OFFICIAL: Canon 1D X announced

How much do kidneys go for theses days? I have 2 perfectly good ones and I really want this camera.

So what are we realistically expecting? 1 stop better noise performance than the 1D4?

wfarrell4 wrote in post #13314400
So what are we realistically expecting? 1 stop better noise performance than the 1D4?

Who knows.

I searched, hope this was not posted before:
http://vimeo.com/31175​496

1D X video feature

Just got home from PhotoPlus East. The Canon booth was jammed with people checking out the 1Dx. They must have had 20 of them there. Looks nice. Sounds like a machine gun. 12 frames/second. Does everything great, except if you have a small hand, like I do, it is not easy to hold. Someone will put out a detailed description on it, with pics, here tonight. The rep said it may be out next March. Lots of you will buy it in June. Personally, I will wait for the 5DMV when it comes out. My 5DM2 does what I want.

A link to the Vincent Laforet high ISO image from the 1 DX http://inagist.com …foret/129348457​122119681/

There is also another he has posted at 100%

Want

kcbrown wrote in post #13313652
LOL!

Well, I know there is more to it than that. If you get more resolution, but when printing to the same size as some other camera you get worse image quality, then that would be a step backwards. I would not be happy about that.

But if downsizing yields at least the same image quality as what you'd get from a camera with the native resolution of the downsized image, then the extra resolution isn't hurting you (at least in the image quality department) and it gives you more flexibility, because it lets you, and not the camera manufacturer, decide where on the resolution versus image quality curve you want to be.

If we wanted to be limited by our cameras, we'd be using point'n'shoots. Resolution should be just another creative parameter to tweak, like the aperture or shutter speed, so long as that added flexibility doesn't get you worse image quality at a given print size.

Downsizing in post doesn't make the sensels physically bigger than they were at capture time.

Thus, it can bring no improvement towards the tonal smoothness and color density (not meaning saturation!) that large sensel cameras (10D, 5D classic) excel in.

This, I believe, is that "more to image quality" bit that Canon has finally decided to recoup.

newworld666 wrote in post #13314168
... somewhere, it's like a big disappointment that only jpg will get better high iso !!!! does it mean the 1Dx sensor is not really better than 1DMKIV ? and just processing with DIGIC V.
It's even not clear that new A/N converters can make a 2EV step, I imagine RAW files would get significant improvement too if sensor was more efficient ?

Canon is really playing with fire ! a big backward step with MPixels and not more than a rather small step in processing, (that can is more or less available on raw files with more parameters in post processing).

It will be long before getting answers !! till march ? because actually all samples we see are more or less useless to get a answer.

Interesting point here. I await to here the results as well...

I thought the actual photo-sites are larger in the 1DX, no?

larger than the 1DIV and 1Ds3, yes. I can't be bothered working out the older cameras

wfarrell4 wrote in post #13314400
So what are we realistically expecting? 1 stop better noise performance than the 1D4?

Probably somewhat better than that. Maybe 1.25 stops?

Remember, the difference in sensor size alone gets you a 3/4 stop improvement.

agedbriar wrote in post #13316865
Downsizing in post doesn't make the sensels physically bigger than they were at capture time.

Thus, it can bring no improvement towards the tonal smoothness and color density (not meaning saturation!) that large sensel cameras (10D, 5D classic) excel in.

Of course it can.

Take your 18 megapixel image and downsize it to 1 megapixel (to use an extreme, but illustrative, example). Is the tonal smoothness now better? Of course it is.

Tonal smoothness is a function of noise. They are inversely related.

$4000 is more like it, no way in hell I would drop $6800 for this thing. that's a lot of money for a few extra conveniences that I can live without. 1D4 is looking mighty attractive for the price in comparison.

ben805 wrote in post #13317630
$4000 is more like it, no way in hell I would drop $6800 for this thing. that's a lot of money for a few extra conveniences that I can live without. 1D4 is looking mighty attractive for the price in comparison.

You don't have to drop the coin but, if you ever shot a 1D, the AF will make you want it.