# 1dx is it all hype or the camera we have been waiting for?



## cpsico (Jan 21, 2012)

I was just wondering why canon would announce a camera so far in the future without being able to deliver? Is it prevent more people to defecting to Nikon when the D4 ships much earlier? I have enjoyed all of my canon gear very much, including the "dreaded" 1d mark III which i never had issues with in the least way, but i have to admit i have been tempted by the low light performance of the D3s. I wouldn't just ship entirely but there are many times i could use that kind of low noise high ISO performance. Esp in uptight catholic church weddings where even diplomatic use of flash is discouraged. 

Has anyone really seen any high iso samples from a 1DX yet? 

Don't get me wrong, i love my canon gear and have had wonderful experiences with canon service. I just was wondering what canon actually has up there sleeve with the 1dx


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jan 21, 2012)

ANOTHER topic about this.... :


----------



## cpsico (Jan 21, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> ANOTHER topic about this.... :


LOL yes another thread, but a valid question, seems likely canon jumped the gun on the announcement.


----------



## bigblue1ca (Jan 21, 2012)

There are several recent threads on this topic. My two cents are it comes down to their marketing strategy and while I wish I had a 1DX now and not in a few months, I think their strategy has worked. They've generated a lot of hype. Having said that, the 1DX better live up to the hype or Canon will find themselves in big trouble with all the negativity and backlash that would come from the 1DX not living up to expectations.


----------



## cpsico (Jan 21, 2012)

bigblue1ca said:


> There are several recent threads on this topic. My two cents are it comes down to their marketing strategy and while I wish I had a 1DX now and not in a few months, I think their strategy has worked. They've generated a lot of hype. Having said that, the 1DX better live up to the hype or Canon will find themselves in big trouble with all the negativity and backlash that would come from the 1DX not living up to expectations.


Much agreed, I don't think a third flagship sports camera in a row trumped Nikon's flagship sports camera would be very good at all for Canons dominance in the market.


----------



## JR (Jan 21, 2012)

I do hope it is the camera we have been waiting for because if it's not, Canon has more to loose then we have! I can always sell my lenses if ever I feel they really missed the boat (which will not happen but anyway), however Canon might loose a lot of customers and they are not able to compete with Nikon's new line of camera.

I am confident Canon will get this right and while they followed a different Marketing strategy then Nikon (nothing wrong with that) I think the 1DX may actually be the better machine here compared to the D4 on several aspect (...like the AF - yes I know about the f8 thing but I think they did this to create a better system overall...)...

I am getting one anyway...will be much better then what exist today...


----------



## distant.star (Jan 21, 2012)

I think The Majors said it best back in 1962:

Last night I had
a wonderful dream about you
Last night I had a dream
hope that it will come true

We were all alone
you told me that you cared
And I never will forget
how happy I was that we were there

Last night I had a wonderful dream
And now that I'm alone with you
My wonderful dream will come true
(sho bop-be-wops a wonderful dream)
(sho bop-be-wops a wonderful dream)


I don't really care why they made such an announcement; as I've said before I'm sure the marketing satans are behind it. When I see a real product I'll make a judgement about it.

Until then, it's a wonderful dream.....(sho bop-be-wops a wonderful dream)


----------



## waving_odd (Jan 21, 2012)

cpsico said:


> I was just wondering why canon would announce a camera so far in the future without being able to deliver?



This interview (translation) is with the 1D X engineers from Japan. They admit to their consideration of Nikon, Olympics, and pro customers.

"... Timing of the 1D X announcement was to quell questions about the 1Ds replacement and to warn pros before the Olympics, and in consideration of Nikon, which they consider to be their biggest competitor when it comes to pros..."


----------



## traveller (Jan 21, 2012)

Not that I'll have the pennies to buy a 1D X, but how can anyone hope to answer this question definitively until they are able to get their hands on a production camera? 

FWIW the 1D X looks like it will be a more significant development for Canon users than the D4 will be for Nikon users, but that's mainly because the D3s is already such a good camera. What Canon shooters are currently lacking and what the 1D X looks like it will address, is the need for a fast shooting camera that has really clean high ISO capabilities. Whilst the 1D MkIV was good, it was not in D3s territory (and according to DXO Mark, not in 5D MkII territory either).


----------



## AG (Jan 21, 2012)

This is sort of a loaded question.

Mainly because the 1D-X or ANY camera no matter how much 1 person loves it will be good enough for everyone. 

I for one don't need 14fps shooting or any of those features but i like the form factor, low light and the video capabilities.

Would i use the Ethernet connection.....NO, would i have preferred to see maybe a thunderbolt port added and headphone jack...YES.

It all comes down to the personal choice. You will either love it of hate it.

As for the marketing hype.... well thats marketing. 
They will always need to make the camera look like the next big thing you need now, otherwise people will always be holding off for the next generation which will be bigger and better and faster etc, but eventually will never live up to expectations.

On saying all that, would i buy one and put up with the limitations it has for what i shoot, HELL YES!, because despite its limitations its still a freaking amazing piece of kit.


----------



## JR (Jan 21, 2012)

traveller said:


> FWIW the 1D X looks like it will be a more significant development for Canon users than the D4 will be for Nikon users, but that's mainly because the D3s is already such a good camera. What Canon shooters are currently lacking and what the 1D X looks like it will address, is the need for a fast shooting camera that has really clean high ISO capabilities. Whilst the 1D MkIV was good, it was not in D3s territory (and according to DXO Mark, not in 5D MkII territory either).



You are bang on _traveller_, this is for sure one area we are looking the 1DX to address. I think there will be others though that will be equally important like its new AF system and metering system (poeple keep forgeting that this alone will be powered by a DIGIT 4 processor!!!) to name a few...

With the D4 at 16MP and the 1DX at 18MP, I cant see how their respective ISO performance would be light years away - I mean once fix the pixel size, I am sure each engineering team have had much time to think how to process the data to provide a good ISO performance. Canon kept talking about the 1DX and its new revolutionary processor, they must did something right!

At least we all hope right!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 21, 2012)

I can't say it's the camera 'we' have been waiting for...but it is the camera *I* have been waiting for. Better than 7D AF and frame rate, better than 5DII ISO performance (presumably, although I'd settle for equivalent), and better ergonomics than both (especially the joystick for portrait orientation). 

Is it missing anything? For me, the big missing feature is enough MP for an APS-C 'crop mode' with 12 MP or more. Accordingly, I'll be keeping my 7D for birds/wildlife. Secondarily, f/8 AF - and I'll admit I was hoping for that to use a 100-400mm or 400/5.6 with a 1.4x TC to compensate for the crop factor of the 7D; that just confirms that what I really need is the 500/4 II, for which I'll start saving after getting the 1D X (and perhaps the 24-70 II if that comes out).


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 21, 2012)

Of course you can always get up close - taken with 1Ds3


----------



## acoll123 (Jan 22, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I can't say it's the camera 'we' have been waiting for...but it is the camera *I* have been waiting for. Better than 7D AF and frame rate, better than 5DII ISO performance (presumably, although I'd settle for equivalent), and better ergonomics than both (especially the joystick for portrait orientation).
> 
> Is it missing anything? For me, the big missing feature is enough MP for an APS-C 'crop mode' with 12 MP or more. Accordingly, I'll be keeping my 7D for birds/wildlife. Secondarily, f/8 AF - and I'll admit I was hoping for that to use a 100-400mm or 400/5.6 with a 1.4x TC to compensate for the crop factor of the 7D; that just confirms that what I really need is the 500/4 II, for which I'll start saving after getting the 1D X (and perhaps the 24-70 II if that comes out).



Neuro - I think you and I are looking for the same thing. I have a 7D for sports and wildlife and a 5DII for everything else. It would be great to have a single body that had the best qualities of both (autofocus and ISO). It seems, from what I can gather, that the 1D4 doesn't have quite as good ISO performance as the 5DII. Is that your impression as well? I have thought about getting a 1D4 (hopefully if the prices drop) after the 1DX comes out and selling both the 7D and 5DII. Have you intentionally passed on the 1D4 because of the ISO performance?


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 22, 2012)

acoll123 said:


> It seems, from what I can gather, that the 1D4 doesn't have quite as good ISO performance as the 5DII. Is that your impression as well?



Definitely not mine! The 1D4 is comfortable about 1 stop more than the 5DII


----------



## aeturnum (Jan 22, 2012)

It seems pretty clear that Canon was reacting to Nikon's announcement, but I think it makes a lot of sense from their perspective. The announcement isn't about generating sales, so much as reassuring people who use Canon's pro cameras that a new model is coming. The last flagship camera model was released in 2007, which was a long time ago in terms of technology. The announcement reassures pro photographers that a new model is coming soon and lets them know where Canon is going in terms of features.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 22, 2012)

aeturnum said:


> It seems pretty clear that Canon was reacting to Nikon's announcement.



Reacting to WHAT announcement? The one Nikon made a couple of months later??

The Nikon and Canon bodies will be available within a few weeks of each other, this is not a long time as was noted.

Since neither is available yet, we only have approximate availability dates to go by, and either or both might slide.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 22, 2012)

acoll123 said:


> Have you intentionally passed on the 1D4 because of the ISO performance?



Not really. More that I wasn't keen on the APS-H compromise, lack of UWA, etc. APS-C is best when focal length-limited, FF is best when not. APS-H is very good for both, but best for neither. 



briansquibb said:


> acoll123 said:
> 
> 
> > It seems, from what I can gather, that the 1D4 doesn't have quite as good ISO performance as the 5DII. Is that your impression as well?
> ...



Is that based on testing, or an impression? For ISO noise, DxOMark ranks the 5DII a little less than 1/2-stop better than the 1DIV. I haven't tested that, but they rank the 5DII a little less than 1.33-stops better than the 7D - and that aligns well with my empirical testing. The 1DIV clearly surpasses the 7D for ISO, but I think you're among the few who believe it bests the 5DII.


----------



## cpsico (Jan 22, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> acoll123 said:
> 
> 
> > Have you intentionally passed on the 1D4 because of the ISO performance?
> ...


I love my 5D mkII I have only seen high iOS samples of the 1 d mkIV but it's clear the 5d has better color but the mark IV seems not to band when really pushed. The 5d has a little more shadow noise at low iSO's than even my lowly 1d mkIII with a tad bit more chroma noise, but when it comes to richness of color the 5d markII is really great and with careful post processing high iSO's are wonderful up 3200, provided you have a proper exposure.


----------



## ejenner (Jan 22, 2012)

Hype. Unless they doubled the quantum efficiency of the sensor and found a way of packing more electrons into a smaller space than previously possible and reducing the gap between photosites without getting leakage.

It will all look amazing for the first few months, then someone will find out how they are getting such good ISO50000 images and we'll find the catch.

Maybe loosing DR at ISO 100-200, maybe NR on the RAW files, who knows.

No I think the DR and IQ will be another incremental improvement and everyone will rave about the fps and maybe AF for a while, then it will just become another good camera, a bit better than previous models.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 22, 2012)

cpsico said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > acoll123 said:
> ...



I have often shot at iso 12800 with the 1D4 and got more usable images than the 5DII at iso6400. I am not so worried about lab tests - I am told that the the 1D4 has noise issues at iso400 - but these are not intrusive on A3 prints - same up to iso 3200 with just dome noise visible at iso 6400.

I am not too worried about the technical side - just the quality of the picture as seen by my eyes and my clients' eyes


----------



## Viggo (Jan 22, 2012)

From my personal experience the 5d2 is superior to the mk4 at lower than 400 iso, but at 2500 and up, the mkIV is much better, at least it has noise that is more easily removable with Lr. And better looking noise. 

Remember that the mk4 is better at half stops , 160, 320, 640 and so on, whilst the 5d is better at full stops.


----------



## pwp (Jan 23, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Is it missing anything? For me, the big missing feature is enough MP for an APS-C 'crop mode' with 12 MP or more. Accordingly, I'll be keeping my 7D for birds/wildlife.
> 
> 
> acoll123 said:
> ...



When both you guys get your 1DX will you really be reaching for your 7D when shooting action? 
If the AF and tracking of the 1DX works as advertised, this will be the action body of choice. 
The 7D will of course have it's days when you need f/8 AF.

Paul Wright


----------



## willrobb (Jan 23, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I am not too worried about the technical side - just the quality of the picture as seen by my eyes and my clients' eyes



Absolutely. As long as the camera delivers in the medium you need it for and you and your clients are happy that's all we can ask for.


----------



## acoll123 (Jan 23, 2012)

pwp said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Is it missing anything? For me, the big missing feature is enough MP for an APS-C 'crop mode' with 12 MP or more. Accordingly, I'll be keeping my 7D for birds/wildlife.
> ...



I will need to sell both my 7D and 5DII to get the 1DX so I am counting on it to have at least (preferably better) the autofocus capabilities of the 7D and at least (preferably better) the IQ (at 3200 or so) of the 5DII. I shoot as a hobby (most of the time) so I am not too worried about having a backup body. Too give you an example, I shot my daughter's basketball game yesterday and put my 70-200 IS II on the 5DII and shot at ISO 3200 / 2.8 / 1/500th and put my 50 1.2 on the 7D and shot at ISO 1600 / 1.8 / 1/500th. Here are two sample shots, 1 each from the 5DII and 7D set-ups. Can you guess which is which with looking at the EXIF data?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 23, 2012)

pwp said:


> When both you guys get your 1DX will you really be reaching for your 7D when shooting action?
> If the AF and tracking of the 1DX works as advertised, this will be the action body of choice.
> The 7D will of course have it's days when you need f/8 AF.



General action, no. But I'll reach for my 7D when I know I'm going to be focal length-limited, i.e. when I'd be shooting at 400mm on the 7D and still need to crop a bit. If the 1D X had f/8 AF, I'd be tempted to use 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4x TC (probably with the prime vs. my 100-400mm) - at least, I'd try it. But practically speaking, I'm going to need want the 500mm f/4L IS II and 1.4x III on the 1D X before I consider abandoning APS-C. 

BTW, the 7D doesn't AF at f/8 either - only pre-1D X 1-series bodies have that capability.


----------



## pwp (Jan 23, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > When both you guys get your 1DX will you really be reaching for your 7D when shooting action?
> ...



Gasp! This may be the trigger for wildlife shooters to rush the remaining 1D4 bodies.

Paul Wright


----------



## cpsico (Jan 23, 2012)

pwp said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > pwp said:
> ...


I wonder if the exclusion of f8 is in part to sell big lenses that have come out?


----------



## AG (Jan 23, 2012)

Could also mean that Canon might start looking at lower f stops on their lenses. Say f2.8 as a base, not f4 like is the current standard.


----------



## Axilrod (Jan 23, 2012)

AG said:


> Could also mean that Canon might start looking at lower f stops on their lenses. Say f2.8 as a base, not f4 like is the current standard.



Highly unlikely, the larger the aperture the more expensive the lens. Every lens would need more glass, they would be larger and much more costly. I mean something like a 600mm or 800mm f/2.8 would be insanely big and would probably require refinancing your house to buy it. There would be no such thing as a reasonably priced zoom if they were all f/2.8.


----------



## Axilrod (Jan 23, 2012)

cpsico said:


> I wonder if the exclusion of f8 is in part to sell big lenses that have come out?



I think it's more that it's easier to lock focus at f/8 vs. f/2.8 (much more shallow depth of field at f/2.8, harder to focus). I think the reason the previous poster was saying it wasn't for him because an f/5.6 lens with a TC loses a few stops so it would end up having a max aperture of f/8 and he wouldn't be able to use AF. I could be totally wrong..


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 23, 2012)

acoll123 said:


> I will need to sell both my 7D and 5DII to get the 1DX so I am counting on it to have at least (preferably better) the autofocus capabilities of the 7D and at least (preferably better) the IQ (at 3200 or so) of the 5DII. I shoot as a hobby (most of the time) so I am not too worried about having a backup body. Too give you an example, I shot my daughter's basketball game yesterday and put my 70-200 IS II on the 5DII and shot at ISO 3200 / 2.8 / 1/500th and put my 50 1.2 on the 7D and shot at ISO 1600 / 1.8 / 1/500th. Here are two sample shots, 1 each from the 5DII and 7D set-ups. Can you guess which is which with looking at the EXIF data?



It was pretty easy to guess which was which - the first has more wa perspective and a grainier bg then the second. I get the point you are trying to make though.

As a 1D4 would meet your requirements as stated then I would be very surprised if the 1DX didn't


----------



## NotABunny (Jan 23, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> cpsico said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if the exclusion of f8 is in part to sell big lenses that have come out?
> ...



Focusing is always being done at the minimum F of the lens; this ensures that the maximum amount of light is used in order to accurately determine the focus. The aperture of the lens changes only when the shutter button is pressed. So, in this case the problem is that if the minimum F of the lens becomes 8 (because teleconverters are added), the camera can't focus.


http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-autofocus.htm

For SLR cameras, the number and accuracy of autofocus points can also change depending on the maximum aperture of the lens being used, as illustrated above. This is an important consideration when choosing a camera lens: even if you do not plan on using a lens at its maximum aperture, this aperture may still help the camera achieve better focus accuracy. Further, since the central AF sensor is almost always the most accurate, for off-center subjects it is often best to first use this sensor to achieve a focus lock (before recomposing the frame).


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 23, 2012)

NotABunny said:


> For SLR cameras, the number and accuracy of autofocus points can also change depending on the maximum aperture of the lens being used, as illustrated above. This is an important consideration when choosing a camera lens: even if you do not plan on using a lens at its maximum aperture, this aperture may still help the camera achieve better focus accuracy. Further, since the central AF sensor is almost always the most accurate, for off-center subjects it is often best to first use this sensor to achieve a focus lock (before recomposing the frame).



With a 1 series body all points are high sensitive with lens of f/2.8 or faster

With a 1d4 series body all points are high sensitive for the following f/4 combinations (I would gues the same or better for the 1DX):

EF17-40mm f/4L USM, 
EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM,
EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM + Extender EF1.4X II,
EF200mm f/2L IS USM + Extender EF2X II,
EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM + Extender EF1.4X II,
EF400mm f/2.8L IS USM + Extender EF1.4X II


Brian


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 23, 2012)

AG said:


> Could also mean that Canon might start looking at lower f stops on their lenses. Say f2.8 as a base, not f4 like is the current standard.



No, in fact, Canon is trending the other direction. While previous 1-series bodies required f/2.8 lenses for multiple cross-type point (with some important exceptions that have 39 cross-type points at f/4 on the 1DIV), the 1D X has 41 AF points that are cross-type with f/4 lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 23, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> With a 1 series body all points are high sensitive with lens of f/2.8 or faster



It's important to distinguish between accuracy and precision. Accuracy is 'closeness to true' whereas precision is repeatibility. So, a system can be accurate but imprecise (meaning you get the right answer on average, but any one measurement can be way off), or precise but inaccurate (meaning you get the same answer every time,but it's wrong). Here's a diagram that illustrates the difference:







An f/2.8 point is more accurate than an f/5.6 point, because the baseline is wider. The f/4 center line in 1-series bodies achieves the same accuracy by using a sensor line with twice the density of 'pixels'. 

The center point on most Canon bodies, including the 1-series, are 'high-precision' AF points. That specification means that point is precise to within 1/2 to 1/3 of the depth of focus for the max aperture of the attached lens, depending on body (depth of focus is the sensor side equivalent of depth of field, it's measured in µm in front of/behind the sensor). Other points that aren't 'high-precision' are specified to be precise to within one depth of focus.

The issue gets confusing because Canon's marketing literature often fails to distinguish accuracy from precision, using the two terms as synonyms (not uncommon in lay speech/writing, but IMO poor practice in technical documentation). I clarified the issue for myself in an email exchange with Chuck Westfall. 

A cross-type point just means the point is sensitive to phase differences in two orientations - it means achieving a lock is possible with more kinds of subjects. Being 'cross-type' says nothing about accuracy or precision of the AF point.


----------

