X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth

Except 1.6, not 1.2. And no dual Digic processors to power all of that. So exactly the same except the many meaningful ways it's completely different.

I have a Canon 5D Mark III... and I can tell you it does not have 14 stops. DXO Mark shows it close to 12 stops.

The sensor is EXTREMELY GOOD from canon. It's the best they've ever made. Sure Sony is eeking out better performance, but it in no way means Canon sensors are bad. They have the best cameras and lenses, and you are upset that it's latest 20mp FF sensor isn't also the best on the market? All sensors are good enough for 95% of shooters. This is so annoying.

Canon sensors are great. I shoot Canon for various reasons. One being that they have the largest, most flexible lens selection available on any camera in the market. Bar none.

@Dester , the OP has magic lantern on his camera. magic lantern has dual iso, which will give you a few extra stops of DR. that's what they are referring to.

OK... makes sense. I shoot with ML as well. Though I don't use the dual ISO setting.

That's correct. I know a lot of people (specially people who don't use Canon) don't know Magic Lantern or they are afraid to use it. But the features that bring us makes an excellent camera even better. Of course that ML won't be available soon for the new cameras (if it is available at all) and this features could be in the original canon firmware/software (maybe in the future?), but canon users are lucky to have these guys from ML who are technology genius but also care about photographers needs. And of course that canon sensors are excellent and enough for almost all situations, but some people besides love photography also watch about technology, and an increased sensor quality is always welcome. Nevertheless, I read a photographer a time ago who wrote "If you have to push your shadows 5 stops, maybe you have the best camera, but you are a really bad photographer". And I believe it is a great true.

@salamander1
"Hello, I have a Canon 5D Mark III and I have ... And also my 5DIII has 14 stops dynamic range."

<DR Police arrives>
https://imgflip.com/readImage?iid=922147

Look, they laughing so hard on you.. :D

I thought that you only get those features via Magic Lantern (i.e., Canon IS missing them).

I'm just hear to read the comments from people defending Canon's years behind sensors and laugh. You people need to get your heads out of the sand!

Wow in breaking news more people are interested in a $1000 small camera than a $6000 very large camera that is far more than they need. Who would of thought this would be the case, it's a dam mystery.

Actually.... it isn't that more people are interested in a $1,000 camera... it's that most people only need a $1,000 camera. That doesn't negate the necessity of the $6,000 camera for those who need it.

Probably the zillion ISO and AF points of NIkon's sounds better :)
Who cares if they actually better in real situations or not.

More clicks, I imagine.

Up to a certain extent, and then no. I'd like to design controlled, repeatable, automated, machine-based that look at this for various body/lens combinations, to answer that exact question. Across different bodies and lenses.

Would you be curious of results from such studies?

It'd be a lot of effort and we have to justify the cost/return :)

Would not be interested too much because real life is always more complicated than models, which try to replicate it :)

I suspected so Rishi, but these clowns are obviously just slinging mud and saying with authority you have already dismissed it as inferior to help boost their credibility.

Rishi that would be awesome. Any such setup, if designed and implemented well and/or updated over time, would last you many a year - maybe making the initial investment justifiable?

Of course, designing such a beast to cater for the inevitable critics would be an interesting task!

Honestly, with most of the cameras having pretty much similar, or at least very very close IQ, resolution, etc, it seems even manufacturers are pushing the AF (and advanced options as face/eye/whatever tracking) as a major selling point (now with fastestest AF in the world. ever! *in a very special conditions*). So, yeah, we would be very interested, but, like you said, it would have to be repeatable and controlled. I guess there has to be some standardized method (and not the lady on a swing)...

AF when tracking moving objects the Nikon is slightly better for sure. So sporting events, etc. But if you're just shooting in situations outside of this, the AF on Canon is superb.

Ha! Agreed Timbukto, sadly.

Lots of video related stuff.

Peaking
zebra's
log
4k uncomprossed through the Hdmi

Not a problem here as this is a sports camera.
however if they do the same thing to de 5d mk4 expect a lot of people ticked off.

mhj19,
Pulitzer fot most pathetic comment.

Rishi - I just had a crazy simple idea for DPR to do an AF tracking test... how about using a swinging pendulum like on a grandfather clock? You could make one cheap with parts from a craft store that sells clock movements, and I'd paint the arm white and the pendulum fob black with a white dot bulls eye. The longer the arm the better, as long as you don't make it so long that it interferes with its consistency. You could do 2 test variations, one side to side, one front to back. Maybe a 3rd diagonal. Set the camera to track the fob, and use continuous burst for 5 seconds. Pick a standard focal length for the test, something like 50mm prime on APSC and 85mm on FF so you can do the test in a reasonable indoor space. Camera gets a score based on the percentage of hits on the bulls eye.

The 1D X II is most certainly not just a studio camera. There are features in the 1D-series that start there and often trickle down to other bodies, so those wanting the cutting edge and can pay the premium may be willing to. And of course there's the class-leading 14 fps, so if that helps you get the shot, and you make a living off of this, you'll pay for it.

But AFAIK, 5D-series are more popular with wedding photographers.

Obviously you didn't get it, where you got the idea 1 series is only a studio camera? have you seem any sport events outdoor? in rain, snow? what sport pro use in those condition? are you kidding? obviously you don't get it, for those use 1-series, it's very hard to go back to anything else. I for one don't want a 5D if I can continue to be able afford any 1 series.

It's mostly a sports and wildlife camera that works well in studio and weddings.

When trollers/haters aren't really photographers who are busy number crunching at home all day in front of a screen this is the comment we get.

Indeed, why would a wedding photographer want to buy a camera designed for hard news, sports, wildlife? I love my 5D MKIII, it's great for the corporate work I do, but I know its limitations for news and sport. As for studio, well you could use a 1D X II in the studio if you wanted. Some press photographers have to work in a studio too sometimes. Are they going to switch cameras just because they don't need weather seals for that?

Dear oh dear, there appears to be a wetware issue between your chair and keyboard.

They just work, and that is essentially why they are used by professionals. It's the camera with the least compromises.

It's primarily a sports/wildlife camera. So it's used outside a lot; kinda makes sense to make it weather sealed dontcha think?

Hmm a bit off that they are practically keeping this secret. Maybe it still doesn't work nearly as well as Sony? Or they are too much into saving face to admit they were so far behind in this regard for so long???

Doesn't Sony have an A/D per column? So an A/D or so on chip may not be quite the same as the analogue multiplexers would still add errors but a big step forward regardless.

This one may be per column as well based on chip image. And of course there is good reason not to talk DR, first of all Nikon, Fuji, Olympus and Sony have never once shown a decent advertorial demonstrating the relation of DR in raw processing in any meaningful way. Second it's a sports shooting flagship with high DR doesn't make any other Canon owner, particularly recent body purchasers, any more happy about their current bodies. It's basically yet another deferred feature to upgrade for. It makes me happy but I don't own much canon bodies right now, so I am in a position to purchase later and not worry about selling devalued gear.

Jim, don´t discombobulate the DPR-people or they just might demand a round of fisticuffs!

Ha! Fisticuffs! It's like I'm learning a whole new language.

Nobody who actually needs this cares about that. You saved yourself thousands by being full of it.

Or a common saying belonging to no one.

Maybe

None of the above

Fuji X-Pro was designed for professionals, as it has the word "Pro" on its name. Similar with all GoPro cams, but that's another story. Obviously they are for pros and only pros use them.

This one(Canon one) is for posers. :P

Simon Cowell :)

If the wi-fi connection is unreliable, then use the fast USB3.0 connection that it has.

The sole purpose of this approach is to sell the pro a $600 wi-fi adapter. I guess the thinking would be: "sure, it's only 10% more."

Funny, my camera costs me less than $600 and it has wi-fi built-in. That said, it's not rare for a pro-level gear to leave out common features we come to expect.

The camera has an all magnesium-alloy body that would act as a Faraday cage and trap wi-fi signals. The little bump on the top for the GPS is no doubt outside the frame, so my guess is either Canon found this more important, or the wi-fi would have been larger and added too much to the hump.

If you think built in camera wifi works at the same level and range as the add-on adapters for these pro cameras do, I don't know what to tell you.

sure it can use R, M, T and Cine, and who can match them especially the M lenses?

The 1D isn't aimed at people who have the time to pi$$ about with manual focus. Nor is the SL.

For example?

The assumption that this sensor is the same as the 6D is absolutely incorrect.

This camera is not made for "the majority of photographers"!

This camera is made for PROS, as stated in the info about the camera. Its made for sports shooters on the sidelines. Some sports shooters use tripods some do not. They never hand hold their camera all the time. They anticipate action. It rests on the floor when they are not using it.
Pro sports shooters shoot for the web or publication, they do not need more than 20mpg.

Try playing with a 300 f/2.8 or 500 f/4 lens and you will not want to use smaller bodies.

Then change the laws of physics. 300mm has to be huge when you want f/2.8.

But smaller sensor and smaller lens means less light for the same exposure time. For sports and wildlife, light is a rare commodity. The more the better.

When you shoot sports or wildlife at 1/1000 to 1/2000s you need all the light you can get

"Try playing with a 300 f/2.8 or 500 f/4 lens and you will not want to use smaller bodies."
I disagree with that comment, but everyone is different.
But, I am really looking forward to my first FF camera body after several years of shooting crop. The new 1dx II looks to be exactly what I have been waiting for. Thanks Canon!

You may disagree, but that doesn't change physics, so stop complaining to Canon or Nikon and talk to the alien master race that created the universe.

There are ways of reducing light path length and lens size. For example, the 300mm F4 PF lens from Nikon is much smaller than other 300mm F4 lenses.