The New Canon EOS-1D X as far as video concern

arroway said:
My T2i sure hasn't. I bought the body-only new for what? Something like $850 when they first came out? They go for $450 used all the time now. Factoring in the difference in eventual resale value between the T2i and the 7D, it probably would have made sense just to buy the 7D to begin with.

I think I lost $350 or so when I sold my 5DM2 (last year).
Click to expand...

Sadly, I have to agree - the T2i has dropped like a bag of hammers. I'm just going to end up keeping it as a B cam/crash cam.

And I'm guessing you'll see the Mark II drop just as soon as an affordable next gen FF camera hits - either the Mark III, or the rumored ones from Nikon and Sony.
 
You really have to look at how fast technology changes and how many options there are out there. Most of the cameras I buy lose about $500-1500 over the course of a year, but I make way more than that over the course of a year on it, plus they'd cost way more than that to rent, so not a bad deal. The only thing that really holds their value over time are lenses, providing you buy them used.
 
arroway said:
My T2i sure hasn't. I bought the body-only new for what? Something like $850 when they first came out? They go for $450 used all the time now. Factoring in the difference in eventual resale value between the T2i and the 7D, it probably would have made sense just to buy the 7D to begin with.

I think I lost $350 or so when I sold my 5DM2 (last year).
Click to expand...

The other day I saw a t2i in the paper. Still the same price as when I bought mine... but this is Africa, so....
 
FYI:

Canon Full-frame 35mm Sensor News
The newly announced Canon EOS-1DX camera features 18.1MP full-frame 35mm sensor. Canon Europe explains technologies it's implemented in the new device, albeit in hard to understand marketing talk:
New photodiode construction has resulted in an improved photoelectric conversion rate that gives increased light sensitivity.
Improved transistors inside the pixels are said to make SNR higher
The first time that gapless microlenses have been employed on a Canon full-frame sensor.
14fps speed is achieved by a 16-channel analog output with two-vertical-pixel simultaneous readout. The 16 outputs are muxed in 4 ADCs siting on a separate image processor chip Digic 5+. It is around 1.4 times faster than the previous generation EOS-1D Mark IV and said to be a first for a 35mm full-frame digital sensor. At ISO 32,000 or higher the frame rate is reduced to 10fps.
Click to expand...
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com/2011/10/canon-full-frame-35mm-sensor-news.html
 
So I haven't been able to keep my ear to the ground as well as I'd like on this, and I'm getting a bit confused. If someone could just write a quick 3 words response and confirm which of these scenarios is true.

1) Canon has announced the 1DX, and it will be coming with both a low compression (i.e., high bitrate) All-I codec, as well as a high compression (i.e., low bitrate) codec.

2) Canon has announced the 1DX, as well as the All-I codec, but they are two independent announcements - the 1DX will not record All-I.

3) Canon has announced the 1DX, as well as the All-I codec, but we aren't really sure what will be shipping yet. It might have it, it might not.

Thanks...
 
I wouldn't go that far with it. First, before we even start talking about noise we need to see images larger than 480p - unless you are shooting for SD.

Also, especially in the last couple of shots, it looks like in some areas (especially the smoke) that there is a lot of...well, I wouldn't call it noise, because it doesn't look like normal noise. It looks like noise that has been heavily smoothed. So it really just looks bad - like someone added an "oatmeal filter" to the image that just make it lumpy.

Is it great to be able to shoot anything at all at that low level of exposure? Yes.
Does it looks like it was shot at - say - 6400 or 12800? No.
And is it noise free? Definitely not...
 
Yeesh...


"Combatentropy" I had no idea that you were using hyperbole there. And no, I don't think you are "that dumb" or dumb at all. In fact, I don't really think anything about you, since I don't know you. I thought that your statement was, perhaps, overlooking what might be considered some obvious problems. The image isn't, after all, what would be considered "noise free".

"AGMedia" - Pixel-peeping? Far from it. I couldn't pixel peep a 18MP image downscaled and compressed to a 480px wide JPEG if I wanted to. Complaining? No, certainly not. For that high of an ISO, it's a feat that there is anything there at all. Answering a post that contained what I believed to be undue praise? Yes.

And as I said, is it "great to be able to shoot anything at all" at that exposure? Yes, it is.
 
http://vimeo.com/31175496

well the HDMI is crippled for sure according to this canon rep. Also he speaks extensively about the new 264 codec. Doesnt say say anything about 8 or 10 bit. the file size of the all-I is 3 times that of the current 264 implementation. Doesnt sound like 444 12 bit to me, sounds like contradicting info from previous info available.
 
Well, more than a hint of a true video camera coming, no HDMI to avoid confusion.

He seemed a bit unsure as to the video codecs so we should wait and see.

Real footage coming from next month (3rd Nov?).

Lead-time to allow for software tweaking so perhaps the codecs aren't set in stone yet. Fingers crossed.

Dave
 
dustwaterwindfire said:
http://vimeo.com/31175496

well the HDMI is crippled for sure according to this canon rep. Also he speaks extensively about the new 264 codec. Doesnt say say anything about 8 or 10 bit. the file size of the all-I is 3 times that of the current 264 implementation. Doesnt sound like 444 12 bit to me, sounds like contradicting info from previous info available.
Click to expand...

Yes, the rep who spoke to Dan Chung directly contradicts the Canon USA source reported by DPreview.

According to that Canon Europe guy interviewed by Chung, we're looking at that "all-i" codec being somewhere between 75 and 100 Mbps. Unfortunately, this would be characteristic of Canon, placing their intraframe recording just short of BBC requirements -- protecting their video line. 10 bit is very questionable, 4:2:2 is possible.

Will this be a monumental leap forward from the 5D Mark 2 and all it's accomplished -- yes, in a big way. Will it break new bounds in the way the 5D Mark 2 did, very likely -- yes. Will it beat AVC-Intra, if this report is accurate and the previous one false, it will probably not.

Also of note in that interview is the elimination of moire and aliasing by not using line skipping. That's actually huge.
 
*IF* the I-Frame is 3x the IBP codec *AND* the IBP codec has a comparable bit-rate to the "bog-standard" Canon H.264 implementation (As intimated) then we get 120-150 mbps, comparable to AVC-Intra, so 10 bit 4:2:2 is *JUST ABOUT* possible.

OTOH if the Canon USA Pro Technical guy is right then we're looking at 360 mbps I-Frame with the *POSSIBILIY* of 10 bit 4:4:4. TBH I would put more trust in Chuck Westfall than in a salesman.

And yes that USB folow-focus was seriously cool.

Non-Sarky question:

What would be better / what would you prefer, 10 bit 4:4:4 or 12 bit 4:2:2?

No attitude or edge, just a genuine curiosity.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top