Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications  (Read 20541 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #60 on: April 24, 2016, 03:24:32 pm »

It just struck me that Canon marketing is still hoping that not only people dong action photography will purchase 1DXII bodies, while Nikon appears to have a more realistic understanding of the market in 2016.

Nikon has focused all the improvements of the D5 on the areas that matter for action, starting with AF on moving subjects and they have focused their pre-release marketing exclusively on photographers doing action (including wildlife).

On the other hand Canon has focused the improvements of their flagship body also on low ISO DR improvement (of limted falue for action) and extended their marketing to also include photographers, such as our very own Josh, who are mostly known as landscape photographers.

I would expect the 1DXII to be a better generic tool while the D5 will shine as a speciality camera.

Future will tell who was right here.

Cheers,
Bernard

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2839
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #61 on: April 24, 2016, 03:35:32 pm »

It just struck me that Canon marketing is still hoping that not only people dong action photography will purchase 1DXII bodies, while Nikon appears to have a more realistic understanding of the market in 2016.

Nikon has focused all the improvements of the D5 on the areas that matter for action, starting with AF on moving subjects and they have focused their pre-release marketing exclusively on photographers doing action (including wildlife).

On the other hand Canon has focused the improvements of their flagship body also on low ISO DR improvement (of limted falue for action) and extended their marketing to also include photographers, such as our very own Josh, who are mostly known as landscape photographers.

I would expect the 1DXII to be a better generic tool while the D5 will shine as a speciality camera.

Future will tell who was right here.

Cheers,
Bernard

Canon may have done that, but I'm expecting the 1Dx2 to eclipse the D5, outshining it in some areas and equalling it in all the others.

The sensor should outshine the D5 at low ISO and there's no reason to think it won't at least equal it at high ISO (half a stop of improvement in high ISO performance in 4 years is a more than reasonable expectation).

It shoots 2fps faster.

It is likely to perform better in video.

AF performance should be very similar - historically, Canon and Nikon action bodies released at the same time have had very similar AF performance.

Just because Canon's sensor will likely allow it to be a better low-ISO and general-purpose tool doesn't mean that the D5 will automatically be a better specialty fast-action camera - it's possible to be both at the same time.

Canon's been out of the sensor game for the last four years due to lack of an on-chip ADC, but the bodies have always been more than competitive with Nikon. Now that they appear to have fixed the sensor (and Nikon appears to have opted for a cheaper option), and retain their longstanding advantage in video, there's no reason the 1Dx2 won't entirely eclipse the D5.
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #62 on: April 24, 2016, 03:53:10 pm »

In this case, no it does not. I'm using the performance of the crop sensor to gauge the performance of Canon's on-chip ADC, not the performance of the sensor as a whole.

You are insane. Better at every measurement = better at every measurement.



In this case, better = better per unit area of sensor, not per whole sensor. Otherwise you could just say that medium format trumps everything, by virtue of being larger (practicality and lens availability aside), despite CCD sensors being, area-for-area, worse than almost any CMOS sensor currently on the market.

No. Medium format is unwieldy and only better at low ISO.

That is why no one uses them in Africa, for sports, etc.



You haven't the slightest clue who I am, so don't presume anything.

That is only because you lack the cajones to sign your name to what you say. :-[



You haven't shown anything except empty rhetoric. Where is the data that backs up your claims?

So far, none of the graphs you've posted actually back up anything you've said - all of them have basically compared the D5 to old Canon cameras, then somehow drawn the conclusion that, since they're better than the old cameras, they're also better than the new one.

Again, you are insane.

You laud the 80D and yet it is the "new camera" that falls short of the elder D7200. (The graph clearly showed this.)

Why don't we discontinue this waste of time and see what the real numbers come out to?



Then explain why the D4s has measurably better low-ISO performance than the D5, while only losing by half a stop at high ISO. You'd expect at least a half-stop improvement in several years of sensor evolution anyway, so it's hardly that they've sacrificed ISO 100-1600 just to gain half a stop at high ISO. That's going backwards by any measure.

Like every other company, Nikon is trying to maximise its profits, not create the best sensor or the best camera. This means making optimal use of its resources.

Nikon does not make its own sensors - it designs them and gets someone else to make them. On-sensor ADCs add an extra layer of complexity to the sensor. More complex sensors require more advanced fab plants, which sell their services for a higher price and so cost Nikon more money. These sensors are necessary for a non-action camera where detail is everything. For a low-resolution action camera, which primarily lives at ISO 800 and up, it just makes for a much-more-expensive sensor without greatly benefiting its primary purpose. So, skimp on the unnecessary parts of the sensor and pocket the change.

Your graph doesn't show anything about the 1Dx2, nor can anything about the 1Dx2 be inferred from it. All it shows is that a brand-new Nikon sensor beats the 1Dx and 5Ds at high ISO (being about the same at low ISO) and the D810 beats both at low ISO.

We are looking at the performance of the 1Dx2 as compared to the D5, not the 1Dx and not the 5Ds. The 1Dx2 sensor is not the 1Dx sensor, and not the 5Ds sensor.

All we know for sure about the sensor at the moment is that:
- It is a 20MP sensor
- It uses on-sensor A/D conversion

Also, from being 4 years newer, it would be reasonable to assume that high-ISO performance has been improved significantly - say, by about a stop - as this is a general trend that occurs with every camera.

It is demonstrated, from the 70D/80D example, that on-sensor ADC linearises the low-ISO SNRs to match the relationship seen in the higher ISOs. If that were applied to the 1Dx sensor, even with no other changes, it would already give a DR of 11-12 stops (by the 20:1 SNR threshold). So, just that one change, without any other upgrade to the four-year-old sensor, would have the sensor beating the D5 below ISO 800 and matching it up to 1600. Then it only needs half a stop of high-ISO improvement - very reasonable over 4 years - to beat the D5 at high ISO as well.

There's almost no way the D5 can have a better sensor than the 1Dx2, assuming the measurements on the website are correct and what Canon has told us about the new sensor is also correct.

Wow, you have a lot of time to waste, theorizing.

If you were important, in any respect, you wouldn't be wasting this kind of time doing so.



I'm not projecting anything onto Canon. I'm merely pointing out what Canon has already demonstrated in the recent 80D - a huge improvement in low-ISO SNR. The numbers are there in front of you, for everyone to see. And the new 1Dx2 sensor uses the same technology, so one would expect the same jump in performance.

Past statistics are meaningless when one side introduces technology that significantly alters their cameras. They hold some weight when you're talking about slow, evolutionary change, but the shift to on-chip A/D conversion is not evolutionary change.

Just look back a few years and see how badly Nikon sensors were trailing Canon. Canon had the 1Ds2, 1Ds3 and 5D2, while Nikon couldn't even produce a full-frame sensor, or a half-decent CMOS. If you made a list back then, pretty much all the top sensors were Canon. Then Nikon got their hands on Exmor and everything changed.

"If this, if that," that is all you are doing, quite frankly, projecting.

If you were my mother's brother, you'd be my uncle.

But you're not.

This simple fact is no (repeat NO) sensor rating body rates Canon sensors anywhere near the top.

Let the facts prove a change here, not your conjectures.

The facts show the only thing the Canon 80D surpasses is the pale, sickly 70D, which itself flounders in the mid-bottom of the heap.



The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'evidence'.

The plural of conjecture is not fact.



They're not doing that at all. They're segmenting cameras by application, not by ISO capability. That would be a pretty dumb way to segment cameras, since action photographers still shoot ISO 100-400 in good light, and non-action photographers still shoot high ISO when shooting non-action in dark conditions.

We disagree. I see no reason to digress infinitely, disagreeing ad nauseum.

You ignore all the evidence and speak in if-clauses.



I never said that. Quit putting words into my mouth so you can argue against straw men.

Can't argue against a man who never shuts up and is afraid to sign his name to what he says, either :-[



Are you a Nikon executive?

Are you?



If not, how do you know what Nikon is committed to producing? All that can be assumed is that Nikon is committed to maximising its profit.

How can you, genius?



Even if they were committed to producing the best of everything doesn't mean that they are actually going to achieve it. There are other companies out there who are equally keen on beating Nikon, and have many times the resources (Sony and Canon).

I think they already have achieved it.

Nikon has 5 of the top 10 FF cameras, specs-wise, to Canon's 1.
Nikon has 5 of the top 10 APS-C cameras, specs-wise, to Canon's 0.
Nikon has 4 of the top 10 prime lenses, while Canon, Zeiss, and Leica share only 2.
Nikon and Canon each share 4 of the top 10 zoom lenses, with Sigma owning 2.

Of 40 possible top positions, Nikon owns 18, Canon owns 9, with Leica, Zeiss, and Sigma each owning 2. (Pentax has 3 I think.)

If that isn't total domination, then we simply can't continue a conversation.



Either you have no grasp on logic, or no grasp on mathematics.

Repeat that in a mirror, and make sure you smile.



What do you think 'D4 and 1Dx were more-or-less comparable' means? IT MEANS THAT THEY ARE EQUAL, not that the D4 is marginally better than the 1Dx.

The D4s doesn't count. Canon didn't bother releasing a competitor against it.

In other words:
D4 = 1Dx
D4s = no Canon equivalent
D5 = 1Dx2

On what basis are you saying Nikon's will be better, anyway? There's no track record of one company's action camera having better AF than the other's, when both were released around the same time. D3 = 1D3, D3s = 1D4, D4 = 1Dx, so it's likely that D5 = 1Dx2.

Do you ever shut up?



You can't argue with fanboys.

Not a fanboy, just a guy who dumped Canon after 8 years of waiting for them to produce something that made me want to buy.

The truth is, it is hard to argue with nameless people who never shut up, type on-and-on-and-on, because they have too much time on their hands, and have no accountability for what they say.



For the record, I primarily shoot Sony.

I feel my life is complete now, knowing that, thank you.

Jack
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #63 on: April 24, 2016, 04:25:55 pm »

Canon may have done that, but I'm expecting the 1Dx2 to eclipse the D5, outshining it in some areas and equalling it in all the others.

....there's no reason the 1Dx2 won't entirely eclipse the D5.

I agree 100% with you and wish you a great day!

Cheers,
Bernard

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2839
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #64 on: April 24, 2016, 06:00:34 pm »

You are insane. Better at every measurement = better at every measurement.

By that argument, crop sensor is a total waste of time, because it's beaten in almost every measurement by a bigger sensor.


Quote
No. Medium format is unwieldy and only better at low ISO.

Not the latest CMOS sensors. They score better in SNR than full-frame sensors, even at high ISO. Hence, they're better.

Better is better, so MF Sensors are better than full frame sensors. That was your argument, wan't it?

Oh, right, of course it makes no sense.

Quote
That is why no one uses them in Africa, for sports, etc.

Obviously.

Quote
That is only because you lack the cajones to sign your name to what you say. :-[

Or that my professional and political positions do not allow me to post independently under my own name.

Quote
Again, you are insane.

You laud the 80D and yet it is the "new camera" that falls short of the elder D7200. (The graph clearly showed this.)

So, a 1.5x crop sensor beats a 1.6x crop sensor. Big deal.

The relevant point is that the 80D beats the old 70D by such a degree - due mostly to the on-sensor ADC - that, if the same thing were applied to the 1Dx2, it should beat the D5 by a significant amount.

For the record, the D7200 also beats the D5 at low ISO. I guess the D5 is crap, then?


Quote
Wow, you have a lot of time to waste, theorizing.

If you were important, in any respect, you wouldn't be wasting this kind of time doing so.

Blah, blah, blah, more ad hominem attacks.


Quote
"If this, if that," that is all you are doing, quite frankly, projecting.

Welcome to Science 101. Extrapolating from existing data and theory and coming up with a hypothesis that can later be tested is about the most basic thing you can do in science.

Quote
If you were my mother's brother, you'd be my uncle.

But you're not.

This simple fact is no (repeat NO) sensor rating body rates Canon sensors anywhere near the top.

Go back eight years and you could say the same about Nikon.

New technology changed that overnight.

Quote
Let the facts prove a change here, not your conjectures.

Then show me the numbers. On the 1Dx2, not on old cameras.

Can't? Then show me how you came to your conclusions via the data at hand, and let the data speak for itself.

Quote
The facts show the only thing the Canon 80D surpasses is the pale, sickly 70D, which itself flounders in the mid-bottom of the heap.

And the fact which you're conveniently ignoring is that you can't directly compare a Canon crop sensor to anything other than another Canon crop sensor, because nothing else shares the 1.6x format.



Quote
We disagree. I see no reason to digress infinitely, disagreeing ad nauseum.

You ignore all the evidence and speak in if-clauses.

I've presented the numbers and charts for everyone to see and explained my reasoning one step at a time.

You either haven't read them, or prefer to sling ad hominem attacks than to actually explain why they're wrong or explain how you came to your conclusion.

Quote
Can't argue against a man who never shuts up and is afraid to sign his name to what he says, either :-[

I've put the arguments out there.

Or is it so important for you to have a person to attack that you are unable to counter an argument in a way that stands on its own.

Good luck getting published in any scientific journak.

Quote
Are you?



How can you, genius?

I never said I was, or that I could. But I never claimed to know what Nikon was planning either, beyond the base profit motive of all companies.



Quote
I think they already have achieved it.

Nikon has 5 of the top 10 FF cameras, specs-wise, to Canon's 1.
Nikon has 5 of the top 10 APS-C cameras, specs-wise, to Canon's 0.
Nikon has 4 of the top 10 prime lenses, while Canon, Zeiss, and Leica share only 2.
Nikon and Canon each share 4 of the top 10 zoom lenses, with Sigma owning 2.

Of 40 possible top positions, Nikon owns 18, Canon owns 9, with Leica, Zeiss, and Sigma each owning 2. (Pentax has 3 I think.)

If that isn't total domination, then we simply can't continue a conversation.

Change the date and change Nikon for Canon, Kodak, IBM, Lotus or WordPerfect and it would be equally true.

All of them lost dominance because their competitors either obtained a new technology to give them an advantage or corrected a major flaw that put them back on an even footing.

On-sensor ADC is such a technology. It was the thing that put Nikon in front in the first place. Now Canon also has it.

Quote
Repeat that in a mirror, and make sure you smile.

I could say that about three-quarters of your posts.

Quote
Do you ever shut up?

Quote
Not a fanboy, just a guy who dumped Canon after 8 years of waiting for them to produce something that made me want to buy.

The truth is, it is hard to argue with nameless people who never shut up, type on-and-on-and-on, because they have too much time on their hands, and have no accountability for what they say.



I feel my life is complete now, knowing that, thank you.

Jack

I don't like personal attacks in any argument, but you have taken it so far I see no reason not to respond in kind. You are the rudest, most condescending person I have dealt with all week, and seem incapable of carrying out a reasoned argument without attacking the other side's credentials, reputation or person. Your inability to address the question without attacking the person is nothing short of childish, and I sincerely hope, for the sake of those around you, that your real-life personality is nothing like that which is projected online.

And a good day to you, too.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #65 on: April 25, 2016, 01:10:10 am »

Hi,

While this discussion is going on a guy named Josh Holko has won a couple of gold medals for Artic photography, and printed some 54" prints from Iceland, all shot on Canon…

I would say that I got the impression that Mr. "Shadowblade" has some good insights in the techniques of his photography, based on his postings. Regarding John's enthusiasm for Nikon is just like his enthusiasm for Canon, just a 2-3 months ago.

Yes, i think that on chip ADCs are a big step forward for Canon. If the EOS-1DX MKII has those, it is a good thing.

Both Canon and Niokon are great systems and we are going to see a lot of developments from both companies.

Best regards
Erik


By that argument, crop sensor is a total waste of time, because it's beaten in almost every measurement by a bigger sensor.


Not the latest CMOS sensors. They score better in SNR than full-frame sensors, even at high ISO. Hence, they're better.

Better is better, so MF Sensors are better than full frame sensors. That was your argument, wan't it?

Oh, right, of course it makes no sense.

Obviously.

Or that my professional and political positions do not allow me to post independently under my own name.

So, a 1.5x crop sensor beats a 1.6x crop sensor. Big deal.

The relevant point is that the 80D beats the old 70D by such a degree - due mostly to the on-sensor ADC - that, if the same thing were applied to the 1Dx2, it should beat the D5 by a significant amount.

For the record, the D7200 also beats the D5 at low ISO. I guess the D5 is crap, then?


Blah, blah, blah, more ad hominem attacks.


Welcome to Science 101. Extrapolating from existing data and theory and coming up with a hypothesis that can later be tested is about the most basic thing you can do in science.

Go back eight years and you could say the same about Nikon.

New technology changed that overnight.

Then show me the numbers. On the 1Dx2, not on old cameras.

Can't? Then show me how you came to your conclusions via the data at hand, and let the data speak for itself.

And the fact which you're conveniently ignoring is that you can't directly compare a Canon crop sensor to anything other than another Canon crop sensor, because nothing else shares the 1.6x format.



I've presented the numbers and charts for everyone to see and explained my reasoning one step at a time.

You either haven't read them, or prefer to sling ad hominem attacks than to actually explain why they're wrong or explain how you came to your conclusion.

I've put the arguments out there.

Or is it so important for you to have a person to attack that you are unable to counter an argument in a way that stands on its own.

Good luck getting published in any scientific journak.

I never said I was, or that I could. But I never claimed to know what Nikon was planning either, beyond the base profit motive of all companies.



Change the date and change Nikon for Canon, Kodak, IBM, Lotus or WordPerfect and it would be equally true.

All of them lost dominance because their competitors either obtained a new technology to give them an advantage or corrected a major flaw that put them back on an even footing.

On-sensor ADC is such a technology. It was the thing that put Nikon in front in the first place. Now Canon also has it.

I could say that about three-quarters of your posts.

I don't like personal attacks in any argument, but you have taken it so far I see no reason not to respond in kind. You are the rudest, most condescending person I have dealt with all week, and seem incapable of carrying out a reasoned argument without attacking the other side's credentials, reputation or person. Your inability to address the question without attacking the person is nothing short of childish, and I sincerely hope, for the sake of those around you, that your real-life personality is nothing like that which is projected online.

And a good day to you, too.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #66 on: April 25, 2016, 07:51:58 pm »

I don't like personal attacks in any argument, but you have taken it so far I see no reason not to respond in kind. You are the rudest, most condescending person I have dealt with all week, and seem incapable of carrying out a reasoned argument without attacking the other side's credentials, reputation or person. Your inability to address the question without attacking the person is nothing short of childish, and I sincerely hope, for the sake of those around you, that your real-life personality is nothing like that which is projected online.
And a good day to you, too.

Your feigned halo in this is comical.

If you don't like personal attacks, perhaps you shouldn't use them (or, perhaps, you should slow down in your typing and realize you frequently use them, or imply them).

You are the most important person I've ever dealt with this week ... who seems to have all the time in the world to ramble on.

My real life personality is that I deal with people of all walks of life ... face-to-face, eye to eye .... at all hours of the day and night ... whether I am hunting down a fraud suspect, or interviewing an executive as to his involvement in a contractual obligation. Yours seems to be more, ahem, academic ...

I hope you have a nice day as well.

Jack
« Last Edit: April 25, 2016, 07:55:50 pm by John Koerner »
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #67 on: April 25, 2016, 08:24:07 pm »

Regarding John's enthusiasm for Nikon is just like his enthusiasm for Canon, just a 2-3 months ago.

Thanks for the (not so) veiled jab, Erik.

I have checked out your site and seen your attempts at technical articles. Admire the effort.

FYI, 2-3 months ago, I was dumping my Canon gear for Nikon gear.

Last year, though, you're right ... I was still hopeful.

Now that I have switched, I can understand why Nikonians are the way they are. History + sincerity + quality.

I enjoy shooting again :D

Jack

PS: I have also seen your snapshots on your new SmugMug page, congrats, looks like fun!
Logged

Christopher Sanderson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2689
    • photopxl.com
Re: Canon announce the EOS-1DX MKII - Full Specifications
« Reply #68 on: April 25, 2016, 09:52:45 pm »

This thread serves as an example of how to take a timely, relevant and factual discussion and rubbish it.

Those who wish to get into personal slanging matches might be less unwelcome on another better-known, bigger forum and leave this one.

Topic locked.

Should I see further examples of this silliness, the author will be permanently banned. I encourage readers to report this kind of behaviour to the Moderator so that I can get a quicker handle on it.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2016, 10:08:34 pm by Chris Sanderson »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up