In terms of resolution at least, it seems reasonable to assume that 18mp will not be significantly superior to 21mp. But this was absolutely not my point.
I don't know enough about the new technology to assume if this is reasonable or not.
However, you did seem to imply that this camera would somehow have less dynamic range, and yet the company states it will have more dynamic range and better overall images, with less mpx. You are also overlooking a whole host of other professional considerations that this camera has, that others brands do not.
I did also not comment on the performance of the new Canon that I think will be outstanding. My reaction is only about your comment saying that DSLRs performance had reached a plateau. The rest is assumption on your end about what I think about Canon of the 1DX.
Why do you think it is unreasonable for the capabilities to have reached a plateau? A DSLR cannot be "all things camera," and there is no 'one' camera that can do it all. Do you know of a camera that excels in every single respect? I sure don't.
By "plateau," I mean no 'one' camera can be rugged, compact, have razor-sharp AF, shoot multiple frames at blazing speed, have incredible low-light capacity, all the while having the largest sensor possible, producing the biggest files possible. Something's gotta give.
It seems that Canon felt that 18mpx were "enough," and that to keep their flagship camera the
overall best and most versatile tool ... in
other important ways ... they had to have a cut-off point on mpx, beyond which magnitude would slow-down the camera, rendering it less effective in other ways. It is now FF, and it has an improved sensor to get more out of 18mpx than the previous versions got out of the 20+ range.
So, yes, there is a plateau in mpx if you expect your camera to excel in other, relevant ways.
I also didn't make any assumption on your belief system I just quoted your own comment that "DSLR quality had reached a plateau". No, they did not, other company have been progressing a lot in the last 3 years and you would understand that no plateau has been reached if you knew that.
I disagree.
Can a Hasselblad shoot 14 frames-per-second?
Can your D3x?
How about the Sony?
Do any of these cameras have superior low-light capability, 61 Af points, the best video capabilities of any DSLR, and a 400,000 shutter life?
So, again Bernard, we're talking about more than just mpx here. Not every professional has "super-high mpx" as their primary goal.
Did I write that Canon didn't progress now with the 1DX? No, I just wrote that others had already progressed enough that it seems now reasonnable to assume they can go higher pixel count wise than 18MP while maintaining the performance on what I think is the most important metric, DR.
Cheers,
Bernard
Once again, you're only talking about mpx and DR. These things are important, I agree with you, and the company claims to have surpassed every other iteration of its arsenal in BOTH of these regards ...
on top of ... also offering more AF points, a 400,000 shutter life, 14 fps shooting, professional videography capabilities, plus a whole host of other advancements.
Ultimately, this camera may not have quite the image quality of your D3x (or it might, who knows?), but it
will be able to do
a whole host of other, vital professional chores a quite a bit better than what your camera can. The truth is, most people will not be able to tell the difference between a shot taken by the 1DX shot and a shot taken by the D3x, side-by-side. Yet any professional most assuredly
will be able to tell the difference between 14fps and 5 fps, not to mention the unparalleled video recording capabilities, plus the many other key features that will make the new Canon and all-around superior tool to the D3x.
Will this camera be able to shoot a static scene at the same quality shots as a Hasselblad? No.
But as an all-around sports, wildlife, and action camera, it will have no equal anywhere.
Jack
.