Official specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II

jwcdds wrote in post #17884957
... photographers strut around with a 10D and EF-S 18-55 kit lens, I most likely wouldn't...

I for one would be impressed, since the 10D normally can't accept EF-S lenses...

apersson850 wrote in post #17887836
I for one would be impressed, since the 10D normally can't accept EF-S lenses...

Interesting. I didn't know that and had to look it up. Nice catch!

I think the most interesting thing isn't the camera itself (which, although nice, doesn't seem to be leaps and bounds above the 1Dx for action stills - more like incremental upgrades), but one little feature which hardly even rated a mention - the sensor is now using on-chip, column-parallel ADCs.

Considering that Canon sensors were doing well at high ISO without them, hopefully this means class-equalling, if not class-leading, low-ISO performance now that that problem has been eliminated.

Sure, it may not matter much to a high-ISO-oriented action camera, but the fact that Canon is now using that technology bodes well for the future 5D4 and 5Ds2.

Now it remains to be seen who can take advantage of BSI technology to put an ADC behind every photosite. That would really blow out the DR, by allowing every pixel to use a different ISO.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17887880
I think the most interesting thing isn't the camera itself (which, although nice, doesn't seem to be leaps and bounds above the 1Dx for action stills - more like incremental upgrades), but one little feature which hardly even rated a mention - the sensor is now using on-chip, column-parallel ADCs.

Considering that Canon sensors were doing well at high ISO without them, hopefully this means class-equalling, if not class-leading, low-ISO performance now that that problem has been eliminated.

Sure, it may not matter much to a high-ISO-oriented action camera, but the fact that Canon is now using that technology bodes well for the future 5D4 and 5Ds2.

Now it remains to be seen who can take advantage of BSI technology to put an ADC behind every photosite. That would really blow out the DR, by allowing every pixel to use a different ISO.

I dont pretend to know or understand how they get these sensors to perform like they do. All I know is what I see. The last 6 yrs have been nothing short of remarkable for sensor improvement. Unbelievable actually. From what I read by what you just posted, if i have my limited techie background thinking right, That means they are on track to creating sensors with ISO performance that is similar to what our eyes see. If they got this far is just 3 short years ( 2 stops over the 5D3 ) I would think that 1 or 2 model updates down the road and sensors are going to see what the human eye can see for light......If that can happen that would indeed be remarkable...I think it could happen. That shot that Ole took with the D5 of the bears in the water at night at 102 ISO comes to mind. Imagine if that got to the point to where it is usable like we are now seeing at 25000......wowzers a great time to be a photographer.....expen​sive....but nice

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17886838
It's not that simple, actually. Canon has only performed one large upgrade firmware change in the past, and that was for the 7D. One could argue that the f8 focusing on the 5D3 was pretty big too. Any other firmware update that Canon sent out was to address bugs/issues, and not to add pretty large upgrades.

However, it is clear from the 7D firmware update and the Magic Lantern updates that much functionally could be added via firmware. It is clearly a business decision to do so. . The aging 7D got a major update to keep it somewhat competitive.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17887880
I think the most interesting thing isn't the camera itself (which, although nice, doesn't seem to be leaps and bounds above the 1Dx for action stills - more like incremental upgrades), but one little feature which hardly even rated a mention - the sensor is now using on-chip, column-parallel ADCs.

Considering that Canon sensors were doing well at high ISO without them, hopefully this means class-equalling, if not class-leading, low-ISO performance now that that problem has been eliminated.

Sure, it may not matter much to a high-ISO-oriented action camera, but the fact that Canon is now using that technology bodes well for the future 5D4 and 5Ds2.

I can't immediately think of seeing the ADC claim on a Canon site but it's appeared on a number of articles, including some written by journalists invited to Canon's announcement of the camera. I can only assume then that they have officially mentioned it. It's certainly been noted in a couple of the threads on POTN.

I very much hope it's true, and that independent tests tell us this new sensor has competitive DR; and definitely, I'm looking forward to a 5D4 with similar DR capabilities.

umphotography wrote in post #17888023
I dont pretend to know or understand how they get these sensors to perform like they do. All I know is what I see. The last 6 yrs have been nothing short of remarkable for sensor improvement. Unbelievable actually. From what I read by what you just posted, if i have my limited techie background thinking right, That means they are on track to creating sensors with ISO performance that is similar to what our eyes see. If they got this far is just 3 short years ( 2 stops over the 5D3 ) I would think that 1 or 2 model updates down the road and sensors are going to see what the human eye can see for light......If that can happen that would indeed be remarkable...I think it could happen. That shot that Ole took with the D5 of the bears in the water at night at 102 ISO comes to mind. Imagine if that got to the point to where it is usable like we are now seeing at 25000......wowzers a great time to be a photographer.....expen​sive....but nice

The on chip ADC is more about the low ISO end; specifically reduced noise in shadow areas. The read out noise that's plagued Canon up till now becomes a relatively small issue at higher ISOs, but reducing that noise isn't going to hurt high ISO performance either - so it's all good.

sploo wrote in post #17888413
I can't immediately think of seeing the ADC claim on a Canon site but it's appeared on a number of articles, including some written by journalists invited to Canon's announcement of the camera. I can only assume then that they have officially mentioned it. It's certainly been noted in a couple of the threads on POTN.

I very much hope it's true, and that independent tests tell us this new sensor has competitive DR; and definitely, I'm looking forward to a 5D4 with similar DR capabilities.

i am 90+ percent sure one of the official Canon videos, with a Canon employee speaking about the camera, mentioned the ADC changes.

IMO, Canon has always downplayed the need for better DR and shadow noise, continuing to not make a big deal of it is a good public relations/marketing move.

sploo wrote in post #17888417
The on chip ADC is more about the low ISO end; specifically reduced noise in shadow areas. The read out noise that's plagued Canon up till now becomes a relatively small issue at higher ISOs, but reducing that noise isn't going to hurt high ISO performance either - so it's all good.

Canon sensors have always done very well at high ISO, but the DR plateaus out at lower ISOs due to read noise.

By removing this limitation, if the ISO-DR relationship continues in a linear fashion (as it does with sensors from every other manufacturer), at ISO 100, the Canon sensor with on-chip ADCs should be near to class-leading.

I think one of the most promising future developments will actually be lower baseline ISOs (with the same high-ISO potential), achieved through deeper well capacities. Double the capacity of the wells and you can reduce the base ISO to 50; quadruple it and you'd reduce the base ISO to 25, gaining two stops of DR in the process. High-ISO output would be the same, since that's essentially an amplification of the baseline. I certainly wouldn't mind a camera with a base ISO of 3 and 20 stops of DR.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17888433
i am 90+ percent sure one of the official Canon videos, with a Canon employee speaking about the camera, mentioned the ADC changes.

IMO, Canon has always downplayed the need for better DR and shadow noise, continuing to not make a big deal of it is a good public relations/marketing move.

It's funny how people always downplay something they're not good at eh (oh, and now start to make a big thing about clean shadows when they [hopefully] have cracked the problem)

Shadowblade wrote in post #17888708
Canon sensors have always done very well at high ISO, but the DR plateaus out at lower ISOs due to read noise.

By removing this limitation, if the ISO-DR relationship continues in a linear fashion (as it does with sensors from every other manufacturer), at ISO 100, the Canon sensor with on-chip ADCs should be near to class-leading.

You're hoping that. I'm hoping that. I think few aren't! There have been a couple of false dawns though, so I certainly await independent tests.

Are you mostly shooting with the A7r II (and Canon glass) now? Would you plan to "return" to Canon bodies with a suitably "DR-equipped" 5D4 - or is that really going to depend on a 5Ds2?

Shadowblade wrote in post #17888708
I think one of the most promising future developments will actually be lower baseline ISOs (with the same high-ISO potential), achieved through deeper well capacities. Double the capacity of the wells and you can reduce the base ISO to 50; quadruple it and you'd reduce the base ISO to 25, gaining two stops of DR in the process. High-ISO output would be the same, since that's essentially an amplification of the baseline. I certainly wouldn't mind a camera with a base ISO of 3 and 20 stops of DR.

Isn't well capacity essentially electron capacity, and therefore related to pixel size? I.e. small pixels would cause a problem (though not necessarily a problem for high DR - I can't recall the reasons/explanation, but IRC John Sheehy gave details once).

Having spent my film days using ISO 50 Velvia, it would be nice to have an ultra low ISO option though - but I do wonder if ~20 stops may start to bump up against issues with current raw formats (and whether even the current class leading low levels of read noise are actually low enough for that). We can hope for the future I guess.

sploo wrote in post #17888900
Are you mostly shooting with the A7r II (and Canon glass) now? Would you plan to "return" to Canon bodies with a suitably "DR-equipped" 5D4 - or is that really going to depend on a 5Ds2?

I'm a landscape photographer (with a bit of wildlife on the side, depending on where I am). It would depend on what Canon does in a 5Ds2 - the 5D3 just has too low a resolution for me.

Yes, it's partly related to pixel size. But not the area available for collecting light, but the area available for electrons to accumulate. That can be expanded in three dimensions, folded up, etc. into areas where no light actually reaches, as long as it's electrically connected to the light-gathering area.

You can always expand the RAW formats to 24 bits.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17888708
Canon sensors have always done very well at high ISO, but the DR plateaus out at lower ISOs due to read noise.

By removing this limitation, if the ISO-DR relationship continues in a linear fashion (as it does with sensors from every other manufacturer), at ISO 100, the Canon sensor with on-chip ADCs should be near to class-leading.

I think one of the most promising future developments will actually be lower baseline ISOs (with the same high-ISO potential), achieved through deeper well capacities. Double the capacity of the wells and you can reduce the base ISO to 50; quadruple it and you'd reduce the base ISO to 25, gaining two stops of DR in the process. High-ISO output would be the same, since that's essentially an amplification of the baseline. I certainly wouldn't mind a camera with a base ISO of 3 and 20 stops of DR.

Funny you say this because this is what I think you can see in those pictures taken in that hockey rink of that goalie and then lifted 5 stops. I went back and looked at them again, and the exposure (100 ISO for both) looks slightly brighter with the new 1Dx II - and thus this was what I thought, in part, attributed to the far better noise in the deep blacks in the corner. If this is indeed true, if they have enough fab capacity, there are going to be a lot of new Canon Cameras released in the next 18months.

This is one hell of a camera. I want the 1DX/3 to come out tomorrow so these amazing features can trickle down now rather than 4 years from now.

Can't wait for original RAW images

Can't wait to have big big budget so i can afford something, including 1DX II