Printable View
I just wanted to give everyone a heads-up that I've published an interview I did with Canon's Chuck Westfall on the soon-to-be-released EOS-1D x. You'll find some interesting information on f/8 autofocus, high ISO performance, and the future of the APS-H sensor. You can find the interview here.
thx Doug.
Thanks too. Interesting. 1.3 crop factor not dead!
Thanks Doug,Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Brown
Your interview cleared up a number of questions.
Here are some key points and comments in my view;
"CW: In a phase detect AF system, it is impossible to spread the AF points out any further. If you were to place AF points at the compositional power points, they wouldn’t receive enough light to do their job properly. You would need an entirely new AF technology to make that possible."
I don't agree with this answer. The AF sensors are already close to the rule of thirds points. Surely the light fall-off from a typical lens from the present edge AF sensors to the rule of thirds points is only a few percent light loss at most. And this is a system that works from bright sunlight to moonlight! There are other considerations in the AF system. One is alignment with the focal plane--very difficult and needs to be not tilted with respect to the focal plane to a few microns, and that is after the light as been reflected by the mirror (so the mirror must fly back and rest at a perfect position)--no simple feat. A second side effect of AF sensors too far from center is focus will be optimized for that point and with lens aberrations, the center may not look as good, causing people to complain as they will not understand the consequences.
2-stop noise improvement in JPEG only. Bummer. The signal-to-noise improvement in raw is likely dominated by the larger pixels collecting more light (bigger slices to the pie) at the loss of spatial detail over a 1DIV. Bummer.
No f/8 AF. Bummer.
AF color only works with face detect on. Bummer. Perhaps face detect will work on some animals, but probably not birds. That means the AF system for wildlife is probably not a big step over the 1DIV (which is already superb and a big step from earlier cameras).
1.3 crop cameras: there is still a future. Yeah! 1DV? Though I would rather have full frame with 1DIV or slightly smaller pixels, but getting the sensor to read out fast and handling the data fast is certainly a challenge.
I was hoping they would move to 16 A/Ds and reduce the need for ISO (could select ISO in raw--or just have higher dynamic range). Need digic VI?
My view: this is a great sports camera, but limited for birds and wildlife, especially at the price. I would consider it a 5DII replacement as it likely has better fixed pattern noise, which the 5DII suffers with a lower ISOs, and better AF, but not at that price. I'll wait for a 5DIII.
Roger
Thanks for this Doug. Did he ever answer the question we discussed over the phone?
The 1DX is sure a great camera for avian photography, perhaps the best Canon has ever made and I look forward to using it in the field.
Here is a simulation with what one will get with various cameras in focal length limited situations. Three cameras are shown: 1DIV, 5DII, and 1DX. Ignore for the moment the image at upper right. The other three images would be what one would get in terms of pixels on subject with all three cameras working at the same focal length. The 1DX will have the least pixels on subject.
Now if one is working at f/8, e.g. 500 mm + 2x TC for the 1DIV image, then the 1DX could only be used with a 1.4x TC so would get the image at the upper right relative to the 1DV image at lower left. That is a big sacrifice. Now, if one never needs phase detect AF at f/8, then the loss in resolution is less, but still significant in my view.
As I image both birds and wildlife at f/8 and occasionally with stacked TCs, the loss is too much for me to consider this camera.
Roger
(edit: replaced image from a few minutes ago as the 1d4 image seemed pixelated.)
Note on the above diagram, the f/8 pixels on subject loss with the 7D is very different than that for the 1DX. Examine the image at lower left from the 1D4. If that was an image made with a 500 mm f/4 lens + 2x TC at f/8 on a 1DIV, then an image made with a 7D + 500 mm + 1.4x TC at f/5.6 would be very close, only about 5% fewer pixels (linear measurement), and with very close to the same signal-to-noise ratio per pixel (made at the same exposure time).
Roger
Thanks Doug. For a guy who makes a living putting people to sleep, you're a good journalist. I didn't nod off once!
Thanks Doug and Roger. From everything I've heard so far - especially from Roger, looks like I will also have to skip this camera...:e3
Roger,
As I have said before, You make my head hurt reading your very highly detailed answers. Thats a good thing. I have learned a lot from your insightful answers. However, I have a question for you. I'm neck of the woods, here in Maine, I use my Canon MK2n, 5D with 300 2.8 for most of my images. They mainly are Loons, a few songbirds in my apple trees, the occasional Pileated Woodpecker, various landscapes, mariner scenes and the like.
I was set to upgrade to the Canon MK4 and new 5D ll, with a 500 and the newer 70-200 2.8. That is a huge investment for me, as I did not plan to upgrade after that for quite a number of years. Now with this new Canon 1DX set for release next year in the spring, hopefully, i was thinking of going to it instead. Since I do not do a lot of small birds in flight, I was thinking of getting the best of both worlds with the 1DX as it is full frame, for landscapes, and the fast frame rate in RAW, 12 per second, would fill my needs in one camera. I would keep my MK ll for backup and give my wife the current 5D.
Does this sound a viable alternative, at least for my particular set of circumstances? By that I mean going ahead with the 1DX plan. Please advise.
Great report Doug thanks for shareing, intresting ( CW: Canon is very cognizant of the importance of the nature and wildlife segment when designing new camera gear ) i dont think i agree here.
i dont think the new camera is a bird friendly camera here in the UK were birds are very shy, Reach is needed along with a very quiet shutter .
Rob.
Agree with you Robert, here in Portugal the birds are also shy, I think in most of Europe with some exceptions. You can't get even close to them, we need reach and good camouflage, the birds will fly away if they see any human figure in 200m or 300m range, sometimes even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Hardy
I was made aware of how skittish European birds were on a trip to Crete a couple of years ago. I could hardly believe how even the common species would fly away with the slightest of disturbance like raising the camera to your eye at 100 meters!
The 1Dx has more "reach" than the 1D mark III and this was never complained about back when that model was state of the art. I know, times have changed and expectations are for more megapixels. The consensus seems to be that Canon will fill this gap in the future with updated 7D and 5D cameras or maybe a new model entirely. Maybe they will produce a 1D mark V with 1.3 crop factor and 24+ mp, 10fps?!!!
For me that would be a dream come true...Quote:
Originally Posted by John Chardine
Quote ( Maybe they will produce a 1D mark V with 1.3 crop factor and 24+ mp ) i think this would equate to the reach the 7d gives now so not much to gain 36 mp would be better :)Quote:
Originally Posted by John Chardine
Rob.
This statement could also mean they understand this is not the best for birds/wildlife and will have another camera better designed for that in the future. My guess is that the 1D X is not the only Pro camera that will be anounced in the next year or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Hardy
I sure hope not on the 24+ MP part. That is the density of a 40.5 MP full frame, almost as dense as a 7D. Stick with about 16 MP, let sensor improvements reduce the high ISO noise.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Chardine
That would be 4.6 microns/pixel. The 7D is 4.3. But if that 24 Mpixel 1D camera could AF at f/8 one could get about 30% more pixels on a subject, measured linearly than with the 7D. And 50% more pixels on subject than with the same lens on the 1DX, and with f/8 AF, 210% more pixels than the 1DX.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Hardy
Roger
Gary,Quote:
Originally Posted by Grady Weed
If you are satisfied with your images, then there is no reason to upgrade. And if you are satisfied with the pixels on subject then the new 1DX should be fine (and will certainly have better AF and more accurate focus). I have a 1D4 and 1DII and the 1D4 is a huge improvement in AF speed and accuracy, and the 1DX should be even better. The 1DX will give you a little less than 20% more pixels on a subject (measured linearly) than the 1DII with the same lens. Your plan seems fine for your situation. But a 1DX + 500 is quite expensive.
The 300 f/2.8 is a great lens (I have one too). The 300 + 2x TC with 1DIV has a plate scale of 1.96 arc-seconds/pixel whereas the 1DX + 500 + 1.4x TC gives 2.04 arc-seconds/pixel. So the 1DIV and no lens upgrade would give slightly more pixels on subject than a 1DX+500, saving you about $13k.
Roger
Thanks for the reply Roger.
