1D X images

In addition to the ISO 12233 charts and the color patches/fabric shots in the growing 1D X review, maybe folks would like to see some real world images...

This was a small outdoor jazz concert at a local science museum, featuring Nathan and the Zydeco Cha-Chas. The shots below were taken about 30 minutes after sunset, ISO 4000 and 12800.

Shot RAW, converted using default settings in DPP, only edit was cropping. Click image then View All Sizes (upper right) for a 1600 pixel version. Thanks for looking!

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8163/7...967d4bf8_c.jpg
EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 200mm, 1/320 s, f/2.8, ISO 4000

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8006/7...df059c76_c.jpg
EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 200mm, 1/250 s, f/2.8, ISO 4000

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7107/7...f81c6dbe_c.jpg
EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 70mm, 1/200 s, f/5, ISO 12800

The 3rd shot should have had an even narrower aperture for a little more DoF, I think. That's my older daughter on stage, singing into the mic.
:)

One more, from before the start of the concert, my younger daughter at the bubbles exhibit. A 12 fps burst is great for capturing a key moment.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7137/7...fde2992f_c.jpg
EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 70mm, 1/200 s, f/2.8, ISO 100

Neuro,

Nice series....looks like a fun concert.

Count me as impressed with the quality at ISO 4,000-12,800. Pretty remarkable. At least, I can't say images from the 7D at ISO 12,800 (or 4,000) look that good.
:)
Brant

John, Thanks a bunch for sharing---These are incredible images, especially considering the iso they were shot at----Even though there is a small glitch with the AFMA that I am sure Canon will fix in the near future; these are impressive images. Unfortunately, I am afraid that I have violated one of the ten commandments----Though shalt not covet.........-----trust me, I am coveting. I can't wait to see more images and more "real world reviews" from you.

Congrats,

Bob

Nice Images! I'm royally impressed. There appears to be a certain level of realism that I can't explain.

The colors and contrast look great! The exposures look good and the white balance looks perfect. I'm noticing the whites really pop on this camera, as in photo #3 (ISO 12,800); his shirt and her hat. That's the best noise that I've "never" seen. The level of detail and micro-contrast looks wonderful too, especially at these higher ISO's!

The last one of your younger daughter at ISO 100, looks Zeiss like!

I'm giddy! I'm ready to order one!

Congrats and enjoy,
Rich

Great representation John. It looks like this is the camera to have for low light situations. I can see how this camera will be a big hit for sports shooters, or any event where low light is an issue.

Rick

WOW! WOW!! WOW!!! How could anything ever get better than that! All of these shots are nothing but fantastic, John! You are one lucky man ...the family, the gear, the good life!

Thanks for sharing those images with us! I'm going to paraphrase the others but it's worth it. Great ISO 4000 images I'd be glad to be able to take those with my 7D. I'm not even talking about the ISO 12'800... brillant!

We want more, we want more...

Very very nice .... looks like I will have to sell some gear and borrow some $$ ... impressive.

Congrats John, great series, incredible image quality from those settings.

Highly impressive at those ISOs. Thanks John.

Gosh, those are great looking photos at those ISOs. I'm currently looking in the sofa cushions for some spare change!

Thanks for the comments, all!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw

Nice to see some shots at higher ISO. Seems to be delivering as promised. Pity about the AFMA but good to see there may be a way around it.

Judging from the shots I think it's safe to say that you are quite pleased with what it can do. ENJOY!!

---

Very pleased. In fact, the only disappointment is how little time I've had to go out and use it...

Perhaps a stomach bug - no significant outward symptoms to mimic? Not that I'm advocating malingering.

Really great shot Neuro. Thanks for posting. I will post some of mine later today when I get home. Reading your post made me think of using DPP instead of Lightroom to process my 1DX image. Doing so made me realize how much the default setting I was applying in Lightroom was not good at all for the 1DX image. After playing with DPP for a few hours on a few image I finally found the sweets spot and now my skin tone and contrast look a lot more natural. Really surprising how much the default setting of the DPP is actually good! Enjoy your 1DX!

I posted some low-light action shots of some friends of mine in the local mountain bike race in Canmore... here is the link:
https://picasaweb.google.com/112330748779360240799/24HrsOfAdrenalin2012

I uploaded the original jpeg file from the camera. Noise reduction was set to the default level in the camera. You can use the zoom controls on the page to get a closer look. The four images range from ISO 1600 to 8000. In each case I fired off a long burst, and focus continued to work perfectly in the reduced light. Yes the black focus points did become a bit more difficult to see, but it wasn't detrimental.

:( The link doesn't work for me

My fault --- try this:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1123307...MjliPjxoLmr8AE

What can you not shoot at 200,000 ISO and f/1.2?:rolleyes:

Cheers,
John.

Okay I finally got a chance to grab some shots with the 500 mm f/4 II and the 1DX, along with the new 1.4 TC III that I just picked up. I tried last week for bear shots and struck out completely, so I went out today for some easier squirrel shots. The Dipper was a lucky bonus --- they are a lot rarer. Post processing in Lightroom 4 included cropping and noise reduction, plus the usual contrast and brightness adjustments.

Juvenile golden-mantled ground squirrels
500 mm, 1/500 sec @ f/8, ISO 500
http://www.huyerperspectives.com/Nat...A39Q8622-L.jpg


Least Chipmunk, 500 mm, 1/1000 sec @ f/8, ISO 25,600
I kind of screwed up here... had the shutter and aperture set so tightly the camera had to pick a rather high ISO. But it's a very good test shot of the capabilities.
http://www.huyerperspectives.com/Nat...A39Q8825-L.jpg


American Dipper
700 mm, 1/320 sec @ f/8, ISO 1600
Another "screw-up" here... I accidentally dropped the shutter speed to slower than I intended. But the stabilizer saved me here, even with the 1.4 TC attached.
http://www.huyerperspectives.com/Nat...A39Q8817-L.jpg

As you can imagine, I'm quite delighted with the results! It's nice to have a camera that can cover my mistakes so well.

Love that first shot, super thin DOF with the rock in a focus plave with the little fellows eye, nice capture.
Is a one legger dipper rarer that the bi-pod version?:cool:

That Chipmunk with an ISO of 25,600 is amazing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conropl

That Chipmunk with an ISO of 25,600 is amazing.

---

+1 .... wow:o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Eade

+1 .... wow:o

---

Yes... incredible. Compare to what I'm used to with my 7D*, it's a bit as if I was shooting polaroid :)

* Which I consider a pretty good camera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw

Nice looking pictures. You must have a good camera.;)

---

LMAO; Jonathan, Great shots, And wow, you must be having a blast with that camera----I am soooooooo envious

Thanks everyone for the feedback and the good laughs! Yes I'm definitely having a blast.

@Jonathan, If I remeber right you had a 1D IV or 1D III when you bought the 500mm II. Now you have the FF 1D X.

Any regrets you didn't go for the 600mm instead?

Very good shots by the way.

Jonathan,

Those shots are stunning! I especially love the color and contrast of the first two.

I'm curious to hear Jonathans answer as well, but I'll chime in for now. With going from the MKIV to the 1DX, all of your lenses will be 30% shorter and it is quite noticable. I used to use the MKIV with 300mm and 1.4X (546mm) for BIF, and the 2X for the reach. Now, I have to use the 300mm and 2X f(600mm) or BIF and then I can't get the far reach that I need with the 1DX, so getting a longer lens, or keeping the MKIV, or other crop camera seems like the main options right now. So, I think I will keep the MKIV for now.

I'll try to go out and post some pics comparing the MKIV to the 1DX. How should I adjust for the focal length differences and framing, or should I just shoot with the same lens, use a zoom or compare with extenders?

Rich

Rich

Here is a thought, a while back John took some shots so I could compare a 7D full size shot to a crop out of a 5D II. He sent it to Daniel and I, Daniel's contention was that the 7D IQ would be better with the 7D than the 5D II crop. It was, but only after PP and then only slightly. I wonder how with the same lens a 1D X cropped picture will hold up with the same lens native shot from a 1D IV.

The other thing is going from FF to crop in most of the length range I am really not limited on focal length because I can always adjust by what lenses I choose. I know that statement might start a debate, but in reality I have enough play in my kit that I can get any focal length or relationship I want, except at the widest or the longest. So really any meaningful comparison of the 1D IV to the 1D X would probably be at the length of the longest lens you have. That is why I think the test above matters; you’re as long as you can reach now how is the best way to deal with it.

One of the reasons I ask Jonathan the question, is the way he uses this lens appears to be very similar to how I use mine. The first 9 months I had the 500mm I used it with a 5D II, as crop factors go I found the 1D IV to be about right with the 500mm now.

Rick

Rich and Rick -
My previous wildlife camera was the 1D Mark III, and while it does have the 1.3 crop factor, the quality of pixels is quite a bit lower than the 1DX. So as you suggested, I can happily crop my 1DX images by a factor of 1.3, and they still look better than a non-cropped image from my 1DIII. As a result, I'm getting the best of both worlds --- wider angle photos that I can crop when I need to. I have to say, I really (really) like the light weight of the new 500. It is 1.5 lbs lighter and 2.5 inches shorter than the 600 f/4, which is significant. Handholding is quite important for me and this lens is wonderful for that. The new 1.4 TC works brilliantly, so if I'm going birding I can slap it on and get all the length I want. I suppose there are always times when more focal length would be good, but for me there are more times when the wider angle is nice (shooting bears for example).
Hope that helps!

@Rick, Well, 300mm is my longest lens, so should I take a shot with both bodies at 300mm, or use the 1.4x and 300 on the 1DX (420mm), and just the 300mm on the MKIV (390mm). It depends if you want to check for cropping the FF, or the decreaser in IQ with the extender? Or I can take the shots with and without the extender.

Thanks for your fedback Jonathan it definitely helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Lane

Thanks for your fedback Jonathan it definitely helps.

---

+1 :)

Jonathan; thanks. What you describe is really how my thinking is. I think the lighter weight and shorter lens is probably the way to go for me.

Rich; I think it wouldn't matter which lens or which combination you use as your results should be about the same, as long as you use the same lens at the same distance and same subject with each camera. Here is my suspicion of what we would find in such a test; of course at higher ISO's the 1D X will prevail but you have to get to 6400 or more. At the ISO's we believe the 1D IV was always acceptable the 1D IV will resolve and be better than the 1D X crop. A win for the 1D X here makes the long lens crop argument meaningless.

Glad I can help. Yes I imagine the 1D4 would do better than the 1DX cropped, at moderate ISO. If I had the 1D4 instead of the 1D3, I might have been tempted to get the 5D3 instead of the 1DX, and save a buck. But I'm pretty happy with the setup I have now :D

Well it's not easy posting after Jonathan, but here's a few from Saturday:

1DX: 300mm f/2.8L IS some with 1.4X or 2X

The first one is moderately cropped.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8429/7...c421332f_c.jpg
BP1Q2245 by RL One Photography, on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7117/7...27155947_c.jpg
BP1Q2595 by RL One Photography, on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8426/7...2d9757df_c.jpg
BP1Q2708 by RL One Photography, on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7248/7...5775a3c8_c.jpg
BP1Q2891 by RL One Photography, on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7107/7...d5b7dd42_c.jpg
BP1Q2584 - Version 2 by RL One Photography, on Flickr

Thanks for Viewing!

C&C always welcome,
Rich

Nice collection Rich! And thanks for posting the large versions on the Flickr link... they allowed for a nice detailed examination. The skimmer shot is great, and pretty much covers the full dynamic range of the camera across the bird. You got detail in the deep black near the eye and the bright white on the wingtips. The rabbit is tack sharp and has beautiful bokeh --- showcasing both the lens and the camera sensor in one shot.

Thanks Jonathan!

I have found it very difficult to lock focus onto a Skimmer, that is "Skimming along the top of the water with it's mouth half-open in the water, as it's such a fast flying and erratic bird, so I was happy to get this one in flight.

Rich