OFFICIAL: Canon 1D X announced

narlus wrote in post #13300070
APS-H is dead.

wfarrell4 wrote in post #13300077
And how sure are we of this?

What if Canon releases a 1.6x 1 series?

Eh? APS-H is 1.3x. 1.6x is far from dead, although I don't see Canon releasing a 1.6x 1-series. Their lineup makes a lot more sense now than it did before the 1DX, and releasing a 1.6x 1-series would just muddy the waters again. Really the only thing left for them to do is bump up the AF on the 5D series so it's at least as good as the 7D and they'll finally have a coherent lineup from top to bottom.

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #13301394
Obviously a no-go on the 28MP, but native ISO on the 1DX goes to 51,200! That's native ISO, i.e. before expansion. What's the max native ISO on the 1D Mark IV? 12,800? Let's assume then that the ISO performance is 2 stops better. I'd say that's "awesome" ISO performance if true. Waiting to see some full size high ISO samples though.

Yeah, it'll be interesting indeed to see how much of a true indicator of performance the "native ISO" really is. The native ISO would suggest, for instance, that the 7D is 2 stops better than the 5D classic at high ISO, which is doubtful.

jwcdds wrote in post #13301415
If I had to guess... it's because those who "need" 30mp are in the extreme minority when you look at the whole scheme of things. I, personally, do not look forward to the days of 35-50mp file per RAW photo. Sure, if you're a big-time photog w/ need for MP... well, you might already be shooting w/ MF anyway and don't really care about what Canon would/might offer.

Canon wants to make a camera where they can sell the most units and make the most profit.

So here's my question for those who want more MP. Would you all be happy with Canon if they shoehorn a 30-35mp sensor into the body of a 5D2 and relabeled it 5D3? Would you be willing to upgrade and pay the $2500-2700 asking price if the camera kept its not-too-stellar AF the way it is?

If not, then would you then pay $8000 for a 30-35mp sensor into the 1DsIII and called it the 1DsIV? (if Canon had not already announced the 1D X)?

Or would there be gripes/complaints of:
1) Rebadged 5D2 w/ higher resolution sensor but pretty much the same crap, different "mark": "WTH, same <insert expletive> useless AF?!?"
2) Rebadged 1DsIII w/ higher resolution sensor but pretty much the same crap, different "mark": "WTH, $8,000 for higher resolution?!?"

As I see it, Canon's damned if they did, damned if they didn't. What couldn't you shoot w/ a 1DsIII @ 21mp that you think you can magically capture with 30mp?

I honestly haven't been disappointed with my 1Ds III. It's AF alone is making me keep it over the 5D MK II I just sold. I could care less if the 1Ds III is behind in tech but, it's still puts out some nice images. I could get into the 5D MK II banding but, I won't.

jwcdds wrote in post #13301415
If I had to guess... it's because those who "need" 30mp are in the extreme minority when you look at the whole scheme of things. I, personally, do not look forward to the days of 35-50mp file per RAW photo.

The thing is, Canon implements smaller RAW formats on their cameras these days, so you can choose to shoot at lower resolutions if you want, and gain the per-pixel noise advantages of doing so. For some strange reason, the resulting files aren't as small as one might expect, and I don't know why that is.

The thing is that higher resolution gets you greater flexibility, as long as you're not trading it for something critical (like speed). The 7D manages 18 megapixels at 8 FPS. The 1DX manages the same at 12 FPS. That suggests that a high resolution 1DX could manage 27 megapixels at 8 FPS if Canon wanted to go that way.

The problem is that Canon hasn't yet implemented a camera where the speed of the camera scales inversely with the selected resolution, so up to now, at least, it has always been a tradeoff between maximum resolution and speed.


Furthermore, while I agree that people who must have the most resolution are likely to be shooting medium format, one could argue the same thing about crop versus full frame. The fact of the matter is that full frame is generally going to be cheaper than medium format, and there's quite a lot of benefit to that.

Canon killed the 1Ds line probably because the next iteration would have been in the price range of medium format cameras, but hitting the same disadvantages relative to medium format that crop has relative to full frame. Which is to say, it would be a flop in the target market.

Exactly. Which is why the 1Ds line doesn't make any sense at a $10K price point.

Hell no. But that's because I'm after a really good all-purpose camera. The 5D2 doesn't qualify.

I'm not paying $8k for any camera, nor $7k for that matter. But if I were in the target market, that might be worth it. It would be less than the price of medium format, would get me enough resolution that I might be able to compete with it to some degree, and would get me a nice fat selection of lenses to choose from.

Landscapes? People claim the 7D isn't good enough for landscapes at 18 megapixels. Why would 21 be?

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #13301435
Eh? APS-H is 1.3x. 1.6x is far from dead, although I don't see Canon releasing a 1.6x 1-series. Their lineup makes a lot more sense now than it did before the 1DX, and releasing a 1.6x 1-series would just muddy the waters again. Really the only thing left for them to do is bump up the AF on the 5D series so it's at least as good as the 7D and they'll finally have a coherent lineup from top to bottom.

I have to say the 1DX sounds nice but I love the 1.3 crop on the 1D4; and really I am sad to think we will no longer have that option. I am so glad I got my 1D4 when I did. If I considered buying the 1DX I would never want to sell my 1D4 to get it.

kcbrown wrote in post #13301626
The thing is, Canon implements smaller RAW formats on their cameras these days, so you can choose to shoot at lower resolutions if you want, and gain the per-pixel noise advantages of doing so. For some strange reason, the resulting files aren't as small as one might expect, and I don't know why that is.

The thing is that higher resolution gets you greater flexibility, as long as you're not trading it for something critical (like speed). The 7D manages 18 megapixels at 8 FPS. The 1DX manages the same at 12 FPS. That suggests that a high resolution 1DX could manage 27 megapixels at 8 FPS if Canon wanted to go that way.

The problem is that Canon hasn't yet implemented a camera where the speed of the camera scales inversely with the selected resolution, so up to now, at least, it has always been a tradeoff between maximum resolution and speed.


Furthermore, while I agree that people who must have the most resolution are likely to be shooting medium format, one could argue the same thing about crop versus full frame. The fact of the matter is that full frame is generally going to be cheaper than medium format, and there's quite a lot of benefit to that.

Canon killed the 1Ds line probably because the next iteration would have been in the price range of medium format cameras, but hitting the same disadvantages relative to medium format that crop has relative to full frame. Which is to say, it would be a flop in the target market.

Exactly. Which is why the 1Ds line doesn't make any sense at a $10K price point.

Hell no. But that's because I'm after a really good all-purpose camera. The 5D2 doesn't qualify.

I'm not paying $8k for any camera, nor $7k for that matter. But if I were in the target market, that might be worth it. It would be less than the price of medium format, would get me enough resolution that I might be able to compete with it to some degree, and would get me a nice fat selection of lenses to choose from.

Landscapes? People claim the 7D isn't good enough for landscapes at 18 megapixels. Why would 21 be?

I prefer FF over crop for landscapes. That's just me.

butterfly2937 wrote in post #13301633
I have to say the 1DX sounds nice but I love the 1.3 crop on the 1D4; and really I am sad to think we will no longer have that option. I am so glad I got my 1D4 when I did. If I considered buying the 1DX I would never want to sell my 1D4 to get it.

I won't sell my MkIV either...

I probably will sell my MkIII however.

The MkIV could go on to become a very sought after body if it does become the last 1.3.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #13301765
I won't sell my MkIV either...

I probably will sell my MkIII however.

Go Jay!

vipergts831 wrote in post #13301784
The MkIV could go on to become a very sought after body if it does become the last 1.3.

It's sad that Canon is discontinuing the 1.3 but, your probably right.

Actually, I think I could be very happy with two MkIVs...

jdizzle wrote in post #13301270
This camera is the best of both worlds. What's not to like? There are a few knits about the camera but, it doesn't affect the way I shoot. I would love more MPs too but, I'll take the hit for quality pixels.

nothing at all ... but the price

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #13301318
AFAIK, the 8-15mm was announced at $1499 and it's retailing at $1499

i hope they seriously bump up the 5DIII features even if i have to pay 3-5k (as long as it's worth the money)

mike cabilangan wrote in post #13302022
nothing at all ... but the price



i hope they seriously bump up the 5DIII features even if i have to pay 3-5k (as long as it's worth the money)

I think it's inevitable for the price of the 5D III to go up.

picard wrote in post #13301349
I am concern that the 1Dx doesn't have enough dynamic range like medium format camera. Canon has the technical ability to make 30MP camera.

Why don't they make it for photographers ? What is holding back Canon ?

Canon have always held their technology back until it sees what the competitor has in store.
Not to sure any 35mm camera will have the dynamic range of an MF body.

I still not get why people are continuously going on about Canon not having a Massively high MP body. We do not know what they have their sleeve next, but not in a million years will Canon stop at 21 MP. They don't release all their bodies at the same time, so give it time. Regading the big MP bodies at present, are there any bodies on the market that actually make the 5D MK2 look so poor, sure there are bodies on the horizon, but so do Canon have Bodies on the horizon. GIVE it time.

*sigh*. The announcement makes me sad. I believe the APS-H format is the perfect compromise between FF performance and 1.6 crop reach. I shoot sports and the extra reach really, really comes in handy.

A full frame sports camera? Sorry, but in my brain that does not compute.

Maybe this will help to bring Mark IV prices within reach for me so I can someday replace my IIn.

^^^There must be a lot of sad sportshooters out there with their Nikon FF cameras...
I think this new camera with the 200-400 zoom coming out will make a killer combo for sport. JM2C