Canon 1DXiii | A New King
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 июл 2024
- Now Available!
MAVEN FILTERS - Color-Coded Magnetic Photography Filters
(Circular Polarizers, UV, ND Filters, Step-Up Rings, and more)
www.mavenfilters.com
****************************************************************
Canon just announced its brand new flagship last night, so I recorded Maui's thoughts this morning regarding why Canon has a new king. This is the best of the best sports shooting cameras, and at the time of this recording, nothing else comes close. I'll outline its strengths and weaknesses, its competitive advantages, and how it will affect advanced semi-pro shooters and high-end pros. Everything in this video is 100% my own thoughts, I have no affiliation with Canon or any camera manufacturer, and really looking forward to the final release of the camera. Hopefully, Ill be able to test it hands-on soon!
Canon 1DXiii footage used in this video:
tinyurl.com/ye5qe3lq
Michael’s Intro Camera Tutorial Videos:
www.canontrainingvideo.com
Michael’s Maven Straps:
www.amazon.com/dp/B07MVXKCHW?...
Michael’s Maven Straps:
www.amazon.com/dp/B07MVXKCHW?...
#Canon #Canon1DXiii #1DXiii
i still love my 1dx mark 1 and even more my old 1ds-3 . i m sure this one will shine. i enjoy to see the sensor tests
I agree! I bought Sony A9ii and I was and still super frustrated with the clearing of the buffer. My god it takes forever to clear! I’m a Sony user 99% of the time( I have other camera systems) but I can’t see a professional photographer at the olympics using a Sony A9ii for fast action sports. It just takes too much time for that buffer to clear.
Buffer clearing is nice on 1dx but how do you know what you're shooting at 16fps with all that blurry mirror flapping through the viewfinder?
Sony makes high end consumer products, but definitely not the Pro
Maxim Podbereznyy I’m happy with my Sony cameras. I have A73,A9ii and a couple of Sony Apsc cameras. But all of them including the new A9ii and A6600 have the same buffer clearing issue. I am not changing systems to canon though but Sony lost the opportunity to make an incredible camera even better with the release of the A9ii. I’m keeping my A9ii no questions about it, but it was a lost opportunity in my opinion to dominate the market for years to come. Canon just delivered an incredible camera and there is no denying.
@@FamilyofTech I use Sony with GM lenses for landscape photography (my hobby). GM lenses are very fragile not saying about their price. My camera is fine, but not more than that. When Canon releases a pro mirrorless I will buy it immediately without any regrets about Sony
Soso Melodies this is what I’m used to and can cope with compared to the viewfinder lag with the Sony A9.
Thanks for you thoughts and honesty regarding this camera. Do you think 4K uncropped and 5.5K at 50 and 60FPS could have AF in a future firmware update?
No AF in some video modes yet you have focus guide and peaking which can sort of replace AF for professionals who often use pure manual anyway?
That is just what I want. A killer photo camera!
Michael: Nice presentation...thank you for sharing. Are the CF Express slots backwards compatible to XQD?
I’m not sure, but we will find out
Great coverage of what looks like an incoming Canon gem. I'd love to give one of these a "go" on the airfield shooting the fast jets... I use the 5D Mark IV (7 FPS is just "there" for full-frame). The 90D at 10 FPS is great but 16-20 FPS FULL FRAME would be a game-changer for sure (when you're subject is clocking between 500mph and Mach 1). Can't justify that cash unlike the NFL and on-deck Pro sports channel guys. Still have one in college to get through LOL. Perhaps one day though. Looking forward to your findings once you're hands-on with that beast.
I have used it at Ces and its amazing
Canon reigns supreme!
Thank you Mr Michael
But, what happens when the touchpad button gets wet? I’m not asking will it break, but will I get false signals?
As far as I've heard, it's optical and scans moving surfaces rubbing across it. Apparently you can even use it with gloves on. I suppose that also makes it less sensitive or even insensitive to moist and water. But I guess we will have to wait and see.
Good video Michael
As someone who was in love with his 7Dii and after seeing what the M6ii is capable of, I'm super excited to see what Canon comes up with in terms of a 7Dii successor. (Yes, I am certainly aware that's a Canon product niche we're gonna keep scratching our heads at until something comes out. I reckon both Canon and Nikon are gonna take at least 2-3 more years at the longer end to comes up with mirrorless versions of their APS-C flagships.
@pinkdiamond82 I hear you. But where and when exactly did they say that?
@@JoaquimGonsalves One of the reasons is that the original 7D was to meet Canonites' demand for a Canon version of the Nikon D300. Now, Canon can discontinue the 7D series since it is no longer an issue.
I think it's all pretty interesting. I think that the D780 has tipped Nikon's hand in terms of the D6's added functionality, but now that CF Express is here it really boggles the mind how Sony never used its precursor in terms of the XQD card format on any of their own camera bodies. There's been a lot of blather about XQD being solely a Sony tech when in actuality it was a joint developmental process that both Canon and heavily Nikon were at the table for with Sony as the manufacturing arm. In any case the thing that excites me most about the 1DX mark III is what Canon has done with the data throughput. And by extension as a D500 shooter what it might mean for those of us that shoot an XQD card system once the firmware is available for switching over. While it won't upgrade the processor obviously, it will still merit a significant boost in performance.
As always I appreciate your content [even though it's Canon-centric of late] ;)
Cheers
I am seriously considering getting one of these for bird and wildlife photography. The main thing holding me back is the size and weight.
Good Morning, thanks Michael, ... now left to Nikon's own devices what they do with D6. It could have 14 & 18 FPS as opposed to 16 & 20 of 1Dxiii.
Regards.
Would be interesting! Hopefully they step up to the plate!
I doubt that is possible but I'm guessing it would not go as far as 18 but we have to wait til february for the announcement. 1DX3's buffer is already impressive though.
When is your Af issue video coming for the 1dxiii? Eos itr dont work turn it off and so forth?
Ill have some more thoughts on it once I use the camera. You know, something more beyond going to best buy and holding it for a few minutes.
@@MMaven Exactly what would I know shooting professionally not making scientific crap up shooting high school gigs. I went there as I have no interest in the camera and my videos clearly proved your utter BS and now your tone changed Canon will be the best you and our famous youtube clebwrties are from the same school of creating drama for views not after the facts. Cant wait to all the crap that will be wrong with the 1dxiii. Stay blessed.
@@camerasutra247 Sounds like you are jealous and didn't really watch the videos. Something that will help your channel is if you actually use the camera before coming to conclusions that contradict what Canon themselves have said. You stay blessed too! Keep on hatin
@@MMaven Jealous are you out mind owning 7 1D bodies I'm jealous of your nonsense really dude go get a life
@@camerasutra247 So you believe that owning 7 1D bodies & a 30D, makes you an expert on cameras you haven't used in the real world? Fascinating - Keep it up!
No ibis? That’s my only complaint. I know that’s not a factor at high shutter speeds, and most of my lenses have i s, but when shooting birds in flight, I like to shoot at lower shutter speeds, handheld. Guess I’m going with a monopod. I’m still going to acquire this camera, for everything from portraits/weddings to landscape/astrophotography, wildlife, and sports. I’m not a pro, just a serious amateur.
At 9:44, he was actually using a 1D Mark IV.
When you get 1DX3 and compare it with A9II make sure for 1D to test both Viewfinder and LCD autofocus systems, they both won't be the same.
Just to update you, the A9II buffer got faster. It's now clearing at 185MB/s from my tests vs the 146MB/s in the A9.
But still 30-40 second to clear right?
@@MMaven it was 24sec to clear it.
And btw your videos are always awesome. I very much appreciate the honesty approach that you use to go over features. People get so wrapped up in reviewing and comparing just one thing and you always look a the bigger picture. Keep it up!
@@MMaven oh and also that time I said was from the moment the buffer filled till the end of the transfer, not including the burst duration, and it was uncompressed RAW. Compressed RAW usually goes faster but I did not test.
Alik Griffin thank you my friend - I’m still seeing many ways I can improve.
I personally love the fact that it's still a dslr, the evf on a mirrorless kills my eyes if I'm using it for a long shooting day. I know a lot of people like evf, (and RUclips would have you to believe there's no one who still prefers the ovf), but Canon still being dslr at this level is a positive for me.
Yeah, it's like looking a screen from 2cm away.
I think it is meant for pro sport photographers however I don't think they will increase thier sells unless they use this technology in their mirrorless camera and sale them for affordable prices
It could be splitting hairs, but would like to have seen 24-26mp instead of 20. I guess we will have to see if that new low pass filter delivers like they claim. I would think at least part of the reason to keep it at 20mp is so that it's low light performance is better, as well as that stunning buffer performance. I already sold my kidneys to get my other gear last year, so I will have to borrow some to get the 1DXmkIII, LOL. JK, I have no need for a camera that amazing, but I am certain this thing will rule the sidelines of every major sporting event for years to come. Even if Sony hurries up and launches an A9III that fixes the buffer, adds CF express, and ups the shutter FPS, Canon still has the advantage in that most pros have been shooting them for decades, and therefore they have all that glass. Canon made the right move here, the dual CF express slots alone are a reason for these pros to grab one of these.
Got to say I was disappointed in the lack of AF in the higher video modes/ frame rates. 4K/60p with AF and full sensor read would have killed.
But there is anti flicker though, on new Sonys
That’s a lot of dollars. In the land down under that’s about $10,000 😱
12000 with the standard Aus tax that gets added on from nowhere
Southern Charity That’s crazy money 🤪
1,430,000 my end. Duty and tax after.
I do hope as you say to see a mirrorless version but a few more pixels less mech fps. The 1d series has been awesome for me for the last decade but it's just a bit too big and bulky for wildlife treks I prefer the A9. Canon seem to look after the sports guys more so than the needs of wildlife photographers. It's ok for sports guys don't need to carry this stuff on long treks.
20 fps using the monitor? Seems a bit impractical, considering the heft of the camera.
What about a tripod? I know that sports shooters have big lens with big tripods. I think shooting in live view mode won't be a problem.
@@RishabhSharma-lq1id Monopod is more likely in that case, but its a valid point. I think people are really underselling that function.
@@kevindiaz3459 16 is practically 20 anyway.
@@southerncharity7928 Fair point. I just mean that people seem to think only sports pros are looking into this camera. I can see some practical use to a mechanical shutter that can hit 20fps, even in LV
Nikon d780???
I picked up a 1DX2 a year ago and as a amateur wildlife shooter I love it and won’t be upgrading to this one. I do love that they put two of the same cards in this one, I wish I had two CFast 2.0 slots instead of one and a compact flash slot.
Wait for eos r pro to come out this February😍
This camera makes all the sense in the world for a pro sport, wildlife or newsgathering shooter and almost no sense for anyone else. I'm sure people for whom money is no object will buy it too, just as a statement or a token, but in reality, it's a very specialized tool that vast majority of photographers do not need.
It is actually the DIGIC X not 10 (they are not using the Roman numeral X as 10). Not sure why they switched from numbers to a letter, but that is what they have done.
Not Digic 10, but it is Digic X
With a base ISO of 400 in C-Log I don't think this camera is going to be good in low light. What do others think because I would love to buy this 1DX camera to replace my A7S for full-frame video.
Its important to remember when it comes to cost the price is irrelevant when it delivers and has what you call competitive advantage plus if you make enough who cares
Spot on. I will pay for mine in less than 2 weeks.
On one level I don’t find this camera interesting at all because I know I'll never buy one. It’s a specialised tool for professional sports photographers, and I'm a casual photographer with very little interest in sports. I stopped watching sports on TV many years ago.
On an other level it’s a bit interesting to see the innovations presented in this camera, but unfortunately in the past Canon have not been exactly generous in allowing advanced technologies to treacle down into lower camera models. You hope to see the advanced AF-ON button features in all Canon cameras, but I don’t expect that to happen very soon, unless Nikon puts it in their consumer cameras.
But it could be very interesting to try this feature, although I'm generally not a great fan of multi function buttons. I fear one might easily move the focus point by accident when trying to focus; I'd certainly expect a learning curve there. I still miss the eye-controlled AF from my old film cameras, and I don’t think anything else can ever compete with that. My 90D is the first camera I've owned that has a joystick, but I am a little disappointed with it. I still find it quicker and easier to select the focus point just by turning the dials.
The most important thing about the 1Dx3 is the fact that Canon is still very much invested in DSLRs. I really wouldn’t have expected anything else, but considering how many photographers seem to think DSLRs are a vanishing breed, it’s nice to see them proven wrong.
hope this translate to a mirrorless with IBIS
Not even a “real” pro here. But I’ll chime in. I seem to always see eye to eye with your conclusions. I sort of come here for feeling less alone in those ideas.
I think if your in full frame these sports bodies can’t be beat. The 1DXII was and still is my main camera even for product and landscapes. For landscapes they’re often so slow And I have a decent enough computer to constantly walk around with my 50mm or 70-200 and merge panoramas just to get more resolution. Though I never hardly need it. It’s more for getting the framing I want later sometimes.
I think of 35mm for speed and flash . These cameras do that the best working with strobes in the field.
If I were looking for ultimate IQ I’d probably be in a Fuji GFX 100( even over a phase one)
I say not a “real” pro as in I do payed jobs but it’s never going to pay as much as my day job which I do more than full time running the business alone. Photography is my art essentially. But of course if someone needs something done I’ll do it.
No Dual Pixel AF for 4K when it is more than 24fps. Presently no UHD video. Duh... Again, huge video file size. Maybe, X-T4 might become a new king if its AF performance is up to Sony or at least to Canon, has IBIS, has a swivel LCD panel and would be released on March as they say at Fuji Rumors, today.
Fuji can make some noise. It’ll have to be APSC but because canon hasn’t made a 7diii, there’s a real opportunity. Fuji will need a bigger battery or grip to get into the 14-16 FPS
@@MMaven, right, I forgot they need a bigger battery badly as well as lenses with linear motors or refreshed lenses of the present ones.
"No Dual Pixel AF for 4K when it is more than 24fps." WRONG!
it shoots 4k30 & 4k60(when set to 1.3x crop) WITH DPAF
@@MikedieONE, yup, you're right "with crop."
@pinkdiamond82, I agree with 1) body shape and 2) third party lens options. Though, Sigma will release few for Fujifilm this year.
Wish I had the money
@@RealSarahJade I not only dream I achieve LOL I plan on my photography business love my new 90D but can go up when the right time comes. I also agree dream affordable Cool
@@mrclean28h The dreaming/waiting part is the most memorable. Remember that it is no longer a unicorn, but just a tool once you get it. I remembered back in 2008, when I picked up my new Nikon D3. The excitement lasted about a few minutes between holding it the first time in my hand and paying for it at the camera store. However, the wait was over six months due to the worldwide shortage.
@@bfs5113 Sam as when I got my D3 as well
Hmmmm...for Wildlife, the 20fps are just not true. Nobody is using in real life a 600mm 4.0 prime in Live View Mode for Wildlife, especially not for birds in flight. Just OVF typically. And this means 16fps then basically, if that’s really coming through (on the 1DX Mark II the net fps rate very often was below 14fps due to many reasons). The buffer on the 1DX II was never a limiting factor for me. The Autofocus performance I cannot judge but would assume it won’t be better than on A9 II - especially as with 1DX Mark III and OVF there is no Autofocus Lock-On function as on A9 II. So what is left then? The same old-fashioned brick type of housing (ok, that is my opinion) and a super high price of 6500 USD - for this money I can get a Sony A9 II plus a Sony 70-200mm 2.8 GM. For me the 1DX Mark III is not a deal, I will continue migrating to Sony. Btw, for Wildlife also the 20MP of the 1DX Mark III is a kind of disappointment.
@M. F. Oh, I use actually for 2 years two 1DX Mark II for Wildlife. Guess I know a little bit about this camera. Just a little bit :) LOL
@M. F. Of course I did and it is a pain in the ass as you lose time with it. You often simply don't have this extra time as the bird comes in and is gone the next moment. No time to switch on Live View. That is the reality in the field, outdoor. I am not talking about setting up situations with a feeder - I don't like this as this is like in a zoo. But again, this is my situation, other people may use Live View or create situations. But for me it is not the case.
@M. F. Why you say that? I don't think you know anything what I am doing. I talk about with or without tripod. I talk about the situation. Using a feeder is not what I am doing. I shoot outdoor in real nature, not sitting the whole day 10m away from a feeder. Is that what you are doing? Then you are fine with the 1DX Mark III, it will serve your purpose and limited setup. So please respect my opinion about the 1DX Mark III, like it or not. And if your read my note carefully then you realize that I said nobody around me used the Live View for taking Wildlife shots. It does not include you, I don't know you. As simple as that.
@M. F. Listen, dude. Maybe your English so bad. Did you not understand what I was saying? Nobody around me (again: me!!!!) is using Live View for Wildlife. Folks I am going with for Outdoor shooting. This is the fact. If you use Live View when sitting the whole day 10m away from the feeder for birds, well, this is your thing. Your thing only.
Overall, I am excited by the 1DX Mark III. First and foremost, the fact that Canon stepped away from its former position of crippling the video features in this body and are now adding 5.5K RAW and 4K 30 at full width with autofocus is just stellar to me. Maybe it is not the absolute best cinema camera, but there is no question I would rather have two of these if I was a documentary filmmaker on location assignment in Africa or India instead of one of these and a rigged C200 or C300 Mark II. In the stills department, I am glad to see the 20 FPS mechanical shutter in live view, and the new AF touch control looks tremendously useful. My one complaint has to be the fact that we still have a 20 MP sensor in this camera. If I am paying $6,500 for this, I would rather have had 24MP in this body with all of the improvements. As it is, I will be waiting to see what your testing on the dynamic range and high ISO performance looks like. If there is a tremendous improvement in image quality for keeping resolution the same, then maybe it is justified. If it is similar to the 1DX Mark II, then I think Canon's engineers should have some explaining to do. Personally, I am happy still shooting with my original 1DX, and I am probably not stepping into this camera for a *long* time for my work. If I *need* more of a video upgrade, I will probably look at used 1DX Mark II's if I need their form factor and durability. I am seeing them for as little as $3,500 in some secondary market listings, which I think is insane value for what they provide. I am excited to see the Epic Shootout results!
Canon, you go some 'splainin to do! (You have to read that in a Ricky Ricardo voice or it doesn't count).
Got to agree about the 20mp, save for a couple things. They have that new low pass filter on it, and if that work like they claim, can maybe bridge that gap. It's one of those things though were I feel like it's more marketing than anything, so we will just have to see. The other is that I suspect it also is 20mp for low light performance and buffer performance reasons. I am interested in seeing IQ comparisons too, even though I personally can't justify a 1DX.
It’s more likely that Canon have used the same sensor and have focused on cleaning the RAW files in camera using the faster Digic processor. Canon is very slow to change their sensor tech as they produce their own sensors so they need longer to pay off the investment.
I agree with the buffer advantage, Canon’s ability to buffer is amazing. The cost of not only the camera, but the cards and the accessories you would need for this camera puts it into a very niche market. The Sony A9 is way more than a sports camera and is a much more ace able camera for other uses. For instance a wedding photography would be absolutely insane to use the Canon 1DX III over the A9. It would make no sense. The frames per second is a bit silly. No one will use the live view in this camera, so it is a 16FPS camera. Also I have heard rumors that it can reach that speed in a very specific setting and that it’s true speed is more in the 14FPS. That is fairly similar to the 1DX II.
I can only see pro sports shooters using this. Maybe a wildlife photographer who is married to the Canon system. But the limitations of the DSLR tech and the extreme cost of this makes little sense for most. Tech like body stabilization, silent shooting, no black out, longer rated life without the moving parts of a mechanical shutter, the EVF advantages, and the amazing eye AF are all missing. Not to mention a smaller and more manageable form factor. I think this camera is a miss for Canon. After all most of their new lenses are RF, they will not work with this camera. If Canon was cutting edge they would have found a way to make a flagship that used their new mount and been forward looking. This update might be more uninspired that the A9 II update (which was also very focused solely on sports shooters for the Olympics). I think both cameras will be forgotten soon as both Sony and Canon will release cameras that will make these two flagship cameras look old and outdated. Just my opinion.
All good and valuable thoughts - thank u
Absolutely agree. Sensor and processor technology together with software is the trinity in modern camera design. Currently Sony is the leader here. Mirrors and mechanical shutters will go away.
NIche market you say? Sure, the high end, professional sports shooter, that sure is a niche market. At the Olympics alone there will be around 1000 shooters, and most of them will be Canon shooters. So lets say 600. That is 3,900,000 USD in sales for that one event, and that only takes into account if they only buy one. It is more likely many of them will have two. But sure, it's a miss.
@@kevindiaz3459 Yep, and 1,00 units of this camera sold would be bad. But the full frame professional market itself is a niche market when compared to all cameras sold. And the professional sports shooters within that small percentage qualifies as a niche market. Probably smaller. It is not an insult, it just is what it is. My point is that the 1DX III with its price, features, and build is intended for a much smaller market than the A9.
@@kevindiaz3459 I think it is a miss for Canon because this camera is a small improvement over its predecessor without any of the new technologies that the company is already developing. So if the sports camera market is okay with outdated technology in their new state of the art brand new (very expensive) camera, then that is fine. But that is what is offered here. You can't even mount the brand new amazing RF lenes to it. So to me, releasing a flagship, best of the best, camera should be state of the art. Everyone would be much better served buying the 1DX II over this camera when taking into account price. Unless you are so bad at shooting that you need 1,000 buffered shots to get the right shot (I would say that 99.9% of professional sports shooters will never get even a quarter of the way to that!). However if this is the perfect fit for you Kevin, that is awesome.
I'm not even close to being the target customer for this camera but I have to say it's one hell of an impressive camera.
"Spray-n-Pray" photographers love this new Canon...
M. F. People photographed sports for decades and had no problem capturing the ‘crucial moment’ because anticipating the moment was a SKILL that they learned how to EMBODY... if you REQUIRE a camera that shoots twenty frames per second then you are a mediocre photographer
M. F. Apparently it’s impossible to reason with a solipsist like you...
First of all,good for Canon,yet we should expect such from Canon,who has been around since Moses came with the tablets and for $6500,just for the body.In fact,after that debacle about the EOS R,they needed to follow up with a professional body.Would I get it?Yes I would if i could set aside at least $20k or more for the system.The 512 GB CF card alone is $600,and of course you need 2,just to get started.Now you will probably see more from Sony,Nikon,Panasonic,and Fuji.This is Canon's answer to all the innovation they missed out on,since their last DSLRs.Now I am wondering what's trickling down from this camera to their mirrorless offerings and newer crop of RF lenses.
I've just bought a (just about!) reasonably priced second-hand one with under 3000 shutter count.
I am 47 years old.
This will be my last camera.
Ok Nikon...your move.
5.5 raw is so much gigs . People don’t realise. It be better if u can choice not to have raw
Michael i Belive in You and in big cameras.
You are, like me, a big muscol man. I Can’t accept so many small mirrorless bodyes.
Problem is my bank account, that is not so big.
Do you have any coupon to buy a Mark III?
It is around 12 frames, watch Nothrup
@M. F. He HAS the camera.
*T H I C C B O I Camera*
None of us here are professional sports photographers from reading the comments so this camera is not for us.
This guy gets it (or girl, or whatever you want to be). The specs on cameras like this are always confusing to people that are not the target market for it. I really doubt people that are high end pros are bothering to leave comments on youtube videos. People sure do like to make it sound that way though, don't they?
You don't have to be a pro photographer, you can be rich or just like seeing what's new in the industry. Also the original 1D X & 1D X ii are getting more affordable so it's also something to look forward to in a few years when the price is $2-3k used
It's always the same problem for me: When you use the optical viewfinder (Mirror) all the focus points are in a small portion of the frame, in 2020 it's a big disadvantage. This camera is too heavy for hand usage, and Live view is for tripod or monopod, all the bigs improvements are for live view... Mirrorless is the future...I think this 1D will be the last DSLR 1D.
1 dx mark iii...Hubba Hubba....
20 fps, but only in live view mode. Meh. Only nice thing about this over a9 is the buffer. And the a9 is still way smaller and lighter. I would not want to lug around that 20lb brick.
I could also say, 20fps for the A9 only with 12bit compressed raw and electronic shutter.. in 14bit uncompressed it only shoots 12fps, even less than the 1DX2
@@MikedieONEExactly, they both have limitations for that 20 fps. Point is that he talks about the limitation of the A9 for 20 fps, but not the limitation of the 1dxiii as the same speed. Lets compare them on equal terms... with viewfinder, mechanical shutter, uncompressed, and continuous AF, since that's what many pros will be using at stadiums. The A9 can do 10 fps, including full continuous eye AF. What can the 1DXiii do under those same conditions?
And even then, the 1DXiii is still a huge brick. On the up side, it can be used for home defense. The A9 can, however, be used as a normal camera even when you dont want to carry a huge bag and mono/tri-pod so your arms dont fall off after 5 minutes. Oh... and you have $2000 left over to buy lenses.
@M. F. And how many of those photographers at the Olympics will be shooting in live view mode? Might be even less than those shooting with Sony cameras.
@M. F. True, but the video mostly talked about the 20 fps and didnt really emphasize the drawbacks. I also think the real speed with viewfinder for the Canon will be more like 12 fps... but maybe you're right and it's high. In any case, the A9 electronic shutter has issues, but only in specific cases. I would even bet that the number of cases where you can shoot the A9 at 20 fps without issues is much higher than the cases where anyone will want to shoot at 20 fps with the 1DXiii and live view.
In any case, I wont be shooting anything at the Olympics, and neither will 99.99% of camera buyers. For me and likely most others, the A9ii is a much better camera for the price than the 1DXiii. The A9 has much better price, much better size and weight, and can be used effectively in most places than the Canon. Tell me, how many wedding photographers are going to be using the 1DX over one of the Sony cameras? Silent shooting and eye-AF are killer features. The killer features of the 1DX are the buffer, and the shooting speed to a much lesser extent. (To some extent physical robustness and weather sealing as well.) But, no one in their right mind except a small subset of pros will pick the this Canon over one of the new A9 or A7R's. I can buy one of the Sony cameras, but plus a couple of great lenses, and carry them almost anywhere I go and shoot almost anything I want. For the same price I get just the Canon body and I would not want to take it anywhere.
The reason i would buy it is because of the larger size. I hate the small form factor of my Sony A7R3.
This is my first time on this channel, LOL NOT
Say what you might about all these supposedly High Tech features the simple truth is this and other supposedly advanced cameras still require me to be present when the pictures are taken! Simply put I am a very busy, highly successful Millennial (you don't think normal working class people can afford $6,500 for a camera do you?) I've got better things to do than hang around some stupid sporting event waiting for some jock to do something spectacular so I can snap a photo! Show me a camera that doesn't require me to be there and then I'll be impressed! Come on Nikon get the lead out! One thing about this new Canon does impress me, anybody can take 10 worthless images per second, this new camera allows me to take 16 worthless images in the same time! Now that's progress!
Have you seen the "robot" wedding photographer?
@@kevindiaz3459 Kevin I've seen a lot of wedding photographers who act like robots but I don't think I've ever seen an actual wedding photography robot. Is it a modification of the Robo Vac that careens around your house smashing into valuable antique furniture in search of dust? If so all I can say is good luck to those fragile brides!
@@boatman222345 ruclips.net/video/mfB8SVwVvNQ/видео.html
@@boatman222345 it's pretty hilarious. Looks like the other robot from wall e, the futuristic one.
M. F. "Better things to do", in my humble opinion anyway, would include poking fun at the ridiculous level of techno addiction on display these days. When camera technology comes dangerously close to making it unnecessary for the photographer to even be there at the moment of exposure poking fun at it almost becomes a duty. Camera manufacturers have a vested interest in convincing us that too much is not enough. Hence every year there are another half dozen "must have" features added to the camera lineup. Cameras grow increasingly complicated and expensive and take over more and more of the skilled tasks that once separated the photographic men from the boys. As a result a profession once requiring great skill and experience has devolved to the point where everyone with a few thousand dollars and the willingness to press the shutter button down and hold it there can sometimes get respectable results. Henri Cartier-Bresson captured the "decisive moment" with a camera that shot less than 1 frame a second and doing so was a mark of real achievement. Shooting 100 frames in 6" to capture the same decisive moment...well let's just say it's less of an achievement. Is the photography dog wagging its tail or is the photography tail wagging its dog?
Sony is good on spec, and good for people who prepare to work a lot of post process on desktop. If you prefer field work and do not like sitting in front of the PC, Canon is a better choice.
Waiting for startup, sensor overheat, worrying about batteries life, awkward ergonomic is not what a professional camera should do.
By the way, has anyone tested the output from sensors of old camera compared to the output they produced when they were new? Ie, How the sensor degrade over time? Maybe that is something that we should look into, before the manufacturer ship out sensor that only last for few years.
I am asking this because I noticed degradation of image quality from my CCTV installed few years ago.
Images became washed out over time. I‘ve examined the camera, the lens was clear as new, as they were protected from the outer casing, the sensor was made by sony.
That made me believe some CMOS or CCD may degrade overtime, given that they worth around a hundred dollar.
Hopefully they are not putting those in the thousands dollars camera.
This is a limited trick pony for PRO SPORTS...thats about it, and that will be a MAJOR pass for me(surely not the prosport shooters). I want 40mpixels or more, I do not need 16 to 20fps, May as well just video and pull stills!! I rather have a ALL AROUND hi mpixel camera than these specs AT $6500. I think they were supposed to release it at $5K, but then marketing changed that. No dual pixel focus..hmm? Locking recordings at max specs is ridiculous, as the A7R4 with 60+mpixels without any other RAW FF option. So I am waiting to hear about the 3 OTHER Canon bodies that are left to hit the market for early 2020!!
Canon 1DX mark III doesn't worth to buy it for 6500$, because there is Sony A9/A9ii that shoots 24MP 20 fps, Canon shots 20MPs 20 fps, Sony's dynamic ranges is higher.... for videography i will buy Blackmagic pocket 6K ( 50-60fps ) camera for 2500$ and will not pay 6500$ for 1Dx mark III that shot 5.5K RAW 50-60p, for this specification Canon 1DX mark III must cost 1200-1500$ or maximum 2000$ USD, not more, Canon cannot compete with Sony, Panasonic, Nikon and maybe with Fujifilm.
P.S. - CFexpress 1TB card cost is 900$.... it is half of cost of 5D mark IV (1800-1900$ in Dubai now.), if anybody wants to buy 1DX mark III, he must pay 6500$++ for camera, +900-1800$ for one or 2x 1TB CFexpress cards, for extra battery 200-400$ (different markets costs)... total 8500-9000$, is it really worth it to pay 9000$ for this stupid camera? Sony A9ii is 4500$, half of price with better specifications.
P.S.-2 - Canon must change their marketing/techn. specs/price policy, they can lose or solve in near 2-3 years, if will not produce some extremely and competitive camera for the market.
so much nonsense. here some facts for you: the canon shoots in 14bit raw with 20fps. while the A9 only can handle 12bit raws in 20fps. with 14bit raws it only shoots 12fps.
""Sony's dynamic ranges is higher"" WRONG again. the sony A9 has a rather low dynamic range in compare to the other A models. the A9 even has a lower DR than the 1DXii and 5DIV
A9 = 13.2ev stops DR
1DX2 = 13.5ev stops DR
5D4 = 13.8ev stops DR
The Black magic 6K is NOT a fullframe camera. Im not even start with the crappy AF of these cams and the lack of photo features. so your price compare is a pure asspull bullshit.
You count single features and make up the whole price for these features and compare it to something that ONLY can do that feature (like a video only cam). but thats not how this works.
the 1DXiii is a PRO camera for journalists, in sport situations and warzones and you can use it for basically everything else. With a durability of a tank. thats why it has this pricetag.
@@MikedieONE for me also 14 bit better than 12 bit, but Canon 1Dx mark III could make 20fps after 3-4 years later after Sony's beast A9, and you forgot about 4 extra Megapixels, Sony A9/A9ii 24MP 20fps 3500-4500$ USD VS 1DXmark III /20MP / 20fps - 6500$ USD. Let sport journalists take 2x higher cost and with less techn. specs camera and use it. very ''smart'' decision.
P.S. - Another Sony's camera - A7iii wins to you 1DX mark II camera with dynamic range... watch the video, i will post DXO mark here also:
ruclips.net/video/23xV8JwDDpY/видео.html
www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A7-III-versus-Canon--EOS-1D-X-Mark-II___1236_1071
@M. F. i don't need to take it with my hands and then talk about that and tell my opinion here, i look at specification and price of both cameras and do decision which one to buy or not to buy.
not a single professional film maker will trust the AF no matter how good it is. That's why cine lenses are all manual.
20Mp for wildlife?? 80% of all the shots do need some of even a strong crop... 20Mp -> 16fps( +/-8.5Mp DX) , or 45.7 -> 9 fps , D500 20Mp DX 10Fps ... the wildlife shooters i know, are NOT happy
D850's and D500 will stay even as the 7Dmk2's and some 90D's we need reach, speed and good AF, in terms of AF the 90D seems to be closer to the 80D then te 7Dmk2
Nikon schould impland the Fuji XT3 sensor, 26Mp DX , bump it to 12 fps or more , thake the D6 AF system 1SD ii and one CFe slot , deep/endless buffer and it will sell..
We can not dictate a bird to go pose at 5 meters, so cropping is the standard.. 20Mp FF is useless