It's cool how we can compare the flagships models from other manufacturers. Oh wait, DP never reviews anything from other manufacturers. I guess they're waiting for Sony and Canon models to age and mellow a bit before they're reviewed. It's probably nearly impossible to get your hands on anything but Nikon within the first two years after release, especially if you have to get them through Nikon. Nice first impression review on the Nikon though. Any word from Nikon as to when they'll release the Canon 1DX for review?
Jose A. Pacheco: After more than two years of releasing this overview, I guess that Canon will release the 1D X Mark II before we see the full review of the 1D X here.
Anyone whose read a review by a site that cares enough to write one knows what an incredible focusing machine the 1D-X is, Plevy.
Tony Ellis: Photography always lies
Lie is kind of harsh. I think photographers should present their work as the moment felt to them, to convey that extra dimension to the viewer that is part of the experience. If you're a photojournalist, you can't add or delete objects, because it removes truth, but adjusting the image color and/or contrast has been a practice since the first accidental mis-timed bath.
Sad Joe: Well, as expected what the 6d does it does well, but the AF system is the massive let down we all knew it would be. Buying a FF camera even one at a reduced price sticks in my guts knowing that the AF system from much cheaper APS-C cameras are much better. Canon should be thankful that Nikon have cocked up their new FF camera just as badly - the D600 has images with a green cast on images and dirt/ muck on the sensor.....seems that despite waiting most of us hard pressed camera users will keep their hands deeply inside their pockets. 6D MK2 anyone?
If you use focus and recompose (as most advanced/pro photographers do,) the number of focal points is meaningless for anything but wildlife & sports. A friend of mine recently got a 6D and loves the focus; I tried it after dusk on a low-contrast subject and the focus snapped on it. Not exactly a proper field test, but I was impressed.
sportyaccordy: 6D may be DOA it seems. Truthfully I think for folks outside of the pros and SLR devotees the DSLR is losing relevance anyway. As great as the new Nikons are, they are weak in the mirrorless game and the mobile game. Now is the time, I think, for Canon to double down on its EOS M bodies/glass, and partner up with a mobile manufacturer to start a mobile phone camera platform to tie everything together. A lot of phone companies are hurting right now and could use the boost- plus Samsung really dropped the ball with that g-d d-mn Galaxy Camera. A Motorola or Nokia phone w/Android Jellybean, a Canon 3x zoom P&S and a built in phone in a pocketable body would be a game changer and a good revival for all parties.
In this area, those cameras are very relevant ...just because lots of people are buying compact cameras and camera phones, doe not mean that the photos they're taking with them are relevant.
Pavel Kohout: The point is that the Oregon coast picture would be much better if it showed the starfish in detail only, not the boring stone, sand and sky.
Actually, I prefer this view. The barnacles are interesting to me as well, remembering them from my Puget Sound days. Those rocks are creatures unto themselves, every inch teeming with life.
Thanks for all your suggestions Rick. Look forward to trying them out.
Wow, what a bunch of ungrateful Idiots here. We get an amazing update to an already great camera, and most of you act as though Canon slapped you in the face or something.
Jogger: the resolving power will be limited by the lens methinks, even in the samples provided, the 100% are useless except for surveillance
I'm sure the thousands of physicists and mathematicians at DARPA probably never thought about or discussed anything similar to your idea, right?
Probably none of the tens of thousands at Sandia, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore ---OR UC Berkely, Cal Tech, JPL, MIT that support DARPA did either.
AND, let's not forget how scientists HATE to disprove one another's theories! Nobody among those PhDs wanted to one-up that design, no sir!
CameraLabTester: The humble Housefly had a better design for thousands of years. What a brilliant creator.
yes, evolution is the best way to make anything, but the fly's eye actually took millions of years, not thousands lol. I'd wager the R& D on this guy was significantly shorter.
bashlal: i do not find Leon Neal's pictures any better than an amateur shooters photos taken with any point and shoot camera. i have done a lot better job with my D3s that all the stuff that you have posted above. mr. dans video could have been lot better without the spitting scene of the person sitting on his rickshaw. i decline to accept the opinion
Even though what you say is true, at least he posts something; all you do is troll.
Does "lucky" include right place, right time?
Nice shot! Any idea what kind of spider?
This will be a true game-changer for me, being able to produce large prints from available light event shoots. Gotta rent first, but 5DIII is looking like the perfect mate for my 7D.
Pretty impressive; low chromatic noise and pretty film-like. ISO 10K!
Photodog7: To make a unbiased comment due to the fact I like both systems, it just seems like a long wait only for this. It does not seem like canon really made a good move. On one note, they seemed to address a lot of improvements photographers were looking for, but It seems like the camera is only a small step in front of nikons d3s which will be replaced soon. Then canon is bragging about the pixel size of 7 microns, and about the fact that it is 1.3 microns bigger than the 1d mark 4 and .5 bigger than the 5d mark 2. Sad to say that even though it is a few less megapixels, the D3s has 8.5 micron size, which is much larger. I also feel they just abandon their sports shooters by making only a full frame model. It is really important to have the reach that a 1.3 sensor can provide. Sorry, don't want to upset anyone unless there is something I don't know, Trying to evaluate why this was worth the wait, Despite the fact yes there is SOME nice new features with the camera.
Umm, the Nikon has a larger pixel site only because it's got less pixels. The D4 is only 16mp,and that 8.5 site dropped down to 7.3. Do the math, Canon DOES have a lot to brag about its size 7 on a 18mp sensor. If you extrapolate the size reduction on the Nikon, its size would be about 6.7 on an 18mp sensor.
amir_np: After 7D and 5DMKII, This camera doesn't come better with this tiny improved features. This is a huge piece of Junk.
@Mtsuoka: Really? Wipes the floor spec-wise with the D4. Guess we'll see what's real when they're both shipping, won't we?
SomeKindOfMichel: blah blah blah... many complains about the sensor resolution. 18 mp is really enough for all the prints (even with 12 mp I can print up to A2). For really large prints, there is the 645D....
This new body is a real jewel/beast for video shooting:
- full frame sensor -> low depth of field - sensor pixel size bigger than 5D MKII -> an even lower noise level - improved moiré, artifact and aliasing -> overall better image quality - recording of time codes -> easy multi-cam synch or sound/video synch - exceed the 4 GB limit -> recording up to 29'59'' (in the EU) - gigabit ethernet -> will probably allow recording to remote storage...
And all of that in a robust body (better than 5D MKII) -> nice for shooting movies in bad conditions.There is absolutely NO contender. This is really a beast for video shooting. The only major drawback (speaking for myself) is... the price... even though....
Yeah, Anthony Bordain's No Reservations uses 7Ds, and I like the look.
I see that video focussing issues were omitted from the conversation completely. Hmmm.
DSLRs may not crack major networks, but the quality/price point has opened up video to the masses that lack the $100k spare bank to get into film "seriously." I think we'll be seeing new creative geniuses emerge that may have been marginalized in the past...
stephenjelliott: Nikon D700 user here. This looks like a great product and a bold move by Canon especially with Sony chasing megapixels like they're going out of fashion (which, ironically, they may well be!)
A battle for IQ between Canon and Nikon can only benefit us all!
Sorry to disagree, but more pixels do create more noise. The pixel density on many sensors is starting to cause noise on the quantum level; noise is generated when the electrons striking the sensor are deflected by interference from adjacent pixel site's magnetic field. This effect increases as the sensitivity (ISO) is increased, which requires more power and more quantum inteference at each pixel site. Bigger pixels mean the chances of electrons arriving unmolested is greatly increased, so image accuracy is increased, and noise (quantum interference) is reduced.
Manufacturers are going to have to eventually increase sensor size to get Nikon's 12mp quality at 32mp resolutions, until materials technology changes the physical properties of the sensor altogether.
All that said, I get fantastic prints all the way up to 20x30 with my 7D noisemaker. We spend far too much time criticizing magnified screen images, when good prints from quality compositions are what makes $$$.
itaibachar: Good for Canon!But I'm a bit worried/disappointed about the small area the focus points cover. They're cramped into the center of the frame, very limiting our composition options to a centralized subject.Me not like...:-(
The mass of 21 center points leaves another 40 for creative focus on the perimeter...er...that's a bunch.
Having better focus for telephoto lenses is a boon to those of us with long lenses, like the 100-400 f4.5/5.6L. At 400mm, maintaining focus on a moving subject is an issue, even with IS.
When I'm off wildlife and on landscapes, I don't think I'll struggle much with focal point selection on the perimeter, even with ONLY 40 to choose from.