolution photo of the bird, the difference that editor would get between you and your competitor is the difference between the bird on the left and the bird on the right. That is the sum total of size increase between the two cameras.
> 
> ...



I appreciated your efforts. I still want my megapixels. Ha.


----------



## Joules (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I appreciated your efforts. I still want my megapixels. Ha.


I think many want and few have a problem with saying that you want more. It is only frustrating if people act like the 1DX III is a catastrophic failure for being 20 MP and praise the A9 II as clearly superior in the next sentence  And that's the attitude that the images provide some context for.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 5, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Well another way of looking at it is, as mentioned a few pages ago, it's like going from a 500mm lens to a ~548mm lens. If it had been 28MP then the equivalent would be 592mm. That's a measurable difference, but is it a substantial one? Comparing it to the 90D and M6II is a bit beside the point, as the 1Dx was never going to approach those pixel densities. (Caveat: I appreciate some people object to the idea of 'equivalent reach', but I think it's helpful in situations like this).
> 
> My style of shooting very much favours cropping ability, and I've chased MPs more than many. I went from the 5D3 to the 5Ds, and now I'm likely to get the 90D. So I totally get where people are coming from on this. But we mustn't lose sight of reality. PBD is correct above in saying that sometimes 24 vs 20 would make the difference - but for most people, in most situations, I'd argue that difference, of less than 10%, is marginal and can be covered by slightly wider cropping or intelligent upscaling, things people have been doing for years. If you want to crop a lot, then the 1 series as it currently stands (and has since the 1Dx came out) is not the optimum choice. I know that's a bummer when Canon only offers certain features (larger size, big battery, top of the line ruggedness, etc) in those bodies. But that's how it has been for nearly a decade. Why the wailing and gnashing of teeth now? Because people got ahead of themselves and dreamed of a major change with the mark III. But the chances of anything more than the high 20s was negligable.
> 
> ...



I understand a high mega pixel body will be coming out, but it will probably lack either the auto focus abilities of the new 1dx3 or the speed and possibly both. I keep going back to this:

1) Mega Pixels
2) Superb Auto Focus
3) High Frame Rate

Canon says you can have two. There seems to be a real demand on this forum for the resolution of the 5d4 along with the speed and auto focus of the 1dx3. I realize it is just internet noise and represent a small fraction of camera buyers, but buyers of the 1d series are a small fraction of camera buyers. I am just shocked it appear this segment is not going to be addressed by Canon. It seems mostly related to wildlife shooters, some portrait shooters and all rounders. Who is buying 600f4 and 500F4 and 800f5.6 lenses?


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 5, 2020)

mpmark said:


> we live in an era of entitled people, demanding they need to be served the best, 20mp was good yesterday but its not good today in their minds everything must keep getting better, here to read all the angry entitled comments as well


It’s when they have conflicting demands, and want them both met.....


----------



## reef58 (Jan 5, 2020)

Joules said:


> I think many want and few have a problem with saying that you want more. It is only frustrating if people act like the 1DX III is a catastrophic failure for being 20 MP and praise the A9 II as clearly superior in the next sentence  And that's the attitude that the images provide some context for.



I don't think it is a failure, and I still want one. $6500 in 2020 for a 20mp sensor is just surprising.


----------



## Joules (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I understand a high mega pixel body will be coming out, but it will probably lack either the auto focus abilities of the new 1dx3 or the speed and possibly both. I keep going back to this:
> 
> 1) Mega Pixels
> 2) Superb Auto Focus
> ...


Just as a reminder, the M6 II has a 32.5 MP sensor and does 14 FPS at full autofocus, with admirable tracking for all but the most tiny subjects, like certain birds. If it was given the superior processors and a modern EVF, it should do quite well for many circumstances that a 1DX II would have been great today. In any case, Canon had as the technology that you ask for and I think they will deliver it eventually. 

I would be shocked if the upcoming 5D V and R II will come with substantially lesser speeds. Obviously, they won't do 14 FPS, since they are FF cameras (talking only about mechanical shutter here), but above 10 should be feasible, given that the 1DX III does 20, right? And I've read often that 20 FPS is not needed by many folks.

Maybe Canon feels like the 1DX line should be about upmost speed and it is finde for the 5D V / R II to cannibalize some of the wildlife and cropping enthusiasts.


----------



## Trankilstef (Jan 5, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Why do 1DX owners need 4K 60fps w/ AF?
> 
> Last I've heard, The Hobbit was shown on the silver screen at 48 fps, and the audience *didn't* like it.


Because as filmmakers we want more fps to achieve better slow motion, it's not always to use it per se. The more fps, the slower and nicer the motion will be. It's not because that we shoot at 60 fps that we will deliver it at 60 fps (it's actually almost never the case it will be edited at 24/30p).


----------



## JPB (Jan 5, 2020)

Trankilstef said:


> Because as filmmakers we want more fps to achieve better slow motion, it's not always to use it per se. The more fps, the slower and nicer the motion will be. It's not because that we shoot at 60 fps that we will deliver it at 60 fps (it's actually almost never the case it will be edited at 24/30p).


I agree. Most of the post produced material is in 24/30p. But be able to take it down to 50-40% is amazing. Especially when filming handheld or with gimbal. I film 99% of material in 4k 60p. But when I know that I´m only going to use the material in its orignal speed, I go for 4k 24/30p, especially in low light situations where the lower fps is doing a lot better. Another thing with the high-res - high-fps is that it many times become a bit to clear. But I rather have it that way and "dirt" it up in post production, than the other way around


----------



## scyrene (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I understand a high mega pixel body will be coming out, but it will probably lack either the auto focus abilities of the new 1dx3 or the speed and possibly both. I keep going back to this:
> 
> 1) Mega Pixels
> 2) Superb Auto Focus
> ...



'Twas ever thus. I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired, and their AF will probably be good enough in most situations (the 1Dx3 will outperform it but only a bit). The higher the resolution, the lower the fps naturally, where your cutoff is will vary. I never found the 5D3/5Ds too slow, but I find the 90D tempting because it combines high pixel density and higher fps (but doubtless lesser AF capability). But there is akways a compromise. I don't for a second believe Sony or Nikon's bodies offer everything to everyone. Or if they do, that's the solution.

There's certainly good reason to say Canon's lineup has a gap for wildlife shooters, especially discontinuing the 7 series. Perhaps they just aren't a big enough segment for it to be worth targeting? But in any case, there are still options, just with more compromises.

PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.


----------



## tron (Jan 5, 2020)

scyrene said:


> ...
> PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.











Nikon D6 updated/rumored specifications (D6 could be 20MP and not 24MP as previously reported) - Nikon Rumors


Here are the Nikon D6 updated/rumored specifications: 2oMP sensor, not 24MP as previous reported (still not 100% sure) 14 fps in normal shutter mode (the D5 could do 12 fps) Improved/better AF system but probably with the same number of AF points The Nikon D6 AF improvements are crucial and...




nikonrumors.com


----------



## tron (Jan 5, 2020)

So what are the two surprises that were mentioned in a previous post? 

I guess the first was the raw video but the second? 

Unless the 20Mpixels count as the second surprise


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 5, 2020)

Mikehit said:


> I would be very surprised if still photography was able to AF at the extremes like that - my guess is that they will be more like Nikon in that they will have many more AF points more densely packed within pretty much the same area as currently configured, with the AF point density improving focus tracking as the subject moves within the frame.


However, 1Dx III with AF points spread as per diagram above would sell like hot cakes even at 20Mp.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 5, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Can't believe so many complaints about 20MP. How many people on here actually own this sort of rig? Seriously. 20MP is fine for who/what this camera is built for. And in keeping it at 20MP, it looks like they were able to get even more high ISO performance out of it and presumably lower noise in low light.



OK, I own four 1D bodies for shooting sports. better high ISO, lower noise is great but not needed for most pro work. Most pro sport stadiums are well lit these days. (1250, f4 iso 3200-6400). So the new 1DX III has no eye autofocus in the OVF, has no real silent shooting, shoots 16 fps vs 20 fps for the A9 and so on. So if it's still 20 MP I find this disappointing. As a sports photographer I always crop a lot so I could use as many pixels as I can get. So don't tell me that 20 MP is enough for me. Remember we can not get the firmware updates with these dslr bodies that the mirrorless bodies can get.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I think we're talking past each other.
> 
> Going from a 24 mp sensor down to a 20 mp sensor, you lose about 530 pixels on the horizontal axis and 350 on the vertical axis.
> 
> ...



We're on the same page and I generally agree with you. This part of the thread began when a question came up regarding how much larger you could print going from a 20mp camera to a 24mp. My response was meant to be one post, and it took on a life of it's own. (The answer to that original question was about 18.5 inches wide print for 20mp, and 20" wide print for 24mp).

I love to crop. If I could shoot every photo I ever took at 16mm focal length, I would be happy. My personal motto as a travel photographer has always been "when I get home, I can always crop to get tighter, but if I'm not wide enough on location, there's nothing I can do to get back what I missed by being too tight". That's why I mentioned in a previous post that I like to crop, and I probably wind up cropping almost every photo I take.

If I had to sum up my position on all if this is, it would be that I too wish with new 1D was going to have more megapixels. I'm actually a little surprised that they didn't bump it up, if not for any other reason than marketing purposes and avoiding all the disappointed potential customers. But that said, I personally don't find the difference between 20mp and 24mp to be that significant. For those that were hoping for 24mp *specifically*, I don't think it's such a huge let down. If one was looking for 30+mp, then yes, remaining at 20mp would be a more significant disappointment.


----------



## tron (Jan 5, 2020)

ToonD said:


> OK, I own four 1D bodies for shooting sports. better high ISO, lower noise is great but not needed for most pro work. Most pro sport stadiums are well lit these days. (1250, f4 iso 3200-6400). So the new 1DX III has no eye autofocus in the OVF, has no real silent shooting, shoots 16 fps vs 20 fps for the A9 and so on. So if it's still 20 MP I find this disappointing. As a sports photographer I always crop a lot so I could use as many pixels as I can get. So don't tell me that 20 MP is enough for me. Remember we can not get the firmware updates with these dslr bodies that the mirrorless bodies can get.


Which DSLR has eye autofocus using OVF?


----------



## sanj (Jan 5, 2020)

I was hoping for 24/26 mpx. If it is not there, Canon must have technical reasons for it. So will make do with 20. But I whish there was DPAF in RAW.


----------



## drama (Jan 5, 2020)

Oh dear. Another camera spec semi-confirmed, and another 300+ posts of people who won't buy it loudly arguing with total certainty why it's awful, amazing and everything in between. When will you guys realise Canon probably have done a lot of research on what their existing 1DX2 users want, and what the market is doing before putting it out? If you don't like it, don't buy it! There are many other cameras that do different things. I greatly suspect Canon will also release more cameras. They will have different specs and be targeted differently. If you look at any camera from the position of "why doesn't it do this", you are a) setting yourself up for disappointment, and b) demonstrating a total lack of understanding of how cameras are sold.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 5, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> this will blow the A9 II out of the water, which is why you will see this dominating the Olympics this year and not the A9 II



Really? 50% of the photographers I know (for my country) that are going to Tokyo are now Sony shooters. Me I don't know yet.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 5, 2020)

drama said:


> Oh dear. Another camera spec semi-confirmed, and another 300+ posts of people who won't buy it loudly arguing with total certainty why it's awful, amazing and everything in between. When will you guys realise Canon probably have done a lot of research on what their existing 1DX2 users want, and what the market is doing before putting it out? If you don't like it, don't buy it! There are many other cameras that do different things. I greatly suspect Canon will also release more cameras. They will have different specs and be targeted differently. If you look at any camera from the position of "why doesn't it do this", you are a) setting yourself up for disappointment, and b) demonstrating a total lack of understanding of how cameras are sold.



This thread is full of existing 1d owners including myself. I probably will buy it, but I am not rushing to get in line. I never said it was awful. The issue is there are no other cameras that offer their best auto focus, more mega pixels and fast frame rates. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about that. There are many in this thread and numerous threads on the internet that own both 1d's and huge white telephotos looking for a top of the line camera body to use for wildlife / sports and other action oriented subjects. Again the 1dx3 will probably be their best camera ever made. It would be better for our segment if it had received a resolution bump. There are quite a few of us.


----------



## Warrenl (Jan 5, 2020)

I may have missed but it seems that the 1DX 111 is an extra $500. The 1DX 11 was $6000, 1DX 111 $6500 (https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-1dx-ii/canon-1dx-iiA.HTM)


----------



## reef58 (Jan 5, 2020)

scyrene said:


> 'Twas ever thus. I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired, and their *AF will probably be good enough i*n most situations (the 1Dx3 will outperform it but only a bit). The higher the resolution, the lower the fps naturally, where your cutoff is will vary. I never found the 5D3/5Ds too slow, but I find the 90D tempting because it combines high pixel density and higher fps (but doubtless lesser AF capability). But there is akways a compromise. I don't for a second believe Sony or Nikon's bodies offer everything to everyone. Or if they do, that's the solution.
> 
> There's certainly good reason to say Canon's lineup has a gap for wildlife shooters, especially discontinuing the 7 series. Perhaps they just aren't a big enough segment for it to be worth targeting? But in any case, there are still options, just with more compromises.
> 
> PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.



I have some hopes for the 5d5 and I love my 5d4, but I am not looking for good enough for most situations. I would like their best auto focus. Maybe one day they will offer a higher MP 1d series. Maybe history taught them it was not a good business decision.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> When an editor has a problem using an image because they _need_ to crop it, but there isn't enough resolution to use it at the size they want, in layout, it means they have to use a different image. This could mean the difference between you making the cover of a magazine or not!
> 
> All this to say, yeah, it would be better if the 1DX mk. III had a higher resolution sensor, because having one would make the camera more versatile. This is inarguable even if one's own specific usage will not benefit from increased resolution.



I am with you about wanting more MP but magazines *can* use very low mp files for a cover of a mag. I had recently one magazine using a 1562 x 1871 file size.


----------



## drama (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> This thread is full of existing 1d owners including myself. I probably will buy it, but I am not rushing to get in line. I never said it was awful. The issue is there are no other cameras that offer their best auto focus, more mega pixels and fast frame rates. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about that. There are many in this thread and numerous threads on the internet that own both 1d's and huge white telephotos looking for a top of the line camera body to use for wildlife / sports and other action oriented subjects. Again the 1dx3 will probably be their best camera ever made. It would be better for our segment if it had received a resolution bump. There are quite a few of us.



Yes, I think the existing users should probably wait for full specs to be confirmed. If there's no MP bump, I would expect the development announcement talk of a "more detailed sensor" to be explained. It's likely marketing voodoo, but let's wait for sample shots. Interested to hear from users who have shot with it, which should become clear when it's announced formally (tomorrow?)


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 5, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I was about to suggest that same theory, but it feels way too cynical for Canon. Then again, looking at what the 32MP M6II can do with a Digic 8, an 26MP R1 could easily do 20fps.


I’ve been saying this all along. Why are they releasing this a month before the big show? Why are we starting to hear rumors about multiple cameras being unveiled at CP+ at the end of February? Because the 1dxmiii is a sideshow, its just an iterative upgrade to the existing camera line to meet promises made to professionals that need to refresh their lineup and maximize their ef lens investments. I suspect the sensor is new only to the point that they used the same design on a new smaller more efficient die process, like the ‘tock’ in intel‘s tick-tock cycle. If they have done this, that probably accounts for the greatly improved read speeds of the chip.

But the real magic will come at the end of February, with cameras that may meet or exceed the 1dxmiii in certain situations, to entice people to start replacing all of their lenses with better RF optics. Then next year we’ll see the hybrid viewfinder RF/EF 1d series with a higher megapixel count and king of the hill camera at the top of canons performance pyramid.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 5, 2020)

tron said:


> Which DSLR has eye autofocus using OVF?



No dslr has. A9 has. That's what I was trying to say. (English is not my native language). The 1DX III lacks some features compared to the A9. So in that respect I was expecting some upping on the MP side. But it appears Canon is not thinking like that. Maybe time for a switch.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 5, 2020)

ToonD said:


> No dslr has. A9 has. That's what I was trying to say. (English is not my native language). The 1DX III lacks some features compared to the A9. So in that respect I was expecting some upping on the MP side. But it appears Canon is not thinking like that. Maybe time for a switch.


Give it a month. I suspect you’ll be surprised.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> OK, so all complaining aside, who exactly is this camera aimed at?
> 
> Bird / Nature Photographers that shoot full-frame? You have the FPS, but then you have way less ability to crop than say the A9ii. So that's a no to me.
> 
> ...



How about those who use their 1-series cameras so hard every day that their 1D X Mark II bodies are starting to show their age (not in terms of specs, but in terms of wear and tear) and need to be replaced?

That and sports photographers, if the AF improvements are truly that much better.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

Mikehit said:


> Yeah. 24MP is so much more than 20MP...



Just for those who don't understand square roots, the difference in linear resolution between 3:2 20MP and 3:2 24MP is only 9.5%.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> 20% or so, which is decent. I think what frustrates people is Canon is basically saying you cannot have a pixel dense sensor, with great auto focus and good frames rates.
> 
> Mega Pixels, Frame Rate Auto Focus, Canon says pick two.



Not really. The difference in linear terms is only 9.5%. The square root of 1.2 is 1.095...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> 20%. If of no consequence then drop it to 16MP.



20% more pixels per area translate to only 9.5% more pixels in linear terms, which is how we measure resolution (and focal length "reach").


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 5, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> How about those who use their 1-series cameras so hard every day that their 1D X Mark II bodies are starting to show their age (not in terms of specs, but in terms of wear and tear) and need to be replaced?
> 
> That and sports photographers, if the AF improvements are truly that much better.



Why wouldn't you just get another 1DX ii at a lower price? Unless of course the AF really is THAT much better.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?



You can print 9.5% longer along each side, which gives you 20% more area.

Look at it in very simple terms: A 16x20 is twice the linear size of an 8x10. Each edge is twice as long. It has four times the area. To get the same resolution using the same printer pixel density, one would need an 80 MP camera to print the 16x20 compared to a 20 MP camera to print the 8x10.

If you're printing at 8x12 (to preserve the 3:2 ratio) with a 20 MP camera, with a 24 MP camera you could print at only 8.76x13.15 with the same pixel density from the printer.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

padam said:


> Besides the 1.9:1 aspect ratio and the AF being disabled in this mode, the 2600 Mbps bitrate is insanely high.
> 
> It does shoot 20fps RAW stils with live-view, although the Servo-AF is probably not in its best mode.



If it is anything like the 90D, the live view Servo AF will be noticeably *better* than the OVF Servo AF. (At least if you believe DP review and their testing methods, mostly using an STM kit lens optimized for smooth video focusing.)


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

Southstorm said:


> A quick hack job, but this is what 191 af points could look like...
> 
> View attachment 188010



It will probably be more like the Nikon D5, where only about 1/4 of the AF points are user selectable and the rest are "assist" points surrounding the selectable ones.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 5, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> 20% more pixels per area translate to only 9.5% more pixels in linear terms, which is how we measure resolution (and focal length "reach").


*Could be, there will be less MP's in the MKIII than the MKII*. 

This was required for the Video frame rates?


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 5, 2020)

criscokkat said:


> I’ve been saying this all along. Why are they releasing this a month before the big show? Why are we starting to hear rumors about multiple cameras being unveiled at CP+ at the end of February? Because the 1dxmiii is a sideshow, its just an iterative upgrade to the existing camera line to meet promises made to professionals that need to refresh their lineup and maximize their ef lens investments. I suspect the sensor is new only to the point that they used the same design on a new smaller more efficient die process, like the ‘tock’ in intel‘s tick-tock cycle. If they have done this, that probably accounts for the greatly improved read speeds of the chip.
> 
> But the real magic will come at the end of February, with cameras that may meet or exceed the 1dxmiii in certain situations, to entice people to start replacing all of their lenses with better RF optics. Then next year we’ll see the hybrid viewfinder RF/EF 1d series with a higher megapixel count and king of the hill camera at the top of canons performance pyramid.



Real magic? You mean ultra-high mpx R body, noone asked for?


----------



## cpreston (Jan 5, 2020)

Something that seems to be missed is that the 1DX III does list cropped 4K and UHD modes. There's a good chance that these modes will allow 60P and DPAF.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> Why wouldn't you just get another 1DX ii at a lower price? Unless of course the AF really is THAT much better.



Have you tried finding a new EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II for a lower price than a new EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III lately? The pipeline is empty. The window for buying remaining stock of 1D X mark II bodies will be even narrower, as most dealers inventory far fewer 1-series bodies than they inventory 70-200/2.8 lenses.


----------



## tron (Jan 5, 2020)

ToonD said:


> No dslr has. A9 has. That's what I was trying to say. (English is not my native language). The 1DX III lacks some features compared to the A9. So in that respect I was expecting some upping on the MP side. But it appears Canon is not thinking like that. Maybe time for a switch.


I saw a few of your sports photos and they seem very good. I do not believe that 4 more Mpixels would mean anything. 
I also do not believe that a Sony system would beat Canon at sport shooting but I am not speaking out of experience. I do not even have 1Dx series. I use the 5 series as a hobbyist (with lenses between 14mm and 500mm). I recently tried a friend's Nikon D750 and I felt frustrated. Canon ergonomics are great. Even the EOS R was worse than 5 series. 

Also if autofocusing was vastly improved that would be the best for your expertise.

Imagine a close to 100% - let's say 90% - keepers ratio. That is much more important than a few more mpixels.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

photo212 said:


> WOOHOO! Now, my hunt is on for someone trying to sell their low mileage 1DX Mk II for a great low price.



Which won't be quite as low as it would have been if the new 1D X Mark III had hit it out of the park on the spec sheet.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> The examples you quote account for printing differences, but not for what you gain in cropping ability and being able to adjust the composition.



Cropping is so minimal as to be negligible unless you are doing huge crops then you obviously are using the wrong piece of equipment for the job, need a longer lens.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

frankchn said:


> I would bet that most Canon Rumors readers are not in the target market for this camera. Reuters, AP, AFP, SI, etc... probably told Canon that 20mpx is plenty -- and those organizations are buying thousands of cameras.
> 
> 20 megapixels is enough to fill a double spread in Sports Illustrated at 300 dpi, and even then it is the rare photo that gets the double spread treatment. Most photos gets thrown out immediately, and most of the selected ones will just end up on Twitter feeds / web galleries at 2 or 3 mp, so why process 30 megapixel files?



Why would Reuters, AP, AFP, SI, etc. buy thousands of new cameras? They no longer have thousands of staff photographers to issue such cameras to. Only a handful remain. Most of their work is now hired out to freelancers working for pennies on the dollar who couldn't afford to upgrade their 1D X Mark II bodies until they actually break beyond reasonable repair.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

sanj said:


> Not in 4k RAW either.



How about 4K24p? isn't that the Holy Grail of videographers? It sure was when certain Canon cameras did not offer 24p...


----------



## Nelu (Jan 5, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> Cropping is so minimal as to be negligible unless you are doing huge crops then you obviously are using the wrong piece of equipment for the job, need a longer lens.


How about when you use the 600mm lens with the 1.4x TC or 2x TC and you still need to crop because it's impossible to get closer to the subject for objective reasons?
Is that still the wrong piece of equipment for the job?


----------



## Bishop80 (Jan 5, 2020)

tron said:


> Which DSLR has eye autofocus using OVF?





ToonD said:


> No dslr has. A9 has. That's what I was trying to say. (English is not my native language). The 1DX III lacks some features compared to the A9. So in that respect I was expecting some upping on the MP side. But it appears Canon is not thinking like that. Maybe time for a switch.


The EOS 3 had eye autofocus through the OVF, but it was whatever YOUR eye focused on!


----------



## unfocused (Jan 5, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> Cropping is so minimal as to be negligible unless you are doing huge crops then you obviously are using the wrong piece of equipment for the job, need a longer lens.


How about when you need a horizontal crop for the website, a square crop for social media, a vertical for printing at 300 dpi and another horizontal crop for large wall displays and posters? The days of an image being destined for a single medium are over. Loose cropping is needed because you never know how the image will be used.


----------



## padrepaul (Jan 5, 2020)

Maybe Canon feels like the 1DX line should be about upmost speed and it is finde for the 5D V / R II to cannibalize some of the wildlife and cropping enthusiasts.
[/QUOTE]

That's really all I care about - can it shoot fast, and more importantly can it autofocus, and give me a decent file for a print in lower light when I'm shooting birds, sunrises, sunsets, landscapes. If it had no video at all I'd be fine with that.


----------



## Canon-Chas (Jan 5, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> this will blow the A9 II out of the water, which is why you will see this dominating the Olympics this year and not the A9 II


Absolutely no chance, take it from me ..a Canon user long term who still owns Canon prime lenses and 1DX II and EOS R and Sony A9II , the A9II leaves Canon and Nikon for dead and in complete silence. I can't imagine trying to take live view pics with any enthusiasm on the 1DXIII , get real


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

degos said:


> What nonsense. Any computer from the past 10 years will chomp a 30MP file without breaking sweat. Do you think that the average mid-tier buyer of a 32MP M6-2 is also upgrading their computing hardware at the same time? Of course not. So why would it be a problem to pros?
> 
> 20MP is abysmal in 2020. Quite often I reach for the 21MP 1Ds3 to get a minor resolution bump and a bit more cropability. That camera was announced in August *2007*. But it was also the last of the stills-only 1D line, before videography starting screwing with the specifications.
> 
> I'd bet that a 30MP 1DX3 would be possible if they removed all that video processing overhead and left that to the EOS C line. After all we're constantly told on this forum that the 1DX is for sports shooters uploading JPEGs in real-time to their editors, so why bother with video?



There are a LOT of shooters in the 1D X and 1D X Mark II user base that rarely transfer images to a computer for processing before pushing them for publication. It's all about the in-camera JPEG engine doing it right and getting the image on the wire services minutes after the shot was taken.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> The faster wifi is via a paid accessory, just vanilla wifi is included. Still, worthwhile in the right situation. I'd want it if I was going to Tokyo this year.



It has built in WiFi as well. The external unit is for when greater distance range is needed.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> The examples you quote account for printing differences, but not for what you gain in cropping ability and being able to adjust the composition.



The math is the same. "Reach" is measured in linear units, not areal units.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 5, 2020)

tron said:


> I saw a few of your sports photos and they seem very good. I do not believe that 4 more Mpixels would mean anything.
> I also do not believe that a Sony system would beat Canon at sport shooting but I am not speaking out of experience. I do not even have 1Dx series. I use the 5 series as a hobbyist (with lenses between 14mm and 500mm). I recently tried a friend's Nikon D750 and I felt frustrated. Canon ergonomics are great. Even the EOS R was worse than 5 series.
> 
> Also if autofocusing was vastly improved that would be the best for your expertise.
> ...


Thanks, I have been shooting with the A9 during a Sony Pro Event at Tenerife, and I was impressed as a Canon shooter with the Sony autofocus and all the Sony engineers were really engaged with our wishes. I never had this with Canon. It's just a feeling that Canon is moving too slow and holding back some tech. I have the feeling that at least Canon could give us some megapixels. I guess mirrorless is the future and why invest another 20000 euros in old tech?


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Jan 5, 2020)

I swear I lost brain cells reading this thread. I now only have a brain that can deal with 10MP cameras


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

scyrene said:


> 'Twas ever thus. I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired, and their AF will probably be good enough in most situations (the 1Dx3 will outperform it but only a bit). The higher the resolution, the lower the fps naturally, where your cutoff is will vary. I never found the 5D3/5Ds too slow, but I find the 90D tempting because it combines high pixel density and higher fps (but doubtless lesser AF capability). But there is akways a compromise. I don't for a second believe Sony or Nikon's bodies offer everything to everyone. Or if they do, that's the solution.
> 
> There's certainly good reason to say Canon's lineup has a gap for wildlife shooters, especially discontinuing the 7 series. Perhaps they just aren't a big enough segment for it to be worth targeting? But in any case, there are still options, just with more compromises.
> 
> PS is it just Canon? What is the rumoured resolution of the D6? I don't follow other brands closely.



The EOS 5D Mark IV was released in 2016. It's been out almost four years.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Jan 5, 2020)

Personally, I've seen many absolutely fantastic shots taken with the 1dx series of cameras and never once did I say to myself that the image would be even more fantastic if there were more megapixels used during the creation of the image. 

Those true pros who use the 1dx ii for it's intended purpose really know how to utilize the right lens for the right scenario.


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Why do 1DX owners need 4K 60fps w/ AF?
> 
> Last I've heard, The Hobbit was shown on the silver screen at 48 fps, and the audience *didn't* like it.


Its not about delivering in a higher framerate, its about using slowmotions which is a HUGE bonus for a lot of different videos - commercial (where this camera could certainly shine), Event documentation, weddings, promo videos ...
Using DPAF on a gimbal with the 1DXII is a charme. Its a good image quality and looks stunning in 4k60. Withouth DPAF working on a gimbal turns from an easy one-men-job to a cumbersome 2 person job.


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> Live view has nothing to do with shooting sports and needing an OVF. The 1DXMKIII was supposed to be


We where talking about video mode with 4k60 and DPAF. This got nothing to do with the OVF or what the 1D was "supposed to be".
The mark II was great for video, mostly because of the nice 4k60 image and the perfect DPAF. With DPAF the Mark III could have become a tremendous camera. Now there is no real reason to not go with a panasonic S1h for video work.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 5, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> Personally, I've seen many absolutely fantastic shots taken with the 1dx series of cameras and never once did I say to myself that the image would be even more fantastic if there were more megapixels used during the creation of the image.
> 
> Those true pros who use the 1dx ii for it's intended purpose really know how to utilize the right lens for the right scenario.



I can't tell you how many times we wished the 1DXMKII's has more resolution.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 5, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> Personally, I've seen many absolutely fantastic shots taken with the 1dx series of cameras and never once did I say to myself that the image would be even more fantastic if there were more megapixels used during the creation of the image.
> 
> Those true pros who use the 1dx ii for it's intended purpose really know how to utilize the right lens for the right scenario.


It's obvious that you are not a working pro sports photographer. Nothing wrong with that but .....


----------



## djack41 (Jan 5, 2020)

If the AF is fast, accurate and stable, I may buy it. Canon has to take the lead somewhere. The AF of the D5 and A92 nas been superior. Maybe Canon has put some AF magic into the 1DX3. If not, watch Canon's market share deflate.


Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Canon said to expect a lighter weight camera. Well, the 1DX3 weighs 3.2 lbs while the 1DX2 weighs 3.4 lbs. Small progress. The Sony A92 weighs only 1.4 lbs. This makes a big difference when handholding super telephoto lenses. 

I had hoped that Canon would include a feature that is cutting edge. Remember all the rumors about IBIS, 26 MP, or hybrid technology? Oh well. If nothing else, Canon is predictable.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

Nelu said:


> How about when you use the 600mm lens with the 1.4x TC or 2x TC and you still need to crop because it's impossible to get closer to the subject for objective reasons?
> Is that still the wrong piece of equipment for the job?



In which case the difference between 20MP and 24MP is still only 9.5% more "reach". The 24MP camera could put the same number of pixels on the subject with a 600mm lens that a 20MP camera with a 657mm lens could put on the same subject from the same distance.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 5, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The EOS 5D Mark IV was released in 2016. It's been out almost four years.



I'm not sure what you're driving at.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 5, 2020)

djack41 said:


> If the AF is fast, accurate and stable, I may buy it. Canon has to take the lead somewhere. The AF of the D5 and A92 nas been superior. Maybe Canon has put some AF magic into the 1DX3. If not, watch Canon's market share deflate.
> 
> Canon said to expect a lighter weight camera. Well, the 1DX3 weighs 3.2 lbs while the 1DX2 weighs 3.4 lbs. Small progress. The Sony A92 weighs only 1.4 lbs. This makes a big difference when handholding super telephoto lenses.
> 
> I had hoped that Canon would include a feature that is cutting edge. Remember all the rumors about IBIS, 26 MP, or hybrid technology? Oh well. If nothing else, Canon is predictable.



I'm not sure the 1 series accounts for much of their market share tbh. As for lighter means better with superteles, I think that's a matter of taste. I've seen plenty of people saying the 1 series bodies balance well with them. They may still do with a lighter body, but it may not be better for everyone.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

djack41 said:


> If the AF is fast, accurate and stable, I may buy it. Canon has to take the lead somewhere. The AF of the D5 and A92 nas been superior. Maybe Canon has put some AF magic into the 1DX3. If not, watch Canon's market share deflate.
> 
> Canon said to expect a lighter weight camera. Well, the 1DX3 weighs 3.2 lbs while the 1DX2 weighs 3.4 lbs. Small progress. The Sony A92 weighs only 1.4 lbs. This makes a big difference when handholding super telephoto lenses.
> 
> I had hoped that Canon would include a feature that is cutting edge. Remember all the rumors about IBIS, 26 MP, or hybrid technology? Oh well. If nothing else, Canon is predictable.



What raised Canon to prominence in sports/action photography in the early 1990s was the superior AF speed and accuracy enabled by their invention of the lens based UltraSonic AF Motor and the all electronic connection between lens and camera body that was able to utilize that speed.

They kept that lead for two decades by continuing to offer the best high speed tracking AF, along with the best long focal length lenses capable of using that superior AF system, while also leveraging the ubiquity of their products on the sidelines of high profile sporting events into selling more entry level ILCs than anyone else.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 5, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Not really. The difference in linear terms is only 9.5%. The square root of 1.2 is 1.095...



I have asked this question before and I thought it was answered in the affirmative. I don't know. I am not a technical guy. Can I not print 20% larger with 24mp image vs 20mp at 300dpi?


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 5, 2020)

navastronia said:


> The bird on the left and the bird on the right, these are two very different compositions. Aside from that, what I'm saying is that more megapixels equates to more ability to crop and adjust the composition without sacrificing maximum usable size in print. You may be one of those shooters who "doesn't crop," and so, yeah, the difference in mp is negligible to you (and without cropping and recomposing taken into account, sure, it's not that many pixels). However, in my experience as a freelance photographer, magazine editors crop the hell out of photos for all kinds of reasons when an issue goes to layout. Because of this, they want the highest resolution images they can get, and in 2020, 20mp looks a little skimpy.
> 
> Hey, maybe that's why it's 20 mp. It's the 1DX mk. III _2020_ edition! Get it?!



viewing larger and ping are the same thing. 
Regards cropping, you are talking about an ability to crop the image 10% either way. That will make a difference to an editor in an amazingly small number of requirements. And if they are 'cropping the hell' out of images, that 10% of the full frame will pale into insignificance. 
And as for printing, I doubt a majority of magazine articles are printed at anything like 300 dpi. And any professional I have spoken to has said that if the image in itself is good enough, such small differences (detail, noise etc) are almost meaningless.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I'm not sure what you're driving at.



You said, "I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired..."

My point was that the 5D Mark IV most assuredly came out in 2016.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 5, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I have asked this question before and I thought it was answered in the affirmative. I don't know. I am not a technical guy. Can I not print 20% larger with 24mp image vs 20mp at 300dpi?



You can print 9.5% wider and 9.5% taller, which gives you 20% more area.

To be able to print 20% wider and 20% taller, you need 44% more pixels, or 28.8MP vs. 20MP.

As far as subject size in the resulting print is concerned, that additional enlargement allowed by a 24MP vs. 20MP camera has the same effect as a lens with 9.5% more focal length.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 5, 2020)

If the new AF mean that the AF will be better at focussing on a moving subject against a complex background then it will be a definite improvement for wildlife photographers - that would have a disproportionate improvement on keeper rate.
But I'm not sure I can justify the outlay for that when my tracking/panning skills would likely render it pretty much meaningless


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Remember we can not get the firmware updates with these dslr bodies that the mirrorless bodies can get.



I'm confused? What has the mirror to do with any FW updates? Care to explain what you meant with this?


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Really? 50% of the photographers I know (for my country) that are going to Tokyo are now Sony shooters. Me I don't know yet.



I'm pretty sure majority of cameras at Tokyo will be Canons. Naturally can't speak for your friends/country, but I'm willing to bet <20% of the cameras we'll see at the stands will be Sonys, and >60% will be Canons.


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 5, 2020)

If this is true, Canon has clearly shut down their DSLR development dept. 
Just a very dissapointing update on the mark II. 

I have spoken to resellers and the numbers are shocking. 90% less pre-order sales on this mark III compared to the mark II.
So either everybody is waiting for what 2020 will bring on the mirrorless Pro side, or most of Canon Pro users are gone to Sony. 

Who on earth is willing to pay 6,5k for this? Not me for sure and lots of colleagues with me..


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 5, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> I agree. I just pulled out my 1DXMKII specs and you can just l*ay them over these*, with a few exceptions. Could this be a *joke?*
> 
> 61 AF points?
> Digic 6?????
> ...



YOU ABSOLUTELY NAILED IT HERE. Canon is insulting us with this camera. Shame!


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 5, 2020)

tpatana said:


> I'm pretty sure majority of cameras at Tokyo will be Canons. Naturally can't speak for your friends/country, but I'm willing to bet <20% of the cameras we'll see at the stands will be Sonys, and >60% will be Canons.


I'd agree, but wait till the next Olympics (Paris 2024). This is the last niche where Canon still has as a strong hold, and it is shrinking.

When there were no real alternatives, the pro world had to put up with arrogant, monopolistic Canon who would do things like add an extra heat sink to a 1Dx, switch on better video capture in firmware, and charge US$15k for it. This is Canon's colors. Hold back their best tech and find ways to extort the market with it. 

But now Sony has said with their wallet that they want the market Canon has been abusing. It takes time, but the tide is turning. 

With this camera Canon is still displaying their true colors. Switching off DPAF is now a trade mark Canon move.


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 5, 2020)

People please, STOP BS-ing about 4k. If you are a filmmaker you can buy a 4k camera for half the price. For us photographers this camera is an insult. Nothing changed compared to the mark II. First specs are 100% equal. 20mp / 16fps / WTF?? What is Canon thinking? Hellooo Japan!! Are you ok?? 6,5k for same specs???


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> I have spoken to resellers and the numbers are shocking. 90% less pre-order sales on this mark III compared to the mark II.



Troll much? Not one single store I know has pre-orders available yet. So to my knowledge the pre-order sales are 100% less than Mark2. 5D Mark5 pre-orders are pretty low at the moment too.


----------



## peters (Jan 5, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> With this camera Canon is still displaying their true colors. Switching off DPAF is now a trade mark Canon move.


I truely hope they will regret this to their bones. Its pretty much the most important feature Canon developed in the last decade, maybe the only important one.
I was hoping for IBIS... what I got was a removal of DPAF... leaving me with a 5,4k raw video feature which is somehow impressive - but than again cumbersome to use. It could have been the one-for-all killer camera..


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> I'd agree, but wait till the next Olympics (Paris 2024). This is the last niche where Canon still has as a strong hold, and it is shrinking.
> 
> When there were no real alternatives, the pro world had to put up with arrogant, monopolistic Canon who would do things like add an extra heat sink to a 1Dx, switch on better video capture in firmware, and charge US$15k for it. This is Canon's colors. Hold back their best tech and find ways to extort the market with it.
> 
> ...



Yea I expect mirrorless AF (and EVF) will be good enough by 2024 that lot of people have gone mirrorless by then. For now they still can't compete with 1DX (and D5/D6) series DSLR bodies on items that really matter for pro sports photographers.


----------



## raptor3x (Jan 5, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> Nothing changed compared to the mark II. First specs are 100% equal. 20mp / 16fps / WTF??



That's a bizarre reading of the specs. For one, the 1DXii only does 14fps with AE/AF, not 16 like the 1DXiii specs (or 20 in liveview). Second, even if the resolution hasn't increased the it's almost certainly an entirely new sensor. This is also ignoring that the camera appears to have a completely new AF system. Saying it has nothing over the 1DXii is just silly.


----------



## raptor3x (Jan 5, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> You obviously haven't shot 4K60 with the 1DX2. Useless.
> 
> Jack



The 1DXii has useable AF in 4K60. I'm not sure why you think I said it's useless on the 1DXii. The whole point is that, as stated by the rumor, it's mostly a downgrade from the 1DXii for the market that the camera is aimed toward. How many sports/wildlife/press people do you think would be willing to give up AF for, at most, a stop improvement in noise and DoF control?


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 5, 2020)

Many more AF points to choose from, great. What about selecting a players eye and track that eye in AI SERVO tru OVF? Haha, this AF system is so 2015. We are in 2020, unfortunately Canon is not.. 

It will take years for Canon to launch a mirrorless pro body, I might switch to sony too..


----------



## Cyborx (Jan 5, 2020)

raptor3x said:


> That's a bizarre reading of the specs. For one, the 1DXii only does 14fps with AE/AF, not 16 like the 1DXiii specs (or 20 in liveview). Second, even if the resolution hasn't increased the it's almost certainly and entirely new sensor. This is also ignoring that the camera appears to have a completely new AF system. Saying it has nothing over the 1DXii is just silly.



You’re right .. I have to admit I am just angry they did not gave us something epic, but just a minor upgrade.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> Many more AF points to choose from, great. What about selecting a players eye and track that eye in AI SERVO tru OVF? Haha, this AF system is so 2015. We are in 2020, unfortunately Canon is not..
> 
> It will take years for Canon to launch a mirrorless pro body, I might switch to sony too..



Go troll somewhere else. No DSLR has eye tracking with mirror down.


----------



## tron (Jan 5, 2020)

Bishop80 said:


> The EOS 3 had eye autofocus through the OVF, but it was whatever YOUR eye focused on!


Yes I remember. My EOS 50E had it too. But that is not our point


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 5, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Go troll somewhere else. No DSLR has eye tracking with mirror down.


That's his point. Why didn't Canon find a way to do this (ie using a semi-transparent mirror) instead of just adding more old tech focus points? A) because this wasn't their priority. 
Strategy: Launch a beefed up old tech camera (with cripple-ware) today, then launch a new tech camera (probably still with cripple-ware) a year later and ask the pros to all buy again.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 5, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Yea I expect mirrorless AF (and EVF) will be good enough by 2024 that lot of people have gone mirrorless by then. For now they still can't compete with 1DX (and D5/D6) series DSLR bodies on items that really matter for pro sports photographers.


Not really the reason. Take battery life as a reason instead, and Canon perhaps doubling the battery life with the 1dx3 compared to the 1dx2, which was already incredible compared to a mirrorless.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 5, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> That's his point. Why didn't Canon find a way to do this (ie using a semi-transparent mirror) instead of just adding more old tech focus points? A) because this wasn't their priority.
> Strategy: Launch a beefed up old tech camera (with cripple-ware) today, then launch a new tech camera (probably still with cripple-ware) a year later and ask the pros to all buy again.


Cripple ware....


----------



## tpatana (Jan 5, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> That's his point. Why didn't Canon find a way to do this (ie using a semi-transparent mirror) instead of just adding more old tech focus points? A) because this wasn't their priority.



I'm sure it's really easy to do since there's so many DSLRs out there with eye-tracking.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 5, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> Many more AF points to choose from, great. What about selecting a players eye and track that eye in AI SERVO tru OVF? Haha, this AF system is so 2015. We are in 2020, unfortunately Canon is not..
> 
> It will take years for Canon to launch a mirrorless pro body, I might switch to sony too..


So do Sony pay you or do you behave like this in order to try and get them to like you?


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 6, 2020)

Canon realizes they are alienating a *portion *of their client base. The transition to mirrorless is being forced not accommodated.

However, with the full cost of new bodies and new glass.... _*they played this game wrong. *_

If Nikon or SONY can accommodate those who feel disenfranchised with viable options then they will get entre shops that have been Canon Shops for many years. If *you have to buy new bodies and new glass anyway.*... why not *go with the equipment that meets your needs* as a *photographer.*

Nikon & SONY have HUGE opportunities here to make the sidelines of the games go less "big white". 

Nikon should delay the D6 and be disruptive and grab market share by simply providing 14-16 fps at 24 to 30MP. Then they should offer discounts to Canon Pro's who sell their kits to move over. They could be getting 3-4 solid generations of Canon's client base from the agencies, teams, leagues, studios, and magazines. No one is going to buy a 1DXMKIII with crippled technology. They will look to other options and continue with their current equipment. 

I predict that Canon is going to have a lof returns. People might try the MKIII for the heck of it.... But refurbished MKIII's will abound.... The first thing still photographers will look for is a substantial difference in IQ. At 20MP's they won't see it and they get a $6500 refund plus tax. 

Then the waiting begins.....


----------



## reef58 (Jan 6, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> Canon realizes they are alienating a *portion *of their client base. The transition to mirrorless is being forced not accommodated.
> 
> However, with the full cost of new bodies and new glass.... _*they played this game wrong. *_
> 
> ...



Meh, I am not buying a Nikon. They have their own issues. I don't think the camera is crippled. I just dislike their decision on resolution, but I suspect it was based off of measured decisions and not due to tech issues or crippling the camera. Overall is sounds like an excellent upgrade. It could have been perfect (for me).

I love my 5d4 but objectively the D850 was / is a better camera. It didn't move the needle for Nikon. Their D5 probably won't either.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> Canon realizes they are alienating a *portion *of their client base. The transition to mirrorless is being forced not accommodated.
> 
> However, with the full cost of new bodies and new glass.... _*they played this game wrong. *_
> 
> ...


It's funny then that Nikon's D6 will also be 20Mpixel...


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 6, 2020)

R&D budgets:
Sony = absolutely colossal, funded by their $Zillion mobile phone camera division
Canon = large, partially funded by their other imaging and office product divisions
Nikon = small, Nikon are more of a specialist photography company. Cameras used to be mechanical, times have changed.

Unless they can access the best Sony sensor tech, I don't think Nikon can compete.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 6, 2020)

tron said:


> It's funny then that Nikon's D6 will also be 20Mpixel...


I presume if Sony was willing to sell them the A9II sensor, then Nikon would be offering 24Mp, 20 fps in live view.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 6, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I'm not sure the 1 series accounts for much of their market share tbh. As for lighter means better with superteles, I think that's a matter of taste. I've seen plenty of people saying the 1 series bodies balance well with them. They may still do with a lighter body, but it may not be better for everyone.


I don't know any photographers who shoot handholding with super telephotos that would not applaud losing almost 2 lbs of camera weight. I shoot BIF with a 1DX2 and a Canon 600mm f4 lll. Doable but a work-out! 

With its lower pricing, performance and features, the A92 is taking a share of the enthusiast as well as pro shooters. I just hope the 1DX3 offers superior AF. We will see soon.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 6, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> People please, STOP BS-ing about 4k. If you are a filmmaker you can buy a 4k camera for half the price. For us photographers this camera is an insult. Nothing changed compared to the mark II. First specs are 100% equal. 20mp / 16fps / WTF?? What is Canon thinking? Hellooo Japan!! Are you ok?? 6,5k for same specs???


Can you stop this non sensual drivel about how evil Canon empire betrayed you? Thank you.
I also request you stop speaking on behalf of photographers. As in “Us”.
Answer this simple question please:
Have you had a chance to shoot with 1Dx III yet? If no, them please refrain from commenting on a subject you have no idea about. Thank you.
Canon cameras are more than their specs. Sony camera’s are less than their specs. Hence pause for the moment and come back when you have a solid data or real experience to share with forum.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

djack41 said:


> I don't know any photographers who shoot handholding with super telephotos that would not applaud losing almost 2 lbs of camera weight. I shoot BIF with a 1DX2 and a Canon 600mm f4 lll. Doable but a work-out!
> 
> With its lower pricing, performance and features, the A92 is taking a share of the enthusiast as well as pro shooters. I just hope the 1DX3 offers superior AF. We will see soon.


Isn't the combination unbalanced if there is a small camera behind?

But there are more interesting things to ask you:

Your impressions on the 600 III !!!!

Have you used it with a high density pixel body like 7DII, 90D, 5DsR

Have you tried 2XIII with it? The reports are that it is worse than 600 II + 2XIII ( and similarly with 1.4XIII)

I do not believe I will afford it but I have the 500II so no complaints.

I do not have 1DxII. I used 7DII with it and now 5DsR.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jan 6, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I was about to suggest that same theory, but it feels way too cynical for Canon. Then again, looking at what the 32MP M6II can do with a Digic 8, an 26MP R1 could easily do 20fps.


i said this on facebook and they got mad at me. why go all out in a dslr if the r system is going to be the successor.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 6, 2020)

Mikehit said:


> viewing larger and ping are the same thing.
> Regards cropping, you are talking about an ability to crop the image 10% either way. That will make a difference to an editor in an amazingly small number of requirements. And if they are 'cropping the hell' out of images, that 10% of the full frame will pale into insignificance.
> And as for printing, I doubt a majority of magazine articles are printed at anything like 300 dpi. And *any professional I have spoken to has said that if the image in itself is good enough, such small differences (detail, noise etc) are almost meaningless.*



You don't talk to a lot of professionals in publishing.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 6, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> Cropping is so minimal as to be negligible unless you are doing huge crops then you obviously are using the wrong piece of equipment for the job, need a longer lens.



Editors aren't photographers, graphic designers aren't photographers, and layout people aren't photographers --- but all of these people determine how an image is used, and sometimes it's radically differently than the way a photographer saw + captured the scene.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 6, 2020)

djack41 said:


> I don't know any photographers who shoot handholding with super telephotos that would not applaud losing almost 2 lbs of camera weight. I shoot BIF with a 1DX2 and a Canon 600mm f4 lll. Doable but a work-out!
> 
> With its lower pricing, performance and features, the A92 is taking a share of the enthusiast as well as pro shooters. I just hope the 1DX3 offers superior AF. We will see soon.


I hand hold with a 1DXMKII and a 2.8 400mm and 300mm ii,s but I've never done that with a 600. You must be in great shape. However, I do always have another 1DXMKII with a 2.8 70-200 II always over my shoulder's with a 24-70 in my vest with batteries and cards. But I've NEVER hand held with a 600, 800 or 200-400 I must tip my hat to you sir


----------



## frankchn (Jan 6, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> I hand hold with a 1DXMKII and a 2.8 400mm and 300mm ii,s but I've never done that with a 600. You must be in great shape. However, I do always have another 1DXMKII with a 2.8 70-200 II always over my shoulder's with a 24-70 in my vest with batteries and cards. But I've NEVER hand held with a 600, 800 or 200-400 I must tip my hat to you sir



If you can handhold 1DX2s with the 400mm II, then the 600 III shouldn't be a problem, given that the 600 III is 800g (1.75 pounds) lighter than the 400 II, and the center of gravity is probably further back than the 400 II as well.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 6, 2020)

tron said:


> Isn't the combination unbalanced if there is a small camera behind?
> 
> But there are more interesting things to ask you:
> 
> ...


The 600 lll is extremely sharp and very fast focusing on the 1DX2. The lighter weight of the 600 lll makes tracking BIF more precise and the 5-stop IS is great. With only 20 MP, I almost always shoot BIF with a 1.4x lll or 2X lll. The combos are capable of producing very sharp images. 

The 600 lll performs well on my 7D2 but as you know, that camera requires good light and it lacks the battery power to drive the large servos as quickly as the 1Dx2. 

The 5DSR is my go to camera for perched birds. The 50 MP files render fine detail that blows the 1DX2 away. Wonderful camera. But the AF of the 5DSR is borrowed from the 5D3 and is not Canon's best option for BIF.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 6, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> I hand hold with a 1DXMKII and a 2.8 400mm and 300mm ii,s but I've never done that with a 600. You must be in great shape. However, I do always have another 1DXMKII with a 2.8 70-200 II always over my shoulder's with a 24-70 in my vest with batteries and cards. But I've NEVER hand held with a 600, 800 or 200-400 I must tip my hat to you sir


It was a 600 mk III lens mentioned though. Which is around 3.1kg in use. 
400/2.8 II is around 4.1kg in use (lens hood, tripod mount).

None of these are advisable to hand hold for a prolonged period of time though.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 6, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> I hand hold with a 1DXMKII and a 2.8 400mm and 300mm ii,s but I've never done that with a 600. You must be in great shape. However, I do always have another 1DXMKII with a 2.8 70-200 II always over my shoulder's with a 24-70 in my vest with batteries and cards. But I've NEVER hand held with a 600, 800 or 200-400 I must tip my hat to you sir


Bah! I handhold my 600 all the time. It's easy as...……..No harder than holding the same lens when it is at 150.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 6, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Canon Rumors: "Come for the discussion, stay for the discussion that's indistinguishable from trolling."



Like your future complaint about a new camera that shoots 16K 120fps, but has AF only in 60fps? Sure, it would be useful for something, but it would still be indistinguishable from trolling.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> I'm confused? What has the mirror to do with any FW updates? Care to explain what you meant with this?


Check the firmware updates of the 1DX II in the past four years and then check the firmware updates of the A9 (mark 1) in the past 2 years. See the difference?


----------



## ToonD (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> I'm pretty sure majority of cameras at Tokyo will be Canons. Naturally can't speak for your friends/country, but I'm willing to bet <20% of the cameras we'll see at the stands will be Sonys, and >60% will be Canons.



Maybe I will see when I get there.


----------



## virsagomk2 (Jan 6, 2020)

I just can't grasp the idea of DPAF omission on 4k60 videos.

1DX2 could do DPAF at 4k60 even though in cropped mode. Surely 1DX3 should be able to do DPAF in 4k60 at least in cropped mode.
Such a laughable downgrade.

I just hope that the spec isn't final & there'll be DPAF in 4k60 mode, both crop & full size, on final consumer product.


----------



## koenkooi (Jan 6, 2020)

virsagomk2 said:


> I just can't grasp the idea of DPAF omission on 4k60 videos.
> 
> 1DX2 could do DPAF at 4k60 even though in cropped mode. Surely 1DX3 should be able to do DPAF in 4k60 at least in cropped mode.
> Such a laughable downgrade.
> ...



What I think is happening is that doing a *full* sensor readout at 50+fps leaves no room/time for AF, but reading a cropped part or using line/column skipping does.
If we look at the closest performing camera Canon has, the M6II, that tops out at 18MP, 30FPS in 12-bit mode for AF. I don't know if that's a sensor or digic limitation, the 1dx3 specs make me think it's the digic 8 being the bottleneck in the M6II, but not by a large margin.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 6, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Check the firmware updates of the 1DX II in the past four years and then check the firmware updates of the A9 (mark 1) in the past 2 years. See the difference?



That Sony releases beta-version of the camera and then patches it later? And Canon releases more mature camera? Yes I knew that.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> That Sony releases beta-version of the camera and then patches it later? And Canon releases more mature camera? Yes I knew that.



Yeah, like the Canon EOS R 1.4 update. More Mature you say?


----------



## scyrene (Jan 6, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> You said, "I expect the 5D4 (if it comes out) or else the next RF bodies, will have the resolution desired..."
> 
> My point was that the 5D Mark IV most assuredly came out in 2016.



Oh! Sorry, ha, I hadn't noticed that. I meant the 5D5, of course


----------



## tpatana (Jan 6, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Yeah, like the Canon EOS R 1.4 update. More Mature you say?



Canon is not yet doing mirrorless cameras (aside P&S).


----------



## ToonD (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Canon is not yet doing mirrorless cameras (aside P&S).


Yeah sure.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 6, 2020)

R don't count. They just poking the waters to see how people react. I'm hoping Canon enters the mirrorless market this year.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 6, 2020)

peters said:


> It could have been the one-for-all killer camera..



No it couldn't, because - how many times does this need repeating? - THERE CAN BE NO SUCH THING.


----------



## Joules (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> R don't count. They just poking the waters to see how people react. I'm hoping Canon enters the mirrorless market this year.


Even the R and RP are employing some technology from previous SLR cameras, saying they don't count is simply an opinion and voicing it as fact sounds silly.

In any case Canon has a line of wildly successfull APS-C mirrorless bodies far longer than the R has been around.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 6, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I love my 5d4 but objectively the D850 was / is a better camera. It didn't move the needle for Nikon. Their D5 probably won't either.



This is a key observation and one reason why so much of the trolling (i.e. 'Canon is ******* because they haven't released the BEST POSSIBLE BODY') by some on these forums is misplaced. Releasing a camera that many - even most - think is better does not necessarily yield better sales. I'm not advocating for laziness, but then I don't think Canon are being lazy - you change what you need to, and not everything needs to be changed (especially as it costs money, and if doing so doesn't help you make more back, then it's a bad business decision).


----------



## scyrene (Jan 6, 2020)

djack41 said:


> I don't know any photographers who shoot handholding with super telephotos that would not applaud losing almost 2 lbs of camera weight. I shoot BIF with a 1DX2 and a Canon 600mm f4 lll. Doable but a work-out!
> 
> With its lower pricing, performance and features, the A92 is taking a share of the enthusiast as well as pro shooters. I just hope the 1DX3 offers superior AF. We will see soon.



It's not the loss of weight overall, which I agree is a good thing, but how the weight is distributed. Mind you, the latest supertelephoto lenses are also a fair bit lighter, so the balance may still be fine with a lighter body.

Incidentally, bravo! I have tried BIF with the 500L II and found it too cumbersome to do for very long (mind you this was swifts, maybe it's more feasible with bigger birds). I figured using a shorter focal length with a much lighter lens was the best compromise (in that case the 70-200 + extender was what I had to hand).

Edit - I missed that you said the mark III. Even so, impressive! How easy do you find keeping moving birds in the frame at such a narrow FOV?


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Canon is not yet doing mirrorless cameras (aside P&S).



Then what the hell is the very well recieved M6 II then? Chopped liver?!?!


Good grief. Just..... no.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 6, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> Then what the hell is the very well recieved M6 II then? Chopped liver?!?!
> 
> 
> Good grief. Just..... no.


Point and shoot?


----------



## Foxeslink (Jan 6, 2020)

peters said:


> The "old" af is completely unusable. It takes up to 10 seconds for the hunting focus to find something, IF it finds anything. There is no possibility for continous focus pull. It just keeps on hunting and hunting.
> 
> DPAF is without much doubt the best AF in the industry and incredible smooth and reliable. If looks like pulled by hand. It tracks smooth and completely quiet, without ANY pumping or hunting.
> 
> Its like the difference between analog and digital.



So does DPAF still has an advantage over sony's af ? live A7III and A7SII ?


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 6, 2020)

Foxeslink said:


> So does DPAF still has an advantage over sony's af ? live A7III and A7SII ?


Some people say the latest version of DPAF is now just about equal to Sony, that Canon has finally more of less caught up. Others claim that the most recent DPAF is better than Sony's combination of focus techniques.

FYI Canon has a patent on quad pixel AF or Sony would be using it, for example in their rumored quad bayer A7S III sensor design, which would be just perfect - a 15Mp design each with 4 sub pixels creating 60Mp in 'slow read mode' what apparently can be read at 15fps. (60Mp @ 15fps, but no on-chip AF). In fast read mode the leaked designs show 4.8k video @ 90fps.


----------



## JPB (Jan 6, 2020)

Does anyone know if the camera will be announced today?


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 6, 2020)

JPB said:


> Does anyone know if the camera will be announced today?


Personally, I hope they take their time and read all 25 pages of this thread first. This is a sample of the mixed reactions that the rest of the world will have.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jan 6, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> Personally, I hope they take their time and read all 25 pages of this thread first. This is a sample of the mixed reactions that the rest of the world will have.



And i was gonna ask whats going on in here! lol - Skips from page one to twenty five...haha

So, my Mk2 is still good right?? I only shoot stills with it (funny enough I use the 5D4 and EOSR for video and thats only at 1080p lol).. I MUST need better AF as I still miss stuff with the 1DX2..... new camera....yummy..... How much blood money is it...?

New sensor check... (not required)
New AF (maybe but old ones not too shabby)
Supersonic video modes (check)

Whats this..... illuminated buttons - SOLD.....


----------



## venusFivePhotoStudio (Jan 6, 2020)

Canon doesn't say this camera is professional, because it's not. 
No professional camera will be completely different of any other cameras. 
Also it still has many flows over the DSLRs. 



ToonD said:


> Yeah sure.
> View attachment 188056


----------



## ToonD (Jan 6, 2020)

venusFivePhotoStudio said:


> Canon doesn't say this camera is professional, because it's not.
> No professional camera will be completely different of any other cameras.
> Also it still has many flows over the DSLRs.


Being professional was not the point. The point was that if you have a DSLR you are kind of stuck with it untill the newer version comes out. With mirrorless bodies, firmware updates can add new functions and not only bugfixes.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

True but EOS R was not completely ready in eye-AF functionality as even the entry level EOS RP proved. So they fixed that.
So now it is not certain that they will provide even more additional functionality.

Don't forget that there were occasions where additional functionality had been given in DSLRs

5DIII (centre focusing at f/8) 1Dx (centre focusing at f/8 plus AF point illumination if I am not mistaken) 7D (buffer depth)


----------



## ToonD (Jan 6, 2020)

tron said:


> True but EOS R was not completely ready in eye-AF functionality as even the entry level EOS RP proved. So they fixed that.
> So now it is not certain that they will provide even more additional functionality.
> 
> Don't forget that there were occasions where additional functionality has been given in DSLRs
> ...


Yes point taken and being it Canon I think it's likely that they will not give us much more additional functionality. After four years with the 1DX II still no built-in intervalometer in their flagship camera.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 6, 2020)

degos said:


> What nonsense. Any computer from the past 10 years will chomp a 30MP file without breaking sweat. Do you think that the average mid-tier buyer of a 32MP M6-2 is also upgrading their computing hardware at the same time? Of course not. So why would it be a problem to pros?
> 
> 20MP is abysmal in 2020. Quite often I reach for the 21MP 1Ds3 to get a minor resolution bump and a bit more cropability. That camera was announced in August *2007*. But it was also the last of the stills-only 1D line, before videography starting screwing with the specifications.
> 
> I'd bet that a 30MP 1DX3 would be possible if they removed all that video processing overhead and left that to the EOS C line. After all we're constantly told on this forum that the 1DX is for sports shooters uploading JPEGs in real-time to their editors, so why bother with video?




You nailed it. So in order to get decent (not spectacular) video performance we give up the chance for a great 1DX iii. Makes 0 sense that they did this. What pro is going to use the 1Dx for shooting video when there's the C series for the same price?


----------



## reef58 (Jan 6, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> You nailed it. So in order to get decent (not spectacular) video performance we give up the chance for a great 1DX iii. Makes 0 sense that they did this. What pro is going to use the 1Dx for shooting video when there's the C series for the same price?



Someone who does still and video and logistically one camera makes sense such as photography / filmmaking in the wild.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jan 6, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Maybe I will see when I get there.





tpatana said:


> I'm pretty sure majority of cameras at Tokyo will be Canons. Naturally can't speak for your friends/country, but I'm willing to bet <20% of the cameras we'll see at the stands will be Sonys, and >60% will be Canons.




I'm noticing a lot more Sony cameras at sporting events. I think Canon's share is going to be shockingly reduced at Tokyo.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 6, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> Personally, I hope they take their time and read all 25 pages of this thread first. This is a sample of the mixed reactions that the rest of the world will have.



Lol and then what? This camera will have taken years to create. They're gonna whip something together to satisfy the forum dwellers in a few hours?


----------



## NorskHest (Jan 6, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Thank you so much. Since about 90% of my paid work is sports photography, I really appreciate people like you telling me what I do and don't want or need. I don't know how I have gotten along without you and others who so confidently can tell me my own needs.


As a professional motorsport photographer I want good pixels with great dynamic range, and 24-50 mpix is nice. More mpix with Sony type sensitivity response is better. They guy saying pros don’t want that is a goon and shots fired


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

djack41 said:


> The 600 lll is extremely sharp and very fast focusing on the 1DX2. The lighter weight of the 600 lll makes tracking BIF more precise and the 5-stop IS is great. With only 20 MP, I almost always shoot BIF with a 1.4x lll or 2X lll. The combos are capable of producing very sharp images.
> 
> The 600 lll performs well on my 7D2 but as you know, that camera requires good light and it lacks the battery power to drive the large servos as quickly as the 1Dx2.
> 
> The 5DSR is my go to camera for perched birds. The 50 MP files render fine detail that blows the 1DX2 away. Wonderful camera. But the AF of the 5DSR is borrowed from the 5D3 and is not Canon's best option for BIF.


Thanks for answering. I use my 500 II mainly from my car with 5DsR. Rarely, I have to handhold for BIF but at least the Full frame camera makes targeting birds easier. 5DsR has not super AF but it is not bad either. The trouble with 600 apart from price is that it is so long it cannot get in a bag with the camera. I have already 2 bags that can carry my 500. A 26L Gura Gear Bataflae that merely carries the 500 without camera (on half of it) and a Think Tank Harddrive 2.0 that can carry a 500 with camera and just a little bit more. No intention to get a 3rd super long bag but also the cost is a factor too.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 6, 2020)

GoldWing said:


> I hand hold with a 1DXMKII and a 2.8 400mm and 300mm ii,s but I've never done that with a 600. You must be in great shape. However, I do always have another 1DXMKII with a 2.8 70-200 II always over my shoulder's with a 24-70 in my vest with batteries and cards. But I've NEVER hand held with a 600, 800 or 200-400 I must tip my hat to you sir


lol. All my BIF buddies handhold 600mm lenses with 1.4 or 2x teleconverters. Shooting from a gimbal/tripod is not as productive on fast moving birds. The EF 400mm F4 DO ll with a teleconverter is much easier to handhold and another good BIF option.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 6, 2020)

When is the announcement? I am dying here.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 6, 2020)

reef58 said:


> When is the announcement? I am dying here.


Good question. Ordinarily, we would have seen the announcement by now, since it is already tomorrow in Australia and mid-afternoon in Europe.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

I too use 400DOII either with 7DII or with 5DsR. I haven't been able to use it with teleconverter with 5DsR, I guess I will have to check AFMA. I have used it twice with 7D2 and the results were decent. A 600DO would go a long way towards portability though. Not very probable since 600III is a reality though. A 1Dx series would require a 2XIII permanently on the 400DOII by the way  Acceptable only if AF remains super fast.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 6, 2020)

Maybe they changed their mind and decided to release the 24mp version instead.


----------



## Tyler Edwards (Jan 6, 2020)

I for one am very excited for this camera. I am primarily in the video world, and my main camera is the Canon C200. In my opinion, the 1DXIII and the C200 will compliment each other very well just based on the specs leaked on the 1DXIII. Sure the DPAF omitted from RAW video capture and 4K60 is a bummer (hoping 4K60p cropped will still have DPAF), but it isn't a deal breaker to me honestly (since most cinema glass doesn't have AF anyways). However, having internal RAW and 10-bit 422 (c200 doesn't even have that) is very exciting as a filmmaker. Sure, at this price I could just get another C200, but having the versatility of a hybrid camera is really important to me and my workflow/filmmaking style. The smaller form factor for travel, weather sealing for when I don't want to/can't shoot on my C200, gimbal camera, and motorized slider for interviews are just a couple of reasons that make the 1DXIII really attractive to me.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 6, 2020)

Nelu said:


> How about when you use the 600mm lens with the 1.4x TC or 2x TC and you still need to crop because it's impossible to get closer to the subject for objective reasons?
> Is that still the wrong piece of equipment for the job?



You tell me.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 6, 2020)

unfocused said:


> How about when you need a horizontal crop for the website, a square crop for social media, a vertical for printing at 300 dpi and another horizontal crop for large wall displays and posters? The days of an image being destined for a single medium are over. Loose cropping is needed because you never know how the image will be used.



That is your problem to figure out.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 6, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Editors aren't photographers, graphic designers aren't photographers, and layout people aren't photographers --- but all of these people determine how an image is used, and sometimes it's radically differently than the way a photographer saw + captured the scene.



So there are so many variables you can never have a perfect camera for so much.
What did you do in the days of film?
There did not seem to be all this hand wringing then.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 6, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> You tell me.


I think you're smart enough to figure out the answer, you don't need me to tell you...it's quite obvious.


----------



## peters (Jan 6, 2020)

Foxeslink said:


> So does DPAF still has an advantage over sony's af ? live A7III and A7SII ?


Hard to tell. we compared it just a couple of times and not in a very extended test. The a7III (and a7RIII) which we both have are realy great in this regard. I would say the canon pulls a little bit smoother, though not much. The Sony got a bit more software tricks to recognize faces quicker and more accurate. Overall I think the canon 1DXII DPAF is a little bit ahead. The smaller display on the Sony makes it a bit more difficult to set up the focus though.


----------



## padrepaul (Jan 6, 2020)

tron said:


> Thanks for answering. I use my 500 II mainly from my car with 5DsR. Rarely, I have to handhold for BIF but at least the Full frame camera makes targeting birds easier. 5DsR has not super AF but it is not bad either. The trouble with 600 apart from price is that it is so long it cannot get in a bag with the camera. I have already 2 bags that can carry my 500. A 26L Gura Gear Bataflae that merely carries the 500 without camera (on half of it) and a Think Tank Harddrive 2.0 that can carry a 500 with camera and just a little bit more. No intention to get a 3rd super long bag but also the cost is a factor too.



I've used the older 800 5.6 and been happy with it for birds in flight. I really can't wait to try it out though as I'm going from the 7DII to the 1DXIII, and am anxious to see how it will handle birds if I use the 1.4 tele on it; of course that would be shooting at f8 too. I envision going back and forth between that and using the 800 alone. Been a great birding combo so far.


----------



## richperson (Jan 6, 2020)

I will agree with several others on here that for my shooting (sports and theater), better high ISO performance and AF is more important than more MP. I can't remember ever cropping to the point of seeing pixelation on my 1DXii, but have had many times where noise on cropped images was obnoxious. I wouldn't complain about 24mp, but it's not nearly important to me as other features. I understand many of you shoot in good light and maybe this isn't as big of a deal, but it is to me.

And the ability to move AF points without removing your finger from the AF-on button could be really amazing.


----------



## Setty (Jan 6, 2020)

reef58 said:


> When is the announcement? I am dying here.



8:00 PM EST, 1:00 AM GMT for the UK people. This is the information that CanonRumors has put on one of their Instagram posts, so how true or accurate it is i don't know. 

Source:

__
http://instagr.am/p/B66FrYtBOep/


----------



## djack41 (Jan 6, 2020)

scyrene said:


> It's not the loss of weight overall, which I agree is a good thing, but how the weight is distributed. Mind you, the latest supertelephoto lenses are also a fair bit lighter, so the balance may still be fine with a lighter body.
> 
> Incidentally, bravo! I have tried BIF with the 500L II and found it too cumbersome to do for very long (mind you this was swifts, maybe it's more feasible with bigger birds). I figured using a shorter focal length with a much lighter lens was the best compromise (in that case the 70-200 + extender was what I had to hand).
> 
> Edit - I missed that you said the mark III. Even so, impressive! How easy do you find keeping moving birds in the frame at such a narrow FOV?


At 6'3" 200 lbs, I am able to track BIF while handholding with reasonable precision using the 1DX2/600mm. I going back to Canada next week to photograph Snowy Owls in flight. Since the birds will be relatively close, the EF 70-200 F2.8 ll will be the lens of choice in low light. The EF 100-400mm in good light. 

Sure excited to see that the 1DX3 has an upgraded AF and a huge buffer. Hopefully, the new AF will be more stable than the 1DX2 for BIF. Maintaining focus lock on birds against contrasty backgrounds has been a weakness of the 1DX2 vs the D5 or A92.


----------



## Berowne (Jan 6, 2020)

Here it is in Germany:

EOS-1D Mark III 

and in the US: 

EOS-1D Mark III


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 6, 2020)

Berowne said:


> Here it is in Germany:
> 
> EOS-1D Mark III
> 
> ...


No that's. the development announcement that we have all know about for a while. That was before we knew what an utter disappointment it is. I have railed against people who dump on the new releases before they have been fully tested but this release is a bad joke.


----------



## FitzwaterPhoto (Jan 6, 2020)

-pekr- said:


> 20mpx? I know that for the purpose given it might be still OK, but, really? Oh, and dual Digic 6+? A typo?



I agree - I get that news and sports photographers don't need high MP - but they are limiting this camera to that market by going 20. I would have been in at 30 because some of my work is in the studio.


----------



## Mark3794 (Jan 6, 2020)

According to Nokishita the new processor is the Digic X


----------



## tpatana (Jan 6, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Being professional was not the point. The point was that if you have a DSLR you are kind of stuck with it untill the newer version comes out. With mirrorless bodies, firmware updates can add new functions and not only bugfixes.



Can you name one item that can be updated with FW on mirrorless, but not on DSLR?


----------



## Go Wild (Jan 6, 2020)

Canon Europe seems to have already launched the camera in their site. Does anyone have info? Videos? Live presentation?

Damn....I am excited and i don´t even think in buying it...at least....not yet!  Can´t wait for the mirrorless versions, but first....let´s see this one! Who knows I will replace my MkII and buy the last DSLR?  

https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-1d-x-mark-iii/


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 6, 2020)

Neuro sure has been quiet lately...


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 6, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Canon Europe seems to have already launched the camera in their site. Does anyone have info? Videos? Live presentation?
> 
> Damn....I am excited and i don´t even think in buying it...at least....not yet!  Can´t wait for the mirrorless versions, but first....let´s see this one! Who knows I will replace my MkII and buy the last DSLR?
> 
> https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-1d-x-mark-iii/


No, again, that is the development announcement, nothing more.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

So a little more than 4 hours till the announcement. I wonder If they will update their site immediately or we will see it tomorrow...


----------



## peters (Jan 6, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Can you name one item that can be updated with FW on mirrorless, but not on DSLR?


Brightness-behaviour of the EVF :-D 

Just kidding, of course its just what the company sees in firmware updates - is it something to deliver new features or is the camera released in a final state and only bugs will be fixed =)


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

peters said:


> Brightness-behaviour of the EVF :-D
> 
> Just kidding, of course its just what the company sees in firmware updates - is it something to deliver new features or is the camera released in a final state and only bugs will be fixed =)


And Eye focus improvement for example during Servo mode


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 6, 2020)

navastronia said:


> You don't talk to a lot of professionals in publishing.



I've spoken to a fair few - in person as well as through fora. But if you bother to understand where I was saying, it was doubting the significance in difference between 20MP and 24MP. 20MP to 28MP - fair enough. 20MP to 30MP - more so. But 20 MP to 24MP? 
If an editor is rejecting your photo at those differences, the problem is NOT the number of MP.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Neuro sure has been quiet lately...


He may enjoy a vacation taking beautiful photos with his ... 1Dx


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 6, 2020)

peters said:


> Hard to tell. we compared it just a couple of times and not in a very extended test. The a7III (and a7RIII) which we both have are realy great in this regard. I would say the canon pulls a little bit smoother, though not much. The Sony got a bit more software tricks to recognize faces quicker and more accurate. Overall I think the canon 1DXII DPAF is a little bit ahead. The smaller display on the Sony makes it a bit more difficult to set up the focus though.



The A7III has more pdaf points to the edge borrowing from the A9, but the A7RIII does not, so there is a difference depending on how it is setup and where it is being focused. I believe the A9 is a better direct comparison to the 1DXII since the processing speed is exclusive to the A9, and not on the III/RIII. There really used to be a day and night difference with DPAF. One other thing to consider is that all of the Sony lenses you pick up for stills/video are (like the RF mount lenses) designed for mirrorless and are mostly quiet for video AF/IS. The same cannot be said for all EF mount lenses, except for some of the STM lenses. Some lenses are slow to AF, clunky and/or noisy and some are not compatible with DPAF. Something to consider as well.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 6, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> ...I have railed against people who dump on the new releases before they have been fully tested but this release is a bad joke.



Wow! This is coming from someone who is even more loyal to Canon than I am. Something that too many in these threads don't seem to get is that unlike many Canon releases, the complaining seems to be coming largely from actual 1D series users. 

We may be surprised when the release hits and it gets out into the field (crossing my fingers). But, Canon has a steep hill to climb with this release. I'm still scratching my head as to why they went this route and if the high ISO IQ isn't stupendous, I'll be even more perplexed.


----------



## s87343jim (Jan 6, 2020)

I'm from the Nikon and Fuji camp and I don't mind it. I actually think its quite good.

New AF system (not just minor refresh)
faster FPS
4K60 internal with 10 bit Canon log in H265 codec 
5.4K 12bit 60fps RAW internal recording

I don't mind the 20MP sensor and since there are improvements for both video and stills, I don't mind it still uses the same processor. 

It is a beast!


----------



## peters (Jan 6, 2020)

jayphotoworks said:


> The A7III has more pdaf points to the edge borrowing from the A9, but the A7RIII does not, so there is a difference depending on how it is setup and where it is being focused. I believe the A9 is a better direct comparison to the 1DXII since the processing speed is exclusive to the A9, and not on the III/RIII. There really used to be a day and night difference with DPAF. One other thing to consider is that all of the Sony lenses you pick up for stills/video are (like the RF mount lenses) designed for mirrorless and are mostly quiet for video AF/IS. The same cannot be said for all EF mount lenses, except for some of the STM lenses. Some lenses are slow to AF, clunky and/or noisy and some are not compatible with DPAF. Something to consider as well.


Jeah thats true. I think we compared the GM 24-70 on the A7III and the 24-70L on the 1DXII. I think the GM is a bit quieter and in general a bit sharper overall. (But my 24-70LII seen some battle over the time :-D). Some older Canon lenses are indeed not that great with DPAF. 
Overall the 24-70GM is impressive when it comes to sharpness on the A7RIII but I dont like the colors that much. Its hard to tell why this is, I think its mostly the camera, not the lense though. I was at at wedding in thailand and the colors where not as beautiful as I hoped, especialy in difficul lighting situations. 
However, given the Sonys offer IBIS AND a comparable Servo AF, its a very decent package overall. I think right now the a7III is the best camera when it comes to "video-and-photo-all-in-one-camera-for-cheap".


----------



## Jethro (Jan 6, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I have railed against people who dump on the new releases before they have been fully tested but this release is a bad joke.


I've missed a lot of the argument on this thread - is the gist that you think they have 'sacrificed' extra MP (from a still photography point of view) to allow the unlimited buffer and added video uncropped frame-rates etc? The specs are … unexpected.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 6, 2020)

Jethro said:


> I've missed a lot of the argument on this thread - is the gist that you think they have 'sacrificed' extra MP (from a still photography point of view) to allow the unlimited buffer and added video uncropped frame-rates etc? The specs are … unexpected.


My assertion has been that from a photography point of view it isn't even a stumble forward; but for video and crossover people it is great, indeed I have said I believe it is, in spirit, a 1DC II not a 1D X III or a 1DS VI.

I truly don't believe there is a photography market for a 20MP camera nowadays, obviously I don't know the sales figures or what segments they go to with the big agencies, then news services, the few news organizations that still have photo departments that include photographers, freelancers, semi pros and keen amateurs, but I'm pretty sure a few of those groups are going to struggle to justify this release.


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

If it was close to 30 (say 28Mp) I would be tempted (as a 5DIV replacement). So one temptation less for me (for now).
But I am not a 1D user so I do not represent this category.

I have other priorities (errr hobbies but you get the point!)

I started this year by ordering RF 15-35 2.8L IS. 
And maybe 24-70 will follow.

And for 2021 I am thinking about something from the dark side: Nikon 500mm f/5.6PF (its only drawback is it needs a Nikon camera behind it!)

I would say 2022 but meanwhile I should be the owner of a 5DMkV so ….

Choices …


----------



## tron (Jan 6, 2020)

3 hours for the disa… errh announcement I mean


----------



## richperson (Jan 6, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I truly don't believe there is a photography market for a 20MP camera nowadays, obviously I don't know the sales figures or what segments they go to with the big agencies, then news services, the few news organizations that still have photo departments that include photographers, freelancers, semi pros and keen amateurs, but I'm pretty sure a few of those groups are going to struggle to justify this release.



Yet the sports market is dominated dated by 20-24mp camera bodies. 

I have a 1DXii, crop 7Dii and an R. In low light, I take the 1DXii and the R. In full light I take the 7Dii and the 1DXii. The common part is the 1DXii, which always has my key lens on it. It is basic physics that more MP in the same size (full frame 35mm) means each pixel takes in less light. It is another rule that fps will be inversely proportional to MP count/buffer depth. 

Until I start seeing pixelation in my images at the size I print/post them, then 20MP will be sufficient and I will take my low ISO performance, buffer and fast FPS to the bank. 

I do use my R for the few portraits/head shots I do each year, but I don't need either low ISO or fast FPS for that. The 1DX# is a sports and news camera primarily. Fast, reliable and weather sealed. If high MP is your top priority the 1DX is not your camera.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 6, 2020)

richperson said:


> Yet the sports market is dominated dated by 20-24mp camera bodies.
> 
> I have a 1DXii, crop 7Dii and an R. In low light, I take the 1DXii and the R. In full light I take the 7Dii and the 1DXii. The common part is the 1DXii, which always has my key lens on it. It is basic physics that more MP in the same size (full frame 35mm) means each pixel takes in less light. It is another rule that fps will be inversely proportional to MP count/buffer depth.
> 
> ...


I have never met a pro sports shooter who didn't regret having a longer lens or the ability to crop more on occasion. The market is dominated by that number of MP because if you want high fps and the best AF that is the only non choice they have! I have seen so many sports shots taken in landscape and cropped to full page portrait it isn't funny.

But another part of my point was the 1 series market stretches way beyond 'sports shooters' anyway, all wildlife shooters want more than 20MP, everybody that owned a 1DS series camera wants more than 20MP, Canon have effectively reduced the target market for this camera down, I don't understand why other than because they could do 2.4k but couldn't push it to 2.9k. @!&$ing video shooters.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 6, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Being professional was not the point. The point was that if you have a DSLR you are kind of stuck with it untill the newer version comes out. With mirrorless bodies, firmware updates can add new functions and not only bugfixes.



Apart from marketing department decisions, why can't you add new functions to a DSLR?


----------



## Go Wild (Jan 6, 2020)

richperson said:


> Yet the sports market is dominated dated by 20-24mp camera bodies.
> 
> I have a 1DXii, crop 7Dii and an R. In low light, I take the 1DXii and the R. In full light I take the 7Dii and the 1DXii. The common part is the 1DXii, which always has my key lens on it. It is basic physics that more MP in the same size (full frame 35mm) means each pixel takes in less light. It is another rule that fps will be inversely proportional to MP count/buffer depth.
> 
> ...




Well....Ok and i also agree with you! My sports field combination (to soccer games)is the 500mmF4 with 1dxmkII and used to have the 5d3 witch i replaced for the Sony a7r3. Like you, the main camera is of course the 1dx mkII for several reasons. However....I cannot second you opinion about high iso noise and the relation with MP. Just because at same ISO of for example 6400, the ISO of the 1dxmkII is not significantly better than the sony A7r3 and we are talking about more than double MP! From 20 to 42 MP! Even with a slight amount of visible noise you can clean it really fast and/or using the NR in camera...So yes...less MP usually give less noise, but its not a hell of a difference or not so visible! At least between this 2 bodies!

If High ISO is the reason of reducing MP its not valid! I mean.....Cmon, i can use 30MP all ocasions, and shooting at 12800 only about 10 times a year!!


----------



## nonac (Jan 6, 2020)

If they are not boosting the resolution, it better have some much improved low light ability or I'm not upgrading.....from a series 1.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 6, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Apart from marketing department decisions, why can't you add new functions to a DSLR?



Yeah I keep waiting for this to be answered properly myself. Having a Mirror and pentaprism is merely a mechanical variance. Every single DSLR right now has a LIVE VIEW mode which effectively becomes a MILC using EVF on the Live view screen. I can't fathom what on earth you could firmware into a camera differently based on totally unrelated mechanical issues. Maybe there's an update to DPAF? DPAF only works in Live View. DSLRs have DPAF. So update it on one, update it on all. I didn't understand the original post whatsoever, and it hasn't seemed to have been answered yet.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 6, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> My assertion has been that from a photography point of view it isn't even a stumble forward; but for video and crossover people it is great, indeed I have said I believe it is, in spirit, a 1DC II not a 1D X III or a 1DS VI.
> 
> I truly don't believe there is a photography market for a 20MP camera nowadays


It sounds like you don't actually shoot video. Like stills, there are different market segments. Those producing content have good options in the $12-25k range, or for under $10k there is the Pocket Cinema Camera 6K with no AF. It records straight to interchangable SSDs with better options than Canon Raw Light, 265, etc.
Then there is the content gathering crowd: documentary production, news, and live events like weddings. These folk need AF in a way that controlled productions don't. This numerically much larger market segment is never going to turn up at weddings with a pair of C500s, and Canon doesn't understand this.

The 1DxIII is only a worthy successor to the 1DC in that it was a Canon strategy to withhold tech and charge more of it. 

Remember the 1DC was just a vanilla 1Dx with an extra heatsink, different firmware, and a $15k price tag. 
It was a stunningly blatant cash grab from Canon which exposed that they really would switch off a feature in firmware unless you paid an extra $8.5k for it..... with all other hardware being the same. (And in this case it failed, sales were dismal.)


----------



## David_E (Jan 6, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> _The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will be announced on Monday_


OK, Monday has come and gone, with no announcement. Any more WAGs?


----------



## tpatana (Jan 6, 2020)

My last guess for the surprise feature they are keeping under the wraps: They'll release 2 versions, one as specced here and another with 30-40Mpix (and slower fps).


----------



## djack41 (Jan 6, 2020)

tron said:


> I too use 400DOII either with 7DII or with 5DsR. I haven't been able to use it with teleconverter with 5DsR, I guess I will have to check AFMA. I have used it twice with 7D2 and the results were decent. A 600DO would go a long way towards portability though. Not very probable since 600III is a reality though. A 1Dx series would require a 2XIII permanently on the 400DOII by the way  Acceptable only if AF remains super fast.


The 400 DO ll is a super lens. Congrats! Wish I owned one. I opted for the reach (and weight) of the 600mm. Comparing 400mm vs 600mm focal lengths, a 600mm lens will put 40% more pixels on the subject. This really helps when shooting 20 MP files. But the 400 DO ll is exceptional.


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 7, 2020)

For those who don't understand why DPAF in 4k 60p is a big deal:

With stills, serious pros want primarily either speed and AF, or very high resolution, while the volume market wants pretty pictures of their family or cat.

With video it's totally different. The high end pros don't care so much about AF because they're filming actors in a controlled environment, but the volume market can't shoot video without good AF. If the moment is OOF, it's lost forever.

A 1DxIII with DPAF @ 4k 60p would pull tens of housands of wedding videographers (who buy 2-3 cameras each) up from the Sonys, Lumix, etc that they currently buy. 60p is critical for that lovey/dovey wedding stuff, and 4k allows cropping and shake removal.

Canon are afraid that the higher end pros will buy a 1DxIII instead of the C400 they're apparently planning as a direct competitor to the industry standard champ Sony FX9, but in reality TV production wants the efficiency of built in ND etc. All they're really doing is snobbing a huge market they could have won over with this camera.


----------



## Quirkz (Jan 7, 2020)

djack41 said:


> The 400 DO ll is a super lens. Congrats! Wish I owned one. I opted for the reach (and weight) of the 600mm. Comparing 400mm vs 600mm focal lengths, a 600mm lens will put 40% more pixels on the subject. This really helps when shooting 20 MP files. But the 400 DO ll is exceptional.


40% more? Isn't it over twice the number of pixels? (125% more)


----------



## tron (Jan 7, 2020)

djack41 said:


> The 400 DO ll is a super lens. Congrats! Wish I owned one. I opted for the reach (and weight) of the 600mm. Comparing 400mm vs 600mm focal lengths, a 600mm lens will put 40% more pixels on the subject. This really helps when shooting 20 MP files. But the 400 DO ll is exceptional.


The difference of 600 to 400 is much more. More specifically it will put (600/400)**2 = 1.5**2 = 2.25X the pixels of 400mm (which means 125% more)

But that's more or less the difference of 5DsR with 1DxII (or III now!) 50 vs 20. Of course the quality is not the same but when the light is good it's more than enough.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 7, 2020)

Quirkz said:


> 40% more? Isn't it over twice the number of pixels? (125% more)


Difference of the square of the focal lengths, I believe.


----------



## navastronia (Jan 7, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> For those who don't understand why DPAF in 4k 60p is a big deal:
> 
> With stills, serious pros want primarily either speed and AF, or very high resolution, while the volume market wants pretty pictures of their family or cat.
> 
> ...



I agree with your point about video pros not using AF (it simply does not happen on pro sets at this time), but I think you may be overestimating (1) how many wedding videographers are able to afford a 1DX mk. III, and (2) how many pros would go for a $6500 1DX mk III with DPAF in 4K if they had to choose between that and a cheaper Sony body with good AF and the same video specs, especially given that the demo that makes wedding videos skews young, and as we know, so does Sony, since new young/new photographers are more likely to pick up a Sony body than any other demographic.


----------



## JWest (Jan 7, 2020)

"monday" ? I guess not, seeing as it's basically over now and already Tuesday in Japan...


----------



## Quirkz (Jan 7, 2020)

djack41 said:


> Difference of the square of the focal lengths, I believe.


Ahh, I think I see why we're talking different numbers.
400mm is only around 44% of the pixels on target of the 600mm; but if you look at it the other way, the 600mm has 125% more pixels on target than the 400mm.

math! huzzah!


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Jan 7, 2020)

JWest said:


> "monday" ? I guess not, seeing as it's basically over now and already Tuesday in Japan...


... and here in the UK and the rest of Europe. I wonder whether a date has been misquoted somewhere - Feb 6 was always more likely than Jan 6, if only because it's a Thursday.


----------



## tron (Jan 7, 2020)

Steve Balcombe said:


> ... and here in the UK and the rest of Europe. I wonder whether a date has been misquoted somewhere - Feb 6 was always more likely than Jan 6, if only because it's a Thursday.


CR guy had mentioned:

8:00 PM EST, 1:00 AM GMT which means 33 minutes from now ...


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

Steve Balcombe said:


> ... and here in the UK and the rest of Europe. I wonder whether a date has been misquoted somewhere - Feb 6 was always more likely than Jan 6, if only because it's a Thursday.



I thought the timing was 8pm EST, which is 32 minutes away.


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

31 minutes away


----------



## peters (Jan 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> 31 minutes away


I am stil excited =) maybe its not true what the rumours said about missing DPAF. IF they have it, its 100% decision to upgrade on my end. I remember the 5D IV (or was it the R?) rumour that had ALL the specs but strangely a few main features where wrong. I think that its possible that canon includes some small errors in documents they release to nail down a source if there is a leak. At least some other companies do. Or maybe its a mistake in translation... I just sit here and pray...


----------



## tron (Jan 7, 2020)

It's a rumor for at least 20 minutes more.

So close your eyes and imagine:

40Mpixels
20fps
16bit depth 
16stop DR (20 when metered the DXO way!)
ISO up to 4 million, native with very good IQ up to 1 million
4K240 with DPAF (RAW included)

OK wake up!


----------



## Nelu (Jan 7, 2020)

After I read about the 1DX 3 specs, I went on eBay to check my saved search for the 1DX Mark II.
I kid you not, since yesterday the prices went up and it’s more difficult to get either a used one in mint condition or a new one.
For example, I had a new body in my basket for 5,195CAD and it didn’t go through.
By the time I got off the phone with Visa, noticed the seller jacked up the price to 5,995!!!
Obviously, I gave up and emptied the basket...
So much for the 1DX Mark III expectations, I guess


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 7, 2020)

tron said:


> So close your eyes and imagine:



Meh, think big.

400Mpixels
200fps
160bit depth
160stop DR (200 when metered the DXO way!)
ISO up to 40 million, native with very good IQ up to 10 million
40K2400 with DPAF (RAW included)


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

Hmmmm.


----------



## Trankilstef (Jan 7, 2020)




----------



## tron (Jan 7, 2020)

Their site sucks!

I am stuck at 









For Product and Support Information | Canon Global


Canon provides a variety of support for the convenience of users. For information on products and support services, please access the Canon website of your country / region.




global.canon





Chose a region and it stays there! No country selection to proceed.

In general if I try to browse Canon starting from www.canon.com I waste my time.

Fortunately their cameras are better than their site


----------



## LesC (Jan 7, 2020)




----------



## nonac (Jan 7, 2020)

Well we are moving in the right direction, it can detect heads now. We'll catch up to the rest of the pack that can detect eyes at some point (without live view). Maybe two iterations down the line.


----------



## virsagomk2 (Jan 7, 2020)

All right so DPAF is still available when shooting 4k60 in cropped mode, this is a good news.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 7, 2020)

It seems it may have been announced at 8pm as Engadet, Tech Radar, CNet, etc all simultaneously posted.









Canon 1DX Mark III revealed – and it's the most powerful DSLR ever made


Canon's Olympics-ready flagship melds the best of DSLR and mirrorless tech




www.techradar.com














Canon's flagship 1DX Mark III is a supercharged sports and video camera | Engadget


Canon has unveiled the EOS 1DX Mark III DSLR, far and away its most advanced flagship camera to date.




www.engadget.com


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> Hmmmm.


8PM EST

*Crickets*


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 7, 2020)

tron said:


> In general if I try to browse Canon starting from www.canon.com I waste my time.
> 
> Fortunately their cameras are better than their site



Yeah, better memorize the url of your regional Canon subsidiary (eg. canon-europe.com, usa.canon.com, canon.co.uk, canon.co.au etc.) But anyway, none of the sites have been updated yet. We just have the embargo-lifted third-party articles and videos right now.


----------



## LastX (Jan 7, 2020)




----------



## Sharlin (Jan 7, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> It seems it may have been announced at 8pm as Engadet, Tech Radar, CNet, etc all simultaneously posted.



Well, the press embargo definitely lifted at that moment. (1:00 UTC)


----------



## m4ndr4ke (Jan 7, 2020)

It seems like Canon USA website is being updated. The full specs are already there.

20.1MP
Digic X


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 7, 2020)

Correct. It is now on Canon USA website:









EOS-1D X Mark III


High Image Quality with New 20.1 Megapixel Full-frame CMOS Sensor Combined with Newly Designed low Pass Filter. New DIGIC X Image Processor with an ISO range of 100-102400; Expandable to 50-819200*. New 191-point AF System Capable of Tracking the Subjects Head and Face using Deep Learning...




www.usa.canon.com


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

Well Canon Just dropped a dozen 1Dx3 videos on Youtube


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

“For technical reasons, AF is NOT available in Raw or at 4k60p”. When I get home I’m rechecking my 1DX2......


----------



## reef58 (Jan 7, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> “For technical reasons, AF is NOT available in Raw or at 4k60p”. When I get home I’m rechecking my 1DX2......



It is available in cropped 4k60

Auto focus looks pretty slick


----------



## peters (Jan 7, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> “For technical reasons, AF is NOT available in Raw or at 4k60p”. When I get home I’m rechecking my 1DX2......


Its a shame     

But, good news! Its working on Cropped 4k DCI mode!!! Judging by the resolution its probably going to be a 1,3 crop =)​​


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 7, 2020)

nonac said:


> Well we are moving in the right direction, it can detect heads now. We'll catch up to the rest of the pack that can detect eyes at some point (without live view). Maybe two iterations down the line.


There is eye-AF, but yes... in live view. One needs an EVF to do it through the viewfinder. That's what I think anyway.

From Techradar and also according to Jared Polin:


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 7, 2020)

Summary of video autofocus features:


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

So YES you DO indeed get DPAF at 4k60p in crop mode on the DX3 just not at FF. That is the same as the DX2


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

peters said:


> Its a shame
> 
> But, good news! Its working on Cropped 4k DCI mode!!! Judging by the resolution its probably going to be a 1,3 crop =)​​


Yes It works exactly the same As the DX2


----------



## peters (Jan 7, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> There is eye-AF, but yes... in live view. One needs an EVF to do it through the viewfinder. That's what I think anyway.


I agree, and I think thats quite logical, isnt it? The squares in the OVF are just to big to effectively mark and track an eye =)


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 7, 2020)

peters said:


> I agree, and I think thats quite logical, isnt it? The squares in the OVF are just to big to effectively mark and track an eye =)


Those squares are not the same as physical AF sensor points. The squares are too big for head tracking too, but this camera now has head tracking through the OVF.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 7, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Those squares are not the same as physical AF sensor points. The squares are too big for head tracking too, but this camera now has head tracking through the OVF.



The pertinent resolution is that of the metering sensor, 400k pixels,or roughly 750x500. Which is plenty enough to recognize heads, but eyes are trickier. When it comes to the actual AF points, they're sparse enough that it's not exactly simple to switch seamlessly from point to point while tracking something as small as an eye, compared to Live View where there's for all practical purposes infinitely many "AF points".


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 7, 2020)

Eye Detect AF requires dual-pixel AF which is only available in Live View with the mirror up. (That's also why mirrorless cameras can do eye-detect AF all the time. No mirror, DPAF 100% of the time.)

With the mirror down and using the optical viewfinder, the more traditional D-SLR style (not DPAF) AF system is used. Apparently that non-DPAF system has been updated to allow face and head tracking, but it's still not DPAF and won't be able to do eye-detect AF. Though as stated, eye-detect AF is of course available in Live View with the mirror up.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 7, 2020)

Interestingly the 1DX3 doesn't appear to have the 1/16000s shutter speed (with the e-shutter) that the 90D and M62 do.


----------



## David_E (Jan 7, 2020)

Those who are fixated on the pixel count appear to not understand the matching of resolution to intended purpose. 20 mp is more than adequate for photojournalism and sports, where photos mostly end up in magazines, newspapers, and on the web. (Weddings generally don’t require 20 fps, and are better suited to a different kind of camera.) So the 1D X Mark III looks to be ideally suited to the target user. Not for me, alas; *I photograph mainly the little things.*


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 7, 2020)

David_E said:


> Those who are fixated on the pixel count appear to not understand the matching of resolution to intended purpose. 20 mp is more than adequate for photojournalism and sports, where photos mostly end up in magazines, newspapers, and on the web. (Weddings generally don’t require 20 fps, and are better suited to a different kind of camera.) So the 1D X Mark III looks to be ideally suited to the target user. Not for me, alas; *I photograph mainly the little things.*


It has been brought to our attention by many pro sports photogs that 20Mp sensor resolution is barely adequate now days. 24-28Mp would be amazing to have. Unfortunately 16fps OVF would not be possible then. Canon prioritised speed instead.


----------



## David_E (Jan 7, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> _It has been brought to our attention by many pro sports photogs that 20Mp sensor resolution is barely adequate now days. 24-28Mp would be amazing to have..._


Now(a)days? What has changed? Do print publications require higher resolution than previously? Does the Web require 24 to 28 mp photos? I don’t believe a word of it. This is just the spurious notion that enough is not enough, and excess is better. And who is the _us_ in _our attention_ and who are these sports photographers?


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 7, 2020)

David_E said:


> Now(a)days? What has changed? Do print publications require higher resolution than previously? Does the Web require 24 to 28 mp photos? I don’t believe a word of it. This is just the spurious notion that enough is not enough, and excess is better. And who is the _us_ in _our attention_ and who are these sports photographers?


Wow.. hold on your horses, Sir!
Us = Canonrumors collective.
There are number of high profile hard working professionals posting on this very subject. that are regular here. It has been discussed to some great extent and explained that cropping and composition requirements is the reason why many action photogs could use a 24-28mp sensor instead of 20mp.
There is no question that we can get by even with 12 years old tech or even film bodies. The point is though : how The advancement in technology may assist sport photogs in getting the desired outcomes.

An finally, in relation to the “spurious notion that enough is not enough”:
It is not even a tiny bit spurious if you consider what other professionals would consider as an ideal sensor resolution for a 1D level Camera body in 2020.
There are limitations, we operate within boundaries and reality though. It is what it is.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 7, 2020)

virsagomk2 said:


> All right so DPAF is still available when shooting 4k60 in cropped mode, this is a good news.



So all those pages of wailing about it were unnecessary? Who'd have imagined!


----------



## Profit007 (Jan 7, 2020)

virsagomk2 said:


> All right so DPAF is still available when shooting 4k60 in cropped mode, this is a good news.


1.3 crop mode? If so, Canon has me for longer, I'll take 3.


----------



## David_E (Jan 7, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Wow.. hold on your horses, Sir!
> ...It has been discussed to some great extent and explained that cropping and composition requirements is [sic] the reason [sic] why many action photogs could use a 24-28mp sensor instead of 20mp.


Lucky for them there’s the Sony A9 II. Said to be a superb camera, 24mp, 20 fps, advanced focus tracking, IBIS, designed to be a 1DX Mk III beater @ $2k less.


----------



## stevelee (Jan 7, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?


That's correct. You could print 9.5% larger. To print 20% larger than a 20mp shot, you would need almost 29mp.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jan 7, 2020)

David_E said:


> Lucky for them there’s the Sony A9 II. Said to be a superb camera, 24mp, 20 fps, advanced focus tracking, IBIS, designed to be a 1DX Mk III beater @ $2k less.


No thank you. I do not trust this being a solid advice. It comes with a rather basic Optical ViewFinder.


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

My number one desire was confirmed:



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



This is huge for me as noise is my primary limit.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 7, 2020)

Regards the 20MP, the 1Dx3 white paper has these comments:



> This camera was designed first and foremost for sports, wildlife and action photographers. Working press shooters, especially those at major agencies, prioritize speed for both shooting and transferring images — and as anyone who’s downloaded an e-mail attachment knows, large files slow down movements of images. Canon consulted heavily with major press and photo agencies in the development of the EOS-1D X Mark III, and the strong consensus was that 20 million pixels was more than sufficient for their needs, including double-page spreads in magazines.
> 
> _Support for full-page and double-page magazine spreads_
> Similarly, 20 million pixels (actual resolution 5472 x 3648) provides the working photographer with sufficient pixel resolution for the vast majority of book or magazine publishing tasks. A US-based publication at standard 8.5 x 11-inch size translates into a double-page spread of 17 x 11 inches (43 x 28 cm).
> A t 300 dpi, as indicated above, a non-interpolated, full-res RAW, JPEG or HEIF files from the EOS-1D X Mark III will fill 18 x 12 inches… in other words, for a double-page spread at typical US publication sizes, the file would need to be reduced slightly in size. A4-size, double-page spreads are likewise well within the realm of what a 20 million pixel sensor can handle, with outstanding potential final print quality.



However, we do need to bear in mind that on this forum it is photographers talking about wanting more MP, not the end users.

The white paper also mentions that the 1Dxiii has up to 1 stop better noise control and also that



> The powerful DIGIC X processor can apply many more processing steps and algorithms during image processing, and Canon engineers accordingly have been able to label the new EOS-1D X Mark III processing as “High-resolution processing.”


Which suggests some level of what is now called 'computational photography' enhancing detail without needing more MP.

I am pretty sure Canon know what they are doing....


----------



## ToonD (Jan 7, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Apart from marketing department decisions, why can't you add new functions to a DSLR?


Sure they can but I haven't seen much from Canon in that regard. But maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> My number one desire was confirmed:
> 
> 
> 
> This is huge for me as noise is my primary limit.



Yup! if I can now faithfully stretch my Auto ISO setting up a notch from 6400 to 12800, I'd be pretty damn happy. Even at 6400 I'm topping out too much when trying to stay at 1/500th shutter speed, forcing me to retreat back to 400 or 320, which I hate to do because I'm not stopping action as effectively. That extra stop would make a ton of difference in my potential keeper rate


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

peters said:


> Its a shame
> 
> But, good news! Its working on Cropped 4k DCI mode!!! Judging by the resolution its probably going to be a 1,3 crop =)​​



Yup! Same sensor dimensions as my DX2. Same 1.3x Crop. Which honestly is just fine. It's really not that bothersome. Especially considering I also use a 1.75x crop on an EOS R... That's a pain mainly because even at f1.4, you can't really bokeh like you'd want to. But the 1.3x crop on the DX2/DX3 has comparatively minimal effect on bokeh. Of course NOW if I want it all, I can go FF and it will bokeh like a stills shot. If I really need AF AND 60fps in 4k, switching down to the negligible crop isn't a deal breaker. I'm fine with that.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

scyrene said:


> So all those pages of wailing about it were unnecessary? Who'd have imagined!



Yeah I said earlier, I'd be shocked if that was totally gone since they had it in the DX2. So They have the same exact specs as the DX2 for AF in video shooting, but now they added 4K RAW + Full Frame (no AF under certain specific conditions). Nothing was lost. Things were added.


----------



## peters (Jan 7, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Yup! Same sensor dimensions as my DX2. Same 1.3x Crop. Which honestly is just fine. It's really not that bothersome. Especially considering I also use a 1.75x crop on an EOS R... That's a pain mainly because even at f1.4, you can't really bokeh like you'd want to. But the 1.3x crop on the DX2/DX3 has comparatively minimal effect on bokeh. Of course NOW if I want it all, I can go FF and it will bokeh like a stills shot. If I really need AF AND 60fps in 4k, switching down to the negligible crop isn't a deal breaker. I'm fine with that.


Jeah, the crop is indeed 1,3 again  Its mentioned in the whitepaper here:


https://www.canonrumors.com/files/Canon_EOS_1DX_Mark_III_Video_White_Paper.pdf


Which is btw a realy interesting read with lots of information. The RAW filesize is realy impressive. I hope CFExpress prices go down soon... right now a 512gb card costs 700€... so you easily have to spend 1-2000€ just on cards, which is insane :-D

Btw, I found the crop to be not THAT much of a problem on the Canon EOS R (and 5D IV). For example you can use the Sigma 18-35 1,8 Art, which works perfect. BUT the biggest problem and total dealbreaker is the rolling shutter. Its just not acceptable AT ALL.


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

peters said:


> Jeah, the crop is indeed 1,3 again  Its mentioned in the whitepaper here:
> 
> 
> https://www.canonrumors.com/files/Canon_EOS_1DX_Mark_III_Video_White_Paper.pdf
> ...



The rolling shutter is ugly but again, if you understand that and tailor its use around its strengths, its a great camera. I’ve slow panned with it And it looks fine. Just cant shake or whip pan with it. Eh. Fine. It now a $1500 camera. What else ya want? I love it for gimbal stuff and works great for stationary or slow/moderate moving interview shots.


----------



## peters (Jan 7, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> The rolling shutter is ugly but again, if you understand that and tailor its use around its strengths, its a great camera. I’ve slow panned with it And it looks fine. Just cant shake or whip pan with it. Eh. Fine. It now a $1500 camera. What else ya want? I love it for gimbal stuff and works great for stationary or slow/moderate moving interview shots.


I find the rolling shutter to be pretty bad when using it handheld, since it gives the movie a more "unstable" look. If you tilt up and down you get some kind of small tears. 

But you are correct, at this pricepoint, its still a nice 4k image, especialy the colors are great as always.
Though I must say, when the 5D IV was released I was a bit disapointed in this area. 

The 1DX III on the other hand is truely an impressive release


----------



## PureClassA (Jan 7, 2020)

peters said:


> I find the rolling shutter to be pretty bad when using it handheld, since it gives the movie a more "unstable" look. If you tilt up and down you get some kind of small tears.
> 
> But you are correct, at this pricepoint, its still a nice 4k image, especialy the colors are great as always.
> Though I must say, when the 5D IV was released I was a bit disapointed in this area.
> ...



Without IBIS and lens IS, it's hard to handhold any camera for video and stabilize it solely on physical technique. Even a proper gimbal like the Ronin M ( I have one I use sometimes with the EOS R and even the 1DX2) still needs good physical technique. But either of these cameras on a proper tripod and a smooth panning video head work great provided you dont try to pan quickly or you are simply making a stationary shot.






That was all done on the EOS R between the Ronin M and Tripod. The last 2-3 mins is bunch of interlaced B roll montage stuff.


----------



## peters (Jan 7, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Without IBIS and lens IS, it's hard to handhold any camera for video and stabilize it solely on physical technique. Even a proper gimbal like the Ronin M ( I have one I use sometimes with the EOS R and even the 1DX2) still needs good physical technique. But either of these cameras on a proper tripod and a smooth panning video head work great provided you dont try to pan quickly or you are simply making a stationary shot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Jeah thats true. Nice video by the way


----------



## richperson (Jan 7, 2020)

From DPReview, this shot is at ISO 16000 (likely direct to JPEG), but looks pretty good in terms of noise.

DPReview sports pic

Same here for a concert photo at ISO 16000

Concert photo


----------



## Dexter75 (Jan 8, 2020)

Nelu said:


> Listen dude, you'd better stop telling people what cameras to use! Nobody was asking for your opinion on that.
> You have a really nasty habit, keep it in your basement, for God sake!



stop crying about this camera. Canon makes plenty of others for amateurs like you, stop crying and go buy one.


----------



## Dexter75 (Jan 8, 2020)

Canon-Chas said:


> Absolutely no chance, take it from me ..a Canon user long term who still owns Canon prime lenses and 1DX II and EOS R and Sony A9II , the A9II leaves Canon and Nikon for dead and in complete silence. I can't imagine trying to take live view pics with any enthusiasm on the 1DXIII , get real



The A9 II can only do 10fps with its mechanical shutter, the 1DX III can do 16fps mechanical shutter and 20fps mechanical in live view. The 1DX III will shoot over 1k RAW photos before it hits its buffer, the a9 II can only do 300. The 1DX III can also do 5.5k 60p RAW 12 bit video and 4Kp60 video at 4:2:2 10-bit in Log, the A9 II can’t do any of that. Shall I continue? This thing wipes the floor with the a9 II lol. Thanks for playing, buh bye now.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 8, 2020)

Just learned that the 1dx3 has an option to automatically choose the right AF case for what one is shooting. That has been sorely missed previously, at least by me.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 8, 2020)

richperson said:


> From DPReview, this shot is at ISO 16000 (likely direct to JPEG), but looks pretty good in terms of noise.
> 
> DPReview sports pic
> 
> ...


Those are jpgs with noise reduction applied by the camera. I thought they looked good too, but then I took a closer look. There's a fair amount of smearing in the details from the noise reduction. I'm waiting to see some raw files to see if the lower noise is real or just noise reduction software.


----------



## richperson (Jan 8, 2020)

Just put the money down. Now the long wait.


----------



## richperson (Jan 8, 2020)

Does the energy sipping properties of the new body negate the need for a backup battery on most occasions? On the 1DXii I always carry a backup, but have only used if when shooting a lot of shots over a very long day. I understand it is always nice to have redundancy, but if someone had a 1DXii and 1DXiii then seems like one backup battery would be sufficient.


----------



## AaronT (Jan 9, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?





reef58 said:


> I will admit I am not a technical guy, but if I have two files with the same aspect one is 20mp and the other is 24mp are you saying I cannot print 20% larger at 300dpi with the 24mp file?


In landscape the 20 MP file is 5373 pixels wide, the 24 MP file is 6000 pixels wide. Divide them both by 300 and you get 17.91 inches vs 20 inches wide print. Not a lot of difference.


----------



## stevelee (Jan 9, 2020)

AaronT said:


> In landscape the 20 MP file is 5373 pixels wide, the 24 MP file is 6000 pixels wide. Divide them both by 300 and you get 17.91 inches vs 20 inches wide print. Not a lot of difference.


Or another way to look at it is that on 19" paper, allowing an 18.75" image width, you can print the 20MP shot at 286dpi and the 24MP photo at 320dpi (or crop a bit and still print at 300).


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 10, 2020)

Cyborx said:


> If this is true, Canon has clearly shut down their DSLR development dept.
> Just a very dissapointing update on the mark II.
> 
> I have spoken to resellers and the numbers are shocking. 90% less pre-order sales on this mark III compared to the mark II.
> ...



Or most of the pro users that pre-ordered 1D X Mark II bodies in 2016 are no longer able to afford upgrading in the business climate of 2020? They've either moved on to other careers/specialties or are now working as freelancers for pennies on the dollar compared to what they were making as staff photographers.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 10, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Meh, I am not buying a Nikon. They have their own issues. I don't think the camera is crippled. I just dislike their decision on resolution, but I suspect it was based off of measured decisions and not due to tech issues or crippling the camera. Overall is sounds like an excellent upgrade. It could have been perfect (for me).
> 
> I love my 5d4 but objectively the D850 was / is a better camera. It didn't move the needle for Nikon. Their D5 probably won't either.



I think you mean their D6. The D5 came out in 2016 around the same time as the 1D X Mark II.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 10, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> I presume if Sony was willing to sell them the A9II sensor, then Nikon would be offering 24Mp, 20 fps in live view.



Sony's sensor design division and Sony's sensor fabrication division are separate entities with separate costs involved. Nikon has not bought any Sony *designed* sensors for several years. All of Nikon's latest sensors are designed by Nikon and fabricated by Sony (or other sensor fabs). They're not "Sony" sensors.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 10, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Being professional was not the point. The point was that if you have a DSLR you are kind of stuck with it untill the newer version comes out. With mirrorless bodies, firmware updates can add new functions and not only bugfixes.



Hmmm. When firmware ver. 2.x was released for the original 7D, it gave several new functions, including in-camera raw → jpeg conversion (after the fact) as well as in-camera cropping to go along with shooting improvements.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 10, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Sony's sensor design division and Sony's sensor fabrication division are separate entities with separate costs involved. Nikon has not bought any Sony *designed* sensors for several years. All of Nikon's latest sensors are designed by Nikon and fabricated by Sony (or other sensor fabs). They're not "Sony" sensors.



As I understand it, they (in this case, Nikon) are given the specs of the Sony sensor architecture and they then decide what 'bells and whistles' they want, and what priorites/compromises they want to make on features and performance. I don't think they as Sony to develop/make a sensor from the ground up. If I am correct, then they are using Sony technology and are limited by what Sony offers to them.


----------



## ToonD (Jan 10, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Hmmm. When firmware ver. 2.x was released for the original 7D, it gave several new functions, including in-camera raw → jpeg conversion (after the fact) as well as in-camera cropping to go along with shooting improvements.


Thanks, did not know that. I do not own a 7d body. Seems that my assumption is not 100% correct.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 12, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Just learned that the 1dx3 has an option to automatically choose the right AF case for what one is shooting. That has been sorely missed previously, at least by me.



Assuming it works better than 'AI Focus AF' historically has...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 12, 2020)

Mikehit said:


> As I understand it, they (in this case, Nikon) are given the specs of the Sony sensor architecture and they then decide what 'bells and whistles' they want, and what priorites/compromises they want to make on features and performance. I don't think they as Sony to develop/make a sensor from the ground up. If I am correct, then they are using Sony technology and are limited by what Sony offers to them.




The point is, no Nikon camera is getting the same sensor that Sony cameras are getting, and none have since around 2012. My original comment was in response to a suggestion that the Nikon D6 would have the same sensor as the Sony α9II. That's not going to happen.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 12, 2020)

ToonD said:


> Being professional was not the point. The point was that if you have a DSLR you are kind of stuck with it untill the newer version comes out. With mirrorless bodies, firmware updates can add new functions and not only bugfixes.


An early firmware update for the 1D X added the ability to autofocus at f/8.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 12, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Assuming it works better than 'AI Focus AF' historically has...


1-series bodies have not had AI Focus AF, just One Shot and Servo. I suspect Canon knows how well AI Focus works, and thus omitted it from the 1-series.


----------



## cruso (Jan 12, 2020)

I am Very disappointed again after waiting for over a year to find out with the price tag of £6500 on the 1dx3 in the uk taking out of the hands of a lot of people


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 12, 2020)

neuroanatomist said:


> 1-series bodies have not had AI Focus AF, just One Shot and Servo. I suspect Canon knows how well AI Focus works, and thus omitted it from the 1-series.



Who said anything about AI Focus AF *in the 1-Series? *It's Canon's only previous stab at an AF system that auto-selects AF mode based on information collected by the AF sensor. My guess is that Canon left it out of the 1-Series because 1-Series buyers/users knew how well it _*does not*_ work. Hopefully the increased processing power available in contemporary cameras will allow the new AF case auto-select to work as intended.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 12, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> Eye Detect AF requires dual-pixel AF which is only available in Live View with the mirror up. (That's also why mirrorless cameras can do eye-detect AF all the time. No mirror, DPAF 100% of the time.)
> 
> With the mirror down and using the optical viewfinder, the more traditional D-SLR style (not DPAF) AF system is used. Apparently that non-DPAF system has been updated to allow face and head tracking, but it's still not DPAF and won't be able to do eye-detect AF. Though as stated, eye-detect AF is of course available in Live View with the mirror up.



@Michael Clark 

This was just some background for those not as familiar with the difference between how AF works in mirrored vs mirrorless cameras. (I'm just posting because I saw your "haha" icon and I wasn't sure if my original post came off as trying to be funny?) I think it's an important distinction for those that are interested in Eye AF to know that it only works in Live View, and not through the OVF.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 12, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> @Michael Clark
> 
> This was just some background for those not as familiar with the difference between how AF works in mirrored vs mirrorless cameras. (I'm just posting because I saw your "haha" icon and I wasn't sure if my original post came off as trying to be funny?) I think it's an important distinction for those that are interested in Eye AF to know that it only works in Live View, and not through the OVF.



The new OVF PDAF and metering sensors, unlike older PDAF and metering sensors, are effectively CMOS imaging sensors, giving OVF the same capabilities as sensor based focusing, other than accounting for the differences in resolution.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 12, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The new OVF PDAF and metering sensors, unlike older PDAF and metering sensors, are effectively CMOS imaging sensors, giving OVF the same capabilities as sensor based focusing, other than accounting for the differences in resolution.



That statement, to the *casual reader*, makes it sound like you will get relatively equal focus performance, functionality and frame coverage in OVF vs Live View. I would not agree with that statement.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 12, 2020)

Travel_Photographer said:


> That statement, to the *casual reader*, makes is sound like you will get relatively equal focus performance, functionality and frame coverage in OVF vs Live View. I would not agree with that statement.



And I would not agree with your statement, both in terms of the way it characterizes what I said as well as the way it characterizes the performance of the 1D X Mark III vs. the EOS R.

The differences are getting much narrower to the point of no longer being *A *or* b*, but rather *a *or* a'*.

The 1D X Mark III does not use a line sensor for the OVF based PDAF system. It uses a small CMOS sensor. This is a first for Canon. No previous EOS DSLR has used such an OVF based PDAF sensor, so your previous experience of Canon EOS DSLRs does not apply to the 1D X Mark III. Have you read what those who used pre-production versions of the 1D X Mark III are saying about it? They say it is just as accurate as Dual Pixel CMOS AF while being just as fast as previous OVF based PDAF implementations.


----------



## Travel_Photographer (Jan 12, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> And I would not agree with your statement. The differences are getting much narrower to the point of no longer being *A *or* b*, but rather *a *or* a'*. The 1D X Mark III does not use a line sensor for the OVF based PDAF system. It uses a small CMOS sensor. This is a first for Canon. No previous EOS DSLR has used such an OVF based PDAF sensor, so your previous experience of Canon EOS DSLRs does not apply to the 1D X Mark III. Have you read what those who used pre-production versions of the 1D X Mark III are saying about it? They say it is just as accurate as Dual Pixel CMOS AF while being just as fast as previous OVF based PDAF implementations..



I'm not saying the new OVF based PDAF is not excellent and a leap forward compared to previous generations. I'm actually pleased to see the new head and face tracking via OVF.

My original post was in response to some other commenters who seemed unclear as to the distinction between AF via OVF and via Live View.

Most importantly for me, eye AF in the R series has been absolutely game-changing, and I appreciate that I can do it through the EVF. Perhaps for a large majority of the target market for this 1D camera, having eye AF through the viewfinder is not important. For me not having it is a dealbreaker. So I thought it was worth mentioning for the sake of those following along who may not have understood that. When shooting portraits of moving subjects at F1.8 or wider with tiny DoF, eye AF is positively amazing. I wish it could be done through the viewfinder of the new 1D, but it cannot.

In general, from Canon:

"Dual Pixel CMOS AF *covers a much broader area*, with up to *100% (vertical) x 90% (horizontal)* possible with most current Canon EF lenses. Servo AF can follow-focus on challenging moving subjects, or lock focus One Shot AF. *The same AF Area options as in viewfinder shooting are available, with the addition of a horizontal Large Zone AF setting*. Set the AF Method to Face Detect + Tracking, and the same powerful Subject Tracking capabilities as in viewfinder shooting are possible. *That includes the same innovative Head Detection technology as with viewfinder shooting* (to put focus upon heads, when faces are obscured, or turned away), *and adds Eye Detect AF.* As a method for virtually silent still shooting, 20 FPS speed, or AF covering nearly the entire image area, Live View on the 1D X Mark III is a tool professionals can turn to."

Those to me are welcome, significant features of the new 1D series that are available, which is fantastic, but only in Live View.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 13, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Who said anything about AI Focus AF *in the 1-Series? ... *My guess is that Canon left it out of the 1-Series because 1-Series buyers/users knew how well it _*does not*_ work.


I did (that it’s not there) to make exactly the point that you reiterated.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 13, 2020)

neuroanatomist said:


> 1-series bodies have not had AI Focus AF, just One Shot and Servo. I suspect Canon knows how well AI Focus works, and thus omitted it from the 1-series.



1D bodies also have the dedicated AF-switch button for this, so less need for badly functioning AI-AF.


----------



## Canon-Chas (Jan 13, 2020)

Dexter75 said:


> The A9 II can only do 10fps with its mechanical shutter, the 1DX III can do 16fps mechanical shutter and 20fps mechanical in live view. The 1DX III will shoot over 1k RAW photos before it hits its buffer, the a9 II can only do 300. The 1DX III can also do 5.5k 60p RAW 12 bit video and 4Kp60 video at 4:2:2 10-bit in Log, the A9 II can’t do any of that. Shall I continue? This thing wipes the floor with the a9 II lol. Thanks for playing, buh bye now.



A picture tells a thousands words ...... , have you tried taking photos in live view holding a brick 2 feet from your nose


----------



## Nelu (Jan 13, 2020)

Canon-Chas said:


> A picture tells a thousands words ...... , have you tried taking photos in live view holding a brick 2 feet from your nose
> View attachment 188227


...and add a super-tele lens to that and try to do BIF using the back LCD display; good luck with that!
So much for the super-duper Canon 1DX ergonomics in this case...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 14, 2020)

tpatana said:


> 1D bodies also have the dedicated AF-switch button for this, so less need for badly functioning AI-AF.


My 1D X doesn’t have a switch like that. I can program a button to that function, but instead I have C-modes with different minimum shutter speeds and AF modes.


----------



## tpatana (Jan 14, 2020)

neuroanatomist said:


> My 1D X doesn’t have a switch like that. I can program a button to that function, but instead I have C-modes with different minimum shutter speeds and AF modes.


True, they can be reprogrammed. But by default that's what they do.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 14, 2020)

tpatana said:


> True, they can be reprogrammed. But by default that's what they do.


The 1D X doesn’t quite have a _dedicated_ focus mode selection button, the AF-Drive button does both AF mode and drive speed. However, the 90D has a truly dedicated AF mode button, and has AI Focus AF. So, your rationale that a dedicated AF mode selection button obviates AI Focus AF doesn’t make much sense.


----------



## cruso (Feb 9, 2020)

cruso said:


> I am Very disappointed again after waiting for over a year to find out with the price tag of £6500 on the 1dx3 in the uk taking out of the hands of a lot of people


Me to Been waiting a long time for a new decent crop camera to come out and with the 7d3 being shelved then the news. of the 1dx3 I thought that I would move on to the full frame and waited for the release of the 1dx3 I was disappointed ? I think the pricing is very high and mostly Pro shooters that get Paid for their work will use it ? and cut a lot of the amateur hobbyist out of the game ?


----------

