Canon 1DX - Official Owners Thread

IGADIZ said:
Wahey!!!
Go out and enjoy. It is a fantastic tool you can trust. I am no longer thinking is this going to be in focus?... Is been a long time coming but, finally, Canon got it right! Some minor issues like the AFMA bug but, this can be resolved by leaving Orientation Linked AF Point set to the default.
I am loving mine! (y)
Click to expand...

Thanks again for your help via pm dude, and also to Gary who also spent time giving me information on his nikon set up. I really appreicated both of your inputs.

Ive not shot anything yet, just doing the usual insurance and cps crap. Then load some CFns ready to try some pieces in the venue tonight.

I shoot on 1.2 glass alot and know that the er.80 has had more issues with this so I am a bit worried about this to be honest but hey ho. Ive never really been 100% happy with my mkiii to trust it so at times I chimped like an idiot and even then the sceen gave me naff all.
 
Gary Coyle said:
But according to these guys http://xerodigital.ca/canon-1dx-nikon-d4/ the 1DX simply cant compete with the AF system of the D4 in low light and for overall AF consistency, my current D3S gives me no less than a 98% keeper rate and any OOF are my fault.

But then again (and i dont mean to sound arsey) i know how to use my equipment and to work it to the best of its capabilities, how many folk lash out £3,500 on new DSLR's and dont even understand the basics of photography :wacky:
Click to expand...

agreed :)
Also I am a little surprised at Rouses comments regarding the autofocus issues on his D4 especially as he has had several years of D3s experience. 3D tracking or full auto AF setting for things like birds in flight especially in lower or very bright light with confusing backgrounds is crap :) not so surprising as it is optimised for facial recognition I believe... further more by his own admission if set up (correctly) in those conditions, continuous focus , 9 point it nails it just as I would expect the D3s to do.... all very odd :)

I must admit I had a couple of days with a D4 recently and while there are some nice touches I saw no real improvement in iso performance nor any massive jump in Auto focus performance either... I shall be keeping my D3s for some time me thinks.... I am however really looking forward to a day or two with the D800 :)
 
Gary Coyle said:
Sort of the point i was making in a roundabout way when i linked to the other blog, what one guy can get out of his equipment another guy cant, so it doesnt mean one system is better than the other, it's one reviewers opinion based on how he set up the equipment, ive seen enough good and bad images from both the 1DX and D4S cameras to actually put it down to each individuals skill level in setting the camera up to the best which can be squeezed out of it in many different situations.

Theres a guy on here who in my mind produces better images with his D3 than i can with my D3S and when i owned a Canon 40D i was producing better images with that than pros who were using 1D MKII's
Click to expand...

Got to agree with you Gary.

I'm not an experienced sports shooter but have spent a lot of time recently setting up the servo AF on a 1D4 and 5D3. The number of performance considerations is truly massive.

The camera aside, the lens, the light level and where it's coming from, subject, subject size and distance, speed, direction, accelleration etc etc. Then overlay that with the number AF settings, basic icon modes, custom tweaks and other settings, AF zones and point selections. How many permutations is that? I don't know, but it's several dozen for starters.

Then there is the user, how well the camera has been set up, and how well it is used. To do it properly you need good technical understanding, a lot of set-up testing in different circumstances, and a great deal of skill behind the camera.

Most folks only test and use within a very limited range. Not a criticism, just a fact, and the guy that uses mostly a big prime to shoot floodlit soccer is not the same as the other shooting athletics with a zoom in good daylight, or another shooting motorsport or BIFing.

All you can really say is, under this particular set of very specific circumstances, one camera did this and the other camera did that. That's useful info of course, but a million miles from conclusive when you're talking about cameras like the D4 and 1DS.
 
Got to agree with Gary and Hoppy. A better test would surely be to take a very experienced Nikon shooter and a very experienced Canon one and get them both to shoot the same sports game at the same time. Only then would we really be comparing like for like rather than lab type tests.

At the end of the day is a photographer is getting the shots he/she needs then it really doesn't matter if someone can't by testing them in a lab. Both the D4 and 1Dx are fantastic camera in my opinion and if either was significantly better/worse than the other we would have heard much more about it by now.

Someone might be a better driver than you but if you lend them your car they usually can't drive it as well as you until they get used to the controls and feel of the car. I guess it's similar with cameras. I had a play with a 1Dx and D4 when I was in Denmark and while both were fantastic I couldn't easily find my way around the D4 whereas the 1Dx I was instantly comfortable with having used a 1DmkIV.
 
EMA747 said:
Got to agree with Gary and Hoppy. A better test would surely be to take a very experienced Nikon shooter and a very experienced Canon one and get them both to shoot the same sports game at the same time. Only then would we really be comparing like for like rather than lab type tests.

At the end of the day is a photographer is getting the shots he/she needs then it really doesn't matter if someone can't by testing them in a lab. Both the D4 and 1Dx are fantastic camera in my opinion and if either was significantly better/worse than the other we would have heard much more about it by now.

Someone might be a better driver than you but if you lend them your car they usually can't drive it as well as you until they get used to the controls and feel of the car. I guess it's similar with cameras. I had a play with a 1Dx and D4 when I was in Denmark and while both were fantastic I couldn't easily find my way around the D4 whereas the 1Dx I was instantly comfortable with having used a 1DmkIV.
Click to expand...

Yes, two cameras side by side is the only way, but even then the findings only apply to that particular situation, with that lens and that camera set up.

It takes a huge amount of effort to do these things properly. For example, a friend and I were AF testing three cameras for a review in Advanced Photographer magazine - Canon 5D3 vs 5D2 vs D800. It took us most of a day and involved a volunteer runner (back and forth again and again, fast around some cones) and a motorbike straight towards the camera at speed.

Just organising all that takes a lot of time and money and at the end of it we got thousands of pictures and a lot of useful data. But even then, though the subjects were chosen as representative as a lot of common subjects, we couldn't cover everything, or go very far in exploring how different set ups would work.

For example, I set the 5D3 to react to quick changes of direction running around the cones, but the handbook warned that it might make the camera less reliable when tracking the subject as consistent speed. And it did get caught out once or twice, but would the same have happened if the subject had been different? What about ice hockey, with a similar subject making similar movements, but much faster and usually in poor light.

That's why I'm agreeing with Gary. When you're comparing cameras like a 1DX and D4, I think that you're mostly testing the photographer's ability to set it up optimally for the particular situation, and then use it to the best of the camera's ability. The tog is the weakest link.
 
HoppyUK said:
The tog is the weakest link.
Click to expand...
Thats right if the camera does work as it should, however, Canon completly screwed up their AF system after the MKIIN by massivly overcomplicating the whole AF system without thinking that a new breed of photographer was purchasing their systems, a photographer who had no grounding or no experience and one who just wanted to pick it up and shoot keepers all day long but this new breed were just overawed by the mass of custom functions for the AF system, i beleive that the MKIII had some 28,000 possible combinations for the AF systen where Nikon had something like 200

Nikon kept with the really simple system which just works, turn it on, select the focus mode, focus point, then fire the shutter, it can actually be as simple as that if you want it to be.

It looks like Canon have finally realised the error of their way and introduced the pre set AF modes for different shooting conditions/subjects, there is still the massivly complicated stuff still under the hood if youre more experienced and want to tweak the camera within an inch of its life but if you dont want to go there you dont need to.

As for debating the high ISO noise issues, why even bother, the D3S and still the D3 are more than good enough for most working pros and any improvement in the D4 is welcome but not at the price premium its at.

Canon users will obviously welcome the quite steep increase in high ISO improvement but seriously, how many of you really need it, if Canon had kept their AF system simple and as good as Nikons then i doubt there would have been so many chasing the rather expensive upgrade.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Canon users will obviously welcome the quite steep increase in high ISO improvement but seriously, how many of you really need it
Click to expand...

High ISO seems to be the new "more megapixels are better" marketing cobblers.
All the top stadiums in the world have lighting so good you don't need much above 1600, and this the type of photographer the camera is built for.
There are of course a few photographers who shoot schools stuff, but for the majority, high ISO will be a bit of bragging on forums, and nothing else.

I'm still amazed how we ever did it on film, pushing to the dizzy heights of 3200?? In my whole career, I think I've only ever shot around a handful of jobs where I've gone (or needed to) above 3200.
 
Edtog said:
High ISO seems to be the new "more megapixels are better" marketing cobblers.
All the top stadiums in the world have lighting so good you don't need much above 1600, and this the type of photographer the camera is built for.
There are of course a few photographers who shoot schools stuff, but for the majority, high ISO will be a bit of bragging on forums, and nothing else.

I'm still amazed how we ever did it on film, pushing to the dizzy heights of 3200?? In my whole career, I think I've only ever shot around a handful of jobs where I've gone (or needed to) above 3200.
Click to expand...

I think there's some truth in that, but I don't entirely agree.

Of the new breed of full-framers I've used or have some (limited) experience of (1DX, 5D3, D4, D800) their highest ISO settings are indeed of marginal use. When you can see prominent noise and severe lack of shadow detail even on the LCD without enlarging the view :eek: you know it's not going to be great.

But the option is there and you can at least get an image of sorts in the most extraordinarily dim light, good enough for maybe a small on-screen output. And more importantly, the performance at more normal ISOs around the 800-6400 level is really quite impressive - somewhere between one stop and maybe even three stops better, depending on what you're comparing.

IMHO that is very useful. You can shoot at higher f/numbers for more DoF, or can get away with a cheaper f/4 or f/5.6 lens rather than shell out £5k for an f/2.8 prime.

How did we ever do it with film? Well in truth, the answer is we simply did not. Today's high ISO performance and AF that works even in moonlight has created new picture taking opportunities.
 
Shooting music the high Iso cock waving buy canon and nikon pleases me.

Last night (if the shots are as good as they are on the mac as they are the camera screen) has made me a very very happy chappy.

Yes I have already felt the need to use 51200.
 
Last edited:
fastworldimages said:
Shooting music the high Iso cock waving buy canon and nikon pleases me.

Last night (if the shots are as good as they are on the mac as they are the camera screen) has made me a very very happy chappy.

Yes I have already felt the need to use 51200.
Click to expand...

Nice one!!! I told you the camera is awesome!
LCD always makes images look better than they are on a full scale monitor. In my (so far limited) experience with ISO 51K I found that, so long as the image was well exposed, it will clean up pretty nice good enough to print up to A4 easy (and I reckon A3 will look good too).

Edtog said:
High ISO seems to be the new "more megapixels are better" marketing cobblers.
All the top stadiums in the world have lighting so good you don't need much above 1600, and this the type of photographer the camera is built for.
There are of course a few photographers who shoot schools stuff, but for the majority, high ISO will be a bit of bragging on forums, and nothing else.

I'm still amazed how we ever did it on film, pushing to the dizzy heights of 3200?? In my whole career, I think I've only ever shot around a handful of jobs where I've gone (or needed to) above 3200.
Click to expand...

Ha, It always amuses me when people thinks the world of photography revolves around them and whatever it is that they shoot, as if anything else is not worthy of news or memories.

There are trillions of situations in which, high ISO performance, makes the difference between getting the shot, or going home empty handed..
For some, it seems, those situations will never happen. In their view, no one needs high ISO. Apparently, it is just a gimmick the manufacturers use to lure us suckers into buying their latest and greatest....
GYHOOYA comes to mind.
 
Yes the screen does make things look slightly better, gives you more confidence though than my 1d III which everything just looked crap on.

Need to look more into my own custom presets for some of the venues I do as the colours at the moment are not as id like in relation to how I had the old one set up.

Ive not done any NR on the images but 20000 seems a reasonable place to be, 51200 is 'just' useable. 204000 - was there any point in it being there?
 
1st photos from me. I think the last time I shot sport was back in 2010 lol!

The new set up seems to have done ok, im sure theres a fair bit of user error to explain some of the duffers I had etc.

The metering is MILES better than my old mkiin and mkiii. I used to never trust either body shooting in AV/TV modes.

Gave the camera a hard workout over the weekend covering 5 music events + this road race. I need to tweak the colour presets for my music work but I am very happy with the results. flash is much more consistent AF in low light is miles better (I ditched my ST-E2 which i used as AF assist on the 1diii)

Olympic road race (as a spectator)
RYAN1058.jpg


Thought this one the light from the motorbike may have caused issues but happy with the results
RYAN1326.jpg


RYAN1352.jpg


RYAN1270.jpg


RYAN1339.jpg
 
Edtog said:
High ISO seems to be the new "more megapixels are better" marketing cobblers.
All the top stadiums in the world have lighting so good you don't need much above 1600, and this the type of photographer the camera is built for.
There are of course a few photographers who shoot schools stuff, but for the majority, high ISO will be a bit of bragging on forums, and nothing else.

I'm still amazed how we ever did it on film, pushing to the dizzy heights of 3200?? In my whole career, I think I've only ever shot around a handful of jobs where I've gone (or needed to) above 3200.
Click to expand...

12800 ISO. No option. http://iwantpics.co.uk/Stevie Smith Boxing Event 01-06-12.html
6400-8000 iso.no option. http://iwantpics.co.uk/Roller Hockey Rotherham 21-04-12.html
Camera that could do it D3s. Some people do need high ISO.:bat:
 
To quote myself

"There are of course a few photographers who shoot schools stuff, but for the majority, high ISO will be a bit of bragging on forums, and nothing else."
 
There are more than a few.Nearly all indoor sport now requires at least 3200.There are thousands of photographers who need high ISO.Maybe people who don't need it use it as bragging rights but those who need it don't.One of the main reasons these cameras sell is because high ISO is required. I can Not get enough even with a D3s. Those cameras you can see being used indoors at the Olympics will all be high ISO cameras.:bat:
 
Got an early 1Dx here in the UK back in June ( for all I know one of the very first bodies to arrive in the country). It has worked flawlessly foe some 14K shots. It has given me error 80 for the first time today. 2x sandisk pro 32GB and EF 50mm f/1.4 attached. This seems to be a real problem with several 1Dx owners reporting the same issue. The error is random and I for one can't nail it down. Exact same combo worked fine yesterday!
 
IGADIZ said:
Got an early 1Dx here in the UK back in June ( for all I know one of the very first bodies to arrive in the country). It has worked flawlessly foe some 14K shots. It has given me error 80 for the first time today. 2x sandisk pro 32GB and EF 50mm f/1.4 attached. This seems to be a real problem with several 1Dx owners reporting the same issue. The error is random and I for one can't nail it down. Exact same combo worked fine yesterday!
Click to expand...

Had mine tonight too. About 3.3k in at the time.

Using the 50 1.2 I was changing my AF point when boom it locked up, pulled the battery and was fine the rest of the night. I'm hoping mine was just a freak incident and doesn't need the pcb changing.
 
Anyone after one, A shop I spoke to yesterday have 7 in, UK stock.
 
Creative Video

Bypasses all the pre ordering, deposit, waiting etc etc
 
Last edited:
They are currently showing 7 in stock on their website.....
 
IGADIZ said:
Got an early 1Dx here in the UK back in June ( for all I know one of the very first bodies to arrive in the country). It has worked flawlessly foe some 14K shots. It has given me error 80 for the first time today. 2x sandisk pro 32GB and EF 50mm f/1.4 attached. This seems to be a real problem with several 1Dx owners reporting the same issue. The error is random and I for one can't nail it down. Exact same combo worked fine yesterday!
Click to expand...
Hmmm not the think I wanted to hear when seriously thinking about spending £5K! :thinking:

I would ideally wait a few months for problems to be ironed out and for the price to hopefully drop a little bit but I could really do with a camera asap. The D4 seems to have some issues I think I couldn't live with and the supply of high-end used gear seems to have all but dried up at the moment. :bonk:
 
1 error in over 14000 shots doesn't seem too excessive. There will be vastly more user errors over that number of shots!!
 
Ploddles said:
1 error in over 14000 shots doesn't seem too excessive. There will be vastly more user errors over that number of shots!!
Click to expand...

Except this particular error kills the camera.. YoU can't even look at the menus without crashing the system. I counted 30 err80 last night before giving up. Today all seems well but, I have gone from total trust in my camera to... is this going to die on me halve way through my session?
I've got a 1dIV as a buck up but, it is not full frame and getting the right focal length if the 1Dx dies is going to be a nightmare I rather do without!
 
IGADIZ said:
Except this particular error kills the camera.. YoU can't even look at the menus without crashing the system. I counted 30 err80 last night before giving up. Today all seems well but, I have gone from total trust in my camera to... is this going to die on me halve way through my session?
I've got a 1dIV as a buck up but, it is not full frame and getting the right focal length if the 1Dx dies is going to be a nightmare I rather do without!
Click to expand...

Sorry, thought you meant it had happened just the 1 time and was OK after a reboot.
 
IGADIZ said:
Except this particular error kills the camera.. YoU can't even look at the menus without crashing the system. I counted 30 err80 last night before giving up. Today all seems well but, I have gone from total trust in my camera to... is this going to die on me halve way through my session?
I've got a 1dIV as a buck up but, it is not full frame and getting the right focal length if the 1Dx dies is going to be a nightmare I rather do without!
Click to expand...

Ivan have you contacted CPS over it already? Seems they might be able to bring in the PCB which seems to be the issue and help you with a loaner till then.

I might need to chat to someone about mine, as I did a few tests on dead/iffy pixels and ive got a big cluster in one are plus a few other small ones. Im still happy with the camera but seeing as I intend to sell it later down the line I know how incredibly anal people are when it comes to buying kit.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Think i remember KIPAX ordering his MKIV from them and there was a problem!!!!!

memory might be failing me but he certainally had one on order with them
Click to expand...

I did get my 1dmiIV from them brand new.. couple of hickups your right mate (what a memory you have.. your worse than the missus haha) but I would certainly deal wiht them again..no problem..

just reading about the problems and I went from ordeing monday morning to...erk hang on :(

one error in 14000 shots is 100% too many
 
redhed17 said:
What are the D4 issues? :shrug:
Click to expand...
Green colour cast on images and LCD, video mode is very soft. Two big issues for me. I actually like the feel of the D4 more than the 1Dx but I'm just not sure I can buy one with these issues present.



So basically for over £5000 both Nikon and Canon seem to have cameras than both have some issues that are rather worrying. On the face of it the error 80 on the 1Dx could be the biggest issues because it could totally wreck a shoot. The Nikon issues are more niggles. However you look at it it's not very good when neither manufacturer can make their flagship camera issue-free. :cautious:


For me own dilema if you were starting out from scratch (ie no lenses or bodies at all at present) would yo recommend a 1Dx or D4?
 
I have no Nikon experience so i can't comment in tha regard As cor Canon even with the err80 I still recommend the 1 Dx. When it works is simply astonishing.
 
fastworldimages said:
Ivan have you contacted CPS over it already? Seems they might be able to bring in the PCB which seems to be the issue and help you with a loaner till then.

I might need to chat to someone about mine, as I did a few tests on dead/iffy pixels and ive got a big cluster in one are plus a few other small ones. Im still happy with the camera but seeing as I intend to sell it later down the line I know how incredibly anal people are when it comes to buying kit.
Click to expand...

On my way to sunny Spain I will contact CPS on my return. Re dead - hot pixels. Got a few of those as well. Not happy! Amazing camera but not happy at all with these early teething problems.
 
I did a silly thing last night.. I googled "canon 1dx err80" ...... Scarey reading :(
 
EMA747 said:
Green colour cast on images and LCD, video mode is very soft. Two big issues for me. I actually like the feel of the D4 more than the 1Dx but I'm just not sure I can buy one with these issues present.
Click to expand...

I'd forgot about the colour cast on the LCD because I haven't seen it mentioned much. :shrug: The video problem, again I haven't heard much of, not that it would be important if I were in the market for such a beast. ;) :LOL: I can see it as a major problem for Nikon who were targeting the 5DII video market. :bonk:

EMA747 said:
So basically for over £5000 both Nikon and Canon seem to have cameras than both have some issues that are rather worrying. On the face of it the error 80 on the 1Dx could be the biggest issues because it could totally wreck a shoot. The Nikon issues are more niggles. However you look at it it's not very good when neither manufacturer can make their flagship camera issue-free. :cautious:
Click to expand...

It is worrying that they both have problems on their flagship models, which should, you would expect, work perfectly. After all they are aimed at Pro's who need things to work straight out of the box to a high level, at least until they can optimise the new features for themselves. :shrug: Added to the D800 AF problems, though seemingly limited in number, and the 5DIII light leak problems, and it seems that Canon and Nikon are having problems delivering cameras of such a technological level.

Dead pixels, and in clusters too, and a potential session stopper/camera killer, is very worrying for anyone who has to rely on them.


KIPAX said:
I did a silly thing last night.. I googled "canon 1dx err80" ...... Scarey reading :(
Click to expand...

Your head must be all over the place Kipax. :bonk: :LOL:

At least the gear you have now is working well isn't it? :shrug:
 
KIPAX said:
just reading about the problems and I went from ordeing monday morning to...erk hang on :(
Click to expand...
Me too Tony. I'm not paying the huge chuck of cash to have worries in the back of my mind. If I got one (or a D4) it would probably be going with me to India on some NGO work and an error 80 lockup while in the middle of nowhere would be a very serious issue indeed.

I'm starting the think a used D3s or 1DmkIV might be the way to go because at least that technology has had it's errors ironed out by now. Just the problem of used examples pushing £3000 from the likes of MPB and Mifsuds. :bonk:
 
redhed17 said:
At least the gear you have now is working well isn't it? :shrug:
Click to expand...

My gear is all tip top now.. and I know the work I am doing now will NOT be improved my a 1dx ... but when winter comes and schools back i will be doing more low light stuff and the 1dx will be a massive upgrade. hopefully they will have it all sorted in the next month ... if not then I will keep hold of this ere barge pole :)
 
EMA747 said:
I'm starting the think a used D3s or 1DmkIV might be the way to go because at least that technology has had it's errors ironed out by now. Just
Click to expand...

I still wouldnt touch a mkIII to be honest.. too many bad experiences.. mkIV is a big upgrade on the ISO though..

mkIV will be cheap private.. mine will be going for 2k IF I ever get a 1dx
 
KIPAX said:
I still wouldnt touch a mkIII to be honest.. too many bad experiences.. mkIV is a big upgrade on the ISO though..
Click to expand...
I had a mkIII a while back and I don't think I would go for another one. Mine had ok AF but to buy another one might be a risk. I didn't like the low res screen either, a silly reason I know but I just like a good screen. ;)

A 5DmkIII would be nice but what would I use for sports? Ideally a 5D3 and 1d4 combo would be good but is too expensive right now for my budget.

Other options would be D3/D800 or D3s/D700. D800 has some major faults like AF and the D3s/D700 combo wouldn't give me any video options (which I need).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top