Official- EOS-1D X Mark III - Announcement

The only downside is the loss of the 1.3 crop factor and loss of resolution when cropping 1.3, going from 16Mpx down to around 12-13, losing a total of 25% area resolution. The rest should be awesome!

Canon Ambassador Martin Bissig working with the new Canon 1DX Mark III(pre-production)

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18991871
The only downside is the loss of the 1.3 crop factor and loss of resolution when cropping 1.3, going from 16Mpx down to around 12-13, losing a total of 25% area resolution. The rest should be awesome!

The last 1.3x body was the 1D Mark IV that was replaced by the 1D X more than 8 years ago.

Well considering my comment was relative to a person coming from a 1d4, it was completely relevant.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18991871
The only downside is the loss of the 1.3 crop factor and loss of resolution when cropping 1.3, going from 16Mpx down to around 12-13, losing a total of 25% area resolution. The rest should be awesome!

Part of why I'm afraid to give up the 5D4/30MP. That still gives me 17+ MP into a 1.3x crop.
Anyway, 12 is still plenty, (more than 1D3/1D2 etc..)

...but if you need to crop further, simply less leeway.


A favorite bit of math happenstance that occurred when I was swapping from the 1.3X 1D bodies to the 5D4, was that for me, with the 1.3 APS-H I loved my 500mm "bare" and would only add 1.4x when needed. (essentially a 650mm FOV)

With the 5D4, the viewfinder image 500mm bare seemed short,. add the 1.4X (and the 5D4's amazing speed with that t-Con) and the viewfinder image was essentially (give or take 50mm) right back to where I was used to after over a decade shooting 500mm on APS-H. 700mm

Google "1DX beats 1DIV in reach limited scenario" leads to a rare thing, agreement on the net! The only variable is at what ISO and the range is 400 to 1600. At ISO 100 1DIV has advantage but 1DX pulls ahead as ISO is raised.
1DX cropped 1.3 is 12MP. So it's 12 vs 16 MP. 1DXII has better ISO performance again and a few more pixels.

5DIV on the other hand has very close to IDXII sensor so it's a simple comparison of 30 vs 20.

https://www.canonrumor​s.com …III_Still_White​_Paper.pdf
https://www.canonrumor​s.com …III_Video_White​_Paper.pdf

I called canon and they do not have a manual yet for the camera.

Does anyone know if it has focus bracketing .

As far as I can tell.only the Eos RP and the90 D has it.

It’s a useful feature for me. And seems to be a software one. Why it’s not available on more models is beyond me.

If the 1d x mark Iii has it I’m a buyer. I do not want to use magic lantern in order to do a work around.

Thanks.

Snapshot101 wrote in post #18992276
I called canon and they do not have a manual yet for the camera.

Does anyone know if it has focus bracketing .

As far as I can tell.only the Eos RP and the90 D has it.

It’s a useful feature for me. And seems to be a software one. Why it’s not available on more models is beyond me.

If the 1d x mark Iii has it I’m a buyer. I do not want to use magic lantern in order to do a work around.

Thanks.

So far only RP, R and 5D IV has it with some native lens:
Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens
Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM Lens
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro Lens
Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens
Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Lens
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro Lens
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro Lens

maybe the list would be expanded to other bodies and lens with firmware updates.

Choderboy wrote in post #18992162
Google "1DX beats 1DIV in reach limited scenario" leads to a rare thing, agreement on the net! The only variable is at what ISO and the range is 400 to 1600. At ISO 100 1DIV has advantage but 1DX pulls ahead as ISO is raised.
1DX cropped 1.3 is 12MP.

That's more like what the 1DxII would be like. The 1Dx would be less than 11MP.
In any event, I think that most of the opinions that you read are based on 100% pixel views. With sensor crops of the same size, and a normalized display of them, the 1Dx doesn't have a whole lot less noise than the 1DIV, especially in tonal ranges and ISOs where photon noise dominates. If two sensors have different pixel sizes, 100% views are always going to favor the larger pixels, even with the same QE, if photon noise dominates, like the highlights of ISOs like 800 or 1600 in these cameras, but normalized displays are going to have the same noise, pretty much. When people say that the highlights of ISO 1600 or 800 are very different with very different pixel sizes, they are probably looking at 100% pixel viws to come to this concliusion. Same is true of almost all sensors of the same general time of manufacture, and QE has only increased slowly, sometimes almost a decade before any improvements are seen. Even the forthcoming 1DxIII, cropped to 1.6x, will probably not significantly outperform the original 7D with a good, high-key ISO 800 exposure. You're going to need to go to higher ISOs or deeper into the shadows to see the bigger potential difference.

Very little visible read noise penalty there for the 50% more pixels of the 5D4, and if you're exposing well at medium and low ISOs, you'll probably never notice any 1DxII IQ benefit; just faster burst and AF and all the other functional frills of the high-end body that can get you more focused keepers per time interval.

http://arihazeghiphoto​graphy.com …review-and-impressions/2/
"I digitally up-sampled the 1DX file to normalize the size of the subject. I used bicubic method in Photoshop CS6"

So they were viewed at 100%, but after up sampling of the 1DX files.

As expected, in the reach-limited and cropped test, the 1D4 at lower ISOs retain detail just a bit better than the 1DX cropped and resampled, but then the tables are turned at higher ISOs due to the 1DX better noise characteristics at those levels. You can see it visually as well in the examples posted.

"The latter test is more tricky as you might expect. At ISO 400 the EOS 1D Mark IV’s higher pixel density does render finer details while visual noise level is comparable. At ISO 1600 the two files are closer while 1DX file looks cleaner despite the modest digital up-sampling and even shows ever slightly more detail in some areas where contrast is low. At ISO 6400 it is again a clear win for the EOS 1DX (notice how EOS 1D Mark IV has lost feather details)."

The 1D4 was a very good camera in its day for high ISO, but every camera in Canon's lineup today beat it out at ISO 3200+ these days, even crop bodies. The 1DX3 will be a great upgrade to the 1D4, for sure. The AF differences alone will be amazing, low light low contrast AF was not the 1D4's strong suit.

I did get the MP / crop calculations wrong.
I believe the 1DIV is a 1.28 crop meaning 1DX cropped to match would be 10.9MP.
1D2 was 1.2554 crop, resulting in 11.4MP, closer to my 12MP statement.

1DX3 Long side: 5472
Crop 1.3 leaves long side: 3830
1DX3 resampling to the 1D4 4896 = 22% (the 1DX is 34%)

Perhaps 20% is a reasonable threshold where most folks, especially with prints, would never be able to discern one image that was up-sampled and one that was not. It appears that in the 1DX vs 1D4, 34% is a bit noticeable at the pixel level, but not terrible.

If that is the case, perhaps this is why the 1DX2/1DX3 hasn't posed any real problems as compared to the 5D4, because the long-side resampling percentage is only 18% (6720 vs 5472).

A good study I feel, and that gives me at least a pretty good resampling rate to bounce against different resolutions on different bodies, I think. If that is the case, the 1DX3 would work for my needs, but would require a change in post processing.

Is anyone else getting the feeling that Canon is going to have 2 cameras in the line ups...a quality DSLR and a quality mirrorless ??

I mean look at how good this 1Dx3 is. Look at how good the 5D4's are

whats wrong with having DSLR's and Mirrorless that can Co Exist with each other ??

Especially with adapters that lets EFS go on the mirrorless bodies

i dont see ability to use RF on DSLR's but EF lens are really good. DSLr's do some things better than mirrorless

Whats not to like ??