mpgxsvcd: Finally Canon is back in the game. This is a camera that offers features that almost no other camera has like 4K @ 60 FPS video. Now I just hope that this continues with their lower price models.
This is a good day for Canon.
@Don Diafragma .... except for hundreds of wedding and event clips? hundreds of youth soccer, football, and baseball clips?I wouldn't buy a pro body today without video. It's been it's weight in gold for me, keeping me from having to lug around a camera and video camera! I've put cell phone video and stills to great use as well. Both have put a huge dent in the consumer, and areas of the professional video market.
cd cooker: For a flagship camera, I expect some forward thinking specs. I expect 1DXII has USB 3.0 type C connector, capable to charge the camera battery without taking out the battery, at least 3.5" back LCD screen. Like what Tony Nothrup said in one of his videos, can we retired those 80s Casio watch top LCD panel with some kind of e-Ink panel?
A $600 wifi adapter!?#@#$
@Ingo70, It's no less a studio camera than it is a sports camera. You don't associate it with studio use, because you're overlooking the breadth of studio work, which isn't confined to static fashion shots and family portraits.
If you want to get 12 separate frames (in one second) of Tiger Woods swinging a golf club or Maria Sharapova serving the ball, in a studio setting using strobes, the common solution is a fast pro body (like the 1Dx/D4s) and several premium (daisy chained) packs (e.g. Broncolor Scoro)
If you wanted 12-16fps of a gymnast facing you a few seconds before dismounting the uneven bars; if you're using strobes or HMI lighting, what camera body would you use? Or would you be satisfied burning up studio time ($$$) taking the shot over and over again with a slower body, trying again, and again, and again, to capture the "decisive moment" that could've been gotten in 1 or 2 takes using the appropriate gear for the job?
maxnimo: Wi-Fi requires $600?I just find that a bit odd since you can get a Wi-Fi device for $200 with a laptop attached.
Rice is overpriced for some people. Movies are overpriced for a lot of people. Do you think the average person thinks $10,000 for a telephoto lens is "appropriately" priced? Is $1,400 for a Macbook "overpriced"? Is $40k+ for a medium format camera "overpriced"?
What about a Photoshop Suite CD that costs over $1,200? Were they overpriced too? ... probably not to people who actually use the stuff as a part of their tools to actually do work.
If you have a rock, and you can paint a face on that rock and *easily* sell that rock for $7.95... then it isn't "overpriced". What's 'overpriced' or 'expensive' is relative.
Eugene232: is any reason to make a cameras so big and heavy?as this camera for professionals does it mean them need to carry at least a 1 extra body and a few lenses?
Mass *adds* to the stabilization of VR/IS/IBIS, and the while mirrorless is wonderful, It's just not for me... yet... but the technology has come a long way and I'll be *very* interested in seeing it makes its way into the mainstream pro bodies assuming no image quality/high iso performance, etc., loss.
Take the mirror away, keep the same size, include built-in (fast) wireless, gps, a large screen (for clients to view in the field) and a few other goodies that include leaf shutter style lenses and I'll gladly open my purse and pay a premium :)
MyReality: The megapixel amount is not a trade for anything. This is a PRO sideline sports camera . Pros shoot for the web and publication. They don.t need more than 20MP.
@ armandino, taking your time and being able to anticipate the "decisive moment" is a skill that is invaluable. However, be very cognizant that in certain situations, it has a very high failure rate; a textbook example of that is when people blink, especially if you're shooting a group of people, you can't anticipate people blinking (their eyes). So for really important shots, I highly recommend a 3-5 frame burst, sometimes more depending on the action unfolding of course.
You don't want your kid in the most important dance recital of his/her life, only to realize that you've taken beautiful, high resolution shots that display him/her mid blink or with eyes closed! You definitely don't want to do that at a wedding :)
You do make an excellent point being "take your time and think", which is excellent with the 1Dx... take your time... wait for the decisive moment... then lay down a short burst to cover the "moment", (and eyes wide open). The downside is it won't be at 42mp; yet :)
Saaaaaaad: And you believe use of these frequencies makes a WiFi transmitter worth $600? Wow.
... it is if people are willing to pay $600 for it. Business 101.
jaygeephoto: As soon as Nikon announced their D5 I know that we'd hear something from Canon any minute. My 1Ds's have held up remarkably well under regular use. I'm torn though between buying a 5DS-R for studio use and a 5D for field /PR use or just go with the sturdier 1Ds for both. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
@photomedium Ding! ding! ding! .. and folks we have a winner!
@Jaygeephoto, If you mainly shoot in the studio, I'd go for the 5Ds(r) and put the residual money into whatever makes you more money. If you shoot action portraits, etc., on location, go for the 1Dx2.
mezastel: Why don't they up the megapixel count? 20MP good enough for everyone?
@MyReality, many pros using cameras like these aren't shooting sports and very well can use more pixels. That said, I think this camera is what the 1Dx should've been, sans video capabilities that didn't exist back then.
I love the larger pro "brick" bodies over the little puny toy cameras hands down. After shooting pro Nikons for years, I opened my 5D2 box, pulled out all the new stuff, and unknowingly pulled out the camera from one of the partitions as I said "what is this?"... to my surprise, it was the actual camera!, not an accessory. I had to laugh at myself back then. I think that might be my last foray into the smaller (albeit very competent!) camera bodies.
Today, I still like the larger bodies, I like the dampened affect it has on movement, they feel better in my hands, don't have to worry about purchasing a grip (not a fan). Different strokes I suppose right?
I wish people would stop looking at the fast pro brick bodies (my favorites) as "sports" cameras. They fit the need for anyone needing a fast shooting raw camera. Period. That means if you shoot action portraits, ballet, wildlife, VIP events, weddings or pomeranians running towards you, so you can get great shots to advertise your dog business; this camera is for you too.
This is a camera that "pros" use for many different purposes, many of which *could* benefit from more pixels, but I give Canon/Nikon credit for upping the rez! We're approaching the point where a really fast pro camera, with a lot of pixels can be used with confidence for printing relatively large portraits, etc., as well!
In two more iterations, we might be there... you know... at the place where the fast Canon finally bridges the gap between their pro level "fast shooter" and "high resolution" offerings. I'm just glad we're out of the 4mp/10mp days! :)
PhotoKhan: From mock-up to teaser site, to mock-up behind a glass, to teaser photos...There's no limit to what Pentax can do.
Alex Sarbu, Yes, I shoot Canon, Nikon and Pentax (film & digital). I welcome competition; the stiffer and the more competition there is, the better as far as I'm concerned.
... unless it has to do with bringing leaf lenses to fruition or at least a high sync speed option at the camera, like their medium format counterparts ;) (ribbing Pentax with my elbow)
nathantw: Who pays the tax on that wonderful high-end medium format camera? The photographer, of course.
Tim, you'd be smart to do so too! Another smart move would be to let whatever family member has the best tax position by virtue of where they reside in the world, to (technically) enter contest/claim the prize ;)
Lan: Anonymous prizes? I hope that doesn't mean a handful of Hasselblad Lunars they had rotting in a cupboard somewhere ;)
... nope, they're just ugly. :)
I don't play either, but spending a few bucks for a ticket, then subsequently winning a billion (powerball), and getting about half that in a lump sum I can't consider a "trap" :)
But if i'm ever on a game show, keep the cars, trips, and over priced prizes... just give me cold hard cash!
Sarge_: I just don't understand, with all the boundaries Sony has pushed, do they not have a lineup of faster f2.8 zoom lenses (11-24, 24-70, 70-200). F4 just seems like amateur kit on a camera that seems to have professional capability.
The 100mm on FF and MF is one of my favorite. Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all against primes! If you don't need the convenience of zooming, get a high quality prime! :)
It just depends on what tool is best for the job. When it comes to getting paid, and not having all the time in the world to zoom back and forth with my legs, the (fast) bread and butter zooms (e.g. 17-35, 24-70 and 70-200) are often the best tools for the job.
If the shoot is totally on my terms, I'll usually pick up a fast prime.
edit: Androole, sound like you already know all the great benefits of using a premium prime lens! (thumbs up)
Regarding f/4 vs. f/2.8 zooms. The elephant in the room is that many shots at f/2.8 look absolutely nothing like shots taken at f/4 when can make all the difference in the world when shooting on other people's property where the background is objectionable.
Objectionable or not, I much more prefer a fast wide angle zoom because when you're shooting a subject / portrait that's relatively close to the camera, the background is rendered considerably smoother at f/2.8 compared to the same shot taken at f/4.
Focus: Irrespective of the aperture you have selected, when it comes to shooting in low ambient light indoor or outdoors; faster aperture zooms really come into their own allowing the camera to focus (or even manual focusing) better with more light coming into the lens (or viewfinder if you're manually focusing); making focusing more expedient with less "hunting".
Studio: fast lenses often negate having to use ir assist or modeling lights to assist with focus.
lawamainn: This roundup is bad news for Pentax 645.... Guess they have to do something, fast!
((chuckle)) ... I think medium format is safe for now. But in many areas, you're right; for so many uses the common dslr has really given MF an excellent run for the money. But when it comes to shooting on location and not having to deal with blown whites, I'll take medium format every time.
G L: I do not know.But often by such photo contests I think the most unusal photo wins.Not often that I think "Wow that is really a great picture".It has just to be unusual that seems to be the most important thing to win a competion.
And no I don´t participate at any competions, I just like it to take pictures as I like it to go for a walk in the morning sun.
I agree, the contest should just be called "digital creations".
@Nathantw... frankly, if a photographer is struggling to get clients AND to get those clients to pay (I'm not sure how other photographers do it, but if a client hasn't paid me anything, they're not my client yet); then that photographer should have another line of work as their primary source of income.