Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 01 Feb 2016 (Monday) 01:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Official specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II

 
this thread is locked
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,091 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 653
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Feb 23, 2016 18:24 as a reply to  @ post 17910100 |  #706

I had a play with a pre production 1DX2 today. Unfortunately they wouldn't allow me to take away any files to play with - NO FAIR!vmad

However my observations were that the ergonomics have been improved over my 1DX, the AF seems even quicker (that's a real biggie for me!), the camera is quieter in all modes - not worried as my 1DX only scares people not wildlife! Looking on the rear screen there appears to be some very significant improvements in high ISO - but we will have to wait for real files that WE have shot to confirm this but it is looking very promising.
So far I am not convinced that it is really worth the upgrade cost - and I am staying with that opinion as I am quite certain that if I get hold of a production one and can really test it that my credit card may need CPR!
No conclusions so far, but it is looking very promising to me. We know it will be better than the 1DX (is that possible???) the only question is how much better? So far the AF alone has me twitching.............​.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,091 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 653
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Feb 23, 2016 18:26 as a reply to  @ post 17910193 |  #707

You mean that it's better than the Sulphur laden smog from the Steel Works! Surely not :p


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
Post edited over 3 years ago by idkdc.
     
Feb 23, 2016 18:31 |  #708

johnf3f wrote in post #17910198 (external link)
So far the AF alone has me twitching.............​.

Quick, draw! Your credit card!


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,633 posts
Gallery: 1654 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 4568
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Santa Monica, CA
     
Feb 23, 2016 18:36 |  #709

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17910193 (external link)
i see an emerging market, uh, emerging.

Well. That will probably be the last time we see this particular mother and child. She's going to be sent to 30 years of hard labor for openly expressing concern over air in Beijing.

And to bring it back to topic, they should have included a HEPA air filter on the 1DX2.


Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Reviews | "The Mighty One" (external link) | "EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS Review" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,896 posts
Likes: 425
Joined Jan 2010
     
Feb 24, 2016 09:57 |  #710

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17910126 (external link)
I'll change my wording,

I can perceive no loss in IQ when I have used extension tubes up to 25mm on my 500mm f/4l IS or 400mm f/5.6L .

Personally I'm not too concerned about the theoretical loss in IQ that I can not perceive when in real world use, the tube = VASTLY SUPERIOR image quality to the bare lens, where I would be so far out of focus there would be no sharpness to measure at all.

Both of those lenses are primes, and use regular optics. For zooms and DO lenses, things can be worse, I think, as they have a larger set of factors to optimize for. A DO, for example, is really multiple ring-like lenses, designed to focus all of them together. Changing the lens-to-sensor distance probably makes them incapable of all focusing perfectly together.

I was very disappointed with tube performance on my 400/4DO II. Enough tube to focus at 5 feet makes AF go insane at maximum focus distance, with the AF oscillating back-and-forth on the 7D2, and the lens is clearly a lot less sharp than without the tubes. A 100-400 II would be a much better choice than the DO with tubes, despite the smaller aperture of the former.

True, an in-focus shot with some distortion is better than being completely OOF, but if you need to take your next shot at 50 feet, you'd better take the tube off if you want maximum sharpness and AF speed. How much of a difference that makes, of course, depends on the lens, and with a very sharp prime, you would probably suffer the least by leaving it on.

There's a funny thing about zooms and tubes - I believe it was the 75-300/5.6 IS USM back in the fall of 2003, at the Brooklyn Botanical Garden, I put on a tube or tubes with the lens, and the match was just right such that the zoom was completely nullified. IOW, the zoom ring did nothing; the FOV was exactly the same throughout its rotation!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,896 posts
Likes: 425
Joined Jan 2010
     
Feb 24, 2016 10:04 |  #711

johnf3f wrote in post #17910177 (external link)
Same here. I use extension tubes quite often to reduce the MFD on my Canon 800mm and there is no perceivable loss of IQ even though my cheapie extension tubes are filled with polluted Port Talbot air rather then the clear mountain air of the Canon ones:twisted:

No loss of subject quality, of course, because you're putting it over more pixels, even if the angular resolution of the lens has dropped a little. If you shot something like a simple, sharp B&W transient, however, You would probably see slightly softer edges.

That's why I disagreed with "no loss of IQ". I would not, however, disagree with "no loss of SQ (subject quality)", whether we are talking about tubes, or TCs. More pixels on subject usually trumps other considerations, and being in-focus but slightly distorted focus can trump better focus with the subject over less pixels.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2loose
Goldmember
Avatar
1,179 posts
Gallery: 192 photos
Likes: 1054
Joined Apr 2011
Location: I Heart NY & T-Dot
     
Feb 24, 2016 10:41 |  #712

Interesting article regarding the Extension Tube in dpreview. Regardless, I'm getting one, it's cheap anyway :-)


Body:Canon EOS-5D Mark IV, Fuji X-T2
Lenses: Canon EF 85mm f1.2L II, Canon 24mm TS-E f3.5L II, Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8L II, Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS II, Canon TC 1.4X III, Fuji XF 23mm f1.4 R, Fuji XF 35mm f1.4 R

flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
Avatar
19,177 posts
Gallery: 1853 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 59644
Joined Jul 2013
     
Feb 24, 2016 20:56 |  #713

Question for the future 1DXii owners.
CFast is faster than compact flash, so it is like the 5Diii that if I want the ultimate speed I should leave out
the compact flash card? Thinking that the compact flash is the rate limiting ingredient in this equation. Surely
some of you remember this issue with the 5Diii that if you wanted to not throttle the write speed you'd leave
out the SD card.
Thoughts?
Predictions?

Now what if you are only writing jpgs to the compact flash and raw to the CFast?

Thanks for clues.


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik ­ S. ­ Klein
uppity vermin fan
Avatar
1,039 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 132
Joined Jun 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 24, 2016 21:05 |  #714

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17911802 (external link)
Question for the future 1DXii owners.
CFast is faster than compact flash, so it is like the 5Diii that if I want the ultimate speed I should leave out
the compact flash card? Thinking that the compact flash is the rate limiting ingredient in this equation. Surely
some of you remember this issue with the 5Diii that if you wanted to not throttle the write speed you'd leave
out the SD card.
Thoughts?
Predictions?

Now what if you are only writing jpgs to the compact flash and raw to the CFast?

Thanks for clues.

I'm planning on setting it up as you said - raw to cFast and jpg to CF. It will throttle write speed, but this new camera has a significant buffer and, from what I'm reading, you can get 8-10 seconds of full-speed shooting into that buffer before you slow down.

I don't foresee too many situations where I'll need that. I rarely shoot full speed on the 1Dx. When I do, it'll be everything to the cFast.

The cFast, IMO, is more about video. 4K @ 60 will need the speed.


Gear List
www.vintage-computer.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rdalrt
Goldmember
Avatar
1,672 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 642
Joined Aug 2008
Location: The Great White North
     
Feb 24, 2016 21:08 as a reply to  @ MedicineMan4040's post |  #715

Yes, there is a speed hit. Writing RAW's to both the CFast and CF cards drops the buffer to something like 74. I so wish Canon had just went with dual CFast and been done with CF.

And if the 1DX II is anything like the previous 1D bodies, writing RAW to CFast and jpeg to CF will actually make it worse yet. Just try it on your 1DIV. Set it to write RAW to both cards and the buffer is approx. 30. Set it to write RAW to CF and jpeg to SD and the buffer will drop to like 16 or so.


Just Sports Photographyexternal link
My Junk ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
Avatar
19,177 posts
Gallery: 1853 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 59644
Joined Jul 2013
     
Feb 24, 2016 22:14 as a reply to  @ rdalrt's post |  #716

Thanks for the info. I agree. Dual CFast would have been preferred.
and you know you're the one who got me down this road ;)
It's a good road too.


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 24, 2016 22:28 |  #717

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17911896 (external link)
Thanks for the info. I agree. Dual CFast would have been preferred.
and you know you're the one who got me down this road ;)
It's a good road too.

Dual CFast would've been nicer, yeah...


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
Avatar
19,177 posts
Gallery: 1853 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 59644
Joined Jul 2013
     
Feb 24, 2016 22:39 as a reply to  @ Erik S. Klein's post |  #718

Erik I'm planning a different scheme. RAW to CFast until it fills then auto-switch RAW to CF.
I don't like throttles even if I'll never reach the upper reaches of the 170 envelope.


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,414 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 464
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Feb 25, 2016 03:00 |  #719

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17911802 (external link)
Question for the future 1DXii owners.
CFast is faster than compact flash, so it is like the 5Diii that if I want the ultimate speed I should leave out
the compact flash card? Thinking that the compact flash is the rate limiting ingredient in this equation. Surely
some of you remember this issue with the 5Diii that if you wanted to not throttle the write speed you'd leave
out the SD card.
Thoughts?
Predictions?

Now what if you are only writing jpgs to the compact flash and raw to the CFast?

Thanks for clues.

I'd be surprised if there wasn't some performance penalty for writing to both cards, but it's worth noting that the problem with the 5Diii was down to the fact that these types of storage devices have various different transfer modes (just like parallel ATA hard disks). I believe the issue was that the 5Diii had to use the same mode for both interfaces (and the one that'd been used for the SD slot was slow), so once you started using both cards you crippled the performance to the CF slot.

IRC CFast is more similar to SATA, which (again IRC) has different modes, but because it's a different interface it may well dictate more separation at the hardware level.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,094 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 325
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Feb 25, 2016 03:31 |  #720

Canon themselves claim they went with the dual card type solution to not obsolete the large number of CF cards some of the current 1DX users have. Now they can still be used in one slot.
Perhaps Nikon's solution of offering the camera with either two cards of this type or two cards of that type is better.


Anders

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

285,017 views & 958 likes for this thread
Official specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is rondimar
1056 guests, 336 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.