Opinions: Any reco's on a Canon 1DXmkii alternative?

James Carpenter

James Carpenter

Well-known member
First of all, Happy New Year folks, hope 2019 is a productive, successful and great year for ya'll.

Now my question, I've been toying with the idea of a 1DXmkii for some time now, but I feel there are better options out there for my needs as I really don't need the continuous bursts of 16fps (or whatever it is). I'm not a sports journo and will only be using the camera for stills and video, and as such it seems silly to spend money on this when I'll never use it. The main reason I am (was) interested in this camera is the silky slow motion, 4k video and of course world class stills.

I know that there is no "perfect" all-in-one camera, but from my research, the 1dxmkii came very close.

I'd like to stay with full frame I think, I had a GH4 and whilst the video was nice, the stills didn't hold up for me.

Any thoughts would be most welcome!


Thanks.
 
I would look into these:

5D Mark IV/EOS R
a7III/a7RIII
X-T3 (APS-C)
Z6/Z7

If you already have EF lenses then the Canons would make most sense (with an adapter for the R).
 
I have the 1DX Mark II and it's fantastic in both photos and video. My only complaints:

1) 30 minute record limit before you have to press record again.
2) No Canon Log recording available.
3) No 10-bit internal 4K recording.
4) Expensive.

Otherwise, it's got excellent image quality, and the dual pixel auto focus is magical. The 5D Mark IV and EOS R both crop the sensor significantly when recording 4K, but if you're OK with that then those should give you similar image quality.

I, too, came from a GH4 and wasn't fully satisfied with the photo quality, and going up to the 1DX II was a gigantic leap in photo and video quality.
 
Depends on what you need. The 5DIV/EOS R are cool if you don't need ~Super35 crop in 4K (meaning OK with a much heavier crop (~2x)) and don't mind extreme rolling shutter for video. A7 III is decent for full frame video (rolling shutter not great; worse than Fuji), color is better but not yet to Canon level. A7R III probably better than A7 III if stills are important (color not to Canon level). Fuji X-T3 has decent color, but to my eye Canon still leads. For video Fuji offers 10-bit and log if that's important for you (more flexible in post). Sony is better than Fuji in slomo.

Thus if you don't want to spend $5500, those are all decent options, however they don't quite reach what the 1DX II can provide: Canon level color at slightly less than Super35 crop in 4K, usable 1080p full frame for medium/close shots (but not as much real detail as Sony in full frame mode), really high quality 8-bit 422 4K files (vs. 420 as with Sony; 1DX II files are big, but now playable in real-time in modern NLEs with a decent GPU), including 4K60, Canon's industry leading phase-detect DPAF, industry leading stills (Nikon has some contenders, but not really for video), and if you have Canon lenses, it is certainly by far the best option for both stills and video.

Regarding no log on the 1DX II- I developed a custom picture style that isn't log but provides max DR while preventing ugly color shifts as with typical custom log-ish profiles for Canon DSLRs (Technicolor and similar paid versions). I published perhaps the first log emulation for the 1DX II right after it came out (gave it away for free, unlocked), however quickly gave up that method because it hurts skin tones and doesn't even provide more usable DR. Canon's real/built-in log does provide slightly more DR, however my non-log custom profile works well enough even in direct/backlit sunlight, which requires max DR:


This is 1080p on the 1DX II with the 70-200 F2.8 II at F2.8 (and Tiffen variable ND) with the custom picture style to boost DR and fix Canon color issues (closer to the ARRI look). I found that rendering 1DX II 1080p to 4K and post sharpening with a touch of noise can help make the 1DX II 1080p really look good on YouTube when viewed in 4K; this also works for C300 II RGB 444 12-bit 1080p: not missing 4K60 or 4K RGB444 12-bit since 1080p upscaled+noise+sharpen works so well.

Here's 1DX II 1080p upscaled+noise+sharpened vs. 4K:
For close ups- hard to tell the difference- can you tell? (for wide(r) shots 4K is definitely more detail/useful):
100% 1DX II 4K60 (some shots rendered at 24p/non-slomo), Canon 50 1.4 (at 1.4), 16-35 F2.8 II (wide shot outside Bronson cave (the Bat Cave from Batman), and 24-105 F4L, with Tiffen variable ND. 100% DPAF using touch focus points. Uses the same custom picture style, with color lowered in post per the director's intended style.

In summary, there's still nothing on the market that bests the 1DX II for both stills and video in one camera. Whether the diminishing returns for the much higher price is worth it is relative to what's important for your use case. The Sony A7S III might be a contender (rumored to be officially announced Q1 this year), though it may not have a very high megapixel sensor (not great for stills; but could be fine for your use case).
 
So, it looks like the EOS R5 might be the camera I’m looking for. Relative specs but a much smaller and lighter footprint.
Looking forward to the official release and real world tests.
����
 
Fingers crossed, lol.
Th only thing that held me back on getting the 1dxmkii was the size and weight.
People seem to be selling them off too, as our local kijiji is flooded with almost new ones with minimal actuations for around $4000CDN, no doubt all preordering the mkiii.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top