"the EOS-1D X DSLR features an 18-megapixel full-frame Canon CMOS sensor, Dual DIGIC 5+ Imaging Processors, 14-bit A/D data conversion and capable of shooting... 12 frames-per-second (fps)."

The Skinny:

-- 18 megapixel, Full Frame CMOS, 12 f.p.s.
-- Dual Digic 5+ Processors plus one Digic 4 processor dedicated to metering
-- Replaces both Canon EOS 1D (APS-H sensor) and 1Ds (full frame sensor) lines
-- 4GB limit removed from video, max rec. limit now 30 min. per clip in HD mode
-- Choice of Intra-frame or Inter-frame compression for video recording
-- Still no clean output over HDMI during live video recording
-- Still no option to configure AV output as headphone jack
-- Adjust audio level during rec. via controller on body
-- Chromatic aberration correction in video mode
-- Dual CF card slots (Type 2 compatible, UDMA 7)
-- Embed free-run, rec-run Time Code in video
-- Time sync up to 10 cameras
-- Claims big reduction in moire artifacts
-- Built-in wired gigabit ethernet LAN, lockable RJ-45
-- Available in March 2012 for appx. $6,800 MSRP

Read the full press release here:

Go to Canon USA Introduces EOS-1D X Digital SLR Camera at DVInfo.net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/canon-usa-introduces-eos-1d-x-digital-slr-camera.html)

Much more info about photo, video capabilities located in the press release, plus product images.

Looks like some nice upgrades on the video side, pretty pricey though.

Yes, it's just as pricey as their previous 1Ds models. I was hoping for a price tag in between the 1D and 1Ds, but they have simply done away with the 1D level altogether. There's a huge gap now between the 5D line at $3,200 and the 1D X at $6,800 -- a gap previously filled by the 1D line which ranged between $4,500 and $5,000.

However I was told that the 1D Mk. IV will continue to be sold right up until the 1D X begins shipping next March.

Five months between the announcement and the ship date seems like a long time. I'm curious to see how this 1DX fares in comparison with Nikon's next flagship model (D4, perhaps?). I wonder what the details are on the new "All-I" compression. According to the interview with Chuck Westfall, All-I is somewhere around 16 GB per 6 minutes. By my calculations, that's about ~350 mbps or so. If it's a 10-bit log format, that would be great. I'm looking forward to checking how it does on aliasing and rolling shutter artifacts too.

This means the 5DMK3 will definitely be more expensive, probably $4000-4500.

Well, alrighty then.

Chris, any confirmation on compression/bit rate? DPreview has an interview were there is a reference to 6 minutes in 16GB cf cards. This means almost 50MB per sec, which also means Prores 4:4:4 or equivalent compression rates...

So, the next step will be to wait till the first footage appears.
I'm really curious about the moire compared to a 5D or 60D and whether the number of horizontal lines in HD has been increased to over 700. (Or whether they now downscale the image instead of lineskipping)

Wow !! will that dip into IR range ??

"" the new model offers a low ISO 50 setting for studio and landscape photography and two high settings of 102,400 at H1 and 204,800 at H2, ideal for law enforcement, government or forensic field applications"".

The downside will be the LCD - it looks as if it's fixed, so not much use for shooting video then, or even stills from low/high angles

With a 17 fold improvement in speed over digic 4, we might expect all the pixels to be processed instead of binning as previous cams have done. This alone could make the images look stunning


This tech will obviously trickle down to the 5D3, so I am saving my pennies now

Watch it till the end to see what settings they were using and your jaws will drop.
?????EOS-1D X?Sample Images & Movie (http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/1dx/samples/index.html)

WOW!
The ISO settings used would seem to have produced more grain.
Nice cam

Very interesting, really dig the longer record times. Nov 3 should yield some even better news on the video front.

Chris, any confirmation on compression/bit rate?

Coming up later today.

The downside will be the LCD - it looks as if it's fixed

It is fixed. It's a pro 1D body so that should be expected.

I'm not too familiar with the upper tier Canon SLR's, but is that standard for these cams to not have a dial?

The specs are just phenomenal though, pretty much what many called out for with a 5D Mark III. The price is not surprising though. Despite the upgraded video specs, I assume this camera, like its predecessors, will be geared more toward the pro photographer. It's tempting for the pro videographer who can afford it, but with these upcoming announcements from both Canon and Red, it's likely that this cam will not be a first (or likely second) choice for the pro videographer.

Great cam though.

Correct, 1D bodies do not have a mode dial.

Program modes on these bodies are simply P, M, Tv, Av and Custom, and you have a mode button which cycles through these choices.

This is Canon's flagship model and it is their top end pro-oriented D-SLR.

Just confirmed by CUSA that they are *not* stating the video recording bit rates at this time. It is VBR but they will not say the numbers.

Is this the Oct. 26th announcement from Canon released a little early? Or can we still expect a separate announcement on the said date?

Canon says the codec is H.264 and it has just tweaked the compression type within the H.264 codec.

Canon says about the Codec:
"When shooting movies, the frames that are captured are usually split into key frames or Intra-Frames and predicted frames. These Intra-frames are used as reference frames to help with compression.

The first type of compression available is IPB. The B in IPB stands for Bi-directional compression. With IPB differential compression is carried out by predicting the content of future frames, with reference to both previously captured frames and subsequent frames. Like the IPP compression method used in previous EOS DSLRs, some data is stored in a Group Of Pictures (GOP), meaning that frame-by-frame editing will result in lower image quality. When using IPB editing video in-camera to trim clips can only be done in one-second increments.

The second method of compression is designed for users working in high-end editing systems or those looking for the very highest quality. This compression is called ALL-I. ALL-I stands for ‘Intra-coded Frame' and it differs from IPB and IPP because all frames captured are treated as Intra-frames or key frames. Although each frame is still compressed, there is no further compression as each frame is seen as an individual image.

When filming with ALL-I, file sizes will be around three times larger than with IPB, and it is easier to edit to an individual frame without degrading the image quality. Despite the extra file size, ALL-I compressed footage actually requires less computer processing power than IPB or IPP and consequently will playback more smoothly on lower specification computers. This is because there is no rendering needed to extrapolate data from the GOPs used in IPP and IPB."

I am wondering whether this would be acceptable by BBC, NGC etc. I would have loved a 1080 at 60p for action sequences. I guess we will see footage from this intercut with other cameras, especially the high ISO shots taken pre dawn and late in the evening recording phenomenal natural history moments.

Canon introduced the Flip screen LCD at the back in their 60D model and then started introducing in the lower models. Not sure why they didn't do so here. Do they expect people to use external monitors only? having said that, the flip screen is of help during still shooting in live view as well.

With a 17 fold improvement in speed over digic 4, we might expect all the pixels to be processed instead of binning as previous cams have done.
It may not be necessary to do a full deBayer/downconvert (difficult to do well) *IF* the number of photosites are chosen carefully - and that means being in an exact multiple of 1920x1080. The issues with pevious DSLRs and the AF100 is that this hasn't been the case in those cameras - the sensors were designed just with stills in mind, and compromises made for video.

Hence optimum numbers would be 3840x2160 (2x), 5760x3240 (3x) etc. Total photosite numbers would then be 4x, 9x, 16x etc greater than 1920x1080. In other words - 8 megapixel, 18 megapixel, 32 megapixel etc. Now, what is this new Canon - hmmm, 18 megapixel.......?? Let's see if it's actually 5760x3240.

The principle is that you take a square of photosites (2x2, 3x3, 4x4 etc) and just extract the red, green blue values straight from the corresponding photosites. Each case gives full 1080p resolution with relatively simple processing..

This means the 5DMK3 will definitely be more expensive, probably $4000-4500.

I don't know that we can make that assumption. The top pro photographer market, cost, and volumes have different dynamics than the full frame consumer market. Consumers will compare the 5D3 to the Nikon D700, rather than the 1D or D3s.

The boxing/drum film looks fantastic. Makes you wonder whether a noise filter was used in post. I know this will be heretical to many, but even with the 5D, we were seeing the advent of low available light shooting, and this camera looks like it is pushing it much further. Frankly I think available light shooting present a more realistic image. If we see a similar type cinema camera coming on November 3, which I hope is the plan,

Chris H, "you are getting sleepy, sleepy, I am going to count backwards from 10, and at 1 you will be fully asleep. When I snap my fingers, tell us all you know about Novermber 3, announcement....."

Look closely at the drummer when he moves quickly - or the door when it shuts quickly at the end. It looks like the rolling shutter numbers are much reduced. No surprise. On the Zacuto Shootout part 3, the 1D4 looked to have about 60% as much rolling shutter as the 5D2. And the 1D X sensor/chip system is probably at least twice as fast.

Also, given that the new sensor has twice the channels and lines, and the press release mentions less aliasing/moire, it's pretty clear that the images will be much cleaner than before.

Now add better compression and dual CF recording, and it looks like studio quality engineers and insurance representatives will both be pleased.

The 1 series all look and work the same off the top panel. Goes all the way back to the film cameras.

The 1D X is a replacement for the 1Ds, so the price is appropriate. The 5Dm2 replacement will be priced the same as current model, even as the previous model did.

It does leave room for a 1D replacement, perhaps the mythical 3D.

Now, what is this new Canon - hmmm, 18 megapixel.......?? Let's see if it's actually 5760x3240...
Having now seen a basic spec on the camera, it seems the 18 megapixel figure refers to the the 3:2 full sensor - the 16:9 crop is then less.

See http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/EOS_1Dx/index.aspx?specs=1

The largest RAW it will produce seems to be 5184x3456 - and I'd suspect this is the same as full 3:2 sensor dimensions. So unlikely to process in the way I'd suggested.

I don't know if anybody here has seen that the intra codec is 350+ mbit per second as said in the dpreview article here Canon EOS-1D X overview: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5149972341/canon-eos-1d-x-overview) in the paragraph ” In the frame to be flagship “

Canon introduced the Flip screen LCD at the back in their 60D model and then started introducing in the lower models. Not sure why they didn't do so here. You have to understand that the 1-series cameras are intended primarily for the pro photo market and are built for extreme shooting environments, namely photojournalism. You don't want fragile moving parts on these cameras. A flip-out LCD would be broken off in a heartbeat on the sidelines of an NFL game or in the middle of a riot or an embedded journalist in a combat area. A flip-out LCD is pointless on a 1-series body... you have to think beyond what *you* want and recognize the bigger picture of what type of environment this camera is made to fit specifically, and realize what is best for that particular market.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a flip-out LCD on the next 5D model -- and I hope it has one, but it has no business being on a 1-series camera, which is made for all-weather shooting in harsh environments.

I don't know if anybody here has seen that the intra codec is 350+ mbit per second as said in the dpreview article here Canon EOS-1D X overview: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5149972341/canon-eos-1d-x-overview) in the paragraph ” In the frame to be flagship “

350mbps. Killer. I expect that we'll see a similar spec on Nov 3rd.

Some observations:

1) The ALL-I bitrate is limited by current CF speeds so I don't see how 50MB/s (MegaBytes) would be possible when only a single CF card on the market can barely keep up with that. Look at the Aja Ki Mini which requires the fastest CF cards on the market for a mere 220Mb/s which equals 27.5 MB/s.

2) If you are NOT a Pro Photographer, why would you spend $6800 on this camera when you can get REAL video cameras for LESS money such as the AF100 and FS100? When you add in the cost of extra accessories to make this 1D feel like a real video camera, you are getting close to F3 territory. Or you could buy a fully-equipped FS100.

3) I know some will say that the very high bitrate is a great advantage over the AF/FS100, but that would be true for only a very very small percentage of people. The 24-28Mb H264 from these video cameras is more than good enough for 99% of people because the sensors and resulting images have so little noise. For example, going from 24Mb/s H264 to 220Mb/s Pro Res would produce such a small and insignificant increase in quality that would be useful only for the most extreme situations. I own a nanoFlash and its only been used about 10 times in the last 10 months because the internal 35Mb SxS recording from my EX3 is good enough for 99% of what I do. I only use it for greenscreen and for backup of very important shoots. When I do use my nanoFlash, I only use the 50Mb 422 L-GOP for backup or 220Mb 422 I-Frame for greenscreen. If the nanoFlash was 10bit, then I would use it far more.

I don't know if anybody here has seen that the intra codec is 350+ mbit per second as said in the dpreview article here Canon EOS-1D X overview: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5149972341/canon-eos-1d-x-overview) in the paragraph ” In the frame to be flagship “

I don't see anywhere in the article that refers to that bitrate. The only numbers mentioned are 30 mb/s (megaBITS) and 50 mb/s. There is a big difference between megaBITS and megaBYTES. The 6 mins for 16GB is a little less than 300 Mb/s which equals 37 MB/s. Such a high bitrate at a bit depth of only 8 bits is unnecessary for most shooting needs. Recording to 422 and 10bit would provide a much better increase in image quality and ability to grade and process in post. Also, something I noticed with current Canon dslr's is that Canon chose to use a higher bitrate to counter the low quality of compression, which is seen by all of the compression artifacts. Someone posted a great way to remove most of the compression artifacts by using NeatVideo and then exporting to Cineform in the Cineform forum, and that thread is where I first noticed the compression artifacts.

Observations...

1. I agree about the flip out screen, it would be out of place on a pro still camera, way too fragile. Totally a consumer/prosumer feature on this sort of body. Makes much more sense on a prosumer video camera like the AF-100 or FS-100.

2. If I were a PJ or Sports photographer, this camera would excite me quite a bit.

3. The video, while seeming to be upgraded/updated in several ways, is still just an add-on for a still camera.

4. The price point makes this camera not very practical for users who primarily want to use it for video. I agree, I would still choose the Sony or the Panasonic over this if my primary use was video. If I were a PJ though and needed to shoot both video and stills, this camera looks wonderful.

5. I wonder how many of the cool new video features will trickle down to the successor to the 5D MKII?

6. I have been delving back into still photography in a big way with my Nikons although I have the 5D MKII as well. It is interesting how many high end Canon pro still shooters have been making the switch to Nikon simply out of reliability. While my 5D MKII has been bulletproof, I know several still pros who have had major reliability and QC issues with their Canon bodies and lenses. Hope that besides adding a bunch of features, Canon is continually improving on reliability and build quality.

7. So far, everyone has been mum on if this camera has a clean HDMI output with no video overalays or glitches on output so that people can use their external recorders for shooting videos. I bet it does have overlays. Any thoughts?

Dan

There is a big difference between megaBITS and megaBYTES. The 6 mins for 16GB is a little less than 300 Mb/s which equals 37 MB/s.

I calculate 364.09 Mb/s. What am I doing wrong?


16 / 6 = 2.66 GB/minute.
2.66 * 1024 = 2730.66 MB/minute
2730.66 / 60 = 45.51 MB/sec
45.51 * 8 = 364.09 Mb/sec


That is why I estimated "around" 350 Mbps in post #4 above.

A flip-out LCD would be broken off in a heartbeat on the sidelines of an NFL game or in the middle of a riot or an embedded journalist in a combat area. A flip-out LCD is pointless on a 1-series body...

So you're saying that none of the video cameras with flip out screens are rugged enough to be used in a NFL game, riot, or combat area?

Observations...

1. I agree about the flip out screen, it would be out of place on a pro still camera, way too fragile. Totally a consumer/prosumer feature on this sort of body. Makes much more sense on a prosumer video camera like the AF-100 or FS-100.

2. If I were a PJ or Sports photographer, this camera would excite me quite a bit.

3. The video, while seeming to be upgraded/updated in several ways, is still just an add-on for a still camera.

4. The price point makes this camera not very practical for users who primarily want to use it for video. I agree, I would still choose the Sony or the Panasonic over this if my primary use was video. If I were a PJ though and needed to shoot both video and stills, this camera looks wonderful.

5. I wonder how many of the cool new video features will trickle down to the successor to the 5D MKII?

6. I have been delving back into still photography in a big way with my Nikons although I have the 5D MKII as well. It is interesting how many high end Canon pro still shooters have been making the switch to Nikon simply out of reliability. While my 5D MKII has been bulletproof, I know several still pros who have had major reliability and QC issues with their Canon bodies and lenses. Hope that besides adding a bunch of features, Canon is continually improving on reliability and build quality.

7. So far, everyone has been mum on if this camera has a clean HDMI output with no video overalays or glitches on output so that people can use their external recorders for shooting videos. I bet it does have overlays. Any thoughts?

Dan

I totally agree with you.

Chris stated in his first post that there is still no clean HDMI output.

When the 5D MkII was released, there were large numbers of users who had dead cameras due to moisture such as the guys over at LL who went to Antarctica and saw many fellow photogs with brand new 5D's that died during shooting or after they went inside and experienced major temp changes.

I don't know how many of the video features will trickle down. This 1D has major processing horsepower and I would believe that its larger body is needed to keep the heat down to prevent heat related issues seen by current 5D users. Also, the phenomenon of hot pixels is still an issue during long recording times. It is such an issue that the largest rental company, Lensrentals.com has a disclaimer on their Canon cameras.

I calculate 364.09 Mb/s. What am I doing wrong?


16 / 6 = 2.66 GB/minute.
2.66 * 1024 = 2730.66 MB/minute
2730.66 / 60 = 45.51 MB/sec
45.51 * 8 = 364.09 Mb/sec


That is why I estimated "around" 350 Mbps in post #4 above.

The '16GB' stated by CF cards and hard drives is never the 'actual' amount of space because they use 1000 bytes to equal 1 Kilobyte, but the actual number is 1024 bytes = 1KB. When added up, it equates to roughly 7% less. Also, the cards are usually not filled up to 100%. I was using the 50mins recording time of a 16GB SxS card for my calcs and divided 50 by 6 and multiplied by 35 (Mb/s) to come out just under 300Mb/s.

Until we know the actual numbers, we are just best-guessing.

But, this brings up another question: can they continue recording ACROSS cards? With only ~6 mins per 16GB, that equals only ~24 mins per 64GB card.

The '16GB' stated by CF cards and hard drives is never the 'actual' amount of space because they use 1000 bytes to equal 1 Kilobyte... Also, the cards are usually not filled up to 100%.


Ah, thanks.

It has two mode, the lower long gop better compression mode and the higher intra codec. So at least you have a choice. It negates the need of an external recorder because it is even higher bitrate than all except the uncompressed ones. A big part of the uptake of the dslr video has been for artistic shallow dof film look reason. Even if it was at first only for PJ work, the example of the 24p patch for the 5D is a good example. PJ don't need the 24p, in fact it is a hindrance. For focusing also it is a big problem for these users who are best serve by the smaller sensor cam.

I guess that many like me are more for the film movie advertising type of users. Where having the best quality will always be a must even with some diminishing returns. I come from photography and grading (for me colour correction) is a second nature. Since the advent of the HDslr, I got interested into filming because I was much closer to the quality of my still photos. I was never interested as I think many, by the stale video look. I am currently experimenting with a hacked GH2 and some low gop and even intraframe codec and I can tell you there is a difference. The only thing missing is a 10 bit codec because of 8 bit gradation and I would not say no to a couple of stop of DR.

For my use, if this camera has 10 bit and those high bitrate it would be a huge advancement because I don't have the money for an F3 or RED. Now I do understand that people doing events etc these type of bitrate are two much. But if I have a music video, short film I won't hesitate to do it at the highest quality.

The '16GB' stated by CF cards and hard drives is never the 'actual' amount of space... Also, the cards are usually not filled up to 100%..

Whatever the exact rate, it's dang fast. It should also be consistent. Unlike long GOP formats, intra frame won't lose quality when the actual motion goes beyond the range of the motion vector search.

So far, everyone has been mum on if this camera has a clean HDMI output with no video overalays or glitches on output...

Chris stated in his first post that there is still no clean HDMI output.

Correct, I made it a point to put that in my first post. I have indeed confirmed with CUSA that there is still NO clean HDMI output.

So you're saying that none of the video cameras with flip out screens are rugged enough to be used in a NFL game, riot, or combat area?No, that's not what I'm saying at all, and I'm not sure why you would put those words in my mouth.

I guess I didn't make it clear that I was referring to photographers in the photojournalism market.

There is an absolute world of difference between photography and videography, between photographers and videographers, and the degree of physical abuse which is heaped upon still cameras vs. video cameras in the newsgathering environment. That is not my opinion -- that is a fact which should be clearly apparent to anyone who has casually observed the news media landscape for any length of time.

You have to understand that the 1-series cameras are intended primarily for the pro photo market and are built for extreme shooting environments, namely photojournalism. You don't want fragile moving parts on these cameras. A flip-out LCD would be broken off in a heartbeat on the sidelines of an NFL game or in the middle of a riot or an embedded journalist in a combat area. A flip-out LCD is pointless on a 1-series body... you have to think beyond what *you* want and recognize the bigger picture of what type of environment this camera is made to fit specifically, and realize what is best for that particular market.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a flip-out LCD on the next 5D model -- and I hope it has one, but it has no business being on a 1-series camera, which is made for all-weather shooting in harsh environments.

Hear hear.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, and I'm not sure why you would put those words in my mouth.

I guess I didn't make it clear that I was referring to photographers in the photojournalism market.

There is an absolute world of difference between photography and videography, between photographers and videographers, and the degree of physical abuse which is heaped upon still cameras vs. video cameras in the newsgathering environment. That is not my opinion -- that is a fact which should be clearly apparent to anyone who has casually observed the news media landscape for any length of time.

I think the ultimately irony, from my perspective, is that I bought the 7D so I could shoot some shallow DoF video. In the end, the camera turned me back into a photographer. And now I use the camera 99% of the time as a photographer. And as a photographer I never use "live view" for obvious reasons.

So you're saying that none of the video cameras with flip out screens are rugged enough to be used in a NFL game, riot, or combat area?

On the two camcorders I've ever had die on me, it was the LCD that went first - and I take good care of my gear. I Would never use an NX5, XHA1s, HVX170 etc in any kind of harsh conditions like rain or dusty situations without some serious protection (and stress). These cameras are just not built to take the same punishment that the 1D cameras are.

It's not that the flip screens can't survive in a riot or a combat zone, it's just that they present a risk that can be eliminated. And anyway, who buys a camera that shoots 12fps and then shoots an NFL game using slow Live-View contrast-detect autofocus?

When it comes to professional sports and photojournalism, the gear cops a whole new level of abuse compared to what most videographers would dream of. Rain, cyclones, mud, fire; these professionals will expose their cameras to everything. I know surf photographers who're using the same 1d mkII they bought seven years ago. In that time they've exposed it to salt spray daily, put it in their checked baggage on hundreds of flights, travelled through deserts, jungles, snow, on mopeds, on boats, in the back of third-world-country pick-up trucks, dropped in on the sand, dropped it in the mud, survived the Indonesian tsunami (and documented the whole thing), camped for weeks in harsh conditions, etc, etc, etc and the camera is still kicking on. Take a look at the photographers on the sidelines of a football game to see the kind of punishment they dish out - they might have three different bodies hung around their neck, all banging together as they run around, and they'll routinely drop one of them onto the wet grass, and they'll do that for hours on end before the cameras get a Gatorade shower at the end of the match.

It's not that professionals like this don't value and care for their equipment - it's just that given the choice between their $7000 camera and a cover shot on National Geographic, they'd choose the cover shot every time. And they wouldn't be too happy if the camera died just before they got the shot, because the rotating LCD screen that they never use anyway let a little bit of moisture in.

Thanks for the explanations.

I think the ultimately irony, from my perspective, is that I bought the 7D so I could shoot some shallow DoF video. In the end, the camera turned me back into a photographer. And now I use the camera 99% of the time as a photographer. And as a photographer I never use "live view" for obvious reasons.

Same thing happened to me. I also hope the 5dIII has most or all of the new video capabilities.

Pat

Is this the sole new product that is to be announced for Nov 3rd, or are other products still possibly pending?
I was hoping for a mirror-less camera to run head to head with the GH2!

I think the ultimately irony, from my perspective, is that I bought the 7D so I could shoot some shallow DoF video. In the end, the camera turned me back into a photographer. And now I use the camera 99% of the time as a photographer. And as a photographer I never use "live view" for obvious reasons.

Haha... Not me Robert... my 5d clip counter has passed 10,000 once already and is now at 7,000 again. My shutter count for stills... 6,500... Since July 2009.

You have to understand that the 1-series cameras are intended primarily for the pro photo market and are built for extreme shooting environments, namely photojournalism. You don't want fragile moving parts on these cameras. A flip-out LCD would be broken off in a heartbeat on the sidelines of an NFL game or in the middle of a riot or an embedded journalist in a combat area. A flip-out LCD is pointless on a 1-series body... you have to think beyond what *you* want and recognize the bigger picture of what type of environment this camera is made to fit specifically, and realize what is best for that particular market.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a flip-out LCD on the next 5D model -- and I hope it has one, but it has no business being on a 1-series camera, which is made for all-weather shooting in harsh environments.

I only shoot with 1 Series bodies. I have been shooting with my 1D Mark II and 1D Mark IV cameras in pouring rain and understand the benefits of a 1 Series body as well as limitations. You use a camera according to its strength and usage for a particular environment. If you are a photojournalist covering NFL, then certainly opening the flip LCD switching on the Live view, manual focusing (as the AF in live view is not fast enough) and clicking is just not going to fly. So clearly this is not meant for NFL situations. However, that doesn't mean the feature is not important. How many NFL journalists shoot video using a 1 series body? Not many. Using that logic Canon should have dropped video from the 1D X.

The 1 Series is a professional body meant for professional applications for all photographic genres and each will push this camera differently. Finally it is upto Canon to decide which feature they can include. Till then it is wild speculation about the reason for dropping a feature, unless Canon has clarified it.

I was a bit surprised by your tone. When you say "..you have to think beyond what *you* want ..." that means half of the people can't express their views here? Communicating in forums like this where we don't have the benefit of watching the gestures of others, sentences like these can always be interpreted in a negative manner.

Anyway, I will share more thoughts when I get one for review.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

Is this the sole new product that is to be announced for Nov 3rd, or are other products still possibly pending?
I was hoping for a mirror-less camera to run head to head with the GH2!

Based on a Canon survey I participated in recently they are working on a mirrorless camera. The questions had to do with importance of features and pricing.

Is this the sole new product that is to be announced for Nov 3rd, or are other products still possibly pending?
I thibk the fact this has been announced now means it this has nothing to do with the Nov 3rd date. The most sensible speculation is that Nov 3rd is likely to do with something regarding digital cinema - not what is primarily a stills camera.