[Christine Tham]

He must have money to burn. I would think the follow up to the 5D MK II (Mark III?) would be much more useful for a studio photographer, even if the auto focus wasn't quite as zippy.

There's already a long discussion about this in Model Mayhem. Bottom line is - the 5D Mark II just doesn't have the usability of the 1D[s]. It's a good camera for an enthusiast, particularly for the video.

The new 1D X has gigabit ethernet tethering, which will come in very useful for studio photographers (although my friend says he probably won't use it).

The 5D Mark III is not announced, so it's pure speculation what the features may be.

I'm personally interested in a 5D Mark III, or 6D, because I find the 1D series too big for me. I don't do studio, so I can't rely on tripod mounting to hold the camera for me.

As for "money to burn" it's all relative. The 1D X is actually significantly cheaper than previous models in Australia (I remember when they used to sell well over A$10000) - at the end of the day if the camera does exactly what you want and you are happy to pay the price then go for it I say.

[Clicker]

I wouldn't call the 5D II and "enthusiast" camera, there's a lot of professionals who make a decent living with that body.

[Christine Tham]

I wouldn't call the 5D II and "enthusiast" camera, there's a lot of professionals who make a decent living with that body.

There are lots of pros making money from "prosumer" cameras too.

Quote from Canon.com:

The Canon EOS 5D Mark II succeeds the EOS 5D, launched in October 2005, which marked the first digital SLR camera for advanced-amateur users

[séamuis]

^^ quoting canons PR material shows nothing really. they are all just cameras. its the person behind the lens thats the ‘pro’ or ‘advanced ammeter’, etc. arguing what a camera is classified as, is just asinine honestly.

[Rondec]

There's already a long discussion about this in Model Mayhem. Bottom line is - the 5D Mark II just doesn't have the usability of the 1D[s]. It's a good camera for an enthusiast, particularly for the video.

The new 1D X has gigabit ethernet tethering, which will come in very useful for studio photographers (although my friend says he probably won't use it).

The 5D Mark III is not announced, so it's pure speculation what the features may be.

I'm personally interested in a 5D Mark III, or 6D, because I find the 1D series too big for me. I don't do studio, so I can't rely on tripod mounting to hold the camera for me.

As for "money to burn" it's all relative. The 1D X is actually significantly cheaper than previous models in Australia (I remember when they used to sell well over A$10000) - at the end of the day if the camera does exactly what you want and you are happy to pay the price then go for it I say.

Of course it is all relative. It is just that most of the professionals I know are very careful with new purchases and are much more likely to use bodies that are two or three generations old, rather than spend unnecessary money for an upgrade. Since the client can seldom tell the difference, it doesn't matter to them.

[Clicker]

Well you guys in Edmonton go see it and report back, next weekend

http://www.mcbaincamera.com/ept/

[pingflood]

remember seeing quite a few pro sport/action photographers saying they preferred the aps-h slightly cropped senor for its extra "reach"with long lenses. Wonder how they are going to like the FF?

In certain respects this camera is breathing hard to beat a consumer Sony body. What happens when the new pro Sony hits town? This camera seems to miss ticking some of the boxes - a Canon specialty in the past. Are they falling behind?

thanks
barondla

Up til the 1DIV the corresponding 1Ds body actually provided higher pixel density than the 1D (1.3x) body. So the "reach" was really nothing more than a cropped view; for instance a 1DsII image cropped to match the field of view of a 1DII was of higher resolution and arguably higher quality. So, I am not so sure the 1DX will be an issue in that way.

As for the Sony thing, you are likely looking at a single item on the spec sheet and using that as a basis for comparison of two entirely different cameras. Yes, the Sony pushing 12fps and 24MP is impressive as hell (and I am glad they are doing this, so the other players can't use the old excuses of lack of processing power), but the 1DX is a serious pro tool in every way. I have a 1-series (1Ds II) and they are solid, reliable, sturdy and functional tools that you can use day after day in near every condition without them ever missing a beat. They are not the "best" in all areas, but as a whole I do not think there is anything around to beat them. Bang 'em around, get them soaked in rain, mud, beat up in all sorts of manners, and they just keep producing excellent files seemingly forever.

[Christine Tham]

^^ quoting canons PR material shows nothing really. they are all just cameras. its the person behind the lens thats the ‘pro’ or ‘advanced ammeter’, etc. arguing what a camera is classified as, is just asinine honestly.

Before you say words like "asinine", maybe you should note that what I actually said was "It's a good camera for an enthusiast" - that's NOT the same thing as me "arguing what a camera is classified as".

But I do note that Canon themselves (and a few pros I know) describe the camera as a camera aimed at enthusiasts. If you disagree with that, great, but I am not the person you are disagreeing with.

I personally don't classify cameras (except I sometimes jokingly refer to mirrorless cameras as MILFs) - they are all cameras to me, even the iPhone.

[séamuis]

Before you say words like "asinine", maybe you should note that what I actually said was "It's a good camera for an enthusiast" - that's NOT the same thing as me "arguing what a camera is classified as".

But I do note that Canon themselves (and a few pros I know) describe the camera as a camera aimed at enthusiasts. If you disagree with that, great, but I am not the person you are disagreeing with.

I personally don't classify cameras (except I sometimes jokingly refer to mirrorless cameras as MILFs) - they are all cameras to me, even the iPhone.

I wasn’t actually calling you or anyone in particular, asinine if you feel my words were aimed directly at you, then there could be reasoning for that on your end, but it wasn’t aimed directly at you. however, a direct quote from a camera manufacturers PR material that is designed to classify a camera as such, was given by you. that means at the very least in the context of your post you were defending the classification of the camera as stated by canon, when the other poster was attacking classification. I was (using your quoted material) merely stating that the whole idea of classification in this way is asinine. maybe you should be more careful in your reading before getting hot under the collar.

[Christine Tham]

I was (using your quoted material) merely stating that the whole idea of classification in this way is asinine.

I am sure Canon and other manufacturers who do classify their cameras this way (I am thinking of the Nikon "I am" ads in particular) would be very interested in your opinion.

For the record, I do defend manufacturers' rights to classify their products however they want, even though I may personally not use their products in the way they intended.

[pingflood]

I do not think anybody is attacking the manufacturers' "right" to classify products, just disagreeing with the classification system as a whole. I too think it is rather ridiculous; there are plenty of amateurs, myself included, who own a lot of "pro" gear but never make any money off it. Meanwhile there are lots of pro shooters with "lesser" gear (my cousin shot weddings up until last year with a 40D, now uses a 5DII). The "pro" thing is mainly a marketing tool IMO.

[eddie1960]

.

Personally: Too big and far too expensive for a single body. Overkill++ for what I do.

In the Market: Probably a superb offering, with magical low-light ability, a Nikon-matching AF, and fantastic video capability. You will see prime-time commercials shot with this and some L glass.


.

pretty much my feelings. you'll see more than commercials shot with it. TV Series and Docs most certainly will end up shot on it as well. All in all a pretty stunning offering ( and in general I can't stand Canon preferring Nikon, but this is quite a camera if you have the dosh and the need)
I imagine a good number of them will be leased not purchased outright. A couple of journalist friends who shoot canon with the older 1 d's likely will trade up through their lease and get rid of their 5 d mkII backup bodies

[Christine Tham]

The "pro" thing is mainly a marketing tool IMO.

Well, of course it's a marketing tool, but it's valid in that a manufacturer has the "right" to provide a use case for a product they are selling.

If you disagree with the classification, then either don't buy the product or get over it and use it for a different use case.

In the case of Canon, I think they were spot on in labelling the 5D Mark II as a camera intended for "advanced amateurs" - compared to the 1D, it's lacking quite a few features that pros will find useful. Doesn't mean pros can't use it for weddings and stuff. But I think if anyone buys a 5D and congratulating themselves for owning a "pro" camera, then they are deluding themselves.

Compare that to other manufacturers (names withheld) actively marketing a product as for "pros" when they are really nothing special, and I think Canon is being brutally honest here.

Now the 1D X is clearly intended for pros, but it won't stop a few amateurs from acquiring one, I am sure.

[Clicker]

^^ quoting canons PR material shows nothing really. they are all just cameras. its the person behind the lens thats the ‘pro’ or ‘advanced ammeter’, etc. arguing what a camera is classified as, is just asinine honestly.

lol point taken i have pre ordered mine, why every time i go to the K5 thread i get discouraged from heading that way plus i want "latest" technology, hope this one's full auto will satisfy my P&S needs and ill drive my clunker for a few more months

this body should be able to match the newest L lenses and produce really "clean" prints.

[reeftool]

Incredibly expensive and far more camera than I would ever need. A professional can justify the cost, especially if he will be using the features. For most of us, and even those who might do an occasional wedding or sell a photo, it's overkill. There are those who will buy it just to show it off, like the home owner who buys the $8000 Snap-On toolbox to work on the family car.