Canon USA Introduces EOS-1D X Digital SLR Camera

[Dan Brockett]

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

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

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.

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

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?

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

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.

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

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.

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

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.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

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.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

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.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

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

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

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.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

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.

[Robert Sanders]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

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.

[Robert Sanders]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

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.

[John Wiley]

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

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.

[Daniel Browning]

Thanks for the explanations.

[Pat Reddy]

Originally Posted by Robert Sanders

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