Jump to content
Trankilstef

Canon EOS 1D MKIII specs revealed

Recommended Posts

well I do maintain that if you are a successful pro and this camera suits your needs/requirements, an upgrade could be a worthy investment.

the main target for 1DX3 is.. 1DX2 owners, and so it has been since the first 1D camera (same for Nikon D series).

the 4 year cycle (timed for the olympics) being a pretty reasonable time frame as far as ROI.

on a related note it's interesting to see how many 1DX2s have popped up in my local classifieds since the announcement on Monday.

nows also a good time to pick up nice deals on 1DX2s if 1DX3 price tag is out of reach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
58 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

110% agreed

If anything, running a business means you need to think even more seriously about ROI ("return on investment") than a hobbyist. As a hobbyist doesn't care at all in the slightest if his new camera will make him more money than his old camera. 

If a pro cannot afford a 1200$ per year for a camera then there is something wrong. So if you would buy a SH1 instead at 4k it would be ca. 800$ a year so difference is 400$ a year I would say that every pro should be able to afford.

IMO you buy in to a system + lens (I buy mostly used lens) and you stick with a 3-4 upgrade cycle you end up spending way less that trying to switch every 1-2 year to another system..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most curious about:

- How is the rolling shutter? As bad a the EOS R or closer to C200/C500II?

- Is there anyway to sync timecode through any of the ports? That's one of the best features of the S1H over the other mirrorless/dslr competition (and the reason it got Netflix approved, a long with the All-I 10-bit 422 4K).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

If a pro cannot afford a 1200$ per year for a camera then there is something wrong.

Let's say you're a pro earning $50k/yr, you want to live on a modest $35K/yr. 
That leaves $15k/yr to put into your business, which needs to cover running your website / advertising / repairs / transport /  software / training courses / insurance / legal / etc and all the other gear purchases you might want to make that year. 

Suddenly it starts to make you pause and think which to choose when you're considering a camera bodies which will cost you $700/yr vs $1200/yr. 

This is true across all businesses. (especially business which are in the same areas which people do for fun, often the serious but rich amatuers are using nicer gear than the hardworking pros!! Unless the pros are getting gear sponsorship, which for example in the case of sportspeople is often the only reason they can afford gear nicer than what your casual weekend warrior is using)

For example in my own world of production sound mixing, there is a shockingly large number of people (working on big shows too!) still using Cantar X2 / Sound Devices 788T / Zaxcom Deva 5.8 as their main production recorder. Doesn't mean they're not still spending heaps on of repairs and new gear each year, just its not being focused on their recorder. (kinda like working pros who are not bothering to upgrade their main camera body every single cycle)

 

11 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

- Is there anyway to sync timecode through any of the ports? That's one of the best features of the S1H over the other mirrorless/dslr competition (and the reason it got Netflix approved, a long with the All-I 10-bit 422 4K).


Yeah, no mention of that. The Panasonic S1H will hold onto that crown of being a "Netflix Approved" DSLR/mirrorless for a long time before Canon joins them. 

 

12 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

- How is the rolling shutter? As bad a the EOS R or closer to C200/C500II?


What is the over/under on the bets that this is the hidden "gotcha" easter egg Canon has hidden away for us? There always is "something" that Canon screws up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

Most curious about:

- How is the rolling shutter? As bad a the EOS R or closer to C200/C500II?

- Is there anyway to sync timecode through any of the ports? That's one of the best features of the S1H over the other mirrorless/dslr competition (and the reason it got Netflix approved, a long with the All-I 10-bit 422 4K).

 

Me too, 1Dx II is 14.7ms but is crop so around 20-25ms but just pure guessing.

Did not see anything about timecode sync so I doubt it has it

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Let's say you're a pro earning $50k/yr, you want to live on a modest $35K/yr. 
That leaves $15k/yr to put into your business, which needs to cover running your website / advertising / repairs / transport /  software / training courses / insurance / legal / etc and all the other gear purchases you might want to make that year. 

Suddenly it starts to make you pause and think which to choose when you're considering a camera bodies which will cost you $700/yr vs $1200/yr. 

This is true across all businesses. (especially business which are in the same areas which people do for fun, often the serious but rich amatuers are using nicer gear than the hardworking pros!! Unless the pros are getting gear sponsorship, which for example in the case of sportspeople is often the only reason they can afford gear nicer than what your casual weekend warrior is using)

For example in my own world of production sound mixing, there is a shockingly large number of people (working on big shows too!) still using Cantar X2 / Sound Devices 788T / Zaxcom Deva 5.8 as their main production recorder. Doesn't mean they're not still spending heaps on of repairs and new gear each year, just its not being focused on their recorder. (kinda like working pros who are not bothering to upgrade their main camera body every single cycle)

 

My bad judging for all the world, here in Switzerland with 35k a year you cannot live point. So then my proportion make more sense. LA area I also doubt that you can live with 35k but not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a quick google search on sport photography salary.  The median seems to range from 36k to 45k USD.  There are a select few that make around 100K but that's on the very high end.  SooOOOoooOOooo yeah.  This is a very expensive camera for the average sport photographer.  Does it provide enough value for them to upgrade from the Mkii or whatever they are using now?  I'm not sure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys seem to omit the fact most pros will be upgrading from their current gear (most likely in this case a 1DX2).

Here in Europe, second hand 1DX2 ranges from 3 to 4.5K euros. So the upgrade really only is going to cost around half the retail price.

But hey if you can't afford it, you can't afford it lol. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy/upgrade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't take the average quoted earnings of professional photographers as a guide to the affordability of this, or any other, camera.

There is a key difference with a self employed professional photographer buying a camera like this that mean you can't equate it to an individual buying it from their net salary in the same way you can't equate a taxi driver's car with an individual's one.

Its a business product so in the vast majority of cases it will be leased which not only spreads the payments but means it is 100% tax deductible.

The working life of the camera will be 3-4 years so the monthly payment is about £130-150 and can be upgraded throughout the term of the contract.

The cost of the upgrade for a leased Mark ii to a leased Mark iii means a manageable increase in monthly payments rather than having to find a £3K lump sum.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like this is regular Canon Log, and not Canon Log 3, even though the 10 bit codec should be able to handle that. Does anyone have any other info?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

I wouldn't take the average quoted earnings of professional photographers as a guide to the affordability of this, or any other, camera.

There is a key difference with a self employed professional photographer buying a camera like this that mean you can't equate it to an individual buying it from their net salary in the same way you can't equate a taxi driver's car with an individual's one.

Its a business product so in the vast majority of cases it will be leased which not only spreads the payments but means it is 100% tax deductible.

The working life of the camera will be 3-4 years so the monthly payment is about £130-150 and can be upgraded throughout the term of the contract.

The cost of the upgrade for a leased Mark ii to a leased Mark iii means a manageable increase in monthly payments rather than having to find a £3K lump sum.

 

Good point.  But at the end of the day, Canon has to ask itself what kind of company it is?  Is it a company that is like blackmagic - serving a niche field (cinema camera, and in Canon's case the sports photography field); or a company that sells consumer goods?

Even if ALL profession sports photographers were to upgrade to the MKIII, that's not enough revenue to sustain a big company like Canon.  Blackmagic is a smaller company so they don't have to sell as many camera's as the big players (Canon, Sony, etc).

Back in the old days, manufactures created a "flagship" product, and hoped the halo helped sell their rebel cameras.  This isn't the case anymore.  People know the value of the products and buy according to value.  The MKIII doesn't make sense anymore in this new environment for a big company like canon.  It really isn't going to help their bottom line.  The profession sports photographer isn't going to make a big dent in canon's loses column in their financial reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2020 at 11:52 AM, BTM_Pix said:

I think the RF mount has legs and has already has great options for non FF cinema cameras like Komodo with the Variable-ND adapter and the EF>RF Speedbooster as well as just the shorter flange distance in general so you can put PL and M mount lenses on it.

It has 43 discrete steps compared to 97 for an EF 18-35mm f2.8 and over 200 for the Sigma ART 18-35mm. Although the Tokina 18-300mm is currently king with over 400!

I haven't ventured into Z-Cam yet as I don't have access to one but from their API its pretty straightforward.

I'm taking a risk and buying the small Crane M2 for my upcoming FP as with the diminutive Voigtlander Color Skopar 21mm M that I'd put on it for such shots its only about 70% of the rated capacity. As its not massively bigger than a pistol grip so keeps within the overall minimalist vibe !

The used price of the Z6 is now flashing a serious amount of ankle at me now they've finally delivered ProResRAW.

As far as I understand it doesn't, at least not at launch.

I don't know what the Atomos exclusivity period is with Nikon, if indeed there is one, so I've no idea if its even a viable option.

Looking at MapCamera in Tokyo they currently have 85 pre-orders for the 1DXiii which isn't bad for one store in one day !

This is a completely broad reply to your thoughtful one, but with the release of the 1DXiii, it is pretty amazing what is available for filmmakers from every budget... for less than $400 you can have a used BMPCC, for $799 we have the Z-Cam e2c, for $1300 the P4K (with full Resolve) or the GH5, for $1900 we have FF uncompressed raw with the Sigma, for $1999 you have the Z-Cam E2, then the P6K, the S1H, ZCam 6K and now the 1DXiii.

Every filmmaker, at every budget, has an option to make a technically good film with a DSLR/DSLM or small cinema camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, eleison said:

Good point.  But at the end of the day, Canon has to ask itself what kind of company it is?  Is it a company that is like blackmagic - serving a niche field (cinema camera, and in Canon's case the sports photography field); or a company that sells consumer goods?

Based on the split of Canon's overall income I'd say their answer should be that its more of an office equipment company as its the Office division where the majority of it comes from.

Cameras are actually the problem child of their Imaging Systems division (which also includes Inkjets and Scanners) which in total only accounts for 25%, and falling, of their overall income.

That is always held up as a reason why Canon can/could/should/will get out but its difficult to imagine that in, say 5 years, Canon wouldn't be making cameras or had sold the camera part to another company but then again I could never envisage Hasselblad being owned by a model aircraft company either so who knows really.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2020 at 12:39 PM, EthanAlexander said:

I had similar thinking as I moved from Canon to Sony: with all the traveling I do, I started buying native E mount lenses (for their size and weight advantage) and sold about half my EF lenses... Well, I recently bought a Z Cam and first thing I did was start buying EF lenses again! 

I love native mirrorless lenses, but the adaptability of EF (or others like Nikon F) really make them desirable simply to keep from being locked into a system. Plus, no focus by wire!

...And don't forget speed boosting...

You probably made the right move, both times. As far as Canon lenses, I've never used a better lens than a Canon L lens. Their IS lenses are as stable as entry level IBIS and even their earlier USM zooms are hidden gems for next to nothing prices. The same goes for their FL/FD lenses and even their c-mounts are hidden gems.

The same goes for Nikkors. Their pre-ai, ai and ai-s lenses are the best value for the money, with an inherent "cinematic" look that can be adapted to anything. They're also marvels of mechanical and optical construction. My ai-s 35mm 1.4 is barely larger than an average 50mm 1.4 and if you compare that to more modern fast 35mm lenses like the Sigma or Samyang, it's pretty incredible the difference in size and weight.

Although I said I don't really see the sense in owning EF lenses if their isn't a camera to mount them to, I am still considering cutting down my now modest collection even more with a Canon 24-70mm 2.8 zoom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, eleison said:

I did a quick google search on sport photography salary.  The median seems to range from 36k to 45k USD.

Wonder if that is gross or net?

If gross my $50K example was a little on the generous side!

But either way, I did not too bad for gut guesswork to whip up an example. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eleison said:

Back in the old days, manufactures created a "flagship" product, and hoped the halo helped sell their rebel cameras.  This isn't the case anymore.  People know the value of the products and buy according to value.  The MKIII doesn't make sense anymore in this new environment for a big company like canon.  It really isn't going to help their bottom line.  The profession sports photographer isn't going to make a big dent in canon's loses column in their financial reports.

I think Canikon makes a profit from their flagship products, but yes, those profits are dwarfed by the number of APS-C cameras they sell because they are perceived as having the best. (even though the Canon Rebel is nowhere close to that! Not even the best in its market niche)

The Canon 1Dmk3 and the Nikon D6 have a massive marketing impact. In terms of the headlines and eyeballs they attract, and discussion they generate. (the same is true for any other groundbreaking product they produce, am sure the "D800 medium-format-equivalent" sold a few more lower end bodies as well, and the "D300 the-mini-D3" sold a few extra lower end bodies as well)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

but then again I could never envisage Hasselblad being owned by a model aircraft company either so who knows really.

"model aircraft company"

hahaha

I laugh, but it is true!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Wonder if that is gross or net?

If gross my $50K example was a little on the generous side!

But either way, I did not too bad for gut guesswork to whip up an example. 

 

I don't think there's a need to wonder, the man who told you not to put too much faith in the estimated salary of professional sports photographers just so happens to be a professional sports photographer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...