Canon 1D X Gallery

I think I'ma have to sell my truck.

 

Canon 1D X: The New Most Epic DSLR Ever

oops, meant this one.

 

You know, the esculating technology with this stuff leaves me asking who it is being designed for and the cost? Man, you have got to kidding me. I am still shooting with my Nikon D300 and there are mulitple features on it, I still never use after several years of shooting. I know, I know, what about video and improved resolution, etc., but I don't shoot video and the pictures are so sharp I can't tell the difference between cameras any more. Even work from less than perfect lens can be corrected in Photoshop and shooting in raw allows for a lot of correction using nothing more than Lightroom.

Now the resolution in cell phones is equal to what I was getting from my first digital cameras! I don't know where it will end, but will someone please reduce the weight of those high dollar lens?

Guess I'm just a dinosaur!

Steve

 

^^^ I have to agree. I have a Nikon D40 that will do a lot more than I know how to do and the pictures it takes are incredible....as far as I'm concerned. And it's just 6 megapixels or so.

 

It will fly off the shelves. The pros will eat it up. The good thing is it makes the 1DIII even more obsolete and hopefully brings the used pricing down to an attainable level for me.

For now I'll have to live with my archaic 30D.

 

I'm a huge fan of my Nikon D90 but I was walking down the pier a few weeks ago and this couple asked me to take a picture of them with their Canon Rebel....(can't remember the rest) and I was blown away by how light that thing was! Granted I had a battery grip on but still it was like I was holding a feather.

 

I'll tell you, I'm so impressed with what the new "point and shoots" can do, at times I would like to ditch the entire SLR scene. The other thing I find is how so many of the pros now shoot in P rather than M and I think "now that I have a camera that does everything except tap dance half of the featurs are just along for the ride. I do like using the menu driven LCD screen almost never for settings, however, and shooting in raw is an advantage in post-processing. I lust after "fast glass" now and find the new high-end bodies interesting, but they don't do anything I need (or at least think I need).

Steve

 

There is no substitute for a fast lens. Of course the good ones aren't cheap.

You can tell yourself you don't need a higher end DSLR as long as you don't ever shoot with one. I made the mistake of shooting with a 1DmkIIN a few years ago. Big mistake. Huge. And that camera is old school nowadays. I've lusted after a 1D series ever since, the III in particular.

 

I don't necessarily disagree, but I think weight and size account for the new small body SLRs like those from Sony. Popular Photography gave the newest Sony model a good review in the current issue and if it were not for the issue of having to change lense systems, I likely would switch over.

Steve

 

Polymer frames vs metal frames. d50 was last in the cannon line up to receive the metal frame, after that they are some sort of plastic. Still great camera's, but my body is 6 lbs without a lens. I've dropped it and I'm glad its metal.

They look funny but they feel right.

New sony camera's are an improvement over the old ones now they bought out konica minolta. However sony is pretty fishy about their info. In the sony camcorder/camera class I went to for work, they touted a bunch of claims for their dSLR's that are not true.

Their new feature is pretty nice, the mirror that doesn't move, but the problem is, you don't actually "see" down the lens, your looking at a screen inside the viewfinder.
With the way the new mirror works, there would be light noise from the viewfinder if they didnt' do it that way.
They claim their camera is the only one who can auto focus while in rapid shot mode.
I wanted to cough bull**** in the class, but held my tongue.
Maybe they shoulda said "one of the only low end dslr's to auto focus while in rapid fire"
haha.

Sony's point and shoots really are excellent, but when it comes to higher end camera's, they really drop out.

I tell my customers, do you want a camera from a camera company who only focuses on camera's, or a camera from a company that makes everything from jock straps to tv's?

The main thing for the sony's is the price point, and they are not bad camera's. I'm not saying otherwise. They are good camera's, but compared to the nikon or cannon equivalent, they fall short if you ask me.
The main benefit for any sony camera is the konica minolta interchangeability (with an adapter) for older shooters to use their ancient lens'.

Yeah, I got some awesome glass for my ae1-p, but I have no desire to use it on my 1500 dollar cannon 50D.
I'll just bottle neck the camera, not worth it even for my 1.8 strait thru lens's.