• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • DPReview is out with their first impressions of Canon’s new rugged sports camera and it looks pretty fantastic:

      16 frames/second stills, awesome autofocus, incredible RAW 5.5K video at 60 FPS, a new image format I love (HEIF), a battery good for 2500 images...

      Downside: it’s a beast and $2,000 more than Sony’s competitor. Sony’s is a little faster, less rugged, and much smaller. It has in-body image stabilization.

      Bonus: I own incredible Canon lenses. @kevin thinks I should sell all my Canon lenses, get Sony gear, and come out ahead. Reading through the comments on DPReview, the sports guys are raving about the canon, saying the Sony is a toy. Young shooters on a budget are responding, okay boomer.


    • It matches the A9 Mk II in speed when using live view. It shoots 5.5K and 4K at 60p while the A9 Mk II sadly only shoots 4k@60 max. The video bit rate and color depth are also higher.

      Plus rugged construction and a huge battery, I think the 1DX Mk III wins except for the price.

      However, I think the A9 Mk II or even A7RIII or IV might still be a better camera for you as part of a system, even if price wasn't a consideration. Canon OEM glass is now, on average, less sharp than Sony FE glass. Just look at DXOMark ratings:

      The difference between Canon and Sony's full frame sensors is even more pronounced. Sony sensors absolutely crush Canon sensors in every category -- dynamic range, bit depth, sharpness, and resolution. The 1DX Mk III might be an amazing machine, but every other Canon body is inferior compared to its Sony counterpart -- specifically the sensor. The Sony sensors are on another level, in the same tier as elite medium format sensors you find in Hasselblad and Phase One's. I suspect the 1DX Mk III's sensor quality will be incrementally better than the Mark II, and that sensor's performance comes short of any recent full-frame Sony sensor.

      I think the 1D Mk III will have a slight edge on the A9 Mk II or A7R III/IV for sports and wildlife, but those Sony's will beat the Canon in every other category. I need to do more thinking on the subject now given we know the concrete specs of the 1D Mk III...

    • As yet If only seen the specs I haven't read any of the reviews, This was one camera I was seriously waiting for, as the specs started to leak in the last few weeks however I was getting a little less excited. The final specs and announcement today confirmed what I thought. I've been waiting to upgrade my 7DmkII with the end aim to get the Canon 600mm F4 for my Birding set up. The last few weeks I’ve been using the 5Dmk4 with my 150-600mm Sigma sports. I’ve missed the frame rate of the 7D at times so missed the odd shot, But made up for it with the higher mega pixel count. With birding you can never have enough reach so the ability to crop in a bit more to me would be a priority. Seeing the 1D X mkIII has the same mega pixel count of 20.3 for me didn’t rock my world, the non-tilt screen which I love the Tilt Screen on my 60D (Mushroom Camera) is also one I thought by now they would have learnt and put on all future models. The new 1DxmkIII has some great video features but again not something I use so not something I was waiting for. Would have liked to see some IBIS though I do shoot a lot on legs with a gimbal so not essential, but when I do event work it would have come in handy.  If I was a sports shooter then this would be high on my last, but form my birding shots, Think I’ll wait to see if a sports R comes around the corner, hopefully with tilt screen and a handful of extra megapixels, somewhere around 28 would be nice, don’t want to overdo it, but something more than 20 would be nice, Frame rate of around ten frames a sec is nice for birding. I was seriously looking at the 1D X MKIII but for now I think I’ll hang off and wait, though I’ll probably get my hands on one to play with a little see if it excites me in when I get some files out of it. But for now back to waiting to see what a sports R looks like, May help in saving for the 600 f4 not splashing out on the 1Dx mkIII. If course looking at new body and lens combination fees me up to pretty much go anywhere while keeping everything else for my other work, there’s always the new Olympus offering around the corner the new lens 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25x PRO lens with 2X converter which works out to be the equivalent of a 2000mm lens coupled with the OMD OM-D E-M1X. Would need to play with one of those checking files before getting too excited there, but another option. I’ve been a Canon shooter since I put up my Minolta X700, Happy with them and how they support their community, but I don’t think the new 1D X mkIII is for me, much to my wife’s delight. So now waiting for a Sports R and an Olympus super zoom to play with both before decision time for me.

      Now to spend sometime checking out all the reviews as they come through.

    • depends on how often you would use it? if it is used infrequently, buy a second hand 1dx from b&h for $2,000. Keep that beautiful 200-400 lens and go Sony with the money saved for short and medium range photography?

      I still use a 1dmk11n and, with a handstrap, love how it fits into my hand. I don't use a camera that much anymore, but intend to get out and shoot when the weather improves. I will be looking for 2nd hand 1dx mark 2 or 1dx when present owners upgrade.

      Personally, I don't use a camera enough to justify the cost of buying new

    • Well, from what I can gather from B&H, it won't really be available to ship to consumers until the end of February, so I am going to wait and see how the new camera is received by working pros. I will probably order it in mid-February.

      I bought a 1Dx when it was first released, and a 1DX Mk II early in its release, and I enjoyed both of them a great deal. I let my 1Dx go about a year ago ( anticipating the Mk III) , and later, kind of regretted that decision, as there really was no back up for a 1DX Mk II until now. Both bodies served me well in Africa and the Artic circle.

      I really wish there was a 7D Mk III (with the 32 Mpxl sensor like in the 90D) in the pipeline, but I don't think one is coming. Or even a mirrorless version 7D Mk III. Or a real sports/wildlife dedicated EOS R type body.

      For now I am going to play with the M6 Mk II with a Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 - Yellowstone is dark in the winter before sunrise and after sunset. Faster lenses do help.

      Yeah @Chris , I get OK Boomer too. I will keep an eye out in Yellowstone and see what folks are using in real winter wildlife conditions as working pros.

      For now, I will carry on with the tools I possess, and find an acorn now and then, God willing.

    • The Sony definitely isn't a toy, it's not huge but that can be a good thing depending on how you like your cameras and with a grip it still should be pretty bulky.

      The real question is will the Sony lens lineup cover everything you want? If so I'd just rent it because I could write pages of advice but since both are such good cameras it'll really come down to your personal preference and there might even be things that you can't even think of right now that are missing from one or the other that you'd find out.

    • I'm afraid that I must take exception with the notion, "... every other Canon body is inferior compared to its Sony counterpart -- specifically the sensor. The Sony sensors are on another level, in the same tier as elite medium format sensors you find in Hasselblad and Phase One's."

      Let me preface a bit; I own Canon dSLR systems (FF, Crop-H, Crop-C), a Nikon dSLR system (3-bodies, Crop-C), and a Sony Mirrorless system (2-bodies, Crop-C). I like them all, for different reasons, and I use them all for different circumstances.

      Using DXOMark data as the arbiter information, and following this conditional statement: Canon dSLR vs Sony Mirrorless, 1D X Mark II vs A9. (original) (The A9 II has not been evaluated yet and the Canon 1D X Mark III is not even in production).

      At DXOMark, choose those 2 bodies for comparison and then compare the two cameras' data on a chart overlay gives us a very clear view of relative merit for each imager/processor.

      Starting with SNR (Signal-Noise Ratio):

      Note the very similar slope and a slight advantage to Sony @ ISO 100-200, but I cannot find visible noise in either camera's images at those ISOs in real life. The remainder of the graph is simply too close to discern a winner.

      Moving to DR (Dynamic Range):

      The Canon moves ahead 1/2 stop in the ISO 400-800 range, but I doubt that you could see meaningful differences between the cameras. Once again the remainder of the graph is close with a minor bump ahead and near the bottom by the Sony, but I wouldn't trust either camera's reliability to provide much quality at these highest ISOs.

      Tonal Range and Color Sensitivity, These last two charts are greatly affected by the default profile within the particular RAW image processing software you use. I have not found more than a gross similarity between DXO and Adobe RAW converters, and relatively small changes in global contrast can affect the results greatly. As long as these charts are in-the-same-ballpark for their respective slopes, I wouldn't place too much emphasis on absolute metrics. (You should be easily able to match the Tonal Range and Color Sensitivity without prejudice between similar sensors like those used in the 1D X Mark II and A9.)

    • Welcome @ziggy53!!

      As a long time user of Canon, Panasonic, and Olympus cameras and a Sony RX10 Mk IV, I appreciate your graphic displays, Ziggy. I use all of them, at times, usually because I feel they each have desireable features, that influence my choice for each task.

      Seldom does the sensor soley make my choice; size, water resistance, ease of use, speed of AF, battery life, all do contribute to my decision as to which camera to use on a given day for a specific task.

      Certainly, some sensors have more or less noise than others, and this can be a part of my decision matrix, but it rarely is the sole factor. Noise is pretty easy to manage these days at ISOs less than 14000.

      I shoot a fair amount of m4/3, even though I also own, and use, and like, a 1DX Mk II and a 5D Mk IV, even with their inferior sensors.....

      @Glenn_Smith will be happy to hear. I think, I just broke down, today, and bought the Olympus M1X to use with my Leica Pany 100-400 in Yellowstone. 800mm equivalent and light and easy to handle. And the fact that the price has been cut $500.00. I will probably not shoot it at ISOs higher than 1600-3200 if I can. I will appreciate its light weight, weather resisstance, and the ability to shoot NDs filters without any ND filters..

    • I think you'll be very happy with the Olympus, a few things to look for in it is Pro-capture (May not work with non-native Olympus lens from memory) It allows you to take a shot and the camera has taken shots before and after you press the shutter, so you can capture the exact moment i.e. a bird landing, something dropping into water. 

      Another feature is the live composite which only adds additional light to a scene, so you don’t overexpose a shot when light painting etc. 

      The image stabilisation is amazing, so you almost won’t need a tripod apart from when you’re doing the pixel shift for super high res images, but make sure you have the hard disc space from them. 

      I’m in no hurry to swap over from canon yet, but it’s certainly got me interested, and I’ll certainly spend some time playing with it when the new lens comes out, considerably lighter set up and about half the cost of the canon equivalent, it’s just a matter of getting my hands of some images and comparing the image quality I can get, the emphasis there is what I can get not what the pros can get.  I’ve seen what Scott Bourne gets out of these So certainly will be interested to see what I can get, I’ve had the odd play with one in a shop, but not taken it out for a while yet, waiting for the lens to drop first also be interested to see the cost of the beast, Image it’s not going to be on the light side.  

    • I'll be sure to report back my opinion in about 3-4 weeks. My biggest concern is about the AF - my Panasonic GH3 does well overall, but not that good for birds in flight, especially in lower light. Catching short ear owls in flight after sunset is pretty demanding of AF.

      I should also add that the Oly 300mm F4 Pro lens is pretty appealing - very very sharp, very small, light and even inexpensive compared to an EOS 600mm f4 lens. I can literally buy the M1X and the 300mm F4 Pro, both, for less than half the price of the Canon 600mm lens. Just sayin'.

    • Yes costed out Sony A9mkii with 600f4 canon 1dxmkiii with 600f4 and Olympus guessing at the new lens agreed about half price much smaller and lighter, the pro-capture to get the exact moment it’s all sounding good. Want to get my hands on each for a few hours and see how they all compare. Will be interesting to see.

    • I have received the Oly M1X. - its smaller than I thought it might be, maybe about 2/3s the size of a 1DX Mk II, and much lighter. Nice, and feels solid in my hands.

      The shutter is almost silent, and takes a very gentle touch on the shutter button - I like the feel of the shutter.

      The electronic viewfinder is less than stellar - Not as bright or clear as a Sony RX10 Mk IV or and EOS R electronic viewfinder or the optical view through a 1DX Mk II - but it is adequate. It was defocused as shipped, so I had to rotate and focus it to see a sharp image in the viewfinder - I shoot with glasses on, so I knew it wasn't my eyes.

      I haven't begun shooting with it, as the rain has been pouring down outside for the last few days - Even out of doors, it wants to shoot at ISO 6400 or higher, it is that dark out, so that's not really a fair test. A few indoors shots with a LumeCube for light reveals that the files will be sharp even when hand held. The lens I plan to use is a Panasonic branded - Leica DG 100-400 which I know to be reasonably sharp if I do my part. I do have several high quality m4/3 lenses, including an f1.2 45mm and an f 0.95 17.5mm Voigtlander Nokton and a Leica DG macro Elmarit 45mm f2.8

      It does look like the weather sealing is quite capable, good rubber seals on all the openings.

    • I’m definitely intrigued, but still loving the portability of my EOS R... hoping they can squeeze similar specs into a mirrorless package in the near future!

    • Here's one of many videos on the weather sealing.

      Some of the guys down here that shot waves crashing on rocks have converted over to the Olympus purely for the weather sealing as their Canon's didn't stand up to it, mind you they weren’t shooting 1DXs which has similar weather sealing. I've shoot 5Ds and 7Ds in rain without any issues. So a lot of cameras aren’t to made weather sealing wise, I’m sure I’ve seen another one with the Olympus submerged in a bucket then shot with. Possible by Kai W.

    • The way my 1Dx died is little Daniel removed the O-ring from my very expensive underwater housing case and wore it as a necklace. 💦

      I got sudden notice of a surfing photo op, so I rushed my 1Dx into the housing without noticing the missing O-ring, plunged into the ocean, and noticed the leak after about a minute.

      The 1Dx didn’t just leak, it filled with salt water. I took off the lens and poured it out. I suspect the water came in where the lens attached.

      Canon said they could have saved it if I had flushed it with distilled water right away and overnighted it to Canon. The lens, however, was fine.

    • I have to go to Marrakech in February to review the new Triumph and that has caused me to think more about size, price, and vlogging. And that makes me think more about a micro 4/3rds system. I rented one before and had a good experience. I even got very shallow depth of field with an f/0.95 lens.

    • @Chris theres always the Scott Bourne option, Why not have both and choose which one suits your needs at the time, no rule to say it has to b eone or the other. I've heard Scott say that on many of his pod casts over the years, no where is it written that it has to be "or". jsut a thought, Micro 4/3 for travel where restrictions apply and then the big boys for when you have no restrictions. One of the options I weight up at times, if I go Micro 4/3s I'd keep a foot in both cames for a while until one or the other convinced me which way to jump.

    • My wife jokes that “you had an unlimited budget for camera gear and you exceeded it.”

      But as I look at the itinerary for Morocco with Triumph, there are people to interview on camera where I’ll need a vlogging setup, there is an off-road day where I’ll need to shoot long-lens action with something that fits in an all-day knapsack I can ride with, etc. That doesn’t sound like 1Dx with my honkin’ lenses.

      Then I’m going to Costa Rica for 3 weeks with 5 young kids and will want to shoot video with them doing zip lines but also get good pics of monkeys in trees and exotic birds while we hike. Doesn’t sound like 1Dx either.

      Sounds like I need a travel kit.