Do you expect a 1DX III any time soon?

glad the 1dx mark iii is a dslr and not mirrorless.

James Crockett wrote in post #18940719
glad the 1dx mark iii is a dslr and not mirrorless.

.
Well, if it was mirrorless, then it wouldn't be a 1DX Mark 3. . It would be in the R series, not the 1D series. . So it'd be impossible to have a mirrorless 1D3 ..... wouldn't it?

.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18940724
.
Well, if it was mirrorless, then it wouldn't be a 1DX Mark 3. . It would be in the R series, not the 1D series. . So it'd be impossible to have a mirrorless 1D3 ..... wouldn't it?

.

good point.

We already knew it wasn't mirrorless sometime in the spring, I believe. It was rumored to already have been in the hands of testers, and there is NO way Canon could have created competition for the A9 in a mirrorless 1D format by that time period, and as Tom pointed out, it would not be a 1D any longer, it would be something like the Rs for sport perhaps.

Not sure I buy some of the specs, (if they are true, then some serious wow as far as i am concerned.)

- 30 FPS stills?
- I.B.I.S. ?

And 5D4 sensor is 30mp, that this is listed at 28 seems really odd/random.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18940837
Not sure I buy some of the specs, (if they are true, then some serious wow as far as i am concerned.)

- 30 FPS stills?
- I.B.I.S. ?

And 5D4 sensor is 30mp, that this is listed at 28 seems really odd/random.

M6 Mark II does 30fps in burst mode (electronic shutter and 18MP). I wouldn't be surprised this would be something similar. No way a mirror is moving like that.

jcothron wrote in post #18940838
M6 Mark II does 30fps in burst mode (electronic shutter and 18MP). I wouldn't be surprised this would be something similar. No way a mirror is moving like that.

Possibly a mirror up 30fps mode

Unless they have really beefed up the DPAF process for sensor focusing, I don't see that really working for sports or action very well.

Higher frame rate with the loss of some features has been offered in not only 1DXII but other manufacturers cameras too.
Mirror up, 2 photos, mirror down would enable almost 30 FPS without the mirror needing to move any faster.

Well anything moving over maybe 10mph will present an issue with every other image having the subject potentially outside the DOF, so I consider that a marketing spec and not much else. Sure in static sports situations it may be useful, a golf swing, boxing match (maybe), etc. but once you are past 10mph or very erratic directional movement, like bicycling, motorsports, BIF, etc, it won't be useful.

In any case, this is just the start of "leaked specs", that will likely change as the date approaches. IBIS is also very highly unlikely, unless the leaked tidbit is about the digital IBIS for video mode, which the M50, M6, and R series already have. I highly doubt there is stills IBIS.

Choderboy wrote in post #18941135
Higher frame rate with the loss of some features has been offered in not only 1DXII but other manufacturers cameras too.
Mirror up, 2 photos, mirror down would enable almost 30 FPS without the mirror needing to move any faster.

Are they using a mechanical or electronic shutter between the two frames? If electronic, there may be bokeh distortion at very fast shutter speeds.

Yeah, I wouldn't want a jello effect on every other frame because it had to do a row scan via an electronic shutter, so I suspect if somehow this spec does pan out, it would be a mechanical shutter at a minimum. We won't know until the specs roll out, and maybe not even then, we may have to wait for the review sites.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18941159
Yeah, I wouldn't want a jello effect on every other frame because it had to do a row scan via an electronic shutter, so I suspect if somehow this spec does pan out, it would be a mechanical shutter at a minimum. We won't know until the specs roll out, and maybe not even then, we may have to wait for the review sites.

I wasn't sure how mixed shutter actually affects the scan speed, but I just had some thoughts.

Many cameras now have electronic first-curtain, so that implies that both the electronic first curtain and the mechanical second curtain have to be operating at the same scan speed, for even exposure. Perhaps it is easier to turn the rows on in rapid succession than it is to read them, hence a fast electronic first curtain, but no fast second curtain is possible, hence the slow scan rates for full-electronic. So, it might be necessary that however first curtains are done, the second curtains of both images in each pair are mechanical. If they have to move the curtains anyway, I would think that they wouldn't bother with electronic at all, so this is likely all-mechanical, in my current opinion.

John Sheehy wrote in post #18941152
Are they using a mechanical or electronic shutter between the two frames? If electronic, there may be bokeh distortion at very fast shutter speeds.

What do you mean by "bokeh distortion"?

When we think of "bokeh", we think of the light out of focus by the lens, and we usuually use it to obtain a pleasing image.

Since bokeh comes from the combination of the lens and aperture, why do you say high shutter speeds would cause distortion?

John Sheehy wrote in post #18941167
I wasn't sure how mixed shutter actually affects the scan speed, but I just had some thoughts.

Many cameras now have electronic first-curtain, so that implies that both the electronic first curtain and the mechanical second curtain have to be operating at the same scan speed, for even exposure. Perhaps it is easier to turn the rows on in rapid succession than it is to read them, hence a fast electronic first curtain, but no fast second curtain is possible, hence the slow scan rates for full-electronic. So, it might be necessary that however first curtains are done, the second curtains of both images in each pair are mechanical. If they have to move the curtains anyway, I would think that they wouldn't bother with electronic at all, so this is likely all-mechanical, in my current opinion.

Here's what seems a good read on "electronic first curtain": https://photographylif​e.com …nic-front-curtain-shutter

What do you mean by "turn on the rows"? If modern cameras use active pixel sensors, and I believe they are, the image can be read without destroying the data on the pixel. If anyone cares about the types of CMOS sensors, reference 2 is an interesting read including circuits. One research group was once looking at reading pixels on CMOS sensors until some reached saturation and then stopping the exposure.

(1) https://en.wikipedia.o​rg/wiki/Bokeh
(2) http://isl.stanford.ed​u/~abbas/ee392b/lect04​.pdf

Capn Jack wrote in post #18941177
What do you mean by "bokeh distortion"?

When we think of "bokeh", we think of the light out of focus by the lens, and we usuually use it to obtain a pleasing image.

Since bokeh comes from the combination of the lens and aperture, why do you say high shutter speeds would cause distortion?

The electronic shutter moves in discrete steps, and the mechanical shutter moves in an analog fashion, hence, the tops and bottoms of the photosites get different exposure through the microlenses when the shutter speed gets very high. Since microlenses image the variation in perspective from different parts of the aperture, which is only much different in OOF areas, one side of the bokeh spread is more exposed than the other.

Here's what seems a good read on "electronic first curtain": https://photographylif​e.com …nic-front-curtain-shutter

What do you mean by "turn on the rows"?

Whatever the camera does to initiate the buildup of electronic charge in the exposure.

My conjecture was that rows can probably be started in relatively rapid succession, sufficient to match the mechanical curtain speed. Ending the exposure, on the other hand, probably requires a slower rate to stop the exposure of each row, hence an electronic second curtain would force a low scan speed.

There is no reason to believe that anything like that is going to be happening in a 1DxIII. All these exotic sensor readout variations you read about usually specialize in one thing and compromise other things in the process. Look at the Sony A9 - it does some nice readout things, but the character of the read noise (camera-added electronic noise) is one of the ugliest I've seen in recent cameras.

Regardless, I don't know why you brought up multiple reads of the same exposure, as it has nothing to do with the issue at hand.