# Canon EOS-1D X Mark II to Feature More Than 61 AF Points [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 5, 2015)

```
<p>We’re told that the upcoming Canon EOS-1D X Mark II will feature a brand new autofocus system, which was to be expected and that it will offer more than the 61 AF points on the current EOS-1D X. The upcoming Nikon D5 is <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/nikon-d5-specifications-surface/">reported to have either 107 or 173 AF points</a>, which we’re told will be more than the Canon will be offering.</p>
<p>We weren’t told the exact number of AF points, only that the camera would feature a “slightly wider spread” of AF points and we’ll see the return of some kind of illuminated AF point when in AI Servo mode. We expect all of the AF points to be crosstype.</p>
<p>The same source also speculated there would be an advancement in liveview AF for this camera.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
```


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Nov 5, 2015)

well i suspect between 80-100+ af points for the new 1DX2
the next 6-8 months will have influx of used 1DX's on ebay,craigslist and even b&H and adorama


----------



## sanj (Nov 5, 2015)

This is great. Hope they are bit more spread out as well.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 5, 2015)

I'm missing a understanding of a benefit for so many AF points. Does anyone actually decide to set AF point number 122? 


How would you calibrate the points? Even now, AF points are often inaccurate, you can use FOCAL to test each one and its a long process even for a 5D MK III. It might take hours to test them all if there were 175.


Dual Pixel Technology is the only tech I know that has consistent accuracy for all the AF points when you use the capability.


----------



## raptor3x (Nov 5, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> How would you calibrate the points? Even now, AF points are often inaccurate, you can use FOCAL to test each one and its a long process even for a 5D MK III. It might take hours to test them all if there were 175.



I've never really understood to practical purpose of that test. It's not like you can apply an AFMA for each individual AF point.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 5, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm missing a understanding of a benefit for so many AF points.



Subject tracking?


----------



## rrcphoto (Nov 5, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that the upcoming Canon EOS-1D X Mark II will feature a brand new autofocus system, which was to be expected and that it will offer more than the 61 AF points on the current EOS-1D X. The upcoming Nikon D5 is <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/nikon-d5-specifications-surface/">reported to have either 107 or 173 AF points</a>, which we’re told will be more than the Canon will be offering.</p>



well it's about time for canon to marry DPAF and PDAF on the 1 series cameras for perfectly accurate AF regardless of lens calibration.

Canon's got a fair amount of patents regarding using both methods together.

it will be vary curious on the fps.. the nikon rumor states 15 fps - I can bet that's with AF/AE locked. IMO I don't think apertures can open and close that fast reliably, after 10 fps things start to get shaky.


----------



## erjlphoto (Nov 5, 2015)

So, can we presume that the 5D mk iv will get the old focus module?


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 5, 2015)

erjlphoto said:


> So, can we presume that the 5D mk iv will get the old focus module?



I thought the 5D3 _already had_ the 1DX AF setup, it just didn't track quite as well. I expect the 5D4 to be closer to the 1DX II than the 1DX for AF.

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 5, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > How would you calibrate the points? Even now, AF points are often inaccurate, you can use FOCAL to test each one and its a long process even for a 5D MK III. It might take hours to test them all if there were 175.
> ...




There is a calibration for every AF point, but only Canon can currently do it. The test basically tells you if a point is off so you can send it in for calibration.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 5, 2015)

On my 5D3 (hoping for some of this new 1DX II goodness to come to the 5D4), trying to focus on things outside of the AF points invariably involves focus and recompose with slight stopping down (to cover the risk of reframing pulling subjects out of focus). Switching to MF might be an option in that case if the 5D3 had an MF viewfinder screen option, which it doesn't.

So shooting wider apertures beyond the AF spread is very, very difficult unless you're on a tripod --> so I'd love a wider spread of points.

- A


----------



## kevl (Nov 5, 2015)

> we’ll see the return of some kind of illuminated AF point when in AI Servo mode.



Um... I want them illuminated no matter which mode I'm using.


----------



## Eldar (Nov 5, 2015)

I don´t care how many there are, provided I get a wider spread and improved ability for tracking of fast moving objects. And I want proper alternatives and support for manual focus.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 5, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The upcoming Nikon D5 is <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/nikon-d5-specifications-surface/">reported to have either 107 or 173 AF points</a>, which we’re told will be more than the Canon will be offering.
> 
> We expect all of the AF points to be crosstype.



I wonder if Nikon will have cross-type points restricted to the center as in their previous models?

All cross-type, more f/2.8 points, and a wider spread would be good (although there are technical limitations on the last one).


----------



## aceflibble (Nov 5, 2015)

Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.

It's a bizarre world where the fastest _and_ most accurate focusing I've experienced is still the old 1Ds mkII (and the other bodies from that line) with the unassuming, cheap 100mm f/2. Even then, using anything other than the few cross-type centre points is asking for trouble. I thought the 1DX was going to finally solve my AF woes and let me be free of manual focusing for good, but nope, no dice, it may have more points but it's no more accurate and, if anything, very slightly slower.

1D X mkII bumps up the point count? Fine, if they can also bump up the sensitivity, speed and accuracy of at least the centre points. More points at the exact same performance they have now? May as well not bother, save some money.


----------



## K (Nov 5, 2015)

Nikon goes for big numbers to have better looking specs. To those not in-the-know, it will appear that Nikon has an advantage in AF. However, at the flagship level with usually pros or experts being the target market, and with folks having to bust out that kind of coin to purchase - the buyer is more educated on the features and won't fall for it. This is why the 5D3 is still such a popular and powerful pro camera even though others beat it in specs. Most of the higher and better spec'ed cameras out there just don't outperform it in actual practice.


I'd rather have 61 AF points that track and work well - than 150 that are iffy.

With enough processing power, that many points could help subject tracking. It will smooth it out a bit. However, current systems are very good at it already. Nikon's D750 locks on a subject and tracks it very well with high accuracy. LIke a pit bul on a pork chop. Not sure how that many more points will truly materialize into a worthy advantage.

It almost seems like that many points would be better for a studio camera to frame up a shot and really zero in on an area for focus. Then again, you can just manual focus in the studio and not worry about it.

All the rumor says is more than 61. That could be as low as 65.


I think what is more important in AF isn't more points at this point - but instead, going lower light, like -3.5EV or more, and better intelligent tracking / speed.


----------



## wockawocka (Nov 5, 2015)

There's hope, the 5DSr AF is better than the 1DX, whether Canon will transfer that to the 5D4 and keep the next stuff to the 1DX II who knows. They will need to keep a defining difference.

I'm probably out of pro series bodies now, the weight was one thing but that flipping BLAT BLAT BLAT was a problem for my wedding work. Silent shutter that is really silent in the 1DX2? I'm buying.


----------



## Silvertt7 (Nov 5, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The upcoming Nikon D5 is reported to have either 107 or 173 AF points



Wow... 107 or 173?

Canon step up your game...


----------



## rbielefeld (Nov 5, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.
> 
> It's a bizarre world where the fastest _and_ most accurate focusing I've experienced is still the old 1Ds mkII (and the other bodies from that line) with the unassuming, cheap 100mm f/2. Even then, using anything other than the few cross-type centre points is asking for trouble. I thought the 1DX was going to finally solve my AF woes and let me be free of manual focusing for good, but nope, no dice, it may have more points but it's no more accurate and, if anything, very slightly slower.
> 
> 1D X mkII bumps up the point count? Fine, if they can also bump up the sensitivity, speed and accuracy of at least the centre points. More points at the exact same performance they have now? May as well not bother, save some money.



I find the talk of the inaccurate and slow AF on the current 1Dx to be a bit perplexing. I have owned and shot many of Canon's DSLR bodies over the years and used the AF systems to try and track all sorts of small and fast subjects. I specialize in bird in flight photography. I have been shooting the 1Dx since it was available and find the AF system to be very fast and very accurate under very challenging conditions and by far the best Canon has produced. The lenses I have used most are the 500 f/4 IS Mk. I and the 600 f/4 IS Mk. II. Both shot with and without the Canon 1.4x and 2x tele-converters. I am sure the 1Dx Mk. II will have even a better AF system, but the current AF system is really amazing to me. Images posted below so people reading this don't take me for some neophyte photographer who would not know a good AF system if it bit him. Click on images for larger versions.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 5, 2015)

And that's one small fast bird!

AF slow on the 1DX...lol whatever...lol.

Let's be seeing all these nice AF points in the dark!


----------



## rbielefeld (Nov 5, 2015)

arthurbikemad said:


> And that's one small fast bird!
> 
> AF slow on the 1DX...lol whatever...lol.
> 
> Let's be seeing all these nice AF points in the dark!



I completely agree about the need for them to be lit so they can be seen in the dark. Being lit also helps a lot during good light when tracking fast subjects. I would be surprised if Canon does not provide at least an option to have the AF points lit.


----------



## TeT (Nov 5, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.
> 
> It's a bizarre world where the fastest _and_ most accurate focusing I've experienced is still the old 1Ds mkII (and the other bodies from that line) with the unassuming, cheap 100mm f/2. Even then, using anything other than the few cross-type centre points is asking for trouble. I thought the 1DX was going to finally solve my AF woes and let me be free of manual focusing for good, but nope, no dice, it may have more points but it's no more accurate and, if anything, very slightly slower.
> 
> 1D X mkII bumps up the point count? Fine, if they can also bump up the sensitivity, speed and accuracy of at least the centre points. More points at the exact same performance they have now? May as well not bother, save some money.



Really, surely you jest...


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 5, 2015)

rrcphoto said:


> well it's about time for canon to marry DPAF and PDAF on the 1 series cameras for perfectly accurate AF regardless of lens calibration.
> 
> Canon's got a fair amount of patents regarding using both methods together.


It sounds like a good idea to combine AF technology (PDAF for gross movement and DPAF for final adjustment) but how would it actually work? Would it only apply to single shot? I think any increase in OVF blackout time and lag would be highly undesirable as well as any negative impact on burst rate. Would you need higher speed sensor readout or global shutter? Also if you are using flash how would it work?

It would be interesting to read deeper into the patent (perhaps you can share link?)


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 5, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.
> 
> It's a bizarre world where the fastest _and_ most accurate focusing I've experienced is still the old 1Ds mkII (and the other bodies from that line) with the unassuming, cheap 100mm f/2. Even then, using anything other than the few cross-type centre points is asking for trouble. I thought the 1DX was going to finally solve my AF woes and let me be free of manual focusing for good, but nope, no dice, it may have more points but it's no more accurate and, if anything, very slightly slower.
> 
> 1D X mkII bumps up the point count? Fine, if they can also bump up the sensitivity, speed and accuracy of at least the centre points. More points at the exact same performance they have now? May as well not bother, save some money.



I shoot professionally day in and day out with a pair of 1Dx's. My only guess is that you have no idea how to use the AF system in the 1Dx, otherwise you wouldn't make such a foolish post. Unless of course, you are just joking. Then it's pretty funny.


----------



## tpatana (Nov 5, 2015)

They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.


----------



## rs (Nov 5, 2015)

StudentOfLight said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > well it's about time for canon to marry DPAF and PDAF on the 1 series cameras for perfectly accurate AF regardless of lens calibration.
> ...



Auto AFMA is theoretically possible with either DPAF or potentially even a standard sensor.

The metadata within the CR2 file already contains information about which AF point was used for focus - if detailed phase information for each AF point at capture could be stored rather than just a yes or no, this could be compared to a summary of contrast at each focus point of the photo captured using CDAF techniques.

It would know depth of the scene at the AF points using this phase data, and that could be compared to where the highest contrast is on the captured focal plane (the photo) to auto adjust the AFMA. If there are enough points in a dense enough pattern, you could get coverage which could show points just in front and behind the intended focal plane. This could reveal more contrast at these +/- points, and provide feedback about how to adjust AFMA. It could potentially be used over time to calibrate each AF point automatically for each lens, and also be extended to fine tune servo modes to compensate for prediction inaccuracies required to bridge the time difference between the AF sensor losing light due to the start of mirror movement and the sensor capturing the image.

DPAF, if it is possible to get individual photodiodes recorded while taking the shot, would allow for detailed depth information from the AF sensor _and_ image sensor to be directly compared and fine tuned with much faster feedback than CDAF techniques.


----------



## Famateur (Nov 5, 2015)

tpatana said:


> They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.



...and blinds the model. Permanently. 

I know, I know...not that kind of laser. Still, your last sentence gave a funny visual of a model screaming in pain. But at least you got the shot!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 5, 2015)

tpatana said:


> They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.



Oooo, that would be great. Good for taking pictures of planes, too!


----------



## applecider (Nov 5, 2015)

Rbielfeld...
Your kingfisher pics are wonderful. I've had a love hate relationship with my local kingfishers, they seem to get active about ten minutes after good light passes and don't like to come close to me. 
If I can get a lock on this fast flying bird I get good results with the 1DX but with the 500 or 600 with extender getting a lock with center point at dusk is challenging, so kudos.
What setting are you using for the focusing and what point spread do u use?

Post more in animal kingdom pls


----------



## Famateur (Nov 5, 2015)

rs said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



If I understand what you're saying correctly, rather than DPAF being used to make an adjustment on-the-fly, it would be used to capture data that is used over time to fine-tune the AFMA. In other words, focus is achieved using traditional method plus AFMA offset, but the captured phase data would help the camera refine that offset for future shots. Is that what you're saying? Seems pretty cool to me. Shoot, I'd be happy if I could just do a FoCal-style calibration in-camera using DPAF. Having it "learn" over time with each focus point and lens would just be extra sweet icing on the cake.


----------



## rs (Nov 5, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm missing a understanding of a benefit for so many AF points. Does anyone actually decide to set AF point number 122?



Tracking? A good metering system coupled with a good AF system has the potential to allow for a subject to be accurately tracked around the frame. The more dense the points, and the wider the spread, the more powerful the system can become at tracking, at the expense of easily being able to select the initial point to track from.

The main issue is selecting which point to lock on initially with. I think it would be nice if Canon could re-introduce eye control AF. The viewfinder could use a different colour or shape to indicate where the photographers eye is looking than what is used for AF tracking, and a button/rocker (7D II style?) could be used to make the system start tracking from where the photographer is looking. It could then be left to track that subject accurately while the photographer can scan around to line up other elements in the frame, view settings etc. Combine with one shot AF for landscapes, servo for action. Keep the button/rocker pressed and it continues to focus where the photographers eye is looking/scanning.

Think of touchscreen focusing, but instead using a viewfinder, your eye, and a button press/rocker switch instead of touching.


----------



## rs (Nov 5, 2015)

Famateur said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > StudentOfLight said:
> ...



Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking


----------



## tpatana (Nov 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.
> ...



And sports tournament. When the soccer goalie is just about to catch the game saving shot, you can make sure you get perfect focus on the goalie face.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 5, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm missing a understanding of a benefit for so many AF points. Does anyone actually decide to set AF point number 122?
> 
> 
> How would you calibrate the points? Even now, AF points are often inaccurate, you can use FOCAL to test each one and its a long process even for a 5D MK III. It might take hours to test them all if there were 175.



Somewhat high density can make them helpful as expansion points. If you have a few, large points as on the 7D it's no good as a single point is too touchy but adding expansion points covers too large of an area, for instance.


----------



## kaihp (Nov 5, 2015)

wockawocka said:


> There's hope, the 5DSr AF is better than the 1DX, whether Canon will transfer that to the 5D4 and keep the next stuff to the 1DX II who knows. They will need to keep a defining difference.
> 
> I'm probably out of pro series bodies now, the weight was one thing but that flipping BLAT BLAT BLAT was a problem for my wedding work. Silent shutter that is really silent in the 1DX2? I'm buying.


My step-mom has been working on documenting the Royal Danish Academy of Music over the last 2 years and the 5D3's silent mode has been her lifesaver almost every day. It has allowed her to be the proverbial "fly on the wall" that the students and teachers don't notice as she shoots the rehearsals.

Recently, she was documenting an international Opera singing contest, and one of the judges pulled her aside and asked her not to take pictures during the performances so that the shutter sound would not distract the performers. With the silent shutter, it was a total non-issue much to the surprise of the judge.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 5, 2015)

kaihp said:


> wockawocka said:
> 
> 
> > There's hope, the 5DSr AF is better than the 1DX, whether Canon will transfer that to the 5D4 and keep the next stuff to the 1DX II who knows. They will need to keep a defining difference.
> ...



Surely, like the anti-flicker mode for indoor sports, a silent shutter feature is coming to the 1DX II. Is there any doubt of that?

My question is _what else_ is coming from the 7D2 / 5D3 / 5DS lines to the 1DX?

The 7D2 nubby joystick thing? The 7D2 in-viewfinder level, perhaps?

- A


----------



## JoseB (Nov 5, 2015)

Famateur said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.
> ...



It would a great photo with the head of the model exploding like a watermellon


----------



## tron (Nov 6, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.
> ...


I guess it would take ... some time to take astro pictures using laser AF ;D ;D ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2015)

tron said:


> [I guess it would take ... some time to take astro pictures using laser AF ;D ;D ;D



Not to worry, Canon just needs to come out with the 1D X IIa – H-alpha filter and faster-than-light-laser-AF. That'll prove they're innovative!


----------



## expatinasia (Nov 6, 2015)

It must be quite tough for Canon. I mean the 1D X is such an amazing camera, and now that it's price has fallen so low (did I see some promos at US$3,800) they have to bring so much more to the table.

4K is the obvious thing as are more 2.8 cross AF points and higher fps. Sure some of us would like a few other changes etc. but there's only so much they can do.

Really can't wait to see what the final specs are, until then the 1D X price is getting more and more attractive.


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 6, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm missing a understanding of a benefit for so many AF points. Does anyone actually decide to set AF point number 122?
> 
> 
> How would you calibrate the points? Even now, AF points are often inaccurate, you can use FOCAL to test each one and its a long process even for a 5D MK III. It might take hours to test them all if there were 175.
> ...



I wonder the very same thing. More isn't always better, but what do I know? It just seems like overkill.

On the bright side: I'm hoping used 1Dx bodies will be very inexpensive.


----------



## pwp (Nov 6, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm missing a understanding of a benefit for so many AF points....



Personally I'd love AF points to cover a much larger percentage of the screen. Even with the 5D3 I fairly often need to focus-recompose. It's great just being able to drop an AF point right on a subject's eye without shifting your composition. This is obviously valuable for portrait shooters working with large apertures and/or long lenses. If I had more AF points I'd be coming home with more keepers.

-pw


----------



## adventureous (Nov 6, 2015)

Is the 1DX shutter sound louder,quiter,or the same as 5DII ?


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

adventureous said:


> Is the 1DX shutter sound louder,quiter,or the same as 5DII ?



I don't have it in one link for you.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx

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

In each, do a find on the word 'sound' and somewhere in the middle of the review are sounds clips comparing different cameras. The first link has the 5D2 vs. 5D3, and the second link has the 5D3 vs. the 1DX. Use your memory and compare.

- A


----------



## adventureous (Nov 6, 2015)

Thanks I was able to download and play back and forth. I like the machine gun the best


----------



## sanj (Nov 6, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.
> 
> It's a bizarre world where the fastest _and_ most accurate focusing I've experienced is still the old 1Ds mkII (and the other bodies from that line) with the unassuming, cheap 100mm f/2. Even then, using anything other than the few cross-type centre points is asking for trouble. I thought the 1DX was going to finally solve my AF woes and let me be free of manual focusing for good, but nope, no dice, it may have more points but it's no more accurate and, if anything, very slightly slower.
> 
> 1D X mkII bumps up the point count? Fine, if they can also bump up the sensitivity, speed and accuracy of at least the centre points. More points at the exact same performance they have now? May as well not bother, save some money.



Do you know what you are talking about?


----------



## Sabaki (Nov 6, 2015)

Question: Do all AF points perform equally, specifically in relation to the centre AF point? 

Assuming they're all cross type AF points.


----------



## kaihp (Nov 6, 2015)

JoseB said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...



Actually, my new phone (OnePlus Two) has a laser-AF for the camera. So why not in a DSLR?


----------



## stoneysnapper (Nov 6, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The same source also speculated there would be an advancement in liveview AF for this camera



Focus Peaking in manual would be good. Having got used to it on my Fuji and Sony camera's I miss it when using my 1Dx, I'd like it on the 1Dxii or 5Div.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 6, 2015)

Sabaki said:


> Question: Do all AF points perform equally, specifically in relation to the centre AF point?
> 
> Assuming they're all cross type AF points.


I believe that due to peripheral light falloff, the further you move away from the centre of frame the less light the AF system has to work on, and that this is why you will generally see the better-performing AF points are towards the centre of frame with less-capable AF points as you head towards the full frame edges.

Maybe a larger mirror box and secondary-mirror assembly is required to give a wider spread of high performance AF points


----------



## luminaeus (Nov 6, 2015)

kaihp said:


> JoseB said:
> 
> 
> > Famateur said:
> ...



It doesn't go through the lens, it goes to the side of it... so unless you're shooting a pancake the lens would probably block the laser. And then parallax issues, crazy calibration requirements, it would get expensive fast.


----------



## rbielefeld (Nov 6, 2015)

applecider said:


> Rbielfeld...
> Your kingfisher pics are wonderful. I've had a love hate relationship with my local kingfishers, they seem to get active about ten minutes after good light passes and don't like to come close to me.
> If I can get a lock on this fast flying bird I get good results with the 1DX but with the 500 or 600 with extender getting a lock with center point at dusk is challenging, so kudos.
> What setting are you using for the focusing and what point spread do u use?
> ...



Thanks so much for your comment. I use AF case #2, but I drop the tracking sensitivity parameter to the full negative setting. I use the center AF point with assist points active around it. This give me a bit of "slop" factor for not staying perfectly on the bird with the center point. I also use backbutton AF start in AI Servo mode. I tend the "pump" the back button as I track the bird to get AF to lock on and then hold as I shoot. If I lose AF I hit the AF button again. It is an iterative process when trying to stay on a small fast bird.


----------



## risc32 (Nov 6, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.
> 
> It's a bizarre world where the fastest _and_ most accurate focusing I've experienced is still the old 1Ds mkII (and the other bodies from that line) with the unassuming, cheap 100mm f/2. Even then, using anything other than the few cross-type centre points is asking for trouble. I thought the 1DX was going to finally solve my AF woes and let me be free of manual focusing for good, but nope, no dice, it may have more points but it's no more accurate and, if anything, very slightly slower.
> 
> 1D X mkII bumps up the point count? Fine, if they can also bump up the sensitivity, speed and accuracy of at least the centre points. More points at the exact same performance they have now? May as well not bother, save some money.



I've owned the 100mmf2, and it was an AF rocket with IQ that was the equal of my 300mf2.8is(on my 5d/30d/40d/1dmk2 cameras at least). i sold it for a 85mm1.8 and regret it. I have no doubts about that lens, but the the 5dmk3 level AF is something entirely different. It's as though the older 1D level systems had loads of power and no brains, while the 5dmk3 has brains and just enough power for a nonpro action shooter. I'm willing to bet the 1dx has it all and any 1dxmk2 will be at least as good.
I for one don't care how many AF points are tightly packing in the middle of the frame. I want a couple in the middle and a few around each of the 1/3rd intersecting lines. Make them light up so i can actually see them(like they do while reviewing images on the LCD because clearly they need to be)and work in crappy light, and i'm good. If i can't keep an AF point or two over a high contrast area of the frame I should go into landscape photography.


----------



## clicstudio (Nov 6, 2015)

Can't wait! My 1DX has 351,000 actuations already, the grip needs glue, it has sand and glitter on it... :
Need a new one asap! 

Please Canon! Better DR and even faster AF with a wider grid that can focus on a face when shooting a full body portrait!


----------



## scottkinfw (Nov 7, 2015)

Beautiful shots.

I have been shooting with the 5DIII since it came out. The kind of examples you have posted are the kind of shots that the 5DIII has trouble with, due to less effective AF.

I am anxiously awaiting announcement of both 5DIV and 1DXII. I'm saving my $ and may just take the leap to the 1DX. When that happens, the question for me will be "will the price drop in the 1DX be too tempting to forgo the MKII version with its improvements?". I suspect that will be hard, if for nothing else, the irrational desire to get the latest and greatest, and knowing that for me, it may be many years until I get the opportunity to update the body again.

Regarding the AF point spread and hand off, I suspect that the processing power of the new digic 7 should take care of it. Canon had enough time to get that right.



rbielefeld said:


> aceflibble said:
> 
> 
> > Too often, a body comes out with more focus points but not more sensitive or accurate focus points. Sony and Fuji have AF points across the entire frame and they're very accurate, but they're all still so slow there's no advantage over manual focus. Nikon and Canon have been adding more and more focus points with every new model, but they're still no more accurate than they were ten years ago so you can never rely on the AF system entirely, unelss you have absolutely no other choice and have to trust to blind luck out of necessity.
> ...


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 12, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > They should implement laser pointer range detector, then it wouldn't matter if the mirror is up or down, pdaf and dpaf or such would be history. With SW control you could aim it anywhere on the pic, even long distances and it'd be more accurate than anything. Tell the SW to focus on person's eye, boom! Laser beam nails the eye.
> ...



Then there would be a Camera Registration thread to match the one about drones.


----------



## sanj (Nov 12, 2015)

clicstudio said:


> Can't wait! My 1DX has 351,000 actuations already, the grip needs glue, it has sand and glitter on it... :
> Need a new one asap!
> 
> Please Canon! Better DR and even faster AF with a wider grid that can focus on a face when shooting a full body portrait!



yes!!!


----------

