Jump to content
Trankilstef

Canon EOS 1D MKIII specs revealed

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Django said:

all that rumour says is some shops in Japan have started taking pre-orders for 792,000JPY incl tax which roughly converts to 6.500 euros.

Different vat here in europe*Ireland compared to land of sunrise

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

Consumption tax is now 10% in Japan so ¥880,000 is ¥800,000 before tax.

Which is just under $7400.

Against the launch price of the Mark II in 2016, which was $5999, its certainly a bit of a bump but I doubt many of the intended market will outgrow its spec for a good few years (if ever) so the extra cost will be offset by it having a longer working life.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2020 at 6:39 AM, gt3rs said:

At 25 MB x 1000 frames = 25 GB Ram I really doubt that the camera has that amount of Ram.

You need around 500 MB/s for unlimited buffer and cfexpress can do 1400.....

20 mpixel raw is more like 35-40 MB, assuming 16 bits of data per pixel. The camera will be writing to the card while filling the buffer, but at some point the buffer will fill and frame rate will drop like a stone. That apparently happens at around 1000 frames. You don't need to have a full 1000 frames worth of RAM available. Some lesser amount will be enough since data is being sent off to the card while the camera is still collecting data.

The cards may be able to sustain those write speeds, it does NOT mean that the camera can actually deliver data at that rate. The way it works is that raw data is written into the buffer as a data stream, it then undergoes some processing and rearrangement into a form that can be saved, after which it is written to the card. The bottleneck is usually that middle step, so even though you might have a superfast card, you are still limited by the processing power of the camera and the physical size of it's buffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mokara said:

20 mpixel raw is more like 35-40 MB, assuming 16 bits of data per pixel. The camera will be writing to the card while filling the buffer, but at some point the buffer will fill and frame rate will drop like a stone. That apparently happens at around 1000 frames. You don't need to have a full 1000 frames worth of RAM available. Some lesser amount will be enough since data is being sent off to the card while the camera is still collecting data.

The cards may be able to sustain those write speeds, it does NOT mean that the camera can actually deliver data at that rate. The way it works is that raw data is written into the buffer as a data stream, it then undergoes some processing and rearrangement into a form that can be saved, after which it is written to the card. The bottleneck is usually that middle step, so even though you might have a superfast card, you are still limited by the processing power of the camera and the physical size of it's buffer.

Do you have a 1Dx II? I have it and the files are around 25 MB RAW. Also the leaked spec mentions 1000+ ….. so back to the ca. 500 MB/s that is 1/3 of the spec of most cfexpress cards so doable. 

Even 12 GB of RAM would be insane for a camera.

Share this post


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

Do you have a 1Dx II? I have it and the files are around 25 MB RAW. Also the leaked spec mentions 1000+ ….. so back to the ca. 500 MB/s that is 1/3 of the spec of most cfexpress cards so doable. 

Even 12 GB of RAM would be insane for a camera.

That is compressed RAW (an actual file). A 16 bit 20 mpixel data feed is 40MB of data, that is what is going into the buffer. It is then processed and packaged into a file, that is where the bottleneck is. The buffer itself must be able to accept at least 800 MB/s to meet the specs. 

Again, you are missing the point, it is irrelevant what a card is capable of, it is what the camera is capable of that counts, and that is approximately 1000 frames at the spec frame rate.

You don't need a buffer to take up the entire 1000 frames before writing, writing will be going on while the buffer is filled, which means that you can have a much smaller buffer and still get those 1000 frames at that frame rate. Let me provide a visual analogy since text is not doing it for you. Think of it as a bottle with a hole in it. Water is running in at the same time it is running out, but if it is running in faster than it is running out, eventually the bottle will fill and you cant get any more water in. 

So, if data is going into the buffer at 800 MB/s and leaving at 500 MB/s, with 1000 frames at 20 fps, the buffer would fill at 15 GB of RAM. If you write to the card at a higher speed then your buffer would necessarily be smaller to hit the same 1000 frame limit. A 600 MB/s write rate would mean 10 GB of RAM, while 700 MB/s write would require a buffer of 5 GB of RAM. Cellphones have 8GB of RAM, it is not out of the question that a large flagship camera has more. This new camera probably has 16 GB.

The fact that there is a maximum frame number cited in the specs means that the camera does eventually bottleneck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mokara said:

That is compressed RAW (an actual file). A 16 bit 20 mpixel data feed is 40MB of data, that is what is going into the buffer. It is then processed and packaged into a file, that is where the bottleneck is. The buffer itself must be able to accept at least 800 MB/s to meet the specs. 

Again, you are missing the point, it is irrelevant what a card is capable of, it is what the camera is capable of that counts, and that is approximately 1000 frames at the spec frame rate.

You don't need a buffer to take up the entire 1000 frames before writing, writing will be going on while the buffer is filled, which means that you can have a much smaller buffer and still get those 1000 frames at that frame rate. Let me provide a visual analogy since text is not doing it for you. Think of it as a bottle with a hole in it. Water is running in at the same time it is running out, but if it is running in faster than it is running out, eventually the bottle will fill and you cant get any more water in. 

So, if data is going into the buffer at 800 MB/s and leaving at 500 MB/s, with 1000 frames at 20 fps, the buffer would fill at 15 GB of RAM. If you write to the card at a higher speed then your buffer would necessarily be smaller to hit the same 1000 frame limit. A 600 MB/s write rate would mean 10 GB of RAM, while 700 MB/s write would require a buffer of 5 GB of RAM. Cellphones have 8GB of RAM, it is not out of the question that a large flagship camera has more. This new camera probably has 16 GB.

The fact that there is a maximum frame number cited in the specs means that the camera does eventually bottleneck.

I'm a software engineer so I know how things work and you have a history of made up story in this forum. First you should know that camera uses a 14bit RAW file and not 16bit. View that the file is 25 MB you assuming that you can prepare it in real time it is absolutely possible with a 1/3 of the max speed of a cfexpress card write at 500 MB/s card indefinitely. In fact the spec says 1000+ (plus means more than that) I think the mechanical mirror running at full speed for minutes would be the issue and not the end to end pipeline speed. In fact the camera can move 12bit compressed RAW 5.4k infinitely and the compression is much more expensive that simple move the raw data to a file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

I'm a software engineer so I know how things work and you have a history of made up story in this forum. First you should know that camera uses a 14bit RAW file and not 16bit. View that the file is 25 MB you assuming that you can prepare it in real time it is absolutely possible with a 1/3 of the max speed of a cfexpress card write at 500 MB/s card indefinitely. In fact the spec says 1000+ (plus means more than that) I think the mechanical mirror running at full speed for minutes would be the issue and not the end to end pipeline speed. In fact the camera can move 12bit compressed RAW 5.4k infinitely and the compression is much more expensive that simple move the raw data to a file.

As a software engineer you no doubt know that memory is arranged as 8 bit blocks, so a 14 bit data piece is stored in a 16 bit space? Yes? Or do your computers work differently?

The spec says 1000+ frames, that means that it will be around 1000, but could be more because actual RAW file sizes vary depending on what is in the image and the point you hit the wall is different based on that. It does NOT mean infinite. It means 1000, thereabouts. If there was no limitation on the number of frames they would have said so, not "1000+". Clearly there IS a limitation.

The write speed of the card itself is irrelevant if the camera can't deliver data at that rate. As a software engineer I would have expected you to know this. Magic does not exist in the real world, you can't write data that has not been created yet.

Mirror speed running is completely irrelevant. The mechanical limitation imposed by the mirror is 16 fps, and in any case is irrelevant to the computing overhead imposed by DPAF since in DSLR mode the camera is using the viewfinder focusing elements (which has it's own discrete processor in the 1D and 5D cameras), not DPAF (which is handled by the main processor/s in those cameras, the 1D has two primary processors, the 5D has one). In live view the frame rate is 20 fps, which is the upper limit of what the camera can handle, subject to the constraints of the buffer size. Note: 20 fps = live view, not SLR mode, the mirror is up and is not involved at all.

12 bit compressed RAW can be handled as 3 byte fragments instead of 4 bytes that 14 bit would require, so it is inherently faster to deal with. Also, 5.4k is working with ~15 mpixels, not the full 20 mpixels. So, significantly less data that has to be dealt with. The overall processing limitations can be roughly deduced from the absence of DPAF in RAW or 4K60p modes. This is not a problem with stills since dropping a frame or two to accommodate the processing needs of DPAF is not an issue, but you can't do this with video. Compression itself is not a factor because that is handled in hardware by a different part of the processor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confirmed DPAF is available in 4k dci crop at

Recording Sizes and Format

NTSC

5.5K RAW 
(5472 x 2886)

59.94 fps* 
29.97 fps 
24.00 fps 
23.98 fps

RAW

4K DCI 
(4096 x 2160)

59.94 fps* 
29.97 fps 
24.00 fps 
23.98 fps

ALL-I
IPB

4K UHD 
(3840 x 2160)

59.94 fps* 
29.97 fps

ALL-I
IPB

4K DCI (cropped) 
(4096 x 2160)

59.94 fps 
29.97 fps 
24.00 fps 
23.98 fps

ALL-I
IPB

Full HD 
(1920 x 1080)

119.90 fps** 
59.94 fps 
23.98 fps^

ALL-I
IPB

29.97 fps

ALL-I
IPB
IPB (Light)
 

* AF does not function. 
** Audio not recorded at High Frame Rate 119.90 fps recording 
^ 24p recording will be supported through firmware update after shipping.

Share this post


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

...

I want a paint to sample seafoam green gt3rs with red-orange brake calipers ?

like this color

54_relic_sea_foam_green_r1560_4.jpg

kinda want this camera too... waaaaay more affordable ?

lol soooooo anyway DPAF works in 4k DCI mode? with how much of a crop? sorry I'm behind 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very confusing as the spec on canon USA and Europe says it can AF in RAW but not at 60fps. 

Also in RAW it can create 4k mp4 proxy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Applauds*

This isn't bad, not bad at all.

5.5K RAW at 60fps - damn. And, internal?

Only 5.5K at 30fps & cropped DCI 4K at 60fps with DPAF.... come on... could be worse, right?

I think its a true successor to the 1DC - given all the above comes with C-Log this time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. I am going to come out and admit that I am floored by this camera. I have been a Canon hater, but this camera is an absolute beast. To have a pro body and amazing photo capabilities - which most already know the 1D line has and then on top of that have internal RAW and amazing DPAF?! It has dpaf autofocus and shoots internal raw and I think the most exciting part for me, is it FINALLY has focus peaking. That was the one thing that was going to make this a non purchase as I use a lot of vintage manual focus glass. Though this prices a lot of people out, if you are a serious hybrid shooter - meaning you do a lot of both - this is a dream camera for you. Obviously there a few downsides, such as the screen for video - but most have external monitors. 

 

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...