Kimmy - 1DX mark II 4K video

One of the other issues for me - which really no one else probably cares about - is the pixel-binning and/or line-skipping in 120fps in HD.

It just sticks out like a sore thumb. Even that opening shot of the motorcycle night video.

I know we should be lucky that Canon even gave us 4K/60P, but still.
 
If you must have great slow motion at HD resolutions in this price range, you will need to go with the Sony FS5 and an external RAW recorder (that is, when the RAW FS5 upgrade becomes available in June):

http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/04/...ternal-4k-60fps-and-1080240fps-raw-recording/

That will give you 240fps RAW HD! This option also allows for 120fps burst rate 4K RAW for up to 4 seconds using the FS5's internal buffer.

If you want to keep it in-camera and add continuous 100fps 4K, your main options are the Raven and Scarlet-W, which are much more expensive, but which can do some impressive 4K slow motion in the right hands:



As for me, I will be perfectly satisfied with the 4K 60fps in the 1DX II or any 1DC II that comes along next year. It's really the only one of these high-quality 4K 60fps cameras that you can mount anywhere or carry to any remote location with ease. And that's not even to mention the underwater shots using the Nauticam housing for those diving videographers!
 
Last edited:
My main option was the URSA and URSA Mini 4K for tons of projects. Respectively, 4K/120p and 4K/60p in ProRes 422HQ, or up to 150fps and 120fps in windowed mode in 444XQ in HD...all continuous. But I was looking for a smaller package with decent quality.

Still not much footage out there for the 1DX Mark II...scanning Vimeo and YouTube everyday.
 
NorBro said:
... Still not much footage out there for the 1DX Mark II...scanning Vimeo and YouTube everyday.
Click to expand...
They just began shipping (and, presumably there's a substantial waiting list).

PS. A Canon exec said in that DPR interview that they try to time their high end pro cameras with Olympic years. Well, setting aside the fact that the Summer and the Winter Olympics have long been split into the leap and non-leap years, are there really thousands upon thousands of photographers covering an Olympic event? Some of those preliminary heats in track-and-field and swimming draw a bunch of empty seats and then, of course, the throng of photogs converges onto the top events such as the 100m dash final or the thong beach volleball (a new event introduced specifically for this Brazil Olympics) and the opening and the closing ceremonies. It looks big because every licensed shooter is there. And then they all go home to cover soccer 24/7. (except in the US)
 
DLD said:
They just began shipping (and, presumably there's a substantial waiting list).
Click to expand...

not really. Anyone looking for one, please PM me. I can point you to where to get one for $5800. Brand new. Premium kit (free Cfast card and reader) Canon Authorize dealer. In stock. Ready to ship out. Can't beat that.
 
Yea, I don't think the waiting list is too big...I seen a few across the country here and there in the smaller shops that I usually visit when I'm trying to buy something out of NY to save on tax.
 
I'm not sure if anyone had a chance to read Andrew Reid's damning assessment of the 1DX II vs. the 1DX and 1DC:

http://www.eoshd.com/2016/05/canon-...nd-colour-performance-worse-than-predecessor/

He uses the DP Review files to demonstrate how the 1DX II is a major step back in terms of ISO and color performance.

As Canon increased the pixel density, they reduced the pixel pitch of the photosites. Combined with changes in the image processing for RAW and JPEG, these factors have reduced the ISO and color performance in the 1DX II versus its predecessors. This much is visible in the posted examples from DP Review.

Reid's claims certainly reinforce my own reservations on the reduction of the photosites from 6.95 to 6.6 microns. Indeed, it seems that there is a corresponding and visible loss in signal-to-noise just as science would predict.

All the same, I don't see how the 1DX II's real-world video performance is compromised because of this. It looks like the 1DX II performs really well in low light, as far as everything we have seen. Whatever differences there are when pixel peeping in photography mode are not necessarily going to translate into differences on video performance or noise levels.
 
Last edited:
I've been looking at the dpreview tests myself, and my conclusion (as in his case, only for RAW stills) is completely different: this is the Canon camera with the most DR, by a wide margin. It has about one stop less than the a7R II, about the same as the a6000, and about a stop more than the RX100 IV, which puts it a bit over 13 stops, maybe 13.2. Compare that with the 11.7 stops of the 5D3 or the 11.8 of the 1DX (yes, the RX100 IV has almost one stop more DR than the previous Canon flagship; it also shoots super nice 1080p 120fps and pretty nice 1080p 240fps; and it's incredibly tiny, you can take it with you everywhere).

Looking at those samples at eoshd, the difference is not that big, in any case. Use the dpreview tool to compare the 1DX II with the 6D (which according to dxomark has slightly better DR than the 1DX, and is on the dpreview tool) and at +5EV you have this:

dr.jpg

If you ask me, that's the big news here, and not the very small change in noise structure.

Canon now has tech for high dynamic range sensor. Next, it needs to have a gamma curve that can use that in video mode. And then, it needs to put all of that on cheapr and smaller bodies. And maybe also keep them able to record RAW video through ML.
 
Last edited:
Bubble said:
not really. Anyone looking for one, please PM me. I can point you to where to get one for $5800. Brand new. Premium kit (free Cfast card and reader) Canon Authorize dealer. In stock. Ready to ship out. Can't beat that.
Click to expand...
This is always the case. Some stores will get more pre-orders than others while their allocation from the manufacturer is limited for the various reasons. Others will go the other way - fewer pre-orders than units shipped. This usually settles down from a period of few weeks to a few months, depending on the actual production of a given model and its anticipated popularity.

NorBro said:
Yea, I don't think the waiting list is too big...I seen a few across the country here and there in the smaller shops that I usually visit when I'm trying to buy something out of NY to save on tax.
Click to expand...
I scanned a few CR threads and some of those complaints are aimed directly at the B&H closing for Passover ("I've never heard of that holiday!"). It seems that B&H had received the shipments from the manufacturer/distributor but was unable to process the paperwork on them. After a few days of catching up on the business days lost, the units began to go out.
 
I was looking at the DPReview comparisons and it was clear to me that there has been somewhat of a plateau with regards to noise performance. Which is fine imho. I had the 1DX II, Nikon D5, Canon 5DMKIII and the Sony A7R II up set to RAW and then took a tour of different ISO levels. Overall things were not that different when you stayed within normal shooting range (under 3200). The Sony was the worst, followed by the MKIII, 1DX II and the D5. But none of them were bad at all. The 1DX MKI was talked about as being the best ever for sports shooting and ISO. Obviously Canon could not top that with the MKII but it really did not need topping so to speak.

If the sports community is less than impressed compared to the 1DX MKI then Canon might have to look to the video side for more sales in the future once the initial buzz dies down.
 
Personally, while I understand what people are trying to show with the "under exposed, then pushed" images, I prefer looking at what I'd be shooting. Yet another sample of crops:

Actual Pixel Quality (100% crops from sensors):


apq.png




Resolution Compensated Pixels (images sized to equal size—high res sensors benefits):


rcp.png




These aren't earth shattering benefits. These pixel peeping studies, while interesting to see where we're at, are totally irrelevant to me.

The 1Dx mkII brings two awesome things to the table: 60 fps in full quality and DPAF… and it gives up Canon Log (compared to 1Dc). For me, the cameras importance is MUCH more related to those things than any incremental improvements in sensor tech at this point.

What lets me down the most is that I think the 1Dx mkII sensor would be a stellar performer with Canon Log. It's a shame it's not there.

PS. Frame grabs captured on a Retina screen and were left untouched.
 
I look forward to extensive video comparisons between the 1DX II and 1DC. Until then, it is really hard to know what to expect from these photo examples. Don't forget that if you shoot and view 60/50fps 4K footage on an 60/50fps 4K monitor it will appear as though it was shot at a higher resolution relative to any 24/25fps 4K footage (given that you will have to compensate for the light loss of HFR by increasing exposure). Although that is the "soap opera" effect that you may not want!

We've also had several 1DC shooters like Abraham Joffe claim that the ISO performance has been improved on the 1DX II's video mode. It could all be part of Canon's promotional rhetoric, but I doubt that someone like Joffe would make such a claim if he wasn't seeing it in his own footage.

And Canon Log is conspicuously absent for intentional reasons as we've already discussed. Canon didn't simply overlook this feature and I'm 99.9% sure that they will not add it through a firmware update. They are either planning on keeping the 1DC around until they sell all the retail stock or they will replace it with a 1DC II in about a year.
 
Last edited:
As a 1DC owner, I would like to switch to the 1DX II for the Autofocus and HFR, but there are a couple of things holding me back. I could take or leave C-Log, so that isn't a big deal. First, I do a lot of events and interviews and the 30 minute cap is obnoxious. Second, there isn't any decent 1080p or highly compressed modes available. All you have is 4K at high bit rate for decent video. You don't even have UHD that you could record externally for 1080p. The killer feature on the 1DC was the S35 mode and it is by far my most used mode. I'm sure that there are some people who only shoot 4K short take videos for whom the 1DX II would be a step up, but the 1DX II isn't as good as the 1DC for interviews and events.

I think that waiting for a 1DC II is foolish, though. All of my experience with the 1DC and Canon tells me that the 1DC concept is dead.
 
cpreston said:
I think that waiting for a 1DC II is foolish, though. All of my experience with the 1DC and Canon tells me that the 1DC concept is dead.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that Canon knows what is going to happen to the 1DC. They are also watching the 1DX II sales and profit margins and hoping that good sales will give them room to do whatever they want with these cameras.

One thing is for sure: the 1DX II has demonstrated that Canon can build a highly capable 1D camera that in many ways outperforms the 1DC in terms of raw processing power, heat management for 4K 60fps, and recording data rate (800 Mbps). They delivered all of this performance for only $6K retail, or exactly half the 1DC's release price. That is a monumental achievement if they are able to reduce their costs by cutting them in half or less. This is also why I believe that a 1DC II is a distinct possibility. If it doesn't cost Canon much more to produce than the 1DX II, then Canon might indeed act to expand their market share of videographers who might be tempted to look elsewhere in the absence of a proper 1DC replacement. A 1DC II priced just above the 1DX II but focusing more on video features and released exactly one year from now would be my guess.

This would also explain why Canon is so cryptic on the 1DC's future. They have some of their reps infer that the 1DX II is the convergence of the two 1D lines. Yet there is no official statement from Canon on this issue and for good reason. They want to leave open the option for "double dipping."
 
Last edited:
I think they are starting to really have no choice with the costs when companies around them are offering very similar products for less money.

Who would buy a Canon 1DC Mark II for $12K today, you know?

I understand $16K for the C300 Mark II because a lot of that is for the name, but I personally still consider that a high price tag for that specific camera and its features.
 
Based on my experience with the 1DC and Canon Service, I can tell you that the 1DC was pretty much DOA as far as Canon Corporate was concerned. It's sales were very poor. The market for a $12,000 DSLR was miniscule and probably less than the development costs for software like C-Log. Rather than try to increase sales by expanding the firmware or adding options, Canon abandoned the camera. Canon now appears to be focusing on photography and videography as two completely separate divisions. Outside of DPAF, Canon's video tech on it's DSLR's hasn't improved since the 1DC. The XC-10 appears to have been a stab at the hybrid market, but it has also been pretty much DOA (even though I'm thinking of picking one up). Now, why Canon would release a 1DC II that would be at least twice as much as any comparable video focused hybrid just doesn't make sense to me from a marketing and sales perspective.
 
cpreston said:
Canon now appears to be focusing on photography and videography as two completely separate divisions...
Click to expand...
They stated that thy would even target narrower groups within the DSLR markets. It basically meant one camera for portraits/landscape (5Ds/r); one camera for the hybrid shooters (5D MKIV); one camera for the nostalgia lovers (5D MKIII).

Seriously, the camera everyone is musing about is C100 MKIII/C200 - 4K pro style video camera for around $8,000. And it'll be here. Some day.
 
A C100 III/C200 would seem to fill a hole in Canon's Cinema EOS lineup as I've speculated as well. The problem is that the C300 II is $16K and they can't undercut that camera by any significant amount with another 4K Super 35mm camera with internal 10-bit intraframe recording (RAW is output only). So, if they do release such a camera for $8,000, we are talking about a C100 III with a very weak codec shooting 8-bit 4K Long GOP (i.e., a Sony FS5 equivalent minus the RAW output option). Canon will simply never offer FS7-like features for the same price. The C300 II is already their FS7 equivalent for double the price!

There is also the matter of the C500, which is currently discounted at $10K and that is in urgent need of a newer model with internal 4K RAW. A new C500 at around $25K-$30K would seem to be the next camera that Canon is going to release in the Cinema EOS line. Now, given the discounted status of both the C500 and 1DC, Canon may be signaling its intentions in terms of which Cinema EOS cameras are up next for a renewal.
 
Last edited:
My guess, for what it's worth, is that the next camera cinema camera announced will be the C500II with 4K internal recording on an 8K sensor and 8K RAW. Canon may also introduce a C200 or 100III meant to compete with the FS5/FS7 with 4K internal at low bit rates as Kinok imagines. The C300II is not a direct competitor to the FS7 since it has timecode, genlock, and RAW output already built in. The FS7 requires an attachment which helps to mitigate the price difference. The Canon cameras still fetch a premium compared to Sony, though.
 
They can do C100III/C200 with the same 205/305 Mbps recording bit rate that XC10 has. If they offer it for $5,000, they can make it 8-bit. For $7,500, it better be 10-bit. The same specs as FS-7, basically, and, basically, the same price.

But they won't do it due to ... let's call it "corporate strategy". Of both companies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top