Canon 1D X Mark II high ISO and colour performance worse than predecessor

[Andrew Reid]

Has Canon moved on from 2012's flagship?

The results of DPReview's studio test scene might surprise you.

Read the full blog post

[wolf33d]

This sounds very bad for 5DIV

[raf702]

Seems to be lots of disappointments this year.

[Andrew Reid]

Is it some kind of Japanese conspiracy?

[OliKMIA]

You are so negative Andrew ! We should be happy with the 2012 camera price drop. On the bright side, the 6D/5Dmk3/1DC/X are becoming cheaper and cheaper after each Canon "new" release.

Since Canon gets stuck on sensor/processing performance why paying 2016 premium price when we can get the same IQ with heavily discounted 2012 camera ? I'll wait for the 5Dmk4 to buy another mk3 or perhaps a A7S/R3.

 

[Zach Ashcraft]

Seems a bit unfair to completely leave the Dynamic Range information they presented out of the equation. Looks like the 1dX mark II performs markedly better  than the D5 in regards to post processing files and dynamic range, particularly at lowers ISOs. 

Given that most have complained about Canons lack of dynamic range in comparison to their competitors and not color performance or low light, I think their claims are at the very least reasonable. 

[OliKMIA]

At least the dynamic range of the newest Canon flagship Camera is now up to the standard of the last year medium level competitor bodies. Ok great... Took 4 years for Canon to get there without anything else on the IQ side ? And we are talking about a $6k camera. In 1 or 2 years the Sony or Nikon entry level FF or even Crop will blow the 1DX that supposed to last until 2020.

Of course I know that IQ is one of the features, along with AF, FPS, etc. but it's too little, to late and too expensive for me. I can't justify the spend $6k for a marginal improvement over a 4 years period. With that money I could:

1. buy the new A7R3 with the 24-70 2.8 G-Master.

2. buy the previous Canon generation camera, save a lot of money, loose a few feartures but have the same IQ

[Simon Shasha]

BSI is the future. Canon is getting left behind.

[Jimmy]

This article is embarrassing.... The guys that did all the hard work gave it a positive review with some negative caveats... Andrew then takes those few caveats, without any real world testing or insight and creates this clickbait monstrosity to fit some ludicrous Canon narrative (while using the 1DC and XC10).

Great forum, dreadful blog.

[DBounce]

Man lot of smack being talked here. Personally I'm not sure what all the complaining is about. The stills I have seen look great, and when the ISO is pushed they look cleaner than what my A7Rii put out. And the video looks great. So do you really care what the specks say if it produces great images? Me... I judge by the footage.

[The Chris]

56 minutes ago, Simon Shasha said:

BSI is the future. Canon is getting left behind.

This one is debatable with large sensor cameras, the original A7r has better DR than the A7rII. Personally I would have been fine with a revised version of the 36mp sensor with all the other updates instead of moving to BSI in the A7rII. Sony's bold claims with BSI in the A7rII turned out to be nothing more than hype. Same goes for the NX1 and its BSI wonder sensor - it was still outperformed by the d7200.

[BenEricson]

19 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

This article is embarrassing.... The guys that did all the hard work gave it a positive review with some negative caveats... Andrew then takes those few caveats, without any real world testing or insight and creates this clickbait monstrosity to fit some ludicrous Canon narrative (while using the 1DC and XC10).

Great forum, dreadful blog.

So true. This camera is going to put out some real nice footage.

[OliKMIA]

28 minutes ago, BenEricson said:

So true. This camera is going to put out some real nice footage.

Of course it will. So does the 1Dx. The problem is not about being a bad camera, it's a about the micro leap in terms of improvements over the previous generation.

4 years for what ? A slightly bump in pixel, catching up in DR, same ISO, a few more FPS, better AF. It's not worth $6k for me.

[wolf33d]

I am astonished by the comments. Andrew is not pessimistic he is realist. WTF is your problem with someone pointing out that a 6000$ camera replacing the 4 years old one is doing worst in numerous KEY IQ areas? 

It is because of people like you that Canon continues to serve us the same shit years after years. People who think it's fantastic to release a 6k$ camera that does less than many 1000$ cameras in some aspect of video and photo and that isnt really better than the previous version are very funny. 
Yes the 1Dx2 will produce good pictures, and god that is the least you can expect for the price. But you can and you should expect a lot more. This is a big deception once again from Canon and I am happy that blogs like this one exist to point it out. Because with bullshit uberpositive reviews that say that a 80D is fantastic sorry but we are going nowhere. 

And the DR, yes it improved on the 80D and 1Dx2. Should we applaud Canon for releasing an 80D that has better DR than 70D but that is FAR from being at just the D5500 level that is way cheaper? Let me guess the answer. 
Even worst for the 1DxII. This is a flagship camera. Yes there are a lot of positive points on this camera that all the internet was/is/will point out so no worries there. However there are some huge unacceptable things and it is good that some people point it out. Because that is how companies work: they will only improve what people complain about and could impact their sale. Look at what Olympus just said, there are a couple of new features ready on the EM-1 mark 2 that will be released with the body only if the competition is doing so. 

So good for you, continue to applaud Canon for the non acceptable and they will continue to serve you the same shit!

[kgv5]

I dont get it. "The same shit" gives nicer images than all those ultra modern, high spec (sony) stuff. How it is even possible?

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

14 minutes ago, kgv5 said:

I dont get it. "The same shit" gives nicer images than all those ultra modern, high spec (sony) stuff. How it is even possible?

And that crap doesn't overheat.

[Andrew Reid]

15 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

I am astonished by the comments. Andrew is not pessimistic he is realist.

Thank you.

Indeed we must be realistic.

DPReview always put an overtly positive 'spin' on things.

It's the job of an independent blogger to add balance to any given set of facts.

The facts:

- No low light improvement over the 2012 model
- Colour is more muted
- Less detail in JPEGs at high ISOs
- 4 years since the predecessor

Dynamic range still behind Sony and most Nikon sensors.

DPReview wrote this:

"Like the EOS 80D there's a big improvement in the camera's dynamic range. Canon's move to a design using on-chip analog-to-digital conversion allows less noise to be added before the signal is converted into digital values"

Which in my opinion is highly questionable.

The way DPR tested the dynamic range relies on the sensor being ISO invariant - i.e., maximum dynamic range at base ISO, exposure achieved by underexposing by as much as 5 stops to protect the shadows. This technique completely changes the distribution of your histogram and kills tonality / skintones / colour, all 3. If you wanna shoot like that be my guest but it's not a viable technique if you want to maximise image quality.

Canon didn't move to on-chip A/D conversion with the 1D X Mark II. The original 1D X has on chip A/D, so that's flat out wrong.

"Big improvement" to dynamic range. By any measure it's not "big".

So you can drink their cool aid and be happy, or you can be properly informed and less happy.

Your choice.

I know which option Jimmy would choose!

[Jimmy]

I'd choose to run my own tests.

I have zero problem if you test this camera and rip it to shreds, based on your own findings. The above article is just the worst type of "journalism" though... To then have the front to bad mouth the people you are cherry picking your info from and accuse them of sugar coating their findings is laughable. 

You talk of seeking the truth, giving honest opinions.... yet peddle this misinformed, 2nd hand nonsense.

31 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

 So good for you, continue to applaud Canon for the non acceptable and they will continue to serve you the same shit!

I think the people going out about buying cameras like the XC10 might encourage them more 

[Andrew Reid]

Where's the misinformation?

You're a nob. There's some more information for you.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Guys, let's not get personal. That doesn't serve anyone.

Keep in mind, this is Andrew's house. You have the right to criticize, but keep it polite and constructive.