OFFICIAL: Canon 1D X announced

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14083467
Only on POTN will you find people complaining about a better feature...

Nope. I applaud their decision. I detest their willingness to outright lie about the limitation in the first place, or to put it in there in the first place for that matter.

The 1D series (most especially since it's been merged into a single line) is supposed to be the flagship of the line. Artificial limitations, most especially ones that were previously not imposed, are the last thing one expects from that line. Engineering tradeoffs are one thing. Artificial limitations are an entirely different thing altogether. The f/5.6 limit is of the latter type.

At least it appears Canon has seen the light on this particular capability. They would do well to not attempt to pull the wool over their customers' eyes again.

So fine, it's a firmware change. So what?

It's (apparently) going to be released with the ability to AF at f/8. Isn't that what people want? Isn't that what all the crying and foot stamping is all about?

God but the conspiracy theorists chap my a** when they whine and moan that they can't have what they want because of some deep, dark plot.

Maybe Canon just didn't think that so many people were willing to part with this much money to put mid-grade glass and kludged-up reach on their flagship body?

People got what they wanted. Isn't that enough? I'll tell you this: If it turned out that Canon had to dumb down the AF to accommodate the f/4-5.6 crowd and it affected the ability to rely on the AF with top-flight glass, I'd be royally p*ssed.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14083487
So fine, it's a firmware change. So what?

It's (apparently) going to be released with the ability to AF at f/8. Isn't that what people want? Isn't that what all the crying and foot stamping is all about?

God but the conspiracy theorists chap my a** when they whine and moan that they can't have what they want because of some deep, dark plot.

Maybe Canon just didn't think that so many people were willing to part with this much money to put mid-grade glass and kludged-up reach on their flagship body?

People got what they wanted. Isn't that enough? I'll tell you this: If it turned out that Canon had to dumb down the AF to accommodate the f/4-5.6 crowd and it affected the ability to rely on the AF with top-flight glass, I'd be royally p*ssed.

I think you are intentionally trying to misunderstand, as I don't know how clearer Kcbrown could possibly be.

Möntgomery wrote in post #14083491
I think you are intentionally trying to misunderstand, as I don't know how clearer Kcbrown could possibly be.

Nothing intentional about it...

I'm honestly failing to see his point.

People were unhappy that the 1DX wasn't going to be able to AF at f/8. Now it's (apparently) going to be able to AF at f/8 and he's calling Canon names.

The logic utterly escapes me.

But what do I know? I see pretty pictures and I push the button. <shrug>

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14083495
Nothing intentional about it...

I'm honestly failing to see his point.

People were unhappy that the 1DX wasn't going to be able to AF at f/8. Now it's (apparently) going to be able to AF at f/8 and he's calling Canon names.

The logic utterly escapes me.

But what do I know? I see pretty pictures and I push the button. <shrug>

Read his posts again. If there was no hardware update, then it is simply firmware.
If it's firmware related, AF was intentionally gimped.
The fact that it was intentionally gimped is crafty and dishonest. Kcbrown's point was that most people don't like to reward underhanded practices, also that people will lose trust in the company if they continue this strategy.

Well AF has always been firmware limited, this can be proven quite easily with a none reporting TC.

a camera can attempt to AF at any aperture if it really wanted too. However with smaller apertures it would probably be unlikely to succeed unless you were focusing on the sun at noon.

Now for the 1Dx it would most likely be limited by Firmware, therefore accuracy probably won't be any better than before the firmware change. However how accurate was previous 1D at f/8?

I don't think canon was being dishonest mearly that they felt that accuracy at f/8 was not good enough for there standards.

Möntgomery wrote in post #14083516
Read his posts again. If there was no hardware update, then it is simply firmware.
If it's firmware related, AF was intentionally gimped.
The fact that it was intentionally gimped is crafty and dishonest. Kcbrown's point was that most people don't like to reward underhanded practices.

The foaming over pre-orders here and in the 5D3 threads says otherwise...

Whatever...

KCY wrote in post #14083519
Well AF has always been firmware limited, this can be proven quite easily with a none reporting TC.

a camera can attempt to AF at any aperture if it really wanted too. However with smaller apertures it would probably be unlikely to succeed unless you were focusing on the sun at noon.

Now for the 1Dx it would most likely be limited by Firmware, therefore accuracy probably won't be any better than before the firmware change. However how accurate was previous 1D at f/8?

I don't think canon was being dishonest mearly that they felt that accuracy at f/8 was not good enough for there standards.

Well it's either good enough or it isn't. If it isn't, then updating the firmware isn't the solution.

KCY wrote in post #14083519
Well AF has always been firmware limited, this can be proven quite easily with a none reporting TC.

a camera can attempt to AF at any aperture if it really wanted too. However with smaller apertures it would probably be unlikely to succeed unless you were focusing on the sun at noon.

Now for the 1Dx it would most likely be limited by Firmware, therefore accuracy probably won't be any better than before the firmware change. However how accurate was previous 1D at f/8?

I don't think canon was being dishonest mearly that they felt that accuracy at f/8 was not good enough for there standards.

This is exactly what I'm saying...

Canon didn't limit it to upset people moving up from XXD and XD cameras. They did it to maximize performance for those expecting the absolute cutting edge because their very livelihoods depend on it.

Möntgomery wrote in post #14083530
Yes, because that's representative and proves you right...

Do you really think POTN is in any general way representative?

Please. There are probably a million Canon users out there who've never even heard of POTN.

Of the 40 members in the photography group to which I belong, probably 60% shoot Canon and absolutely none of them have ever heard of POTN and nearly 1/3 of that 60% are working pros.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14083537
Do you really think POTN is in any general way representative?

Please. There are probably a million Canon users out there who've never even heard of POTN.

Of the 40 members in the photography group to which I belong, probably 60% shoot Canon and absolutely none of them have ever heard of POTN and nearly 1/3 of that 60% are working pros.

Jay, you should get a POTN strap and introduce them all

KCY wrote in post #14083544
Jay, you should get a POTN strap and introduce them all

It's funny because I've gone to pretty good lengths to explain the depth and breadth of knowledge available here and even those members who are hip to places like DPReview and Photocamel can't quite wrap their brains around POTN and why it could benefit them.

Oh well...

You can lead a photographer to the web...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14083563
You can lead a photographer to the web...

This could open a whole new thread.

"You can lead a photographer to the....but you can't..."

Möntgomery wrote in post #14083516
Read his posts again. If there was no hardware update, then it is simply firmware.
If it's firmware related, AF was intentionally gimped.
The fact that it was intentionally gimped is crafty and dishonest. Kcbrown's point was that most people don't like to reward underhanded practices, also that people will lose trust in the company if they continue this strategy.

I'm with Jay on this one...Calling people liars, crafty, dishonest...etc on a so-called "educated guess" is easy in the anonymity of a forum like this. It also says as much about the accusers as it does about the accused.

For God's sake cool it you guys...it's all just too silly for words.

I'm happy that Canon fixed the f8 issue. Enough said.