Are 1Ds users satisfied with 1Dx specs?

[linda_jones1]

<p>I'm thinking it means the dreams of the 5DMKIII will not come true. Don't plan on 10fps, nor the 32mp camera. There is no way canon will make the 5DIII more appealing than the 1Dx. From what I have read, the 5D will not be anything people expected. Still a great camera though.</p>

<p>The thought of a 7D upgrade for the price of the 5D would be very appealing however. I don't have to worry about it because I plan the rest of my years with the MKIV. Hoping they will still make them. It is a surprise to see their best camera canon ever made stop production. The value of the IV will go up, though, and already has. It's already this week hard to find. And I have no intention of shortening my lenses with a $6800 camera!</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p><em>"It is a surprise to see their best camera canon ever made stop production"</em></p>

<p>It is called progress, every best camera they ever made has been superseded. The MkIV was only a 1.3 crop, the 1DX is the camera that anybody who ever shot with a 1VHS always dreamt of, but so much more. Look over on the FD forum, they still lament the end of production of the T90, "the best body Canon ever made"!</p>

 

[zml]

<p>We'll see how bad/great the 1Dx really is in a few months, but something tells me that the naysayers better start scrubbing their feet and washing their mouths because there might be a lot of inserting of one into the other after all is sorted out.<br>

:-)))</p>

[linda_jones1]

<p>I don't see anyone here as naysayers. We all know it will be a fantastic flagship FF. The pros and cons of whether the MKIV 1.3 line being sorely missed is not a complaint. It's a legitimate concern understood by only those who know. No one is bashing the new camera. Are you kidding me? It sounds awesome, and long overdue for the Full Frame line.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p><em>"The pros and cons of whether the MKIV 1.3 line being sorely missed is not a complaint. It's a legitimate concern understood by only those who know."</em></p>

<p>All I know is I can get a FF camera with listed better AF, near identical resolution, over twice the fps and a huge jump in functionality for several thousand dollars less than the list price of my current one. I see no downside and suspect the few 1.3 devotees will, if they give it a try, be surprised at how little resolution is lost in real world images when comparing crops to 1.3. Being concerned about it before we get our hands on one is fun but pointless, speculating about it is counterproductive. </p>

<p>If you have been using a 300 f2.8 pretending it is really a 400 (390) f2.8 on your 1.3 crop camera then you will need a 1.4 TC for $500. </p>

[lester_wareham]

I am worried this will mean the 7D roadmap will go lower Mp, I actualy saw someone hope the next version of the 7D

was 15Mp. Although I don't need 18Mp for a subject filling the frame, the high sampling resolution means I can crop

in, this has revolutionised my bird photography.

 

Whilst I agree the 1Dx will be a fantastic camera the loss of cropping will limit it's atractivness to many wildlife

shooters, particularly those who can't aford big glass. Scott I expect many wildlife shooters will already be using TCs

with 500/4 or more, so a larger format with less Mp will be an issue.

 

Either Canon have somthing else on the roadmap or they have decided the wildlife shooters represent a small

percentage of sales.

[massimo_foti]

<p>The dismiss of 1.3 sensor put a new light into the upcoming 200-400 lens...</p>

[scottelly]

<p>This camera seems to be positioned to stop sports shooters from switching to the D3s. I believe we will see a 36 Megapixel 1Ds Mk IV soon. In the past, Canon has introduced 1Ds cameras that were about 2x the resolution (in megapixels) of their latest high-speed camera. I believe the new 1Ds Mk IV will be a 6 fps camera that shoots at an amazing 36 megapixels, making it the Nikon killer. Then Nikon will have to introduce a D4x to keep up.<br>

-<br>

What I worry about for Canon is what Sony will do. Will the next Sony full-frame camera be a high-speed, 10 fps 36 megapixel SLT that sells for $2,999? If so, Canon will be left in the dust, when Sony introduces their 400mm f2.8 and a high-end 50mm. Already Sony has 85mm, 135mm, 16-35mm and 70-200mm and 300mm lenses that compete with Canon's best. At some point, Sony will introduce a stellar quality 24-120mm f4 that is as good as Nikon's, and Canon will be wondering what to do next, if the Sony does make a 36 megapixel, full-frame SLT body. Don't forget that Sony bodies have built-in image stabilization. Canon STILL does not. I don't know why. With all of Canon's good primes, Canon is the perfect company to introduce in-body stabilization. Actually, Nikon is even more perfect. Maybe Canon will wait until Nikon does it, and then they'll have to scramble to catch up.</p>

[scottelly]

<p>I'm sorry. I see that the 1Dx is a video user's camera too. Anyone who wants better video capabilities than the 5 D Mk II and the 7 D can use this new monster, and they will get far superior quality. Now there is another option for best quality video in the full-frame world. And high-end video shooters will love this thing, I'm sure.</p>

[linda_jones1]

<p>The 1Dx is an expensive camera, yes it will be interesting to see if the 1Ds line continues. I doubt it, Scott. Who would buy it if the 1Dx is so fabulous? Time will tell. In the meantime I am happily sitting with a MKIV 10fps wonderful camera that I hope lasts long enough to get to the future models, because for $6800 the 1Dx does not suffice.</p>

<p>Lester, yes, a 7D upgrade along the way with higher quality clarity and better ISO features may be in our future. Thats ok too. I doubt the 1Dx will be anything other than a Pro camera. And for wildlife shooters, I doubt other than a few who have the long lens line up, will consider the 1Dx their dream camera. If I was a wedding/event/portrait photographer, this would be pretty exciting.</p>

[zml]

<p><em>> what Sony will do</em></p>

<p>A big part of a camera system (and that's what pro shooters and serious thinking amateurs are after, the system) is support, including pro services, equipment rental, repair, on-site support at important events and venues, equipment availability in retail all over the world, etc. It has taken Nikon and Canon eons to develop their respective support organizations (with Nikon being a few steps behind Canon to this day) and I don't see anyone else barging in (it takes money and time...did I mention time..?) anytime soon, especially not Sony with its fantastically crappy support network and zero customer service. Many have tried to develop and support a pro camera system in the film era (Olympus for instance, with its legendary OM SLR system but without a real support network) but only the big two have succeeded and I don't expect it to change in the near future.</p>

<p><em>> 36 mpixels 10 fps</em></p>

<p>Good luck with that: just calculate how much data needs to be pumped through the bus and consider the heat and battery usage... What Canon does @14 fps in 1Dx is presently at or near the upper limits of practicality. It might change in the future but expect any changes to be very gradual rather than revolutionary.</p>

[brian_ellis19]

<p>I own the 1Ds MarkIII. I'm not the least bit tempted to replace it with the 1Dx. I think the 1Dx could more appropriately be named the 1D Mark V because its principal improvements and changes seem to be aimed at the photographers who use that camera (action), not 1Ds MarkIII photographers. I bought the 1Ds MarkIII because I thought it would be a camera I could happily use for at least 10 years. So far it has been and the 1Dx doesn't change anything for me.</p>

[snapper_freezeframe]

I'm a Canon 1DS mk II user which I bought only a few months before the mk III came out I wasn't disappointed as my

friend who bought the 1DS mk III had White balance problems. As time went on, still very happy with my purchase I

started to read about the future 1DS mk IV. I have been really looking forward to Canon announcing their new flag ship

but when I read 18MP I was gutted, I thought this must just be a intermediate camera before they announce the 1DS mk

IV but as I read on and saw that this 1DX replaces both 1D & 1DS, I was so disappointed. I'm wondering just how much

better is this 1DX, is it just a glorified 7D. The extra 1.3MP doesn't interest me the video could be useful but I have an

XL2 so I don't really need it. But I really could have done with the 30-40MP which, even with my 600mmIS, would have

made a massive difference for some of my elusive wildlife shots. I will not be buying the 1DX, it hasn't grabbed me at all,

even the 12-14fps, I am very happy with my 1DS mk II. So if Canon want me to buy another camera they need to up the

MP.

[dennisgg]

<p>I understand the wildlife photographers being a bit upset about the f8 AF issue. My thoughts are if you can spend $6800 on a Canon body then you can get either the 500mm f4 or 600mm f4 with a Canon 1.4x giving 700mm f5.6 or 840mm f5.6. That is pretty long and then 18 mp allows for cropping to bring it in closer. </p>

[scottelly]

<p>Michael, I don't know where you're coming from. Do you know that the A77 shoots at 12 fps? It is 24 megapixels. 36 megapixels is only 50% more. It would be within Sony's current technology to build a 36 megapixel camera with the ability to shoot 10 fps. Nikon now has a 10 megapixel camera that shoots 60 fps (the Nikon 1). That's the equivalent of 40 megapixels at 15 fps. I don't think the processing of 36 megapixels at 10 fps is the issue. In fact, since the 24 megapixel A77 can shoot at 12 fps with just one BIONZ processor, Sony could put two processors in their next full-frame body, like Canon has been doing with their 1D series cameras, and Sony could exceed 12 fps with a 36 megapixel sensor. Imagine that?<br>

-<br>

One more thing about image processing Michael . . . the 1D Mk IV can shoot at 10 fps with a 16 megapixel sensor. Why, in more than 2 years, can Canon not double that? The simple answer is, "They can." Canon COULD make a 32 megapixel camera that shoots at 10 fps. In fact, they could have done that a year ago. It's not a heat issue, and it's not a battery issue. Moore's law hasn't gone on holiday. If Canon can do that, then Sony could surely build a 36 megapixel camera that can shoot at 10 fps. Sony has the technological advantage over Canon, as I'm sure you know. Sony is the creator of Playstation, afterall, which is basically a high-performance computer system designed to specialize in graphics (image processing). I'm sure you know that Sony is one of the top computer makers too, right? How about the fact that Sony makes their own computer chips? Did you know that Sony worked with IBM (and other) to develop the Cell chip (the chip that is being used to power the World's fastest super-computers) years ago? Imagine what they're working on now? Sony has been making cheap, high-performance video cameras that process information incredibly fast. That's how you could buy a full-HD video camera capable of shooting 60 fps (yes, 1080p 60) about two years ago for only $500. Crazy, huh? Yes, I know they don't record the same volume of data, because they are only shooting jpeg quality at best. That's all just a matter of circuitry though, and a bigger camera with two processors will handle the greater volume of data just fine.<br>

-<br>

As far as support networks go . . . I don't know a single story of a photographer who was able to get a replacement camera or lens from the manufacturer the day of the shoot. Maybe you do. My experience with Canon's "huge" support network has been pathetic. One service center in New Jersey for the eastern U.S.? No, I know that's not their "pro support" network, but if that's indicative of Canon's service, I think Canon's service leaves much to be desired. Here's an example of how Sony does indeed have an advantage over Canon. There are more companies that sell Sony stuff in Orlando than there are for Canon and Nikon combined (from the looks of the place). You have to visit them, in order to see this, because all the stores are not listed. When was the last time you saw a Canon store? How about a Nikon store? There are Sony stores popping up all over the place. (more than two dozen in the U.S. alone) Yes, you can get a replacement lens or body at a Sony store . . . even their top-of-the-line bodies and lenses. Sony sells all over the World, just like Canon and Nikon do. They are a Japanese company, just like Canon or Nikon. Sony is MUCH bigger than Canon or Nikon. In fact, Sony is bigger than Canon and Nikon put together. That gives them the financial and technological resources to do what they need to do in order to dominate the market, which they are in the process of doing right now. Did you forget that Sony HAS a professional support network set up already? Sony is the biggest name in professional AV equipment in the World. What, there are no professionals using Sony equipment? Tell that to the hundreds of news crews and TV studios out there. Do you think maybe they use some Sony equipment?<br>

-<br>

Now, on top of all that, I've heard of a number of wedding photographers (no, wedding photographers aren't professionals, are they?) who are considering a switch to Sony, and my guess is they are considering that, because they want 24 megapixel full-frame, and they don't want to pay through the nose for it. They also want in-camera image stabilization, so they can have an image-stabilized 24-70mm f2.8 - Sony is the only company that offers this (because their camera bodies do the image stabilization). On top of that, those photographers can shoot with a 50mm or 85mm lens and still have image stabilization. No Canon or Nikon shooter has that option. There are no IS or VR lenses capable of f2 or f1.4.<br>

-<br>

Presumably, Canon and Nikon are working on their in-camera image stabilization, but they don't want to put it into their cameras until they have to, because they don't want to miss out on the profits they get from selling IS and VR lenses.<br>

-<br>

On a side note about Sony, since you seem to be defending the big two, trying to say they aren't being beaten by Sony, I've heard of more than one bird shooter who is considering a switch from Canon or Nikon to Sony, because of their wonderful 70-400 lens and the new A77. You must admit, the Sony has advantages over the Canon 7D with a Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS or a Nikon D300s with a Nikon 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR. (such as significantly higher resolution, greater zoom range, faster shooting frame rates, and better video)<br>

-<br>

Anyway, this is about the Canon 1Dx, and from what I can tell, it isn't going to satisfy the people who have been comparing the top Nikon and Sony cameras against the Canon 1Ds Mk III. Not at all. These are people who don't care about shooting more than 5 fps. (Yes, there are people out there like that - they sometimes shoot Leicas and Hasselblads.) People who want a high resolution camera will not be satisfied to shoot with an 18 megapixel camera, when they have been considering a switch to a medium format camera, so they can get higher resolution. Medium format has been coming down in price, and Canon knows this. I believe Canon will definitely introduce a new full-frame camera with a 30+ megapixel sensor soon. It's inevitable.<br>

-<br>

I just don't know why they're posturing the new 1Dx as the replacement for the 1Ds Mk III. Maybe they're acting like Sigma, lying in order to make more hype and sell more cameras. Maybe they haven't seeing what's been happening to Sigma's sales of their SD1 as a result of their marketing debacle. Canon is full of smart people though, so I guess they know what they're doing. I'm sure they'll sell plenty of 1Dx bodies to film makers who are using the 5D Mk II right now and wishing they had something better.</p>

[snapper_freezeframe]

Response to Are 1Ds users satisfied with 1Dx specs?(Category:EOS Digital SLR Bodies)

 

Wow! Scott that was some Reading. I'm really happy to hear that someone else out there that believes canon CAN do

better. I've already dais I will not be buying the 1DX I'm not impressed at all. I was waiting for the 1DS mk IV with 30-

40MP. I've never really looked at Sony for pro cameras but after Reading your post I will now. I have always had canon

and trusted them but when the 1DX was announced I was extremely disappointed. I will definately be holding out for

another year or so to see if canon decide to stop trying to fob us off with 18MP when we know they have had the

technology to do better (MP wise) than the 1DX for years. As you wrote 5fps with much higher MP would be brilliant for

me obviously I'd like 10 or 12fps but I want more MP. I hear other photogs zapping away next to me, they may aswel buy

a video camera the amount of pix they take but people still buy mine before theirs! Maybe because I have the 600IS on

my 1DS mk II but I have looked at their pics and as I have said to them knowing when to press the button saves on the

fps. It's obvious because I'm selling and they're struggling. I do all sorts of photography from weddings, surfing to wildlife

and I am more than happy to stick with the 1DS until canon bring out something considerably better or maybe I'll start

looking at Sony :-)

[scottelly]

<p>I guess we will see Snapper. The 1Dx seems to me to be a purpose-built camera. Of course, I'm sure that Canon builds their cameras that way for good reason. My guess is they realized they needed something better for full-frame video, something faster than the 1Ds Mk III, and something good in low-light situations, to compete against the D3s and give video people an upgrade path from the 5D Mk II. I'm sure that they may have received some comments from wedding photographers that went something like this, "I don't need more megapixels! The 1Ds Mk II was fine! I need better high-ISO performance! That and maybe more speed will give me a reason to upgrade." Remember that the 1Ds Mk III does not do video. This new camera has a bigger, much-higher resolution review screen, better high-ISO performance, and much more speed, so it is indeed an upgrade from your 1Ds Mk II. (2 megapixels is not much improvement on resolution, but for photographers who don't feel they need higher resolution, because their photos look great, even when printed at 20x30 inches, there is not need for more megapixels.)<br>

-<br>

Still . . . I believe a much higher resolution camera is on the horizon. I wonder what it will be.</p>