Canon USA Introduces EOS-1D X Digital SLR Camera

[Edward Mendoza]

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.

[Chris Hurd]

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.

[Edward Mendoza]

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

[Sabyasachi Patra]

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.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by John Jay

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..

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Evan C. King

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.

[Chris Barcellos]

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....."

[Jon Fairhurst]

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.

[Kin Lau]

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.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by David Heath

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/Prod...x.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.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

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 in the paragraph ” In the frame to be flagship “

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Sabyasachi Patra

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.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Jean Daniel Villiers

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 in the paragraph ” In the frame to be flagship “

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

[Steve Kalle]

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.

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Jean Daniel Villiers

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 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.