# The Canon EOS-1D X Mark III is coming in 2020



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 17, 2019)

> We’ve confirmed from a very solid source one of the worst kept secrets for 2020, that Canon will announce the EOS-1D X Mark III. The same source gave us a few tidbits of information about what could possibly be coming in the new flagship DSLR.
> 
> It’s likely the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III will shoot 6K video without a crop.
> Dual CFExpress cards are in the prototype models and will likely make it to the production version.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## kingrobertii (Sep 17, 2019)

Canon is *******!


----------



## peters (Sep 17, 2019)

My guess: its going to be roughly 24 megapixel. Thats why they can offer 6k -> they always make a 1:1 pixel readout on the 1D and 5D for the 4k image. Thats why its cropped 1,3 and 1,8. 
If they give it 24megapixel they can get a fullframe 1:1 pixel readout


----------



## digibane (Sep 17, 2019)

kingrobertii said:


> Canon is *******!


Why?


----------



## csibra (Sep 17, 2019)

To shoot 6k without crop, and to be 3:2 sensor aspect ratio, the minimal resolution is 6144x4096 (or 6145x4097). This will be the 6D mark II sensor


----------



## masterpix (Sep 17, 2019)

Since the 7DIII is not comming, I need to start saving the $$$ to get the 1DxIII... I was really hoping to get the 7DIII, but heck, the 1Dx comes with a battery grip!


----------



## amorse (Sep 17, 2019)




----------



## masterpix (Sep 17, 2019)

kingrobertii said:


> Canon is *******!


We are also *******  , it is only a matter of time for either of us (camera or flesh) to get to the point where our waranty ends.


----------



## xps (Sep 17, 2019)

Mmmhhh....
Sony is rumored to bring the A9II with 32-36 MP at the same fps the A9I has.
Canon will be a lot behind, if the sensor will not be in the same league (28-....MP).

Like to hear the rumor, as my old eyes love OVF!
Will be an early adopter, if the specs come close to the Sony.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 17, 2019)

csibra said:


> To shoot 6k without crop, and to be 3:2 sensor aspect ratio, the minimal resolution is 6144x4096 (or 6145x4097). This will be the 6D mark II sensor



True, if they decide to go ”DCI 6K”, so to speak. Which isn’t unlikely, actually.


----------



## David Hull (Sep 17, 2019)

digibane said:


> Why?


Because.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 17, 2019)

Having used the 1Dx II alongside the 5DIV and R, I can say I have not seen any difference in high ISO performance with the three cameras. (At least none that can be seen in daily use). I would not be surprised to see the 1D x III jump to 30-32 mp. 

I hope Canon doesn't pull a "Nikon" and simply announce they are developing the 1Dx III without giving any details. Tell us something we don't already know.

The three things I'd like to see in a III are better autofocus, less of a "dust-magnet" and a quieter shutter in "silent" mode. (Although I've solved the shutter noise problem by buying the R)

The 1D x is not a video camera, so don't expect any video features that might compromise it's use as a stills camera.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I hope Canon doesn't pull a "Nikon" and simply announce they are developing the 1Dx III without giving any details. Tell us something we don't already know.



Isn't that similar to what they did when they announced the 1DX and 1DXii?

EDIT: Looks like they had the resolution and framerate but nothing else for the initial announcement, so better than what Nikon has done for the D6.


----------



## lglass12189 (Sep 17, 2019)

xps said:


> Mmmhhh....
> Sony is rumored to bring the A9II with 32-36 MP at the same fps the A9I has.
> Canon will be a lot behind, if the sensor will not be in the same league (28-....MP).
> 
> ...




Well so it's all about specs ?

What about a battery that will last days shooting, the most robust body in the industry, and not to mention the BEST customer service and Professional services. When you buy a 1 series you buy the best PJ/Wildlife camera made EOS.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 17, 2019)

peters said:


> My guess: its going to be roughly 24 megapixel. Thats why they can offer 6k -> they always make a 1:1 pixel readout on the 1D and 5D for the 4k image. Thats why its cropped 1,3 and 1,8.
> If they give it 24megapixel they can get a fullframe 1:1 pixel readout



Negative. We all know that canon now hates the number 24.


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 17, 2019)

I really hope it is 30mp as from my experience (shooting my 5DIV) 30mp is a sweet spot for bird photography as it allows some crop on the small guys, but should still allow for all the fps and no buffer fill the current 1DxII provides. With CFExpress I expect there will be no hitting a buffer on the III, not even close. I may pass on this 1D if the sensor is less than 30mp. I will stick with my 5DIV and try out the Sony a9II if it has the rumored 32-36mp.


----------



## xps (Sep 17, 2019)

lglass12189 said:


> Well so it's all about specs ?
> 
> What about a battery that will last days shooting, the most robust body in the industry, and not to mention the BEST customer service and Professional services. When you buy a 1 series you buy the best PJ/Wildlife camera made EOS.





lglass12189 said:


> Well so it's all about specs ?
> 
> What about a battery that will last days shooting, the most robust body in the industry, and not to mention the BEST customer service and Professional services. When you buy a 1 series you buy the best PJ/Wildlife camera made EOS.


Indeed, but some of us specs do matter. I like an superfast AF when it comes to birding. I´m owning Sony gear too (actually 7III, 7RIII and my newest investment: 7RIV &200-600), and I like the eye AF and it nails the Eyes of the bird. It works really good. Not fantastic, but really good.
I like the robustness of 1DX and battery life of the competeting Sony is great too (2000 shots no problem).
So, it is Canon´s chance to get closer to the top again, where it was some years ago. Don´t misunderstand me, Canon is great, but the competitors did their homework and surpassed Canon in some topics.


p.s.: I do not do stars, so star eating is no problem for me  (A7RIV stareating problem....)


----------



## slclick (Sep 17, 2019)

I am curious to hear from 1DX and Mk2 users that if either the form factor or weight (not both) were changed, would they see it as a good thing? Balance with the 1D series and larger glass is very important, I get that. So what if the shape stayed the same but the overall weight was reduced with more carbon, lighter magnesium, you know all that space age stuff cameras get trickled down from F1 racing .


----------



## peters (Sep 17, 2019)

slclick said:


> I am curious to hear from 1DX and Mk2 users that if either the form factor or weight (not both) were changed, would they see it as a good thing? Balance with the 1D series and larger glass is very important, I get that. So what if the shape stayed the same but the overall weight was reduced with more carbon, lighter magnesium, you know all that space age stuff cameras get trickled down from F1 racing .


I use one for some commercial videography and wedding photography. I would totaly welcome it, if the form factor would change to the 5D (with a little bit bigger viewfinder, which is excellent on the 1D). 
The battery is not as great as people say and not much better than on the 5D, so this isnt realy a point for me. I rarely use the vertical grip (and if I would, I could use an attached version). I travel a lot, so the extra size of the 1D is reason enough to not bring it. If I would shoot extensively with super big lenses, I could attach the battery grip as well, for the better weight distribution. 
All in all, I dont enjoy the size and weight of the 1D (the viewfinder is outstanding though).


----------



## richperson (Sep 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Having used the 1Dx II alongside the 5DIV and R, I can say I have not seen any difference in high ISO performance with the three cameras. (At least none that can be seen in daily use). I would not be surprised to see the 1D x III jump to 30-32 mp.
> 
> I hope Canon doesn't pull a "Nikon" and simply announce they are developing the 1Dx III without giving any details. Tell us something we don't already know.
> 
> ...



I agree with the ISO performance of the 1DXii and the R and also hope for something in the 20-32 range. 24-26mp would be disappointing.


----------



## neurorx (Sep 17, 2019)

Yes to make this interesting it would definitely need to have something in the range of 32-35 MP and an improved AF and ISO performance. Added to IBIS it would at least be competitive.


----------



## NorskHest (Sep 17, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> I really hope it is 30mp as from my experience (shooting my 5DIV) 30mp is a sweet spot for bird photography as it allows some crop on the small guys, but should still allow for all the fps and no buffer fill the current 1DxII provides. With CFExpress I expect there will be no hitting a buffer on the III, not even close. I may pass on this 1D if the sensor is less than 30mp. I will stick with my 5DIV and try out the Sony a9II if it has the rumored 32-36mp.


As a fellow birder and well a little bit of a everythinger this will be a hard purchase to justify, I use my 5d4 quite often and my 1dx2, some days I like one vs the other. If this camera is greater than 30mp with better high iso then maybe, I’ve never hit the buffer on my 1dx2. Yes we all know cfast is dead but it’s hard to justify getting rid of of all your stuff and take that massive loss to get that new new feeling and buy all new media. Using it til it dies seems like a better idea. For the video front it would be awesome if this does 4k120 but I’m guessing it won’t. We can only hope canon blows are mind with this final 1d


----------



## Adelino (Sep 17, 2019)

digibane said:


> Why?


Always are, we just need to get that out of the way with every new topic.


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 17, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



I do not see anywhere that this is a DSLR except in the first sentence which is just saying a continuing possible DSLR. Who says that the MIII cannot be a mirrorless monster? The specs so far listed in the speculation, can easily be placed into a mirrorless camera.
Just not limiting my thinking to a DSLR where Canon has been building pro lenses for the R mount and could put out a couple of long ones for sports between now and the Olympics.


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 17, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I do not see anywhere that this is a DSLR except in the first sentence which is just saying a continuing possible DSLR. Who says that the MIII cannot be a mirrorless monster? The specs so far listed in the speculation, can easily be placed into a mirrorless camera.
> Just not limiting my thinking to a DSLR where Canon has been building pro lenses for the R mount and could put out a couple of long ones for sports between now and the Olympics.


If the 1DxIII is not a DSLR, but a mirrorless instead, I will probably have a stroke. I don't think I have anything to worry about.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Who says that the MIII cannot be a mirrorless monster?


Because then it would not be a Mk*III*.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Because then it would not be a Mk*III*.


Plus it would be a monster, not a camera.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 17, 2019)

richperson said:


> ... hope for something in the 20-32 range. 24-26mp would be disappointing.


Did you mean 30-32MP? If so, I agree. 32MP FF cropped to Canon APS-C is still 12.5MP


----------



## ozturert (Sep 17, 2019)

csibra said:


> To shoot 6k without crop, and to be 3:2 sensor aspect ratio, the minimal resolution is 6144x4096 (or 6145x4097). This will be the 6D mark II sensor


6d II sensor is very slow for a 1DX body.


----------



## neurorx (Sep 17, 2019)

xps said:


> Indeed, but some of us specs do matter. I like an superfast AF when it comes to birding. I´m owning Sony gear too (actually 7III, 7RIII and my newest investment: 7RIV &200-600), and I like the eye AF and it nails the Eyes of the bird. It works really good. Not fantastic, but really good.
> I like the robustness of 1DX and battery life of the competeting Sony is great too (2000 shots no problem).
> So, it is Canon´s chance to get closer to the top again, where it was some years ago. Don´t misunderstand me, Canon is great, but the competitors did their homework and surpassed Canon in some topics.
> 
> ...


 Yes very curious about the a7riv low light focus and performance....and an affordable 600 mm option is really attractive!!


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Sep 17, 2019)

If it shoots 6K uncropped that should put 3/2 stills at around 24 MP or so. edited: 24MP assuming the sensor is 6000 MP's wide. Sounds like the sensor in the C500 Mark II. If that's the case I'd expect the video function's to be "less than ideal"


----------



## djack41 (Sep 17, 2019)

lglass12189 said:


> Well so it's all about specs ?
> 
> What about a battery that will last days shooting, the most robust body in the industry, and not to mention the BEST customer service and Professional services. When you buy a 1 series you buy the best PJ/Wildlife camera made EOS.


I shoot a 1DX2 for wildlife. It is a wonderful DSLR. That said, technology has moved on and Sony's A92 may blow it out of the water with a much faster frame rate, silent shutter, focus tracking, wildlife eye-AF, on-sensor focusing, lag-free EVF, etc. I will buy the 1DX3 if the AF tracking is significantly improved.


----------



## djack41 (Sep 17, 2019)

Specs? Perhaps "performance" is a better word. Canon has to keep pace, if it is no longer able to lead.


----------



## keithcooper (Sep 17, 2019)

From my quick check* of my timeline, it could be said that Digic 2, 3 and 5 were first seen in 1 series announcements.
Next year Digic 8 will be 2 years after it's first use - quite reasonable for Digic 9 to appear somewhere (I'd pinned it for the Pro Mirrorless, but with IBIS in the 1D X mk3 and 6k vid, maybe it has some features that make it a good fit there too)

_*Just eyeballing the chart - I'm travelling so disinclined to start looking up old press releases ;-)_


----------



## $winter (Sep 17, 2019)

richperson said:


> I agree with the ISO performance of the 1DXii and the R and also hope for something in the 20-32 range. 24-26mp would be disappointing.


so as always *"it depends",* for me as i do 30-35 wedding reportages 50mp is cleary an over kill. But if i could have some kind of higher MP (30-40) for Shooting/studio situation and an MRAW often of abou 20MP that woul be a great deal.
But i guess canon likes to sell me a second high mp CAM 

if i can wish:

RAW: 34MP M1RAW:20MP ---------> i can work as with the 1DXII like before with extra MP if requsted.
Additional::

great IBIS that would be a killer 
Crosstype dualpixel AF
AF-S in livevie like 5dMK4 
slightly improoved battery life
higher 14-16FPS 
CURRENT Cams :
1DXMKII:
RAW: 20MP 5.472 x 3.648 
M1RAW: 12MP 4.368 x 2.912 

5dm4: 
RAW: 30MP 6.720 x 4.480 
mRAW: 16MP 5.040 x 3.360


----------



## flip314 (Sep 17, 2019)

xps said:


> Mmmhhh....
> Sony is rumored to bring the A9II with 32-36 MP at the same fps the A9I has.
> Canon will be a lot behind, if the sensor will not be in the same league (28-....MP).
> 
> ...



So... Canon's camera that we currently know nothing about can't be any good because Sony will also have a camera that we currently know nothing about?


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 17, 2019)

djack41 said:


> I shoot a 1DX2 for wildlife. It is a wonderful DSLR. That said, technology has moved on and Sony's A92 may blow it out of the water with a much faster frame rate, silent shutter, focus tracking, wildlife eye-AF, on-sensor focusing, lag-free EVF, etc. I will buy the 1DX3 if the AF tracking is significantly improved.


Also, the a9II will likely be 2K less than the 1DxIII if Canon prices the 1DxIII like it did the 1DxII. Rumors are the a9II will be 5K, I am thinking the 1DxIII will be $6999. If this is what happens, I will have a hard time choosing the 1DXIII over the a9II given what I have learned about the comparative capabilities of the 1DxII and a9 after shooting them side by side for a while now. Osprey image is a9 with adapted Canon 600 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC hand held.


----------



## Quackator (Sep 17, 2019)

What about 83MP and MRAW binning that down to 20+ MP
while at the same time de-bayering on board?
Quadpixel AF at that?

Mirrorless, of course.

I think the chance for the coming 1 series camera to 
be DSLR vs MILC is not more than 50:50.


----------



## gwooding (Sep 17, 2019)

slclick said:


> I am curious to hear from 1DX and Mk2 users that if either the form factor or weight (not both) were changed, would they see it as a good thing? Balance with the 1D series and larger glass is very important, I get that. So what if the shape stayed the same but the overall weight was reduced with more carbon, lighter magnesium, you know all that space age stuff cameras get trickled down from F1 racing .



I have a 1DX Mk2 and a 7D2. I find the 7D2 without the grip to be too small for my hands (I can't quite get my pinky to fit onto the 7D2 comfortably). Using the camera for extended periods of time causes me pain (I find the front of the grip digs into my palm between the ring finger and pinky). For this reason I have the grip permanently attached to my 7D2. Honestly I don't find the weight of either camera to be a problem and wouldn't want to sacrifice build quality for weight.

I have used X0D and XX0D cameras and wouldn't want to go back to such small cameras (even with their grips).

No matter how good the 1DX3 is I won't be getting rid of my 1DX2, the camera is still too good to replace just because there is a new version. They could possibly tempt me to be rid of the 7D2 by releasing a high (80+MP) resolution camera in a 1D body but I doubt this is on the radar.

I see many people on here complain about the AF on the 7D2 and even some the 1DX2 but I personally don't have issues with either. So an "improved" AF is not a deciding factor for me. I primarily shoot wildlife (African) and birds.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Sep 17, 2019)

xps said:


> Mmmhhh....
> Sony is rumored to bring the A9II with 32-36 MP at the same fps the A9I has.
> Canon will be a lot behind, if the sensor will not be in the same league (28-....MP).
> 
> ...



No .. Canon is rock solid proven for ergonomics, sealing and durability. Sony has barely got off their ass, leaning on a few specs to prop themselves up. Even mirrorless, Sony hasn't followed Canon's innovation to close out dust.

But as for DSLR .. Sony can hardly contend with the proven track record of the legion of 1DX workhorses blanketing the market. Any A9 is no reason in itself to ignore the sterling 1DX reputation and build.

To put it another way ... 1DX owners trust their gear through thick and thin. Sony A9 user "HOPE" whether the bodies will hold up. A9 is entry level in proving itself.


----------



## djack41 (Sep 17, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Also, the a9II will likely be 2K less than the 1DxIII if Canon prices the 1DxIII like it did the 1DxII. Rumors are the a9II will be 5K, I am thinking the 1DxIII will be $6999. If this is what happens, I will have a hard time choosing the 1DXIII over the a9II given what I have learned about the comparative capabilities of the 1DxII and a9 after shooting them side by side for a while now. Osprey image is a9 with adapted Canon 600 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC hand held.
> View attachment 186655


Wow! Very nice shot! Can you share more about your experience with the Sony A9 using adapted Canon glass?


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Because then it would not be a Mk*III*.



How do we know that there is a MIII? Perhaps they are misleading the self righteous know it all's, boy would that be great. Not saying there is no DSLR but Canon has been, by rumor, testing a MIII capable mirrorless camera currently.
Yes, a real MIII DSLR is possible if the mirrorless cannot meet the pinacle of camera standards the MII has set. But who knows. This is a rumor site and we all can speculate as well as any other source who really has no clue. Again the specs listed in the article starting this chain could apply to a Mirrorless as easily as to a DSLR.


----------



## Go Wild (Sep 17, 2019)

Shooting with the 1dx mkII for about 3 years now, and i am a happy user (well, most of...) For photography the camera is a beast and always gave me the best shots either in sports (soccer) or wildlife. Very reliable camera, great AF. 
So, regarding to Stills, what I would love to see is that bump in resolution. Despite 20mp is more than enough for sports, well...for wildlife and big prints is kinda painfull....Also you dont get a lot of room for cropping when needed. For Facebook photos, or Insta is enough (well also is an Iphone!  ) but for larger prints is not...I sold yesterday a 3 meter print and....well it was roughly ok...For this matter a bump to 30/32 mp would be awesome! Impossible? well...Sony 9II is around the corner....  

What i would also love for stills (and video) is a somehow animal eye focus like the one in sony! I find it very useful for wildlife. FPS the 14FPS of the 1dx mkII are more than enough. Would love an improvement in jpegs straight out the camera, despite they are good already (yeaahh i know, pros use RAW, but sports photographers dont....guess we are not pro!  ) 
Well, then anything that improves the camera will be welcome, hope canon can surprise us with something inovative. 

For Video....I give up, I will go for the Sony FS line or the FX6 when it come out in few days. Find that hybrid cameras never give me the needs in video (for my purposes of course)... 
REgarding to 1dxmkII and possible updates....I do love the video from 1dxmkII. If they could change the codec would be great. They need to put zebras, focus peking, possibility of external recording in 4k60 and 4k120. If they dont put that....6k resolution doesnt solve anything and its better no to bother with that! What would be awesome is 10bit recording, but if they dont put that, please allow that externaly!! 

So thats it! I would consider to upgrade if some improvements in still are made. Video...Well...just dont care anymore! Its time to make video with a Sony Fs5mkII or the new FX6. Why not a C200 or C300? Because of the always stupid Canon nonsense of crippling things andnot to allow proper external recording! 

Waiting. 

PS: Ohhh.....and I would DEFINITELY would LOVE much more to see a mirrorless 1dxmkIII!! And please stop that annoying and overpassed "Canon is *******" meme!! Its just not funny!


----------



## peters (Sep 17, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Also, the a9II will likely be 2K less than the 1DxIII if Canon prices the 1DxIII like it did the 1DxII. Rumors are the a9II will be 5K, I am thinking the 1DxIII will be $6999. If this is what happens, I will have a hard time choosing the 1DXIII over the a9II given what I have learned about the comparative capabilities of the 1DxII and a9 after shooting them side by side for a while now. Osprey image is a9 with adapted Canon 600 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC hand held.


INCREDIBLE shot! Congratulations 
What adapter are you using and how is its performance?  I am very interested in the Sony A7R IV but my canon lense collection makes the decision difficult...


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 17, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Wow! Very nice shot! Can you share more about your experience with the Sony A9 using adapted Canon glass?



Sure. I have primarily shot the a9 with my Canon 100-400 and 600 both with and without 1.4x and 2x extenders. The adapter I have been using is the Sigma MC-11. Both the a9 and the Sigma have the latest firmware.

I have found the a9's AF performance to be very good with the adapted glass. I use primarily Small, Medium, and Large Flexible Spot AF and Zone AF settings on the a9 depending on the shooting scenario I find myself in. The AF accuracy of the a9 is as good as the 1DxII and actually does a better job of staying locked on a moving subject than my 1DxII. Since I started shooting the a9 I have had more long bursts of flying birds where every image is tack sharp than I have been able to muster with my Canon 1DxII.

One issue I have found with the Sony a9 AF, whether shooting with native or adapted Canon glass, has to do with missing the first attempt at locking on to a subject. If you miss, the a9 does not like to let go of what it originally focused on. So, I find myself "pumping" the back-button AF frantically trying to get the a9 to grab the bird and not what it first focused on. Is this a huge problem, no, or I would not be shooting the a9. It is just a different behavior by the AF that takes a bit of getting used to. The main issue I have found with adapted glass is the slow focus cycling if you miss your first attempt at locking on. I tend to pre-focus on an area where I anticipate subject acquisition will take place (a good practice no matter what camera you are using IMO), so the AF is fairly close to where it needs to be when I initiate AF. When doing this, the a9 AF response is fast at locking on and it does a wonderful job of staying locked on. However, if you miss and the AF has to do a complete cycle it is very slow compared to Canon glass on a Canon body or Sony glass on a Sony body (I have shot the Sony 100-400, 400/2.8, and 200-600 on the a9). Lastly, when shooting Canon glass on the a9 and using active subject tracking I am getting 12-15 fps not the full 20 fps the a9 gives you with native glass.

Overall, I enjoy shooting Canon glass on the a9 as I think the image quality is spectacular and the no-blackout EVF is a joy when shooting fast subjects. I like the EVF better than the "stop action" affect I get through the OVF on the 1DxII. I never thought I would say that, but it is true. The 1DxII is an awesome camera that is built like a tank. I love it. The Sony a9 is no slouch IMO and brings some nice abilities to the table that the 1DxII does not. I like shooing a mirrorless body, and I am anxiously awaiting a true action mirrorless from Canon. I am sure it will be a super machine. Given a true action mirrorless will come from Canon I will hold off on purchasing the 1DxIII and wait for the Canon mirrorless. In the mean time I will continue to shoot my Canon glass on my a9 and 1DxII, and enjoy the results from both.

I hope this was somewhat informative.


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 17, 2019)

peters said:


> INCREDIBLE shot! Congratulations
> What adapter are you using and how is its performance?  I am very interested in the Sony A7R IV but my canon lense collection makes the decision difficult...


Actually, I just had a chance to shoot the A7RIV. I was thinking the black out of the EVF would preclude shooting birds in flight, which is what I do the most. It actually is serviceable for BIF and thus other action I assume. It is not an a9 or 1DxII with regards to being able to easily track a fast moving subject, but it can work IMO. With regards to the adapter I am using it is the Sigma MC-11. Please see my earlier post for my thoughts on performance. Thanks.


----------



## David16 (Sep 17, 2019)

Not to push this news too far off topic but, is this Canon’s answer to users of the 7D ii? With no official word from Canon on the future of the 7D, release of the 90D which Canon admits is not the 7D iii, what are we to think? What does a 7D ii owner do after five years and looking to upgrade? 

Not trying to be funny here. I am truly confused and wonder what others are considering as the next move.

Thanks.


----------



## DTCOM (Sep 17, 2019)

It will probably have more than 30mp to keep up with competition, but forget that, IBIS is what I'm waiting for.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 17, 2019)

David16 said:


> Not to push this news too far off topic but, is this Canon’s answer to users of the 7D ii?...



No. This is Canon's full frame flagship camera. At $6,000, it's not the same target market. Although if it has 30mp or more, the 1DxIII will accept a lot more cropping than its predecessor. 



David16 said:


> ...What does a 7D ii owner do after five years and looking to upgrade?



Hope that there is a market for a 7DIII type camera. But that isn't looking good. Nikon is reportedly abandoning the D500. If Canon drops the 7D and Nikon the D500, then we can only conclude that neither company could justify making these cameras.


----------



## Canon1966 (Sep 17, 2019)

Here is a question I think is interesting...how many of us would go Sony keeping our Canon glass? Canon seems to be leading with glass, but not with bodies.
Just a thought... I guess it would depend on how many lenses we have invested in...


----------



## unfocused (Sep 17, 2019)

Canon1966 said:


> Here is a question I think is interesting...how many of us would go Sony keeping our Canon glass?...



I vote no. I could not care less what Sony puts out. I don't follow them and never will. I could not tell you what an ARWhatever is, even if my life depended on it. (Well, maybe if my life depended on it, I would look it up.)

Oh, and by the why, you may think the question is interesting. But it isn't.


----------



## neurorx (Sep 17, 2019)

Canon1966 said:


> Here is a question I think is interesting...how many of us would go Sony keeping our Canon glass? Canon seems to be leading with glass, but not with bodies.
> Just a thought... I guess it would depend on how many lenses we have invested in...


This is along the lines of what I am feeling now. RF vs E mount in the future. Either my amassed EF lenses will need to be adapted some way or other and I’ll likely need to start updating. It’s not starting over but it sure feels that way.


----------



## MadisonMike (Sep 17, 2019)

David16 said:


> Not to push this news too far off topic but, is this Canon’s answer to users of the 7D ii? With no official word from Canon on the future of the 7D, release of the 90D which Canon admits is not the 7D iii, what are we to think? What does a 7D ii owner do after five years and looking to upgrade?
> 
> Not trying to be funny here. I am truly confused and wonder what others are considering as the next move.
> 
> Thanks.


I thought Canon said there will be no 7D ii replacement. The 90D is where it is at. I stopped waiting for it as it will never come. I would expect this 1D will be prohibitively expensive for most 7D users. Other than the 90D, the mirrorless EOS R series is where you will need to look. Unfortunately they offer nothing for sports orientated shooter at this time. A good mirrorless sports shooter will come ......eventually. But that mirrorless cannot step on the toes of the 1Dxiii so it will be gimped in some ways to make it not compete against it's big brother. I feel bad being on a Canon forum recommending a different brand, but you may need to look elsewhere. Earlier in the thread was a poster using his Canon lenses on a Sony A9. Sony is an option if you want to go FF. You can keep your glass, but as he said there is a loss in focus speed and fps, but the results are still really good.


----------



## Valdormar_Hauslendale (Sep 17, 2019)

I could give two shits about all this video swag. By a video camera if that's your jam, Canon makes them!
I would be joyed with a 1D X Mark III that was a stills only camera.
"Come ON Canon" Give us Pro body mirror flapping stills shooters what we have been asking for, over the past 7 years.
We need a 1D X Mark III with 32mp to 50mp.


----------



## ToonD (Sep 17, 2019)

Go Wild said:


> Would love an improvement in jpegs straight out the camera, despite they are good already



Just curious. What could be better in the straight out the camera jpegs? I'm a sports photographer and shooting 99% jpegs and fairly happy with the quality. Only shooting RAW during press conference due to mixed lights.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> How do we know that there is a MIII? Perhaps they are misleading the self righteous know it all's, boy would that be great. Not saying there is no DSLR but Canon has been, by rumor, testing a MIII capable mirrorless camera currently.
> Yes, a real MIII DSLR is possible if the mirrorless cannot meet the pinacle of camera standards the MII has set. But who knows. This is a rumor site and we all can speculate as well as any other source who really has no clue. Again the specs listed in the article starting this chain could apply to a Mirrorless as easily as to a DSLR.


You stated, "I do not see anywhere that this is a DSLR except in the first sentence which is just saying a continuing possible DSLR." The first sentence is, "We’ve confirmed from a very solid source one of the worst kept secrets for 2020, that Canon will announce the EOS-1D X Mark III." If Canon announces an EOS 1D X Mark III, it will be a DSLR. Period.

Now, if you want to question the validity of this rumor more generally, and are suggesting that Canon will not release a successor to the 1D X II but instead will release a MILC that delivers the specs and performance of a 1D X III, that's a different discussion. If that's the path Canon takes, they will announce something that will not be called an EOS 1D X Mark III. That was my point.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Sep 17, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Also, the a9II will likely be 2K less than the 1DxIII if Canon prices the 1DxIII like it did the 1DxII. Rumors are the a9II will be 5K, I am thinking the 1DxIII will be $6999. If this is what happens, I will have a hard time choosing the 1DXIII over the a9II given what I have learned about the comparative capabilities of the 1DxII and a9 after shooting them side by side for a while now. Osprey image is a9 with adapted Canon 600 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC hand held.
> View attachment 186655


Stunning image!


----------



## LSXPhotog (Sep 17, 2019)

It's going to take significant improvement over the 1DX Mark II that will convince me to invest another $6,000 in one of these bodies. The 1DX2 is currently my only EF mount camera and I have been intending to make the switch to RF lenses over the next couple years - this camera holds that idea back for me. We'll have to wait and see what they intend to do with this model line. Just being entirely honest, the 1DX Mark II does everything I ask of it and is one of the best motorsports camera ever made...what's next? For me, I entertain the idea of mirrorless, but OVFs are king in sports for me.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 17, 2019)

I paid $4,700 for mine a few months after they were out via CPW, got the free CFast cards and readers too. If the 1DX MkIII is $5,000 after a. few months and I can get $3,000 for my MkII's the 'investment' is closer to $2,.000 than $6,000.

If I move on a high resolution R's' the body will be $3,500+ and the two lenses I'd want, the RF 85 and the RF 35 add another $3,000, then there is yet another $1,000 in adapters for the ND filter and the CPL to use the EF glass I need to use, and then there is the version with the control ring. I'm looking at well over $7,000 to make a serious move on the R's'...



LSXPhotog said:


> It's going to take significant improvement over the 1DX Mark II that will convince me to invest another $6,000 in one of these bodies. The 1DX2 is currently my only EF mount camera and I have been intending to make the switch to RF lenses over the next couple years - this camera holds that idea back for me. We'll have to wait and see what they intend to do with this model line. Just being entirely honest, the 1DX Mark II does everything I ask of it and is one of the best motorsports camera ever made...what's next? For me, I entertain the idea of mirrorless, but OVFs are king in sports for me.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> It's going to take significant improvement over the 1DX Mark II that will convince me to invest another $6,000 in one of these bodies.


I’m not sure I’d expect a significant improvement over the 1D X II, but I’d love to be wrong. Personally, the improvements offered by 1D X II the over the 1D X were not significant enough for me. It will likely be a different story for the 1D X III.


----------



## richperson (Sep 17, 2019)

30-32mp would not shock me. 22-24mp might be disappointing. But what if Canon could do 26-28mp but improve noise at high ISO by one stop? That could be the winner. Higher resolution is nice, but I could be pretty happy with 24mp and half or less than half of the noise at high ISO.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Sep 17, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I paid $4,700 for mine a few months after they were out via CPW, got the free CFast cards and readers too. If the 1DX MkIII is $5,000 after a. few months and I can get $3,000 for my MkII's the 'investment' is closer to $2,.000 than $6,000.
> 
> If I move on a high resolution R's' the body will be $3,500+ and the two lenses I'd want, the RF 85 and the RF 35 add another $3,000, then there is yet another $1,000 in adapters for the ND filter and the CPL to use the EF glass I need to use, and then there is the version with the control ring. I'm looking at well over $7,000 to make a serious move on the R's'...



I didn't need a dime spent on filters. The threads on most new RF are the same as the EF fllters I already have.

Can really only shoot one lens at a time, so one less than $200 gets the job done. Less if used adapter.

Unlike the Sony roller coaster, Canon made the adapting or transition to RF bodies "dirt cheap" if need be.


----------



## peters (Sep 17, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Actually, I just had a chance to shoot the A7RIV. I was thinking the black out of the EVF would preclude shooting birds in flight, which is what I do the most. It actually is serviceable for BIF and thus other action I assume. It is not an a9 or 1DxII with regards to being able to easily track a fast moving subject, but it can work IMO. With regards to the adapter I am using it is the Sigma MC-11. Please see my earlier post for my thoughts on performance. Thanks.


Oh, I thought it was free of the blackout in the viewfinder.
I think I will take a look at it when the next wedding season starts - the incredible loud shutter and the big weight of the 1D is a big downer for me on weddings. The 5D is much better in this regard.
The A7R could replace both of them =) It will be interesting to see what canon will offer in the mirrorless higher megapixel area... I think its a big benefit for weddings and product shots to have a higher megapixel count for crops and better teouch/cutouts


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2019)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> I didn't need a dime spent on filters. The threads on most new RF are the same as the EF fllters I already have.
> 
> Can really only shoot one lens at a time, so one less than $200 gets the job done. Less if used adapter.


There aren’t RF equivalents for the 11-24L or the TS-E 17L. The filters I have for my EF lenses don’t fit on those two lenses for some reason…probably because they lack filter threads.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> There aren’t RF equivalents for the 11-24L or the TS-E 17L. The filters I have for my EF lenses don’t fit on those two lenses for some reason…probably because they lack filter threads.



If it won't go on, you need a bigger filter hammer.


----------



## David16 (Sep 17, 2019)

Thanks for the responses, folks. 

Conclusion: Canon has gone in another direction leaving the 7D Mii users in a precarious position: spend huge $$ for a substantial upgrade, switch platforms to the R, or leave Canon entirely. I have shot Canon equipment for 40 years and now they leave me at a dead end. 

Very disappointing.


----------



## Go Wild (Sep 17, 2019)

ToonD said:


> Just curious. What could be better in the straight out the camera jpegs? I'm a sports photographer and shooting 99% jpegs and fairly happy with the quality. Only shooting RAW during press conference due to mixed lights.



Yes, im also happy! Overall the files are very good. But for example the color rendering...Even in standard mode i find the reds to be very strong and I did had to make a custom mode with -3 saturation. Then that adds another problem that is you take off saturation from all colors. So when a team is red i tend to have some problems. This is more like a preference... but for me, trying to improve the saturation processing in jpeg would be fine. Specially in soccer, if you shoot for newspaper you know we need to deliver the photos ASAP and in big games some photos are sent even before first half to finish, so no time to correct in post. Then i find sometimes the noise reduction (i think is that...) to give the photo some "plasticity..." even when reduced to low...I would be happy if when you choose Low in noise reduction, noise processing could be less noticeable....
Well, not very important things, just small things that i dont like so much....But, and it is a biiig BUT, the jpeg straight out of the camera are very good and like it!

EDIT: I put 2 examples of that exagerated reds, you can see better in the second pic.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 17, 2019)

xps said:


> Mmmhhh....
> Sony is rumored to bring the A9II with 32-36 MP at the same fps the A9I has.
> Canon will be a lot behind, if the sensor will not be in the same league (28-....MP).
> 
> ...



Sony has what relevance here?


----------



## mclaren777 (Sep 17, 2019)

30MP and I'm in!


----------



## slclick (Sep 17, 2019)

David16 said:


> Thanks for the responses, folks.
> 
> Conclusion: Canon has gone in another direction leaving the 7D Mii users in a precarious position: spend huge $$ for a substantial upgrade, switch platforms to the R, or leave Canon entirely. I have shot Canon equipment for 40 years and now they leave me at a dead end.
> 
> Very disappointing.


I'm still using a 5D3 which is 2 years older than the 7D2. Nothing but GAS gets in my way of continued use and it doesn't take herculean strength to avoid it's siren call, just a teeny bit of willpower.

Perhaps your body is broken or malfunctioning but if not why cry to the heavens when you could just keep shooting with it? It was once great or at least good enough, believe me, nothing has changed. Nothing.


----------



## Hector1970 (Sep 18, 2019)

I'd be surprised if its below 30 MP. 
I'll be interested if they increase the FPS.
I assume it will be at least 1 stop better in ISO.
I wonder how silent it will be. I can see press conferences in the future banning noisy cameras with the mirrorless option available.
Once it starts it spreads. Weddings too the click click is distracting. I'm sure Canon could make a fairly silent mirrored camera (of course mirror lock up allows for fairly silent shooting).
Yes I'll be very interested in this one. Could be the last great mirrored camera. 
It will be years before a mirrorless camera will match its battery performance.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

$winter said:


> so as always *"it depends",* for me as i do 30-35 wedding reportages 50mp is cleary an over kill. But if i could have some kind of higher MP (30-40) for Shooting/studio situation and an MRAW often of abou 20MP that woul be a great deal.
> But i guess canon likes to sell me a second high mp CAM
> 
> if i can wish:
> ...



mRAW and sRAW seem to be dead with .cr3 and C-RAW having replaced them.

Dual Pixel AF already exceeds the capability of cross-type AF points on dedicated PDAF sensor arrays.

AF-S? That's a Nikon/Sony/Pentax thing. Do you mean 'One Shot AF', which is the Canon equivalent?


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

keithcooper said:


> From my quick check* of my timeline, it could be said that Digic 2, 3 and 5 were first seen in 1 series announcements.
> Next year Digic 8 will be 2 years after it's first use - quite reasonable for Digic 9 to appear somewhere (I'd pinned it for the Pro Mirrorless, but with IBIS in the 1D X mk3 and 6k vid, maybe it has some features that make it a good fit there too)
> 
> _*Just eyeballing the chart - I'm travelling so disinclined to start looking up old press releases ;-)_



If the DiG!C 5 was the last one introduced in a 1-Series body, it has been quite a while since a 1-Series body was the first to sport a new DiG!C processor.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Also, the a9II will likely be 2K less than the 1DxIII if Canon prices the 1DxIII like it did the 1DxII. Rumors are the a9II will be 5K, I am thinking the 1DxIII will be $6999. If this is what happens, I will have a hard time choosing the 1DXIII over the a9II given what I have learned about the comparative capabilities of the 1DxII and a9 after shooting them side by side for a while now. Osprey image is a9 with adapted Canon 600 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC hand held.
> View attachment 186655



Nice image!

The 1D X debuted at $6799 in the U.S. in early 2012 when one USD bought about 80 yen. ($6799 = 544,000 yen)

The 1D X Mark II debuted at $5999 in the U.S. in March 2016 when one USD bought about 110 yen ($5999 = 660,000 yen). The USD was at 120 yen at the beginning of 2016 but slid to 101 yen by July 1, then recovered to about 117 yen by the end of 2016.

The USD has been ranging between 106-112 yen since the beginning of 2019, but the USD typically drops against the yen during Presidential election years in the U.S., which are the same as Summer Olympic years (2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, etc.).

If the USD stays relatively strong vs. the yen, I don't see Canon pricing the 1D X Mark III above the $5999 introductory price of the 1D X Mark II in the U.S. We'll see.


----------



## photo212 (Sep 18, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> I really hope it is 30mp as from my experience (shooting my 5DIV) 30mp is a sweet spot for bird photography as it allows some crop on the small guys, but should still allow for all the fps and no buffer fill the current 1DxII provides. With CFExpress I expect there will be no hitting a buffer on the III, not even close. I may pass on this 1D if the sensor is less than 30mp. I will stick with my 5DIV and try out the Sony a9II if it has the rumored 32-36mp.


And I will pass on any camera with a sensor >30MP.

I used to crop on a Canon EOS 10D 6MP. No issue even for 16x20" prints.
I found the 20-24MP my sweet spot. For me, larger files just eat up more space and time.

If you need to "crop on the small guys" stick with the 7D Mk II or whatever the next generation might be. You'll have the built-in crop. If you like the full frames, get a longer telephoto lens (teleconverters, too). imho, it makes little sense to pay for a sensor of huge megapickles, just to toss most of them away. If you are trying to photograph a hummingbird a football field away, buy a blind and move in closer. ;o)


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

Go Wild said:


> Yes, im also happy! Overall the files are very good. But for example the color rendering...Even in standard mode i find the reds to be very strong and I did had to make a custom mode with -3 saturation. Then that adds another problem that is you take off saturation from all colors. So when a team is red i tend to have some problems. This is more like a preference... but for me, trying to improve the saturation processing in jpeg would be fine. Specially in soccer, if you shoot for newspaper you know we need to deliver the photos ASAP and in big games some photos are sent even before first half to finish, so no time to correct in post. Then i find sometimes the noise reduction (i think is that...) to give the photo some "plasticity..." even when reduced to low...I would be happy if when you choose Low in noise reduction, noise processing could be less noticeable....
> Well, not very important things, just small things that i dont like so much....But, and it is a biiig BUT, the jpeg straight out of the camera are very good and like it!
> 
> EDIT: I put 2 examples of that exagerated reds, you can see better in the second pic.



Wouldn't it be nice if the 1-Series would allow you to load an HSL profile from DPP 4 into the camera? I often have the luxury of shooting raw even with sports (no tight deadlines for what I do), and the HSL tool is perfect for pulling back the reds, shifting the yellow tint that cameras inflict on natural grass slightly towards green, neutralizing the blue/purple tinted shadows that certain white jerseys made from synthetic fibers demonstrate under halogen lights, etc.

When shooting at stadiums/fields one has shot at before, which I do frequently, one could preload an HSL profile that was created using raw test files from previous visits. Custom Picture Styles created in Picture Style Editor are nice and all, but often unexploited by most Canon users because there is no 1:1 correspondence between development settings in DPP 4 (or the very similar HSL/HSB/HSV tools in LR, C1, DxO, etc.) and custom settings in PSE.


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 18, 2019)

scyrene said:


> Sony has what relevance here?



It's the other platform that some of us are using while we're waiting for an upgrade to the 1dx2. The relevant discussion is that the inflection point for us to go back to a 1dx3 from an A9 is similar to those who are debating whether to upgrade from the 1dx2. 

For my part, I have one foot in each camp, and I think the competition is fantastic. Will be purchasing the a92 later this year, and then some quarters later (hopefully not years) the 1d equivalent mirrorless. There is a distinct luxury when you come from the Canon camp. You can surgically buy some native glass in an alternate, but my ef primes work great. 

Trust me, you want the Sony dabblers in on these discussion, as they'll add some good perspective, so long as they're not the trolls streaming from DPR, etc. Those of us who've been on the CR forum for years and have other systems as well add a great deal.

-tig

PS: If you guys don't check out Sonyalpharumors.com as well, you won't realize how good our admin is here on Canonrumors.com. The Sony rumors site is fun to check out, as there's always some impending announcement, but the fellow metes the information out in a fashion trying to drive traffic instead of clarity. We have it good here.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

slclick said:


> I'm still using a 5D3 which is 2 years older than the 7D2. Nothing but GAS gets in my way of continued use and it doesn't take herculean strength to avoid it's siren call, just a teeny bit of willpower.
> 
> Perhaps your body is broken or malfunctioning but if not why cry to the heavens when you could just keep shooting with it? It was once great or at least good enough, believe me, nothing has changed. Nothing.



I don't know about everyone else, but my 7D Mark II is getting fairly long on the shutter count. I'm at the point where I need to get another one or stop taking paid jobs where my 5D Mark IV doesn't have enough reach to be a viable backup. Even at 30 MP, cropping a 5D Mark IV image to APS-C size only yields 11.7 MP. The only other option is to start spending a LOT more on 300-400mm f/2.8 lenses to get the same reach on FF that an $1,800 EF 70-200/2.8 IS gives on APS-C.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> I don't know about everyone else, but my 7D Mark II is getting fairly long on the shutter count. I'm at the point where I need to get another one or stop taking paid jobs where my 5D Mark IV doesn't have enough reach to be a viable backup. Even at 30 MP, cropping a 5D Mark IV image to APS-C size only yields 11.7 MP. The only other option is to start spending a LOT more on 300-400mm f/2.8 lenses to get the same reach on FF that an $1,800 EF 70-200/2.8 IS gives on APS-C.


Cropping a 5DsR image to APS-C gives you the same MP as your 7DII, and a sharper image. So why not buy a 5DsR? Or a 5Ds if you’re worried about moiré.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Cropping a 5DsR image to APS-C gives you the same MP as your 7DII, and a sharper image. So why not buy a 5DsR? Or a 5Ds if you’re worried about moiré.



Frame rate. It really does make a difference when shooting sports. At 5 fps, your only frame of the peak moment might happen right as an official steps between you and the athlete(s). At 10 fps, you can often salvage one of the frames just before or just after the referee's butt is your primary subject.

Sure, you can get plenty of keepers at 5 fps or even 2 fps like in the motor drive film days. But you get a lot more, which often include the key moments of a contest, at 10 fps. Expectations are much higher now that you deliver shots of practically *every* key play than they were in the past, when just getting a good frame of the key players was enough, even if it wasn't when they were making the key plays.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Frame rate. It really does make a difference when shooting sports. At 5 fps, your only frame of the peak moment might happen right as an official steps between you and the athlete(s). At 10 fps, you can often salvage one of the frames just before or just after the referee's butt is your primary subject.
> 
> Sure, you can get plenty of keepers at 5 fps or even 2 fps like in the motor drive film days. But you get a lot more, which often include the key moments of a contest, at 10 fps. Expectations are much higher now that you deliver shots of practically *every* key play than they were in the past, when just getting a good frame of the key players was enough, even if it wasn't when they were making the key plays.


How about the 90D then?

I definitely get the frame rate advantage. After getting the 5DII, I kept the 7D for birds with the 100-400 – the 8 fps allowed better choices for wing position. After getting the 1D X and 600/4 II, the 7D became superfluous.


----------



## HarryFilm (Sep 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> How about the 90D then?
> 
> I definitely get the frame rate advantage. After getting the 5DII, I kept the 7D for birds with the 100-400 – the 8 fps allowed better choices for wing position. After getting the 1D X and 600/4 II, the 7D became superfluous.




---

Within the last week, the specs for a 60 FPS BURST RATE 18.6 megapixel (5952 x 3140) Canon Full Frame camera came out which could solve ALL your fast action issues. It's a tad expensive BUT the Canon C500 Mk2 Cinema Camera is the PERFECT size and weight for your football (soccer), hockey, basketball, rugby, skiing, cycling, F1, Rallycar and other fast action sports AND for wildlife imagery.

At 60 fps and 18.6 megapixels, you shoot flat log or 12 bit RAW colour and then download your videos into Blackmagic Resolve colour corrector and choose the frames you like. Export each selected video frame to PNG at uncompressed 12 bit or 10 bits per colour channel and send to your editors via email! And Bob's Your Uncle! YOUR DONE! Put the c500 Mk2 into a shoulder mount rig and you can hold it all day no problemo.

What's not to like?

.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Sep 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I’m not sure I’d expect a significant improvement over the 1D X II, but I’d love to be wrong. Personally, the improvements offered by 1D X II the over the 1D X were not significant enough for me. It will likely be a different story for the 1D X III.


Trust me, having Dual Pixel was worth it alone. They could have changed absolutely nothing and just added that and I would have been happy! LOL


----------



## unfocused (Sep 18, 2019)

David16 said:


> Thanks for the responses, folks.
> 
> Conclusion: Canon has gone in another direction leaving the 7D Mii users in a precarious position: spend huge $$ for a substantial upgrade, switch platforms to the R, or leave Canon entirely. I have shot Canon equipment for 40 years and now they leave me at a dead end.
> 
> Very disappointing.


Just curious where you would go. Nikon is dropping the D500.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 18, 2019)

photo212 said:


> And I will pass on any camera with a sensor >30MP.
> 
> I used to crop on a Canon EOS 10D 6MP. No issue even for 16x20" prints.
> I found the 20-24MP my sweet spot. For me, larger files just eat up more space and time.
> ...


 I don't understand this. You can get a 10TB drive for under $200, but you are suggesting that people should instead just go out and buy a longer telephoto lens, which can cost $6,000 to $10,000. Not everyone has that option. And, why would it take more time to process a 30 mp image vs. a 24 mp image? That's only a problem if you never update your computer. It might take a few more minutes to download the files, but no one has to babysit the computer when it's downloading. As far as paying "for a sensor of huge megapickles, just to toss most of them away," it's not as though you are paying extra for those megapixels. The cost of the 1Dx has remained fairly stable from generation to generation, I expect the 1Dx III will come in at about the same price as the 1DxII was at introduction.


----------



## ethanz (Sep 18, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Just curious where you would go. Nikon is dropping the D500.



Orly? Source?


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 18, 2019)

Dual CF-express slots certainly would a shift in Canon's obsession for antiquated interfaces. Hoping to see CFexpress slot in more cameras down the line.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> Trust me, having Dual Pixel was worth it alone. They could have changed absolutely nothing and just added that and I would have been happy! LOL


Not for me. I really only use live view when on a tripod, and in that case I’m often manually focusing (DPAF doesn’t allow TS-E lenses to AF), or if using AF then the slower CDAF is just fine (i have yet to come across a building that moves too fast for CDAF).


----------



## sanj (Sep 18, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Also, the a9II will likely be 2K less than the 1DxIII if Canon prices the 1DxIII like it did the 1DxII. Rumors are the a9II will be 5K, I am thinking the 1DxIII will be $6999. If this is what happens, I will have a hard time choosing the 1DXIII over the a9II given what I have learned about the comparative capabilities of the 1DxII and a9 after shooting them side by side for a while now. Osprey image is a9 with adapted Canon 600 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC hand held.
> View attachment 186655


Wow photo


----------



## ToonD (Sep 18, 2019)

Go Wild said:


> Yes, im also happy! Overall the files are very good. But for example the color rendering...Even in standard mode i find the reds to be very strong and I did had to make a custom mode with -3 saturation. Then that adds another problem that is you take off saturation from all colors. So when a team is red i tend to have some problems. This is more like a preference... but for me, trying to improve the saturation processing in jpeg would be fine. Specially in soccer, if you shoot for newspaper you know we need to deliver the photos ASAP and in big games some photos are sent even before first half to finish, so no time to correct in post. Then i find sometimes the noise reduction (i think is that...) to give the photo some "plasticity..." even when reduced to low...I would be happy if when you choose Low in noise reduction, noise processing could be less noticeable....
> Well, not very important things, just small things that i dont like so much....But, and it is a biiig BUT, the jpeg straight out of the camera are very good and like it!
> 
> EDIT: I put 2 examples of that exagerated reds, you can see better in the second pic.



OK I see now what you mean. Personally I take the time during a soccer match to correct in post. Just a quick edit takes maybe 20 to 30 secs. When shooting a big game we often have an editor at the office.


----------



## Danglin52 (Sep 18, 2019)

sanj said:


> Wow photo


Just out of curiosity, what version of the 600 f4 and what adaptor? Any issues with AF lag, etc. BTW - Great image. Why are you even worrying about a 1dx III if you are getting those kind of images with an adapted lens?


----------



## CampanellaFoto (Sep 18, 2019)

I'm going to be purchasing two and figure they will be the last DSLRs I ever buy. I had hoped Canon would surprise us and have a mirrorless equivalent ready for the Olympics but it doesn't look that way. 

I tried the A9 earlier this year at a Sony event for pro photographers and it was very impressive but switching is a big ordeal when you start thinking about all the small bits of gear in your bag that need to be replaced. Plus I just do not like the ergonomics of the A9 it's too small and does not feel robust like the 1D X does. For me I really want to see that technology in a larger body and can wait until someone is ready to give it to me.

I love the 1D X Mark II out of a new version I hope to get built in WiFi (stop robbing us on those transmitters), improved auto focus, better dynamic range and better high ISO performance.


----------



## Bahrd (Sep 18, 2019)

slclick said:


> Nothing but GAS gets in my way of continued use and it doesn't take herculean strength to avoid it's siren call, just a teeny bit of willpower.


Are you sure you didn't mean Odysseus? Forgive me nitpicking but... you know... the kids learn from the Internet almost exclusively now...


----------



## $winter (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> mRAW and sRAW seem to be dead with .cr3 and C-RAW having replaced them.
> 
> Dual Pixel AF already exceeds the capability of cross-type AF points on dedicated PDAF sensor arrays.
> 
> AF-S? That's a Nikon/Sony/Pentax thing. Do you mean 'One Shot AF', which is the Canon equivalent?



sorry i wrote it misleading, in Liveview-stills the 1dxmk2 does not support Continious autofocus, no reason why, 5dmkiv does!

C-RAW is not an option, for me is not saving space the argument, the argument ist speedup processing .. less pixel les processing time.. if there is the same cound of pixls it helps nothing..


----------



## keithcooper (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> If the DiG!C 5 was the last one introduced in a 1-Series body, it has been quite a while since a 1-Series body was the first to sport a new DiG!C processor.


Indeed, but I was just reacting to the original post, which implied it didn't happen. The Digic 5 was first in the 1D X (announcement - it took a long while to appear)

The appearance of different digic chips over the years and in different models. This is the latest I've used (good to see Digic 4 still going strong from 2008 [50D])



I suspect we'll see some big changes to the bottom the table in just a few years - perhaps time to spit it into DSLR and Mirrorless versions.


----------



## Treyarnon (Sep 18, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Dual CF-express slots certainly would a shift in Canon's obsession for antiquated interfaces. Hoping to see CFexpress slot in more cameras down the line.


Sorry to ask the silly question - but CFexpress slots compatible with our existing collections of CF cards?


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 18, 2019)

$winter said:


> sorry i wrote it misleading, in Liveview-stills the 1dxmk2 does not support Continious autofocus, no reason why, 5dmkiv does!



The 1DX2 has the earlier, 7D2 generation DPAF. Servo AF in Live View was introduced in the 80D.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 18, 2019)

Treyarnon said:


> Sorry to ask the silly question - but CFexpress slots compatible with our existing collections of CF cards?



No CF is based on the old IDE and CFast is based on SATA. CFExpress is based on PCI express in the same way QXD was and why Nikon users have a happier time migrating with nothing more than a firmware update. 

Note: CF and CFast have long hit their limits


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> How about the 90D then?
> 
> I definitely get the frame rate advantage. After getting the 5DII, I kept the 7D for birds with the 100-400 – the 8 fps allowed better choices for wing position. After getting the 1D X and 600/4 II, the 7D became superfluous.



Well let's see: If the reason I need to think about replacing my aging 7D Mark II is because it has 300,000+ clicks on the shutter then how much sense does it make to think about replacing it with a camera rated for 120,000 clicks that costs about the same as another 7D mark II rated for 200,000 clicks would?

Above ISO 1600 I doubt there will be much difference between the 90D and the 7D Mark II (which had slightly better DR and S/N ratio than the 80D past ISO 800, though not enough better to be significant in any real way). The real improvement with the 80D sensor was at base ISO. Under the lights and indoors shooting sports, ISO 3200 is where I live.

If spending $12K for a 600/4 was an economically viable choice in terms of still making a profit instead of going in the hole using it, then I probably wouldn't need to worry about the economic advantages of using a $1,500 APS-C sports camera with a $2,000 70-200/2.8 lens instead of using a 1D X Mark II with 300-400/2.8 lenses and still needing the 70-200 for shorter distances.


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 18, 2019)

photo212 said:


> And I will pass on any camera with a sensor >30MP.
> 
> I used to crop on a Canon EOS 10D 6MP. No issue even for 16x20" prints.
> I found the 20-24MP my sweet spot. For me, larger files just eat up more space and time.
> ...


Your second paragraph is worded like you are telling me what I should do, how I should shoot, and that I am wrong to want 30MP in a full frame camera. It comes across as arrogant and that you know how I shoot, my skill level, and that everyone should think the way you do about this topic. Just FYI, I shoot the 1DxII, a9, and 5DIV with the Canon 600mm f/4 IS II with both the 1.4x and 2x TCs. I also use blinds when needed or possible. Also, I have a 7DII. The high ISO IQ of the 7D is not what I get from the full frame cameras I use even when cropping in a bit. In my post that you quoted I stated "I" would like to see 30MP. And I base this on my experience with 20-30MP cameras, what and how I shoot, and the IQ I like to see from my images. IMO, there is nothing wrong with me wanting 30MP in a full frame body as I see 30 as the sweet spot for me. Happy shooting to you. Kingfisher image taken with 5DIV, 600 f/4 + 1.4x TC from a blind.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> ---
> 
> Within the last week, the specs for a 60 FPS BURST RATE 18.6 megapixel (5952 x 3140) Canon Full Frame camera came out which could solve ALL your fast action issues. It's a tad expensive BUT the Canon C500 Mk2 Cinema Camera is the PERFECT size and weight for your football (soccer), hockey, basketball, rugby, skiing, cycling, F1, Rallycar and other fast action sports AND for wildlife imagery.
> 
> ...



The sheer number of frames to go through? No one has got time for that.

The economic impact of spending that much on a camera to do what a $1500-2000 camera can do with cheaper lenses?

Those who select 7D Mark II bodies instead of more expensive 1D X Mark II bodies for shooting action/sports do so for economic reasons. Not only does the camera cost 1/4-1/3 as much, but a $2000 70-200/2.8 can get most of the same shots as a $6100 300/2.8 on FF can.

7D Mark II ($1500) + EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II ($1800) = $3,300

1D X Mark II ($6000) + EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II ($6100) + EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II ($1800) = $13,900


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> Trust me, having Dual Pixel was worth it alone. They could have changed absolutely nothing and just added that and I would have been happy! LOL



Not for those who never use AF in Live View.


The addition of flicker reduction is the primary thing that finally compelled me to replace my 5D Mark III with a 5D Mark IV (and make the III my backup FF body and retire my II) when the price dropped low enough. So it was worth it to me for that feature alone.

But for someone who does not shoot under flickering lighting, such as is found in most high school and small college stadiums and gyms, flicker reduction would not be a compelling differentiator.


----------



## TracerHD (Sep 18, 2019)

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the main difference between DSLR and DSLM that you don't need micro adjustment on a DSLM?
All other features (except EVF) are software based i guess. In this case we are not talking about the DSLM features we are talking about the functions and performance in Live-View.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

keithcooper said:


> Indeed, but I was just reacting to the original post, which implied it didn't happen. The Digic 5 was first in the 1D X (announcement - it took a long while to appear)
> 
> The appearance of different digic chips over the years and in different models. This is the latest I've used (good to see Digic 4 still going strong from 2008 [50D])
> 
> ...



It's been a while, but if I remember correctly, the 1D X was announced first but the 5D Mark III actually shipped first?


----------



## $winter (Sep 18, 2019)

Sharlin said:


> The 1DX2 has the earlier, 7D2 generation DPAF. Servo AF in Live View was introduced in the 80D.


ye but still stange in video that one works perfect  - i hope Mk3 gets it, becaus meanwhile i love to shoot weddings over the display, only real citical stuff, where i need the ranrate i shoot over the viefinder. This way of shooting much less exhausing. So defacto i have already a mirroless with the MK2  with a hammer battery life...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Well let's see: If the reason I need to think about replacing my aging 7D Mark II is because it has 300,000+ clicks on the shutter then how much sense does it make to think about replacing it with a camera rated for 120,000 clicks that costs about the same as another 7D mark II rated for 200,000 clicks would?
> 
> If spending $12K for a 600/4 was an economically viable choice in terms of still making a profit instead of going in the hole using it, then I probably wouldn't need to worry about the economic advantages of using a $1,500 APS-C sports camera with a $2,000 70-200/2.8 lens instead of using a 1D X Mark II with 300-400/2.8 lenses and still needing the 70-200 for shorter distances.


Regarding the thread topic, presumably the 1D X III is not in your cards. So, then...lucky for you the 7DII is widely available.


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> You stated, "I do not see anywhere that this is a DSLR except in the first sentence which is just saying a continuing possible DSLR." The first sentence is, "We’ve confirmed from a very solid source one of the worst kept secrets for 2020, that Canon will announce the EOS-1D X Mark III." If Canon announces an EOS 1D X Mark III, it will be a DSLR. Period.
> 
> Now, if you want to question the validity of this rumor more generally, and are suggesting that Canon will not release a successor to the 1D X II but instead will release a MILC that delivers the specs and performance of a 1D X III, that's a different discussion. If that's the path Canon takes, they will announce something that will not be called an EOS 1D X Mark III. That was my point.



I am sure you know all.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

TracerHD said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the main difference between DSLR and DSLM that you don't need micro adjustment on a DSLM?
> All other features (except EVF) are software based i guess. In this case we are not talking about the DSLM features we are talking about the functions and performance in Live-View.



AFMA can be a pain, but once done for a particular body/lens combo it works fairly well without needing to be redone very much, particularly for primes.

The real advantage of main sensor based AF over dedicated AF sensor based PDAF is that it's right at all subject distances _if_ the camera optically confirms AF rather than only confirming the lens moved the instructed amount (which is what the most advanced PDAF systems do when shooting fast bursts). By the time the lens has moved, the mirror is already swinging up again and the lens position is measured by position sensors rather than optically. But some DSLMs also do not wait to optically confirm AF before resetting the shutter curtains to take the next frame in a fast burst. That's why some DSLMs also have forms of micro adjustment - to calibrate the lens' AF position sensor(s).

You can't use a DSLR in Live View with your eye to a viewfinder. 
You can use a DSLM with your eye to an EVF.

There's still a fundamental difference there. Sometimes camera stability is critical in an environment where using a tripod is not practical or even possible.

Maybe there is someone somewhere that does it that way, but I know of no pro or even advanced amateur who uses a rear LCD screen to shoot sports/action stills.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> [..]
> 
> The real advantage of main sensor based AF over dedicated AF sensor based PDAF is that it's right at all subject distances _if_ the camera optically confirms AF rather than only confirming the lens moved the instructed amount (which is what the most advanced PDAF systems do when shooting fast bursts).
> [..]



And 'older' lenses don't have enough resolution in their encoders to read back small intervals, so the camera saying "Move to 7.41 meters" the lens might say "Well, I can do 7.0 or 7.5, so I'll move to 7.0 and you can tell me to do relative adjustments after that."
In one of the RF announcement interviews Canon mentioned that they have been improving the encoder resolution for a few years now due to DPAF and that the RF lenses will have The Best(TM) ones.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Regarding the thread topic, presumably the 1D X III is not in your cards. So, then...lucky for you the 7DII is widely available.



Probably not in the cards unless shooting sports miraculously again starts paying what it was paying 20 years ago.

But this sub-conversation started by David16 was about what body to replace a 7D Mark II with that doesn't cost as much as the 1D X Mark III is likely to cost. Right now it's pretty much another 7D mark II or switching to a nikon D500 with Nikon already having officially announced there will be no D500 replacement (and the price of the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8E FL VR is about $2,800 right now...).


----------



## scyrene (Sep 18, 2019)

richperson said:


> 30-32mp would not shock me. 22-24mp might be disappointing. But what if Canon could do 26-28mp but improve noise at high ISO by one stop? That could be the winner. Higher resolution is nice, but I could be pretty happy with 24mp and half or less than half of the noise at high ISO.



As far as I can gather from what knowledgable folks say, there isn't a whole stop of extra high ISO performance to be had with current technology, no matter what manufacturer we're talking about. Sensors are already nearly as efficient as they can be in low light.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I am sure you know all.


 Certainly not all, but definitely more than some.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 18, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I am sure you know all.



So rather than engaging with what he said, and gracefully acknowledging that it was correct, you make a cheap jibe. Slow clap for you.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> And 'older' lenses don't have enough resolution in their encoders to read back small intervals, so the camera saying "Move to 7.41 meters" the lens might say "Well, I can do 7.0 or 7.5, so I'll move to 7.0 and you can tell me to do relative adjustments after that."
> In one of the RF announcement interviews Canon mentioned that they have been improving the encoder resolution for a few years now due to DPAF and that the RF lenses will have The Best(TM) ones.



The older EF lenses (if we're talking about telephoto L lenses) are about as capable as the newer EF lenses in terms of the smallest increments the lens can be instructed to move, they're just not as precise when measuring exactly how far they have then moved as the newer lenses are.

The watershed for that seems to have been about 2010, at least according to Roger Cicala. I don't doubt that the RF lenses can be even more accurate with the increased bandwidth between RF body and RF lens, but the Super Telephoto IS II series are remarkably consistent from frame to frame in burst mode when used with one of the latest top tier bodies.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 18, 2019)

scyrene said:


> As far as I can gather from what knowledgable folks say, there isn't a whole stop of extra high ISO performance to be had with current technology, no matter what manufacturer we're talking about. Sensors are already nearly as efficient as they can be in low light.



Indeed. The D5 has a roughly half a stop lead over the 1DX2 and is _ridiculously_ close to a theoretical ideal sensor only limited by photon shot noise. Modern Sony FF sensors lie somewhere between the two DSLRs.


----------



## sanj (Sep 18, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> Trust me, having Dual Pixel was worth it alone. They could have changed absolutely nothing and just added that and I would have been happy! LOL


For me too


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 18, 2019)

More megapixels would be very bad news for me. If I needed many megapixels, I would buy a 5Ds, which is much cheaper. Canon still has big problems with noise. Even at ISO 100 you see a lot of noise if you try to recover shadows. Sony is in another league in that regard. If Canon really wants 30 megapixels, they either need to develope a totally new sensor technology or just buy Sony sensors like Nikon and even Phase One do. Otherwise more megapixels will mean even more noise - at least at a pixel level. 

I already booked tickets for the Olympics and will use my very old 1DX (Mark I) there unless I find $7000 somewhere under my couch.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 18, 2019)

Skyscraperfan said:


> More megapixels would be very bad news for me. If I needed many megapixels, I would buy a 5Ds, which is much cheaper. Canon still has big problems with noise. *Even at ISO 100 *you see a lot of noise if you try to recover shadows. Sony is in another league in that regard.



I think you meant "*only* at ISO 100". And interestingly NOT with the a9 which is pretty much equal to the 1DX2 in low ISO performance. And the D5 is quite a bit poorer, by the way… gee, it's almost as if extremely fast sensor readout is not compatible with extremely low readout noise! Fascinating. Admittedly the D5 and the a9 have a ⅓ to ½ stop lead at high ISOs, so there's that. But how often is that a problem in practice, when not pixel-peeping studio shots?



> Otherwise more megapixels will mean even more noise - at least at a pixel level.



Yes, if you compare apples to oranges. More pixels means MORE DETAIL and yes, more pixel-level noise. It makes zero sense to compare the noise of two photos that have different resolutions, without normalizing resolution first.


----------



## sanj (Sep 18, 2019)

Now I regret selling my EF lenses. I thought it is all about mirrorless now and should move in that direction because of the better lenses. 
Canon is making it difficult for people (like me) who are about to update their system. I had most of my gear stolen. Just 24ts and 24-70 remained which I sold. Need to start from scratch. Honestly I wish there was a mirrorless like 1dx3. I would buy that already.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 18, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Orly? Source?


Nikon Rumors


----------



## MadisonMike (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> AFMA can be a pain, but once done for a particular body/lens combo it works fairly well without needing to be redone very much, particularly for primes.
> 
> The real advantage of main sensor based AF over dedicated AF sensor based PDAF is that it's right at all subject distances _if_ the camera optically confirms AF rather than only confirming the lens moved the instructed amount (which is what the most advanced PDAF systems do when shooting fast bursts). By the time the lens has moved, the mirror is already swinging up again and the lens position is measured by position sensors rather than optically. But some DSLMs also do not wait to optically confirm AF before resetting the shutter curtains to take the next frame in a fast burst. That's why some DSLMs also have forms of micro adjustment - to calibrate the lens' AF position sensor(s).
> 
> ...


Excellent way of describing the difference of the systems. I would also add the ability of accurate focus across nearly all the sensor area. With the Sony A9 for example, 693 phase-detection autofocus points offering 93% frame coverage. The ability to hit nearly any part of the frame and keep it in focus is amazing technology.


----------



## slclick (Sep 18, 2019)

Bahrd said:


> Are you sure you didn't mean Odysseus? Forgive me nitpicking but... you know... the kids learn from the Internet almost exclusively now...


If everything has to be a teaching moment it must really suck to be a kid reading CR


----------



## sanj (Sep 18, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> I'd be surprised if its below 30 MP.
> I'll be interested if they increase the FPS.
> I assume it will be at least 1 stop better in ISO.
> I wonder how silent it will be. I can see press conferences in the future banning noisy cameras with the mirrorless option available.
> ...


30mp is ambitious. 1 stop better ISO is ambitious. It will be around 24mp and 1/4 stop better ISO.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 18, 2019)

slclick said:


> Nothing but GAS gets in my way of continued use and it doesn't take herculean strength to avoid it's siren call, just a teeny bit of willpower.





Bahrd said:


> Are you sure you didn't mean Odysseus? Forgive me nitpicking but... you know... the kids learn from the Internet almost exclusively now...


Surely Odysseus could display Herculean strength? The Herculean reference preceded the Odysseus reference so I do believe siclick is fine


----------



## Cyborx (Sep 18, 2019)

Here is my vision on this case: Canon already had the 1Dx mark III ready and was testing when Sony brought their mirrorless A7 / A9 to the market. Lots and LOTS of pro's converted to Sony, thanks to Sony's proactive way of convincing professional photographers by organising events and taking the pro's to nice hotels and tropical test sites. Canon fell asleep, the past 10 years they simply increased the shutterspeed, ISO and thought they were good to go for another 4 years. How many people have made the switch to Sony, I guess around 15 - 25%. Canon is very clearly having a hard time keeping up with all technological inventions competitors come up with.

So, the 1Dx mark III was tested, ready for market, WTF do we do with it, the Japanese must have asked themselves. There were two options:
1. We bin it, we cannot afford to launch a noisy prehistoric product while competitors are kicking with mirrorless cameras with much better performance. If we launch this product Canon will be known as the brand that is not up-to-date and selling vintage camera's.
2. We launch it anyway and see what happens. It has costed a lot to upgrade the 1Dx mark II so why putting 4 years of work to waste?

I think it is a very very risky period for Canon. They cannot afford another mistake, bare in mind the 1D mark III focus issues. I have owned two of these garbage bins and it took me 1 year to finally get Canon to admit something was severely wrong in their AF system. If Canon launches the 1Dx mark III and something is wrong with it, it's over and out. There is no way they will be back in pro business (*) like they were a few years ago. If they DON'T launch the 1Dx III in 2020 most of the pro's will be using Sony by the time the Mirrorless Pro body is ready for market somewere around 2021.

* maybe Canon does not want to be no.1 anymore when it comes to pro cameras, since Research and Development is costing a fortune.
It would be much more profitable to focus on semi-pro and consumer series (i.e. 5D series) and simply do a little RND yourself, but mainly copy stuff from other brands and put it into the semi-pro series a few months later. Canon is still a well known A-brand and I am sure lots of people are willing to buy it, even if it's not the highest megapixel camera or the shutterspeed is 1 fps less.

So...
Canon is falling behind. They have quickly launched the Canon EOS R just to have a mirrorless body on the market.
The EOS R is the camera YouTubers have quite some complaints about. It's design is not even close to what the pro's need, it only has 1 card slot and it is not silent in burst mode. Just imagine screwing an EOS R on your 400mm 2.8. Looks like attaching a post-stamp to a ... well I don't know, but the body would look small and ridiculous.

And what about all those loyal Canon pro's that -year after year- have invested in EXTREMELY expensive L-series lenses?
Canon is clearly not interested in developing EF lenses anymore, and is putting the pedal to the metal on RF series.
Bought a nice 400mm 2.8 lately? Too bad, byebye 13k. These buckets of glass are going to become useless in 2 years.
Be sure to be ahead of the game when Canon is launching new RF products, chances are the prices of EF lenses will drop like crazy.

Is it all negative and doom here? No.
I am pretty sure Canon will come up with a nice mirrorless pro body somewere end 2020 begin 2021 (and I'm pretty sure it's gonna cost 5 - 6k too).

But every day they wait will make Canon users switch to other brands... Canon has to step up, launch a mirrorless pro body ASAP!
And when they do, they have to be sure they are not launching a product that is already using outdated technology, since Sony seems to come up with new (semi) pro bodies every year.
Canon needs to increase their interval on launching new pro bodies, and they need to come up with something good SOON! Also they need to listen to their European and American users, WE HAVE BIGGER HANDS AND FINGERS HERE GUYS! So bigger grip please.. and dont put all them buttons on a square inch.

And last but not least, Canon needs to compete in pro gear pricing. The pricing has been ridiculous for the past decades, due to their monopolist status, but those times are over. And we have to thank Sony for that. So I never thought I would say this, but "thank you Sony."

Please Canon, make us (pro photographers using Canon) leading again AND charge reasonable prices.
And we'll be good to go for another decade. Focus on Photography, who needs 6K video and all that. Save that for C-series.

What we need is:
RELIABILITY, HIGH SHUTTER SPEED, WIFI, HIGH ISO PERFORMANCE, IMAGE QUALITY, FLAWLESS AUTOFOCUS, SHARPNESS, SILENCE.

Mr. Imo


----------



## Kit. (Sep 18, 2019)

Cyborx said:


> Now they have lost around 25% of the market to Sony


[citation needed]


----------



## criscokkat (Sep 18, 2019)

sanj said:


> 30mp is ambitious. 1 stop better ISO is ambitious. It will be around 24mp and 1/4 stop better ISO.


I don't think it will be that low. I don't think the Nikon D6 will be that low either. I'm guessing 28-30 for all three pro systems (canon, nikon, sony). From the snippets we've seen of the newer sensor tech in the m6ii and 90d it looks like they've solved the throughput issue. A new Digic chip might be powerful enough to replace 2-3 chips from before, off the shelf licensed designs have had enormous leaps in the last few years, a custom design could even be faster. It'll be interesting to see the outcome of this.


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 18, 2019)

> These buckets of glass are going to become useless in 2 years.



Nope, they do and will continue to work great on R bodies and for that matter even on Sony bodies. Don't like adapters, well, that of course is a personal choice, but they work great for me and I like all the lens options going this route provides me.


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 18, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Looking forward to this Canon.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Sep 18, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


The video specs sound promising but then again so did the video specs of the 5DIV, 6DII, M50, M5, EOS R, EOS RP and M6II.


----------



## flip314 (Sep 18, 2019)

rbielefeld said:


> Nope, they do and will continue to work great on R bodies and for that matter even on Sony bodies. Don't like adapters, well, that of course is a personal choice, but they work great for me and I like all the lens options going this route provides me.



I totally agree... EF glass is a great complement to the R system.

I do hope that everyone hates adapters and ditches their EF glass though.... so I can pick some up for cheap


----------



## rbielefeld (Sep 18, 2019)

flip314 said:


> I totally agree... EF glass is a great complement to the R system.
> 
> I do hope that everyone hates adapters and ditches their EF glass though.... so I can pick some up for cheap


I am totally with you on this. Please, everyone, dump your EF glass off at Goodwill so I can buy it.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 18, 2019)

keithcooper said:


> Indeed, but I was just reacting to the original post, which implied it didn't happen. The Digic 5 was first in the 1D X (announcement - it took a long while to appear)
> 
> The appearance of different digic chips over the years and in different models. This is the latest I've used (good to see Digic 4 still going strong from 2008 [50D])
> 
> ...



Just wanted to say I found this graphic highly illuminating in setting out history.

I also notice you've labeled the different "strata" (from Entry to Best) for the DSLRs. I guess my cameras are higher-level than I thought. I will say the M50 has features that the T6i does not, so it ought to be at least a Mid--unless, of course the fact that it's newer changes expectations.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 18, 2019)

Has anybody done a list of what they'd like in the 1DX MkIII? Here is mine from another thread.
I'd like:-

30MP
Illuminated buttons
Full touch screen in all modes including touch drag AF
Tilt screen
Built in intavalometer
Built in WiFi
240fps 1080 uncropped
Same stills fps
C-Log
.CR3
Much fuller wireless control via Canon app (Current software is a joke compared to CamRanger and DJI)
Uncropped 4k
Built in RT flash controller
Dual pixel sub image RAW option
Dual CFast
Newer smaller CODEC
120 4k


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2019)

Cyborx said:


> How many people have made the switch to Sony, I guess around 15 - 25%. Canon is very clearly having a hard time keeping up with all technological inventions competitors come up with.
> <snip>
> Canon is falling behind.


Your guess: 15-25% of Canon users have switched to Sony

The actual market share data: Canon has lost no market share (still at ~49% of the ILC market), Sony has gained ~3% market share (going from 14% to ~17% ILC market share in the past 2 years).

Even if your guess is correct (which seems very unlikely), it means that Canon gained as many users as they lost, so the net effect is zero.

I’ll leave you to consider the implications of the lack of data on which Mr. Imo is basing opinions.


----------



## slclick (Sep 18, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> The video specs sound promising but then again so did the video specs of the 5DIV, 6DII, M50, M5, EOS R, EOS RP and M6II.


Serious? Unhappiness over a 1 series video function is like crying about your boat not being able to tow your car.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 18, 2019)

Cyborx said:


> Here is my vision on this case: Canon already had the 1Dx mark III ready and was testing when Sony brought their mirrorless A7 / A9 to the market. Lots and LOTS of pro's converted to Sony, thanks to Sony's proactive way of convincing professional photographers by organising events and taking the pro's to nice hotels and tropical test sites. Canon fell asleep, the past 10 years they simply increased the shutterspeed, ISO and thought they were good to go for another 4 years. How many people have made the switch to Sony, I guess around 15 - 25%. Canon is very clearly having a hard time keeping up with all technological inventions competitors come up with.
> 
> So, the 1Dx mark III was tested, ready for market, WTF do we do with it, the Japanese must have asked themselves. There were two options:
> 1. We bin it, we cannot afford to launch a noisy prehistoric product while competitors are kicking with mirrorless cameras with much better performance. If we launch this product Canon will be known as the brand that is not up-to-date and selling vintage camera's.
> ...



Wow! This is bizarre. Completely delusional and divorced from reality.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 18, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Has anybody done a list of what they'd like in the 1DX MkIII? Here is mine from another thread...



My list is a little shorter:

Better Autofocus (In particular locking on eyes and staying locked on the subject -- for sports shooting)
Wider autofocus point coverage (if possible)
30-34 MP 
Slightly better high ISO performance.
Full touch screen in all modes including touch drag AF (If possible)
A sensor that isn't a dust magnet
2-4 fps bump for stills
Dual CFast
Quieter "silent" shutter


----------



## ethanz (Sep 18, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Has anybody done a list of what they'd like in the 1DX MkIII? Here is mine from another thread.



I'd like:-

24-30MP
Illuminated buttons
Full touch screen in all modes including touch drag AF
Built in WiFi
Same stills fps
.CR3
Dual CFast
A sensor that isn't a dust magnet
Quieter "silent" shutter


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 18, 2019)

SteveC said:


> Just wanted to say I found this graphic highly illuminating in setting out history.
> 
> I also notice you've labeled the different "strata" (from Entry to Best) for the DSLRs. I guess my cameras are higher-level than I thought. I will say the M50 has features that the T6i does not, so it ought to be at least a Mid--unless, of course the fact that it's newer changes expectations.



That chart appears to be a modified version of the one at Wikipedia (at the bottom of the article).

All mirrorless bodies are underneath all DSLR bodies in the chart.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 18, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> That chart appears to be a modified version of the one at Wikipedia (at the bottom of the article).
> 
> All mirrorless bodies are underneath all DSLR bodies in the chart.



I didn't think he was placing mirrorless "below" entry level DSLR (if that's what you thought I was saying). I was trying, actually to figure out where they would go if it was broken into three charts and laid side-to-side. In other words: Given the features of the M50, about what level of DSLR is it equivalent to? It ends up being above the "Mid" Ti6. BUT...because it's a few years newer, I can't say that the M50 was targeted at today's "mid" level, even if it beats out an older "mid" level.


----------



## Hector1970 (Sep 19, 2019)

sanj said:


> 30mp is ambitious. 1 stop better ISO is ambitious. It will be around 24mp and 1/4 stop better ISO.


Who knows really. I just think if its 24MP it would need a few tricks up its sleeve.
I would have thought 30MP would be no issues to Canon who will soon launch an 80MP sensor
They will need something to convince people to move off the 1DX II which is a fine camera.
A minor upgrade would be tricky.
A great focusing system would really help.


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 19, 2019)

I wasnt gonna upgrade my DX2 .... but Sh!t ....


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 19, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Who knows really. I just think if its 24MP it would need a few tricks up its sleeve.
> I would have thought 30MP would be no issues to Canon who will soon launch an 80MP sensor
> They will need something to convince people to move off the 1DX II which is a fine camera.
> A minor upgrade would be tricky.
> A great focusing system would really help.



All joking aside, yes you are correct, however its not just us DX2 guys. There are still plenty of Neuros out there sitting on the original 1dx because the dx2 wasnt enough. You’ll have a lot of generation skipping users out there like that. It’s a $6000 machine you buy to KEEP. Even if I bought the DX3 I would likely keep my DX2 and sell other Canon bodies I own.


----------



## Warrenl (Sep 19, 2019)

Mine are getting a bit long in the tooth... As long as they keep making them as good as they have previous ones I'm in. I have just replaced my first shutter after 1.4 million actuations.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 19, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> All joking aside, yes you are correct, however its not just us DX2 guys. There are still plenty of Neuros out there sitting on the original 1dx because the dx2 wasnt enough. You’ll have a lot of generation skipping users out there like that. It’s a $6000 machine you buy to KEEP. Even if I bought the DX3 I would likely keep my DX2 and sell other Canon bodies I own.



It makes sense to skip over a version if there's little change.

I have skipped every other version of Microshaft Windows and it seems to have worked out well for me because it seems like the ones I don't get turn out to be disasters. (And I've broken the pattern by using Windows 7, then not using 8...but then not using 10 either.)


----------



## David16 (Sep 19, 2019)

slclick said:


> I'm still using a 5D3 which is 2 years older than the 7D2. Nothing but GAS gets in my way of continued use and it doesn't take herculean strength to avoid it's siren call, just a teeny bit of willpower.
> 
> Perhaps your body is broken or malfunctioning but if not why cry to the heavens when you could just keep shooting with it? It was once great or at least good enough, believe me, nothing has changed. Nothing.



Body is working fine and I use it almost everyday. It was a great camera and still is. Just itchy for the “latest and the greatest.”


----------



## David16 (Sep 19, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Orly? Source?



I was speaking in general terms in defining the options Canon has given 7D Mii users. I have no idea where or what I would turn to if leaving Canon. I would really hate to even consider that. I’m just wondering what others are thinking or considering. The real, true option is keep shooting the 7D Mii until something better available. It works beautifully, not a thing wrong and takes terrific shots.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Sep 19, 2019)

If it has greatly improved AF against busy backgrounds, more coverage, a big jump to at least 30MP, dual CFExpress, 6K and IBIS, I would definitely consider this and return to Canon. I still have my Canon glass and my 500 f/4L Is not getting used that much, but I was holding on to it just in case Canon offered something great again. Still where is the new lighter 500 f4 III? I hope Canon can knock a few hundred grams off the 1DXIII too, D5 is noticeably lighter than the 1DXII. 2020 will be exicting with D6, 1DXIII and A9II (October). I am definitely updating my A9 to A9II if the 36MP resolution is true.


----------



## preppyak (Sep 19, 2019)

unfocused said:


> The 1D x is not a video camera, so don't expect any video features that might compromise it's use as a stills camera.


On the contrary, the 1DXII was leaps and bounds ahead of any Canon DSLR for video features for a long time, and still is the only Canon DSLR that shoots 4k60. And it was released 3 years ago. I absolutely believe the 6k rumor, as they'll care about matching what Panasonic is doing with the S1H. Not sure how a video feature would compromise its still use though; better processing power, faster card readouts, and quality cooling are all things a high frame rate stills camera needs to be good.

Its at a price point where Canon doesnt worry about a consumer buying it over their Cine line, since it costs as much as C200/C300. So they put everything they can into the camera, unlike the 5D, R, and xxD lines where they intentially leave out features they can clearly include.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 19, 2019)

preppyak said:


> On the contrary, the 1DXII was leaps and bounds ahead of any Canon DSLR for video features for a long time, and still is the only Canon DSLR that shoots 4k60. And it was released 3 years ago. I absolutely believe the 6k rumor, as they'll care about matching what Panasonic is doing with the S1H. Not sure how a video feature would compromise its still use though; better processing power, faster card readouts, and quality cooling are all things a high frame rate stills camera needs to be good.
> 
> Its at a price point where Canon doesnt worry about a consumer buying it over their Cine line, since it costs as much as C200/C300. So they put everything they can into the camera, unlike the 5D, R, and xxD lines where they intentially leave out features they can clearly include.



And 24 MP is where the math works out to do uncropped 6K with even whole numbers of binned pixels.


----------



## mikekx102 (Sep 19, 2019)

I only have 15K shots on my 1DX II  It's got a lot of life left in it!


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 19, 2019)

> Dual CFExpress cards



Is this the same as the CFast card that is in the 1DX Mark II? They look different.

I have the 1DX Mark I and Mark II and one thing I like is that I can use the batteries in both and the Mark II takes the CF card of the Mark I, though it has those very expensive CFast cards in the other slot. But it's nice to have back up cards and batteries (I have quite a few).

The SanDisk Extreme PRO Cfexpress Card Type B retails on Amazon UK for just under £300 for 128GB and just under £500 for 256GB. This adds considerably to the already expensive price of the camera, especially if you want to shoot video as well as stills as 128GB is not going to last long at 4K or 6K.

Someone asked about weight in one of the previous threads and I like the current weight and frequently travel with both. It is very well balanced.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 19, 2019)

expatinasia said:


> Is this the same as the CFast card that is in the 1DX Mark II? They look different.
> [..]



No, they are different. CFexpress is basically a rebranded XQD. It is however a lot faster than both CF and CFast, so, personally, I think it's the right choice for high FPS or high MP cameras. And I'll complain loudly about the price of CFexpress cards when I finally get a camera that uses those


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 19, 2019)

Thanks for explaining, koenkooi.

I would need at least two cards and a third would be ideal, and covers you in case of theft or card failure whilst on the job. That adds almost £900 to the price if I go for the 128GB, and almost £1,500 if I go for the 256GB which would be better if I wanted to shoot 4K or 6K video as well. That's very annoying.

Most of the video I do is still at 1080p. I have done a few at 4K but it is not really worth the extra time and effort for the types of videos I do.

For my stills, two 128GB would be sufficient with a third as extra security.

This extra cost will definitely come into the equation when I consider whether to buy the Mark III or not, as I am sure it will for many others too.


----------



## serhatakbal (Sep 19, 2019)

If he can't shoot 6k, I think this is my last year with a Canon...


----------



## Jinfla (Sep 19, 2019)

fps??


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Sep 20, 2019)

serhatakbal said:


> If he can't shoot 6k, I think this is my last year with a Canon...


Why do you need 6k? Just curious


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 20, 2019)

Obviously everyone needs a justification for leaving Canon camp and move elsewhere.
6K requirement non compliance in a pro level action mirrorless camera is likely a solid reason to start looking elsewhere. Sony A9ii is a 6k enabled rig, I suppose.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 20, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Sony A9ii is a 6k enabled rig, I suppose.


If not, Sony will add it via firmware because they really care about their customers.


----------



## David_E (Sep 20, 2019)

kingrobertii said:


> _Canon is *******_!


Canon and "beleaguered Apple Computer."


----------



## David_E (Sep 20, 2019)

xps said:


> _Mmmhhh....
> Sony is rumored to bring the A9II with 32-36 MP at the same fps the A9I has.
> Canon will be a lot behind, if the sensor will not be in the same league (28-....MP)._


What is it with this rage to compare Canon to Sony or Nikon? I compare Canon cameras to _my_ _requirements_, technical and ergonomic, and they pass every test. I've nothing against Sony or Nikon, certainly they are fine cameras, but they simply aren't relevant to me, even if a certain specification may look better on paper. Out in the world, neither brand can make better photos than a Canon. As good, almost certainly. But not better. Nor is the race to higher and higher pixel counts, which is driven by marketing departments and Kool-Aid drinkers, and not by engineers or serious photographers who are too busy for such nonsense.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 20, 2019)

David_E said:


> What is it with this rage to compare Canon to Sony or Nikon? I compare Canon cameras to _my_ _requirements_, technical and ergonomic, and they pass every test. I've nothing against Sony or Nikon, certainly they are fine cameras, but they simply aren't relevant to me, even if a certain specification may look better on paper. Out in the world, neither brand can make better photos than a Canon. As good, almost certainly. But not better. Nor is the race to higher and higher pixel counts, which is driven by marketing departments and Kool-Aid drinkers, and not by engineers or serious photographers who are too busy for such nonsense.



Some folks actually believe Sony hires people to troll on Canon and Nikon sites, as well as YouTube reviews and constantly point out every little spec where Sony exceeds the others while never mentioning the areas where Sony falls short compared to the others. They all do seem to be reading the same script at times... I guess it could be web crawling spam bots.


----------



## masterpix (Sep 21, 2019)

serhatakbal said:


> If he can't shoot 6k, I think this is my last year with a Canon...


I was under the impression that people by the 1DX for stills, it is not a video camera. It does shoot video but the main purpose is stills, so I wonder why 4K,6K,8K, zillion K is the factor that matters that much? What does matter is FPS (should be over 14), ISO range (which is already very high), senosr dinamic range (using Dual focus as a means to increase dynamic range), noise reduction (in high ISO), sensor size, burst shooting. I would not really care for the video 4K, 6K, 8K or whatever. If I want video (and can afford the 1Dx) I would buy a video camera dedicated for that purpose.


----------



## sid.safari (Sep 21, 2019)

Why dual CFexpress cards when DxII users already invested in the CFAST which is incredibly powerful cards still. 

One Cfast and Cfexpress would have been perfect for legacy users. Damnit Canon -- why not protect the users who have bought your halo products instead of making them shell out more every 4 years?


----------



## David_E (Sep 21, 2019)

serhatakbal said:


> _If he can't shoot 6k, I think this is my last year with a Canon.._.


That's risible. Blind tests show that viewers can't tell 720p from 6k unless they're about 2 feet from the screen.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2019)

sid.safari said:


> Why dual CFexpress cards when DxII users already invested in the CFAST which is incredibly powerful cards still.
> 
> One Cfast and Cfexpress would have been perfect for legacy users. Damnit Canon -- why not protect the users who have bought your halo products instead of making them shell out more every 4 years?


Considering it is almost certainly the last of the 1series and users already have them and the card speed is easily up to the task I agree sticking with CFast makes more sense to me, which means they won't do it! Though I would much prefer two slots the same than mixed. 

Ideally, were Canon to ask me (which they won't), I'd like two CFast slots.


----------



## sid.safari (Sep 21, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Considering it is almost certainly the last of the 1series and users already have them and the card speed is easily up to the task I agree sticking with CFast makes more sense to me, which means they won't do it! Though I would much prefer two slots the same than mixed.
> 
> Ideally, were Canon to ask me (which they won't), I'd like two CFast slots.



Look I get it. CFexpress is faster and likely to be used as the standard going forward. But why force users to shift when it's easier to give them a choice. The ones who want to pay for top of the line cards can go the CFExpress route. I imagine that for 6k video CFexpress will be a minimum -- but leave the customer an option to keep using legacy storage...and CFAST isn't even that legacy! It was until a few years ago one of the fastest protocols out there. I just don't get it with Canon sometimes. It's like someone in a black suit is twirling his razer thin moustache and saying "yes...do that...that will annoy them."


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2019)

David_E said:


> That's risible. Blind tests show that viewers can't tell 720p from 6k unless they're about 2 feet from the screen.


From my regular viewing position of 15' from a 65" screen I can easily tell the difference between 4k and 1080, I don't know how that fits in with your 'fact,' which seems dubious anyway, because you don't even include a screen size. Do you mean 2' from a 20" screen or an 85" screen?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 21, 2019)

sid.safari said:


> Look I get it. CFexpress is faster and likely to be used as the standard going forward. But why force users to shift when it's easier to give them a choice. The ones who want to pay for top of the line cards can go the CFExpress route. I image that for 6k video CFexpress will be a minimum -- but leave the customer an option to keep using legacy storage...and CFAST isn't even that legacy! It was until a few years ago one of the fastest protocols out there. I just don't get it with Canon sometimes. It's like someone in a black suit is twirling his razer thin moustache and saying "yes...do that...that will annoy them."



They could do a Nikon and launch a legacy dual CFast version and a dual CFExpress version. Franky, they should not have implemented CFast at all. SATA was already on its way out so they must have caught on that It was a dead end.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2019)

sid.safari said:


> Look I get it. CFexpress is faster and likely to be used as the standard going forward. But why force users to shift when it's easier to give them a choice. The ones who want to pay for top of the line cards can go the CFExpress route. I image that for 6k video CFexpress will be a minimum -- but leave the customer an option to keep using legacy storage...and CFAST isn't even that legacy! It was until a few years ago one of the fastest protocols out there. I just don't get it with Canon sometimes. It's like someone in a black suit is twirling his razer thin moustache and saying "yes...do that...that will annoy them."


Nikon did that with the D5 and XQD and CF cards. I dot think it worked out too well for them but who actually knows. For sure I never saw a D5 with CF cards....

The problem with mixed cards is that the camera can only run at the slowest one. I basically never used the SD slot in my 1DS MkIII's because it slowed the camera down to the slower card, same with the 1DX MkII and CF ad CFast. Only the 1DX got dual CF cards and that can be used effectively with no speed penalty for genuine real time backup.


----------



## sid.safari (Sep 21, 2019)

Codebunny said:


> They could do a Nikon and launch a legacy dual CFast version and a dual CFExpress version. Franky, they should not have implemented CFast at all. SATA was already on its way out so they must have caught on that It was a dead end.



I agree. Canon picked the wrong horse...that being said Cfast is no donkey. I'll be surprised if the DxIII pushes the CFast to the limit except possibly in 6k video. But for all other functions Cfast has been proven to work very well. Hopefully they follow Nikon and do a dual release...anything less is insulting.


----------



## Bert (Sep 21, 2019)

Dual C-Fast = user is locked in ‘old’ tech with ‘low’ performance - bad camera maker!
Dual CFexpress = user’s old cards are rendered useless & user is forced to buy expensive new cards - bad camera maker!
C-Fast plus CFexpress = top performance is only available without the essential dual card backup - bad camera maker!
Hope that summary helps Canon (& others) with their decision making ...


----------



## sid.safari (Sep 21, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> The problem with mixed cards is that the camera can only run at the slowest one. I basically never used the SD slot in my 1DS MkIII's because it slowed the camera down to the slower card, same with the 1DX MkII and CF ad CFast. Only the 1DX got dual CF cards and that can be used effectively with no speed penalty for genuine real time backup.



I agree about the speed -- you do sacrifice some speed. But CFast isn't slow...so the lag may not be noticeable unless you are doing some extreme stuff (dual saving 6k vid perhaps isn't a good idea). But yeah...it's a fair point. It's basically options vs speed. I like options.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 21, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> From my regular viewing position of 15' from a 65" screen I can easily tell the difference between 4k and 1080, I don't know how that fits in with your 'fact,' which seems dubious anyway, because you don't even include a screen size. Do you mean 2' from a 20" screen or an 85" screen?


Wow! Bionic eyes!


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2019)

stevelee said:


> Wow! Bionic eyes!


No I have relatively poor acuity but I am 56. My wife, who is younger, can tell the differences even easier than I can. That doesn't mean I am particularly enamored with the 4k overly crisp look but as I have spent a lifetime looking at a smoother aesthetic to me 4k often jars my brain too much. I do like the look of overly fast shutter speeds to frame rate though so maybe I am unusual.

Just go look in a decent TV shop at their various models, it isn't difficult to see differences in the screens, sure in a 'blind test' saying this is one thing and that is another is difficult, when you make comparisons the differences become much more apparent.

I can tell if my internet is throttling 4k streams from Netflix to lower resolution, I don't think I am special in any way. Its like when you look at a super-resolution print, the maths says you can't tell the difference between 300ppi and 700ppi, but print it and compare the two and you can. How valuable that difference is is the moot point.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 21, 2019)

OK, so you can tell oversharpened pictures from those that are not.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 21, 2019)

serhatakbal said:


> If he can't shoot 6k, I think this is my last year with a Canon...



LOL. Repeat ad infinitum every year, increasing the number before the letter K


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2019)

stevelee said:


> OK, so you can tell oversharpened pictures from those that are not.


If that is the conclusion you want to draw from the several real world examples I gave then feel comfortable with your opinion, clearly there is no point to anything I say...


----------



## richperson (Sep 21, 2019)

David_E said:


> That's risible. Blind tests show that viewers can't tell 720p from 6k unless they're about 2 feet from the screen.



This is completely true. But, if you shoot in 6k, you can crop down in post, which gives you a lot of flexibility. You could essentially fix your zoom on a full theater set and the do all the zooming in post and still come out with nice 1080 if you want.

I do use my 1DXii as a second video camera (after the R), but the video specs were not a factor in my buying it and I don't really care what the video specs on the iii are as long as the camera is even better for shooting sports and low light situations.


----------



## richperson (Sep 21, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> From my regular viewing position of 15' from a 65" screen I can easily tell the difference between 4k and 1080, I don't know how that fits in with your 'fact,' which seems dubious anyway, because you don't even include a screen size. Do you mean 2' from a 20" screen or an 85" screen?



You have better eyes than me. I have a 100" screen with a laser projector. Sitting about 10-15' from the screen I can hardly tell a difference in 4k and 1080 resolution. I can certainly see the HDR difference, which is why I buy 4k discs, but in normal watching I don't miss much with the 1080 disks.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 21, 2019)

richperson said:


> You have better eyes than me. I have a 100" screen with a laser projector. Sitting about 10-15' from the screen I can hardly tell a difference in 4k and 1080 resolution. I can certainly see the HDR difference, which is why I buy 4k discs, but in normal watching I don't miss much with the 1080 disks.



Many people overlook the upscaling ability of a TV. With some TV's, 1080p from 15 ft away can be nearly indistinguishable from 4k; with others, the difference is obvious even further back. And then there is compression of streamed material, other factors, etc.

I'm not familiar with projectors.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 21, 2019)

Time to make a prediction with no insider news to back it up.....

I predict that this camera will have quad processors!


----------



## stevelee (Sep 21, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> If that is the conclusion you want to draw from the several real world examples I gave then feel comfortable with your opinion, clearly there is no point to anything I say...


There are so many apples and oranges in the bunch, that was a start on my part. Compression, streaming, bitrates, etc., are all factors, including sharpening algorithms. At least you didn't say you could tell 720p from 1080i. For people with less than 20/15 vision, around 8 feet is supposedly the distance where one can start to see the difference between 4K and 1080p on a screen about 65" diagonal. I don't doubt that you see differences, but many of them are likely artifacts of something other than just resolution. And you are right that upscaling can be done really well. I'm sitting two feet from my 27" 5K monitor, and when I watch some 1080p material full screen, it can look really good. It is hard to see much difference between upscaled 4K and upscaled 1080p. On my 46" 1080p TV seen from 10 feet away, I think I can often see a difference between 1080i received OTA from the same station seen via cable.


----------



## richperson (Sep 22, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Many people overlook the upscaling ability of a TV. With some TV's, 1080p from 15 ft away can be nearly indistinguishable from 4k; with others, the difference is obvious even further back. And then there is compression of streamed material, other factors, etc.
> 
> I'm not familiar with projectors.



My projector does upscale, so that may be part of the reason I can't see a big difference.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 23, 2019)

richperson said:


> You have better eyes than me. I have a 100" screen with a laser projector. Sitting about 10-15' from the screen I can hardly tell a difference in 4k and 1080 resolution. I can certainly see the HDR difference, which is why I buy 4k discs, but in normal watching I don't miss much with the 1080 disks.



With projectors screen irregularities tend to limit resolution.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 23, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I was under the impression that people by the 1DX for stills, it is not a video camera. It does shoot video but the main purpose is stills, so I wonder why 4K,6K,8K, zillion K is the factor that matters that much? What does matter is FPS (should be over 14), ISO range (which is already very high), senosr dinamic range (using Dual focus as a means to increase dynamic range), noise reduction (in high ISO), sensor size, burst shooting. I would not really care for the video 4K, 6K, 8K or whatever. If I want video (and can afford the 1Dx) I would buy a video camera dedicated for that purpose.



I made a similar statement once... (be ready to read several pages of replies to see the full conversation)





__





Canon EOS-1D X Mark III field testing has begun [CR2]


In THEORY, using the sensor is far superior. Period. The reason off-mirror PDAF sensors maintain some AF advantages even today is because they can be purpose built to more accurately measure phase differences and predict the correct distance the lens has to move. On sensor PDAF and DPAF...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## richperson (Sep 23, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> With projectors screen irregularities tend to limit resolution.



I think as someone else mentioned, my projector definitely upscales 1080 to 4k, so that likely helps a lot with making the difference harder to see.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2019)

richperson said:


> I think as someone else mentioned, my projector definitely upscales 1080 to 4k, so that likely helps a lot with making the difference harder to see.


I think his point was not about the projector, but about the screen. If you're projecting onto a textured surface (which most screens are), subtle differences (and even less subtle ones) will be more difficult to perceive.


----------



## masterpix (Sep 23, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> I made a similar statement once... (be ready to read several pages of replies to see the full conversation)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks, it was long.


----------



## padam (Sep 25, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I was under the impression that people by the 1DX for stills, it is not a video camera. It does shoot video but the main purpose is stills, so I wonder why 4K,6K,8K, zillion K is the factor that matters that much? What does matter is FPS (should be over 14), ISO range (which is already very high), senosr dinamic range (using Dual focus as a means to increase dynamic range), noise reduction (in high ISO), sensor size, burst shooting. I would not really care for the video 4K, 6K, 8K or whatever. If I want video (and can afford the 1Dx) I would buy a video camera dedicated for that purpose.


Just one small problem with that: what if someone is actually serious about photo And video, but want One camera that can do Both very well?  If one buys a cinema camera, there always has to be a second camera in the bag just to be able to take stills as well.
Plenty of people (who are not sports photographers hired by agencies) get the 1DX II to shoot video, but that does not mean that they won't utilise its still capabilities as well when needed.
Of course there are other cameras which really aim to fill in this exact same target audience, and yet none of them manage to really nail it so far (maybe intentionally).
The 1DX II is already strong as-is, so even with minor tweaks to enhance it in both ways will be enough for its target audience. More interesting is what they are going to do lower down their product range, besides the sheer speed and best AF, what other features will be restricted to keep them at a fair distance from the top level.


----------



## masterpix (Sep 25, 2019)

padam said:


> Just one small problem with that: what if someone is actually serious about photo And video, but want One camera that can do Both very well?  If one buys a cinema camera, there always has to be a second camera in the bag just to be able to take stills as well.
> Plenty of people (who are not sports photographers hired by agencies) get the 1DX II to shoot video, but that does not mean that they won't utilise its still capabilities as well when needed.
> Of course there are other cameras which really aim to fill in this exact same target audience, and yet none of them manage to really nail it so far (maybe intentionally).
> The 1DX II is already strong as-is, so even with minor tweaks to enhance it in both ways will be enough for its target audience. More interesting is what they are going to do lower down their product range, besides the sheer speed and best AF, what other features will be restricted to keep them at a fair distance from the top level.



It is like wanting to have a family race car. You can have a race car, but I wonder if they make it a 5 seat race car. on the other hand, a family car is nto expected to drive as fast, for it needs to accomodate different needs. Any combination will mean that you give up on some of the features of one to accomodate the other. You need to buy a race car for the races and a family car to bring the family to see you race with the other car. 

One can have diffeferent opinion about what they like to see in a cemara, however, we also need to be realistic that every camera, or any device for that matter, is a compromise between many, sometimes different, needs, and how technology can perfomr them all. You need to loose some to gain others.


----------



## padam (Sep 25, 2019)

masterpix said:


> It is like wanting to have a family race car. You can have a race car, but I wonder if they make it a 5 seat race car. on the other hand, a family car is nto expected to drive as fast, for it needs to accomodate different needs. Any combination will mean that you give up on some of the features of one to accomodate the other. You need to buy a race car for the races and a family car to bring the family to see you race with the other car.
> 
> One can have diffeferent opinion about what they like to see in a cemara, however, we also need to be realistic that every camera, or any device for that matter, is a compromise between many, sometimes different, needs, and how technology can perfomr them all. You need to loose some to gain others.


It is a bad analogy in this case. It is simply a case of paying more for more features. The good thing is that technology in recent years has gotten so good, that it is not necessary anymore, the capabilities are already there to produce products with certain features, but the bad thing is that they are simply deliberately limit some of these features. (Or what others perceive as 'not trying as hard as they can')

With some differences between steps, Canon's model lineup is structured in a way, that a higher-end camera is better in photo And video as well with some features missing. Like C-Log in the case of the 1DX II, but that does not mean that the video is not good, far from it, but just this one single software related feature would already lift the 1DX III even higher, and it could get IBIS as well, which would be another significant step forward, and it is questionable where they will draw the line of which level of product can have this.

So basically, to have Canon's best video features in a stills camera like 4k60p or 1080p 120fps with DPAF one has to go to get the sports body amongst them - unless they decide to change their marketing strategy.


----------



## HarryFilm (Sep 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> The sheer number of frames to go through? No one has got time for that.
> 
> The economic impact of spending that much on a camera to do what a $1500-2000 camera can do with cheaper lenses?
> 
> ...




---

Hmmmmm..... !!!! You DO KNOW I'm being sarcastic right? 

I do know MOST people would NOT do what I have suggested! I have actually used the C700 FF for my soccer/hockey games and after-work-hours funtime MANY TIMES just for such type of 60 fps burst rate 18 megapixel still image gathering. It's a little overkill ... BUT WHY NOT?

Since I've got acces to 40+ of the C700's and probably 60 of the C300mk2 and who knows how many 1Dx2's, 1Dc's, 5D 3/4's, Arri Alexa's, Sony Venices and XDcams, I can pretty much take any camera and cinema lens kits I want from the parent aerospace company's inventory. I just use whatever works for ME! 

AND YES! I actually DO have permission from the owner(s) to use ANY of the gear for personal use so long I buy the gear insurance and 3rd party liability insurance which works out to barely $300 a month on an all-perils and COMPREHENSIVE insurance gear and 3rd party liability policy !!! 

Don't skimp and go for the super-cheapest policy! Get the one that actually COVERS WHAT you do and WHERE you actually go! No point in spending wasted money on cheap insurance if the claim is denied because you're too cheap to by a decent policy! Shop around because policy fine print and prices are VARIABLE ranging from $99 US per month to $2000 US per month!

NOTE: When you have access to or use expensive gear (Your own or others!) , MAKE SURE YOU ALWAYS BUY AND HAVE an ALL-PERILS and COMPREHENSIVE insurance policy that covers ALL COUNTRIES you travel to AND which includes theft and damage to gear (2 million US+) , water/weather damage, Acts-of-God, vandalism, 3rd party liability ($10 million US), accidental self-breakage, etc. AND REMEMBER to take PHOTOS of the production gear on your smartphone (including the gear serial numbers and model number tags usually stamped or printed on the underside of your camera and production gear) BEFORE you take it out! I make sure my gear photos have a date/time stamp BURNED into the JPEG photos in case something happens and the insurance company wants to see PHOTO EVIDENCE of before and after gear damage!

.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 26, 2019)

padam said:


> It is a bad analogy in this case. It is simply a case of paying more for more features. The good thing is that technology in recent years has gotten so good, that it is not necessary anymore, the capabilities are already there to produce products with certain features, but the bad thing is that they are simply deliberately limit some of these features. (Or what others perceive as 'not trying as hard as they can')
> 
> With some differences between steps, Canon's model lineup is structured in a way, that a higher-end camera is better in photo And video as well with some features missing. Like C-Log in the case of the 1DX II, but that does not mean that the video is not good, far from it, but just this one single software related feature would already lift the 1DX III even higher, and it could get IBIS as well, which would be another significant step forward, and it is questionable where they will draw the line of which level of product can have this.
> 
> So basically, to have Canon's best video features in a stills camera like 4k60p or 1080p 120fps with DPAF one has to go to get the sports body amongst them - unless they decide to change their marketing strategy.



You can get C-log in the 5D Mark IV for an about $100 premium. That's still far cheaper than a 1D X Mark II.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> You can get C-log in the 5D Mark IV for an about $100 premium. That's still far cheaper than a 1D X Mark II.


I keep hearing that C-Log implementation is a bit of a joke in 5D IV. I am not a video shooter.


----------



## padam (Sep 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> You can get C-log in the 5D Mark IV for an about $100 premium. That's still far cheaper than a 1D X Mark II.


Or there is the EOS R similar but even cheaper with C-Log included. But is that good enough? 4k 30fps, the 4k crop is way more, the rolling shutter is way more, only 720p 120 fps and no AF at all in that mode. As I said before, yes it is not at the same price level, but it is also much weaker overall (if one intends to use these extra features or one could try and live with it as-is). If they can put what the 1DX II does now a level down in the next generation of cameras, it would be a big step up(because I don't think 6k is that necessary), but maybe they simply won't to keep them at a fair distance.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 27, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> I keep hearing that C-Log implementation is a bit of a joke in 5D IV. I am not a video shooter.



IMNSHO, anyone who wants C-Log in a camera designed primarily for stills is a joke.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 27, 2019)

padam said:


> Or there is the EOS R similar but even cheaper with C-Log included. But is that good enough? 4k 30fps, the 4k crop is way more, the rolling shutter is way more, only 720p 120 fps and no AF at all in that mode. As I said before, yes it is not at the same price level, but it is also much weaker overall (if one intends to use these extra features or one could try and live with it as-is). If they can put what the 1DX II does now a level down in the next generation of cameras, it would be a big step up(because I don't think 6k is that necessary), but maybe they simply won't to keep them at a fair distance.



Imagine that! Having to pay more to get more. It's unfair, I tell you, TOTALLY UNFAIR! They should give us EVERYTHING in the cheapest models. Everything!!


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 27, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> IMNSHO, anyone who wants C-Log in a camera designed primarily for stills is a joke.


Disagree. Canon explicitly charge Clients for the feature. If in their opinion c-log implementation is not up to sniff And not in line with their standards then they should not offer substandard quality or at least do not charge.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 27, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Disagree. Canon explicitly charge Clients for the feature. If in their opinion c-log implementation is not up to sniff And not in line with their standards then they should not offer substandard quality or at least do not charge.



You are free to disagree, but it's not going to change my opinion.

Canon charges a minimal fee that is less than even the cost of a non-invasive "clean and check" to enable C-log in the 5D Mark IV. If you insure your 5D Mark IV for the full MSRP, UPS charges you more to ship it to Canon than Canon charges to do the alteration and ship it back to you.

It's up to the customer to decide if the limited added functionality, though not as extensive as spending several thousands of dollars more to upgrade to a camera in the cinema line, is worth the $100. You get what you pay for. You seem to think it is criminal to not give the full $3K worth of added value to those who only pay $100.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 27, 2019)

No, I think you are not listening or having a bad day. I have said: it is not typical of Canon to offer a substandard quality at charge.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 27, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Disagree. Canon explicitly charge Clients for the feature. If in their opinion c-log implementation is not up to sniff And not in line with their standards then they should not offer substandard quality or at least do not charge.



That's about like saying "If in their opinion the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 is not up to sniff And not in line with the standards they have for the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS, then they should not offer substandard quality or at least do not charge."

One's a $199 (or less when bundled in a kit) lens, the other is a $1,350 lens. But both should be held to the same standard?


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 27, 2019)

Canon positioned this option as Pro feature:






Canon Learning Center | Canon U.S.A., Inc.


Explore the Canon Digital Learning Center to find everything ranging from buying guides to training courses.




www.usa.canon.com





your comparison to a kit lens isn't quite relevant. please notice references to an extensive post production processing and multi camera setup.

anyway, let's leave it right there.


----------



## padam (Sep 27, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Imagine that! Having to pay more to get more. It's unfair, I tell you, TOTALLY UNFAIR! They should give us EVERYTHING in the cheapest models. Everything!!


Of course not, the conversation wasn't even about that at all, more like buying a sports camera for video purposes...


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 27, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> your comparison to a kit lens isn't quite relevant. please notice references to an extensive post production processing and multi camera setup.



Sure it is. EOS still cameras with C-log are the entry level cameras into shooting video with C-log output, just like the Rebels and kit lenses are the entry level into the EOS system for stills and H.264 level video.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 27, 2019)

thank you.


----------



## Viggo (Oct 3, 2019)

Anyone else scouting for new cameras?


----------

