1D X Mark II Owners Unite! Discuss & Post Photos

At a go-kart track in Sumas, WA. The racers ages were anywhere from 6 to 70 years old. It was a fun day!

Here are a few from a recent airshow at Heritage Flight Museum (Skagit County Airport).

This plane is named Pearl. Of the 5 or 6 civilian aircraft that were in the air when Pearl Harbor was bombed, Pearl is believed to be the only survivor.

apersson850 wrote in post #18889145
It's possible to do with a single key press on the 1DX Mark II. You do it easily with your eye still at the eyepiece and no change of grip of the camera. I double the 5D Mark IV will support it that fast.

When I'm using two cameras, I'm usually combining the 1DX with the 1DX Mark II.

Anders...you mentioned, "it's possible to do with a single key press on the 1DX Mark II. You do it easily with your eye still at the eyepiece and no change of grip of the camera." When I read that, I went back and took a look at my custom controls, and found that I could program the M-Fn button to do just what you mentioned. Wow, how cool is that! Thanks for the tip, Anders. I should have noticed that when I first got the camera. Now, I'm using it all the time.

I'm glad you found my tip useful!

I surely did, Anders. Thanks again.

MatthewK wrote in post #18889999
The big differences that have affected how I shoot (bird) when compared to the 5D4:

- spot metering linked to AF point. This is huge. In fact, this is the one feature that I feel has substantially improved my keeper rate w/ the 1DX2 over any previous Canon body. It's a travesty that Canon only reserves this for the 1-series. I also shoot w/ the EOS R, and despite the WYSIWYG advantage of the EVF, the shots from the 1DX2 come out metered exactly how I'd do it in the R.

- 14 fps is the other major thing that has positively impacted my keeper rate, as it makes capturing the perfect pose on a flitting, jittery bird a ton more easy.

- improved AF. The differences are subtle, but definitely noticeable. The 1 feels a little more immediate and rock solid when locked on. I don't get as many missed focus frames in a burst as I used to.

- high ISO advantage: ~.75 to 1 stop of noise. Not as big of a deal as the previous items, but I'll take every stop I can get

One of the first things I did when I got the 1DX2 was to compare side-by-side shots in order to see if the MP difference was noticeable for bird fine feather detail. In the end, it wasn't all that big of a difference, and like you said, both bodies produce crop-able images.

The 5D4 is a stellar camera. If I wasn't primarily shooting birds, without a doubt it's the body I'd still own. Emphasis added because unless you're in need of more FPS and slightly improved AF, I feel that the 5D4 is the better camera.

I think that this is getting a bit out of control about what I stated: I did mean that I didn't see a noticeable difference between the images of the two bodies in MOST of my shooting situations. There have been many comments about the frame rate and quick acquisition of the 1DXII-I agree. This is a huge difference between the two bodies.

Another big difference is the incorporated wireless and "touch-screen-to-capture-above-the-head-shots" of the 5DIV. They are very different bodies, with different strengths, I was only trying to submit the notion that either would be my last camera on a desert island. With wi-fi. And power. And Profoto strobes. And the models from the last 5 issues of SI Swimsuit....I guess I'll just top there and hope that my point was clarified

rejay14 wrote in post #18891610
I think that this is getting a bit out of control about what I stated: I did mean that I didn't see a noticeable difference between the images of the two bodies in MOST of my shooting situations. There have been many comments about the frame rate and quick acquisition of the 1DXII-I agree. This is a huge difference between the two bodies.

Another big difference is the incorporated wireless and "touch-screen-to-capture-above-the-head-shots" of the 5DIV. They are very different bodies, with different strengths, I was only trying to submit the notion that either would be my last camera on a desert island. With wi-fi. And power. And Profoto strobes. And the models from the last 5 issues of SI Swimsuit....I guess I'll just top there and hope that my point was clarified

In reading back over your original post, and now this, I'm now more confused about what you're asking You wanted us to reply with any differences we saw b/w the cameras, and then it was re-qualified in this latest post to compare only IQ. And then in your last paragraph, you go on to compare non-IQ features. I don't know what to say anymore, except your last statement is golden

umphotography wrote in post #18890580
I Bring C stands to every wedding. And I can get them up to 10 Ft. I think i was about 8-9 ft for these shots.

I sold off my 70-200F/2.8. Too big and too heavy to use all day at a wedding. If I had a do over, I would get the Sigma 105 1.4. Its the best of both worlds BT the 85mm and 135MM and it has great bokeh like the 200 f/2.0.....I have been lusting for one but with a 135mm and an 85 art in the bag it just wasted $$ for me. 135MM does such a great job. I highly recommend for portrait work. If you get a little closer and it just blows the background to pieces. I still use it a ton

2nd body is a 5D4

here are close up 135L shots- these just have a preset applied. So the 135L i have is 12 yrs old. No need to rush off to get the 105 for me

Hosted photo: posted by umphotography in
./showthread.php?p=188​90580&i=i136458926
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by umphotography in
./showthread.php?p=188​90580&i=i147551483
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Have to agree the 135L is an amazing lens, and one id never consider selling.

dexy101 wrote in post #18891819
Have to agree the 135L is an amazing lens, and one id never consider selling.

I've been probing for more feedback on several threads for the Sigma 105mm lately, with little response. I know it takes good images, but samples I've seen indicate the 105mm is not truly better for bokeh .. just different. Given easy weight, build quality and price, the 135mm from Canon seems one of the best values available.

David Stallard wrote in post #18889456
Hi Richard,

Not sure if that particular 2 seater is original (guessing it is) they had a few buit for high level recognisance I believe - camera man in the rear seat. They now use it for passenger flights out of Biggin Hill air strip - NOT a cheap treat!!

.DAVID.

graham121 wrote in post #18889762
I can chime in with a bit of history about that particular two seat spitfire.

ML407 is currently painted with invasion stripes to commemorate the 75th anniversary of D-Day, this was originally a Mk IX single seater built at Castle Bromwich in 1944 and flown operationally by a number of units including 485(NZ) Squadron.

It was one of about 15 Mk IX's that were converted post WWII by Supermarine or Vickers Armstrong to become T Mk IX's - later known as TR9's - and this one served as a trainer with the Irish Air Corps.

Known as the 'Grace Spitfire, more details of ML407 can be found here https://www.warbirdfli​ghts.co.uk/spitfireml4​07

Hope that helps.

Thanks David and Graham.
Fascinating history. Thanks for link.
Interesting how they modify those planes and turn them to other uses etc.
(apologies, late response. Got a bit lost on this forum!)

San Diego Safari Park

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

A little sports action

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

San Diego Zoo Safari Park

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Bkop wrote in post #18903385
=Bkopperl;18903385]San Diego Zoo Safari Park

Hosted photo: posted by Bkopperl in
./showthread.php?p=189​03385&i=i172891857
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Bkopperl in
./showthread.php?p=189​03385&i=i190372208
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Nice job of photographing that ol' boy. I notice you chose to shoot him at a fairly high ISO. They surely came out clean looking.