More 1Dx full samples

IGADIZ

IGADIZ

Messages
1,433
Name
Ivan
Edit My Images
No
Can be found here.
I am very concerned at the quality shown here. That lioness at ISO 12800 is, to be frank, horrible.

By contrast the 5DMKIII sample file of a tiger at ISo 3200 and with a 2x extender to boot, looks pretty darn sweet.

I hope that ISO 12800 1Dx sample file is not a warning of what is to come from this camera....:thumbsdown:
 
Last edited:
Have a look at 5D II samples from the same place. They were downright horrible as well, but the camera is not so bad after all.

I'd wait for proper samples from 3rd party before making conclusions.

edit: I had a look at some other new JPEGs and to be honest they all look quite sharp and clean to me, unlike the ISO12800 one (underexposed and very bad light). 6400 is more than good enough for me. The 5DIII samples look worryingly soft-waxy though, this at 18MP looks like the better one for detailed scenes.
 
Last edited:
On my monitor most of the images look underexposed by at least 1 stop.

By contrast the 5D Mk III image 10, the girl in a wedding dress at 3200 ISO looks incredible.

The noise levels are probably equivalent to 400 ISO on most other cameras which would make this camera a great money saver for wedding togs since they would no longer need very large aperture lenses.

.
 
Last edited:
The 1Dx has a 100K pix sensor and digic 4 processor exclusively dedicated to exposure and AF tracking. It also boast a100 - 51200 natural ISO.

Yet with the lioness image, the 1Dx fails miserably at the very things it is supposed to excel at.

It got the exposure wrong, it failed to achieve critical focus and the image, although two stops below its natural ISO capabilities, looks as noisy as images from my 1DMKIV taken at an extended 51200 ISO

This is a bad show.

If this camera fails to achieve on release day, Canon will lose all credibility and I can see hordes of Pro sports, nature and journo togs flocking to Nikon faster than the claimed 14fps this camera boast.

The clock is ticking and I fear time is running out for Canon to correct these shortcomings. The images they have posted, come nowhere near the minimum performance expectations for a camera at this level. :thumbsdown:
 
Last edited:
IGADIZ said:
Yet with the lioness image, the 1Dx fails miserably at the very things it is supposed to excel at.

It got the exposure wrong, it failed to achieve critical focus and the image, although two stops below its natural ISO capabilities, looks as noisy as images from my 1DMKIV taken at an extended 51200 ISO
Click to expand...
Well, the exif says the following for that image:

Code: 
$ exiftool 009.jpg
...
Make                            : Canon
Camera Model Name               : Canon EOS-1D X
Orientation                     : Rotate 270 CW
Modify Date                     : 2012:01:21 06:39:57
Exposure Time                   : 1/1250
F Number                        : 4.0
Exposure Program                : Aperture-priority AE
ISO                             : 12800
Focal Length                    : 600.0 mm
Focus Mode                      : AI Servo AF
Record Mode                     : CR2+JPEG
Metering Mode                   : Evaluative
Exposure Compensation           : -2/3
White Balance                   : Daylight
Canon Image Type                : Canon EOS-1D X
Canon Firmware Version          : Firmware Version 6.5.1
AF Area Mode                    : Zone AF
Num AF Points                   : 61
Valid AF Points                 : 61
AF Points In Focus              : 17,27
AF Points Selected              : 14,15,16,17,25,26,27,28,36,37,38,39
Spot Meter Link To AF Point     : Disable (use center AF point)

So... he's got the camera set to underexpose by 2/3rds of a stop, and has Zone AF in use. According to DPP Pro, the two focus points that are in focus are on the nose, just below the left eye and an area with a whisker on the left side.

I suspect this set is from the camera that was shot on safari a few weeks ago. Also, just because a photo is up on the Canon web site doesn't necessarily mean the photographer knows what he's doing ;)
 
boyfalldown said:
I would of thought Canon would put out its own proper samples :shrug:
Click to expand...

It should be like that, but I would like to refer you again to my remark about their [dreadful] 5D mkII sample images. i am not sure why they did it like that back then.

arad85 said:
Well, the exif says the following for that image:

Code: 
$ exiftool 009.jpg
...
Make                            : Canon
Camera Model Name               : Canon EOS-1D X
Orientation                     : Rotate 270 CW
Modify Date                     : 2012:01:21 06:39:57
Exposure Time                   : 1/1250
F Number                        : 4.0
Exposure Program                : Aperture-priority AE
ISO                             : 12800
Focal Length                    : 600.0 mm
Focus Mode                      : AI Servo AF
Record Mode                     : CR2+JPEG
Metering Mode                   : Evaluative
[B]Exposure Compensation           : -2/3[/B]
White Balance                   : Daylight
Canon Image Type                : Canon EOS-1D X
Canon Firmware Version          : Firmware Version 6.5.1
AF Area Mode                    : Zone AF
Num AF Points                   : 61
Valid AF Points                 : 61
AF Points In Focus              : 17,27
AF Points Selected              : 14,15,16,17,25,26,27,28,36,37,38,39
Spot Meter Link To AF Point     : Disable (use center AF point)

So... he's got the camera set to underexpose by 2/3rds of a stop, and has Zone AF in use. According to DPP Pro, the two focus points that are in focus are on the nose, just below the left eye and an area with a whisker on the left side.

I suspect this set is from the camera that was shot on safari a few weeks ago. Also, just because a photo is up on the Canon web site doesn't necessarily mean the photographer knows what he's doing ;)
Click to expand...

There you go - -2/3EV is a perfect recipe for this. At that ISO the exposure needs to be spot. In fact, all wildlife images down there are very underexposed. Maybe the photographer was testing the worst case scenario, when the images got picked for inclusion :cuckoo:
 
Am I missing something here?... the whole point of upgrading to the latest and greatest is so that we can get closer to that perfect low noise, crisp image in high ISO low light conditions.

High ISO, Exposure and AF tracking performance together with super high FPS are the selling points Canon is boasting on this new 1Dx....

Yet at 2 stops below claimed natural ISO performance, the image (although slightly compensated for under exposure) Is underexposed by at least 1.5 stops, the noise is (as I said) as high as those I have taken with my 1DMKIV at an extended 51200 ISO and, it has failed to achieve critical focus.

Whether this is due to Camera operator incompetence, is beside the point.
These are images supposed to showcase the Camera capabilities. As it is, the images Canon has posted, together with the delayed release day, do not inspire me with confidence

I've been shooting Canon equipment for 25 years. Canon burned me with the 1D MKIII which, incidentally, introduced a revamped AF system and, like this new 1Dx, was also delayed.

This time I am going to wait it out until real world images and reviews give the camera the all clear.
 
POAH said:
never seen good sample from canon for some reason on any camera
Click to expand...

I agree. At least anecdotally, and considering my advancing years, I don't remember being blown away by any samples over the last few years. :thinking:

That said, the aforementioned 12800 iso shot is as good if not better than 3200 on the old 1d MkIII that I've been using the last five years. Even though the sample is jpeg and underexposed it also seems to respond reasonably well to some noise and exposure adjustments in comparison to the 1d MkIII.

So all else being equal, and if the 1Dx delivers on its spec sheet, colour me sold and it will be my new tool for the next 5 years. :)
 
Much as I'm trying, I can't work out why the Lion is underexposed.
From past launches Canon for some reason do release average images at launch, no idea why, but when it's in the real word, then we will have a better idea of what this camera can do.

Canon are probably where Nikon were before the launch of the D3, Nikon came up with the goods, maybe now Canon will?
I'm hoping they will, but the days when they had a big lead over Nikon (1989-D3 launch) are over.
 
Despite the criticisms being leveled at the lioness image above, for a slightly underexposed image taken of a moving subject at 12800 iso, I am more than impressed with the quality of this jpeg. I gave it a minimal tuneup in Photoshop and every hair on the face of this cat pops out while at the same time removing the relatively light grain was extremely easy. I'd very much like to post here what I've done with this image, but I'm not sure if it would be allowed.
 
Canon's sample pictures for the new 5D are generally pretty awful imo (edit: the 1dx lioness looks fine to me unless you pixel peep though). Some of them have clearly missed focus on the face/eyes in portraits - things which would be immediately picked up on in the critique section on here. The mind boggles as to how some of these shots end up as samples for a new £3000 camera.
 
Last edited:
Mearle said:
Despite the criticisms being leveled at the lioness image above, for a slightly underexposed image taken of a moving subject at 12800 iso, I am more than impressed with the quality of this jpeg. I gave it a minimal tuneup in Photoshop and every hair on the face of this cat pops out while at the same time removing the relatively light grain was extremely easy. I'd very much like to post here what I've done with this image, but I'm not sure if it would be allowed.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I found when I popped it into lightroom for a minute's work. Even after I'd adjusted the exposure it wasn't too awful either. :) Not bad really, and if two generations since the 1d MkIII gives me two stops extra ISO for the equivalent noise I'll be a happy bunny. :) I'll find out soon enough as I'm on a five year cycle for camera bodies and it's the company year end soon so I will be updating no matter what.

And hi to Mearle with your first post. :wave: It's been a long while since I visited a few friends over in WA, down the road in Centralia and over the hills in Spokane, and even though I was only driving around for a month I kind of miss it. :)
 
Irritable_Rabbit said:
Pretty much what I found when I popped it into lightroom for a minute's work. Even after I'd adjusted the exposure it wasn't too awful either. :) Not bad really, and if two generations since the 1d MkIII gives me two stops extra ISO for the equivalent noise I'll be a happy bunny. :) I'll find out soon enough as I'm on a five year cycle for camera bodies and it's the company year end soon so I will be updating no matter what.

And hi to Mearle with your first post. :wave: It's been a long while since I visited a few friends over in WA, down the road in Centralia and over the hills in Spokane, and even though I was only driving around for a month I kind of miss it. :)
Click to expand...

I won't be getting the 1DX (too pricey), but I do have the MKIII on preorder. I've greatly enjoyed the high resolution of my MKII and can't bear to drop back to "only" 18mp, so that just clinches my decision to go with the 5D MKIII. Canon _finally_ put a lock on the back control wheel. I've wanted that for sooo long. I'm keeping my MKII - it's been a great studio camera, but I think the MKIII is just what I need to capture those low light wedding receptions more effectively.
Washington has something for most everybody, unless you are fond of hurricanes and tornados. We'll make up for that to the thrill seekers with the next big earthquake, I'm sure. ;-)
 
daugirdas said:
It should be like that, but I would like to refer you again to my remark about their [dreadful] 5D mkII sample images. i am not sure why they did it like that back then.
Click to expand...

POAH said:
never seen good sample from canon for some reason on any camera
Click to expand...

I agree I=m just confused why not - they must know most of the camera owning world is watching the new releases from both manufacturers, why put out anything but their very best :shrug: the marketing peeps responsible for that want shooting
 
I'm not especially confused by the lack of museum quality images for promotional purposes from Canon. They look almost as if they are intended as worst case scenarios; as if despite poor exposure, shallow depth of field, and common operator error they want to show the images are _still_ damned good. Hell, these aren't even the RAW files.

Too good, and God knows, someone will want to sue the hell out of them for misrepresenting the camera's capabilities. From experience with the 5D I knew the 5D MKII would be good. From my experience with the 5D MKII, I know the 5D MKIII will be even better. I trust Canon because they have come through every time for me.

Now if you want to look at how Canon has promoted the video capabilities of these cameras, that's a whole other story. I don't think an amateur videographer was allowed within 5 miles when they produced those videos. Nor was any expense spared in accessory add-ons or production expense. Video capabilities are a very very big deal in Canon's promotion of these cameras.
 
Last edited:
Mearle said:
I'm not especially confused by the lack of museum quality images for promotional purposes from Canon. They look almost as if they are intended as worst case scenarios; as if despite poor exposure, shallow depth of field, and common operator error they want to show the images are _still_ damned good. Hell, these aren't even the RAW files.

Too good, and God knows, someone will want to sue the hell out of them for misrepresenting the camera's capabilities. From experience with the 5D I knew the 5D MKII would be good. From my experience with the 5D MKII, I know the 5D MKIII will be even better. I trust Canon because they have come through every time for me.

Now if you want to look at how Canon has promoted the video capabilities of these cameras, that's a whole other story. I don't think an amateur videographer was allowed within 5 miles when they produced those videos. Nor was any expense spared in accessory add-ons or production expense. Video capabilities are a very very big deal in Canon's promotion of these cameras.
Click to expand...

Maybe - that may sort of apply to 1Dx samples :shrug:

What I really don't get is the horror from 5d III. They are sending me straight to D800 or a used 1Ds III. If I am to believe those images were representative this camera is no good for landscape, barely OK for portraits but great for low light action, weddings and obviously making MOVIES. I'll obviously wait before actually arriving at these conclusions.
 
It's easy to make an image look second rate.

But, no matter how good you are, you can't make a camera perform above its spec. And I've seen some spectacularly good images.

Being sensible about it, either you trust Canon and just place an order, or you wait until real world images from regular peeps start appearing, before casting judgement. All this winging and speculation is just pointless guesswork.
 
for an underexposed image the 12800 examples look good to me.. I regulary "HAVE TO" use the mkIV at iso 12800 and over expose 1/3 for best results.. in dim lighting as that looks I have to say theres a massive difference.. as others have said.. in photoshop some PP on that wipes the floor wih a mkIV 12800.. Take into consideration it seems to be an idiot who took the sample shot (canons not mine) and I am confident..

I hate setup shots for high iso examples..

The real life situations that require high iso that i have to endure will tell a story.. mines on order. i am on the priority list.. I will be shooting in extreme conditions from day one.

Can't wait to post the results :)
 
HoppyUK said:
It's easy to make an image look second rate.

But, no matter how good you are, you can't make a camera perform above its spec. And I've seen some spectacularly good images.

Being sensible about it, either you trust Canon and just place an order, or you wait until real world images from regular peeps start appearing, before casting judgement. All this winging and speculation is just pointless guesswork.
Click to expand...

its not whinging. Its a simple question, why do canon repeatedly put second rate examples to support a new cameras release?
 
Mearle said:
I won't be getting the 1DX (too pricey), but I do have the MKIII on preorder. I've greatly enjoyed the high resolution of my MKII and can't bear to drop back to "only" 18mp, so that just clinches my decision to go with the 5D MKIII. Canon _finally_ put a lock on the back control wheel. I've wanted that for sooo long. I'm keeping my MKII - it's been a great studio camera, but I think the MKIII is just what I need to capture those low light wedding receptions more effectively.
Washington has something for most everybody, unless you are fond of hurricanes and tornados. We'll make up for that to the thrill seekers with the next big earthquake, I'm sure. ;-)
Click to expand...

I can understand that. :) It's different for me. My kit for the last five years consisted of the 1d MkIII and the original 5D. I barely use the 5D now as I prefer the handling and the files from the MkIII even though they're lower resolution. The missing 2mp didn't make much difference to my eye. Working on that basis the 1Dx is the perfect all rounder for me and is worth the extra. Maybe a 5D MkIII body in the future as a second body when the price drops a bit but not at the moment because I know I wont use it.

Hehe. I have to admit that I didn't miss the absence of hurricanes and tornadoes. :) I spent a more time suspiciously eyeing up Mt Rainier and hoping it could wait till I left before it decided to go the same way as Mt St Helens. :eek: That and chatting up the ladies with my distinctive accent :naughty:, although this was some time ago and chatting up the ladies is in the distant past. :(
 
LOL. All this hand wringing doubt over one lousy picture of a lioness.:D

At 12800 ISO and f/4, light levels were obviously very low anyway and the shot is clearly under-exposed which has added to the visible noise so it's a poor example and I'd be inclined to blame the photographer before the camera anyway. Nevertheless the shot is sharp and there's not much wrong with it which can't be easily put right in editing. If this is as bad as it gets I don't think you have much to worry about. ;)

The 1st image - the portrait shot - is nothing less than stunning in the resolved detail! I'm not in the market for this camera but if I were my pre-order would be in.
 
Last edited:
CT said:
LOL. All this hand wringing doubt over one lousy picture of a lioness.:D

At 12800 ISO and f/4, light levels were obviously very low anyway and the shot is clearly under-exposed which has added to the visible noise so it's a poor example and I'd be inclined to blame the photographer before the camera anyway. Nevertheless the shot is sharp and there's not much wrong with it which can't be easily put right in editing. If this is as bad as it gets I don't think you have much to worry about. ;)

The 1st image - the portrait shot - is nothing less than stunning in the resolved detail! I'm not in the market for this camera but if I were my pre-order would be in.
Click to expand...

Isn't it just! If anyone ever thought you need 36mp to make sharp pictures, take a look at that first. It's the top one here http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dx/
 
I'm confused guys - nobody is arguing that portrait is stunning. But why the lion? It's your new flagship camera and it may well be the photographer, why showcase the photo
 
boyfalldown said:
I'm confused guys
Click to expand...

equally confused.. should be multiple images in various lighting conditions at various ISO.. all should be properly exposed for a start.. confused as to why not :(

its not a matter of complaining.. but when you want the camera you want to see what it can do..
 
I'm not so sure the firmware is finalized yet. Whatever they post right now is not likely to truly reflect what it will be capable of later. I'd not be overly judgmental just yet on the sample images. I'm quite sure the best is yet to come. I'd be happy just to see an on-line owner's manual. Not even that is ready yet.
 
Mearle said:
You don't think the firmware can't have a significant impact on image quality?
Click to expand...

I dont think they are going to post examples then in a couple of weeks come back and say...only kidding.. this is what it can really do ..
 
Mearle said:
You don't think the firmware can't have a significant impact on image quality?
Click to expand...

Course it can, but again the question stands, why produce sub standard images in your marketing materials for your new flagship?
 
boyfalldown said:
I'm confused guys - nobody is arguing that portrait is stunning. But why the lion? It's your new flagship camera and it may well be the photographer, why showcase the photo
Click to expand...


So that when you buy the camera thinking ..."surely it can't be that bad" and then realise that it is in fact that bad, you won't be able to sue them :lol:
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
equally confused.. should be multiple images in various lighting conditions at various ISO.. all should be properly exposed for a start.. confused as to why not :(

its not a matter of complaining.. but when you want the camera you want to see what it can do..
Click to expand...

And that's my point.. It has 252 EV zones and a 100K sensor + a digic4 processor dedicated to exposure and AF tracking... yet here we have an image underexposed by at least -1.5 stops and yes, I know the photographer (I use the term loosely) set the camera for a -2/3rd EC. Not to mention the noise levels. Remember guys this is 12800, two full stops below the claimed 51200 "natural" ISO Performance
 
Last edited:
IGADIZ said:
So that when you buy the camera thinking ..."surely it can be that bad" and then realise that it is in fact that bad, you won't be able to sue them :lol:
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Mearle said:
Despite the criticisms being leveled at the lioness image above, for a slightly underexposed image taken of a moving subject at 12800 iso, I am more than impressed with the quality of this jpeg. I gave it a minimal tuneup in Photoshop and every hair on the face of this cat pops out while at the same time removing the relatively light grain was extremely easy. I'd very much like to post here what I've done with this image, but I'm not sure if it would be allowed.
Click to expand...

I know with a bit of work the files will be ok but, that's missing the point.
Out there, you need to send a lot of Jpg's to your editor double quick. There is no time to tweak the images, they have to be perfect out of the box. Looking at these images... this camera is nowhere near ready for proper daily workout!
 
Last edited:
IGADIZ said:
I know with a bit of work the files will be ok but, that's missing the point.
Out there, you need to send a lot of Jpg's to your editor double quick. There is no time to tweak the images, they have to be perfect out of the box. Looking at these images... this camera is no were near ready for proper daily workout!
Click to expand...

Kind of getting excited about a camera I think you seem to have decided not to buy. :D I should be the one jumping up and down in horror, as we have to update before our accounting year end and the order is in for good or bad. ;)

But! I'm still of a mind that an underexposed by two stops image where he's also messed up by adding -2/3 EV at iso 12800, that cleans up well with very little work is pretty damn good and we all mess up sometimes. :)

Let's also look at a few other clues.

If we think it was taken in East Africa, and the date and time of 21/01/2012 06.39.57 is the local time, then I can tell you from own experience that the sun is only just about coming up at that time of day. It's kind of dark. ;) I'm also not a morning person and was a bit groggy myself when I was out at that time over there, so even though he could have a better exposure by doubling the ISO, or halving the shutter speed, as well as dialling out the negative compensation, he didn't and we have the example we have. It's as interesting to me as a well exposed shot for a new camera because it shows me what may happen if I mess up in a similar way and the shot has to be used for whatever reason, and there's no going back to shoot it again because it's a one off. :'(

I somewhat agree that it has always been odd that they don't show the best of the best for their new cameras, but I'm also pleased to see the quality of the results from when they screw up, as we all do. :)
 
Well, I did have two bodies on Pre-Order (cancelled now).. So I've got good reason to be disappointed.
Now, I do understand where you are coming from but, with the technologies being thrown about here (100K sensor, 252 Ev zones and the digic 4 processor) to get the exposure right, I find it unforgivable that in this case the camera choked badly...
Still, I do hope you guys are right, Canon sorts it out and this is a one off kind of deal.
 
IGADIZ said:
I know with a bit of work the files will be ok but, that's missing the point.
Out there, you need to send a lot of Jpg's to your editor double quick. There is no time to tweak the images, they have to be perfect out of the box. Looking at these images... this camera is nowhere near ready for proper daily workout!
Click to expand...

dial in +1/3 or +2/3 and you have a good image - no need to underexpose and then complain. At the end of the day the photographer has to make a choice of what the image will look like, it is not a PS. Of course you are free to purchase D4 and all the lenses if you wanted.
 
daugirdas said:
dial in +1/3 or +2/3 and you have a good image - no need to underexpose and then complain. At the end of the day the photographer has to make a choice of what the image will look like, it is not a PS. Of course you are free to purchase D4 and all the lenses if you wanted.
Click to expand...

Yes that true but, then... why upgrade?.
Canon has thrown a lot of tech in to this camera, at this price range and, if I am to upgrade, I would expect it to work.

As it is... it doesn't and it's not just exposure control. I would also be expecting much better ISO performance 2 stops below natural ability (even for an underexposed image) but, once again, I find the camera wanting...That's the point I am making.

But hey, fell free to go down this rabbit hole... is a £5300 blind date, I hope you like what you find.

Oh and I won't be going down the Nikon route neither. Like I said, I am sitting this one out until all the dust settles and I can see exactly what it is that I am buying. There will be no1DMKIII déjà vu in this camp...:bang:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top