1D X III vs EOS R5 and R6

[Andrew Reid]

59 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

I thought companies could now achieve very decent 4K pixel bined now unlike before?

Yes the quality is pretty good on GFX 100, A7R IV and SL2 / S1R. The Nikon D850 too. But, still a step back for moire, aliasing and low light performance compared to 1:1 or oversampled 4K.

If 4K/120p looks as good as GFX 100 4K I'll be very satisifed and will be giving Canon some praise for that.

They don't deserve praise for the 1DX3 rolling shutter though.

I wonder if they will fix it?

Do they even listen?

[Mokara]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I think your guess will turn out to be right.

EOS R5

8K = very bad rolling shutter and unusable file sizes, impossible to edit

4K = pixel binned mush.

Have Canon really turned a corner or are they playing the same old games with new, higher numbers?!

If they are competing with Sony A9 then they really need to change the rolling shutter in stills mode too, it's unusable compared to the A9 in that respect.

The stacked DRAM on the A9 sensor allows for the fastest sensor readout on the market.

It's also why the 4K rolling shutter is so low on the RX100 IV / RX10 IV

RX100 IV? Are you sure you don't mean one of the later ones?

Sony cameras poll fewer data points for AF, so that is probably why they can get away with less RS. DPAF in theory has millions of AF points, but in practice no processor is going to be able to cope with anything near that number. Canon don't normally say how many AF points they are actually using for most of their cameras, but iirc in the R series they did mention that those cameras are using around 5k points. Or was it one of the M cameras, I forget exactly which one. I would guess the quality of data coming from DPAF is less than that from dedicated PD points and that is why they need more. More does impose a larger processing demand though, and that is probably what is eating into the sensor read headroom (the processor has to stop reading/processing data during AF polling, hence the RS - the more polling you have to do, the less flexibility you have when it comes to reading image data).

[Mokara]

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

This is why 1Dx III is not a mirrorless they don't have a sensor with that fast read out but the A9 sensor has other problem like less DR also no fast mechanical shutter (led panels are problem in stadium) and also have really limited video modes. Crippled or tech who knows?

Personally for sports I prefer OVF, I tried quickly a colleague A9 on a pro hockey match and I did not like the EVF. I had more problem following the action but maybe using it for a couple of games I would get used.... 

 

Probably a mix.... finally trying to do their best and not cripple but also they don't have a quantum leap on sensors tech that people are dreaming of..... thinking that Canon would come out with a FF 8k 30fps RAW with great RS DPAF with super sampled 4k 120fps DPAF at 4000 USD is  a day dream when their 6 months old 6K FF cinema camera cannot do 4k 120fps..... and no other competitor has similar spec even on the most expensive cinema line

I'm really curious to see what R5 will bring the good and bad...
 

The limitations are not due to the sensors, it is a result of what the processors involved can handle. And that in part is affected by the form factor of different models due to the different thermal envelopes involved.

I am pretty sure the R5 will outperform the 1DXIII when it comes to video. My expectation is that it will come close to C500M2 and C300M3 general performance, less the dynamic range those camera have.

[Adman]

So I’m still in a dilemma about whether to get the 1DXmkiii or wait for the EOS R5.

I have a C500mkii and need a gimbal/B cam to match up as close as possible. Currently use my 1DC as gimbal/B cam but need 4K 50fps. Never upgraded to 1DXmkii due to cropped 4K and negligable improvement in image. Same reason didn’t get the EOS R, but do like the smaller size for gimbal.

Can live with RS as will primarily use at 50fps on gimbal or 25fps with the DPAF for simple walk and talks or interview B cam.

Needs to have good low light for events and fine with no zebras/histogram as use a monitor when on gimbal.

Will also use it for time lapse and some photography but nothing like sports.

My question is obviously hypothetical, but will the EOS R5 likely outdo the 1DXmkiii for the above needs or is the 1dxmkiii the camera to get. I’ve tried other brands but would prefer to stick with a full frame Canon to match my A cam as much as possible.

 

 

[gt3rs]

13 hours ago, Mokara said:

The limitations are not due to the sensors, it is a result of what the processors involved can handle.

Please read a sensor specification sheet.

In sensor’s specification there is the scan time / fps for every mode, windowed and not. Some they mention in ms some they mention in fps with comma precision eg. 128.21 fps....  go check some sensor specs.

Even in single shoot mode the RS stay the same and you have all the time to process the photo buffer.

So A9 sensor is more than twice as fast to scan ca 6-7ms than the 1Dx iii ca 16ms. But Canon can process 60 fps almost full res 17:9 where Sony not so an educated guess the processing power of the 1dx iii is > A9 but sensor readout is exactly the inverse.

[gt3rs]

2 hours ago, Adman said:

So I’m still in a dilemma about whether to get the 1DXmkiii or wait for the EOS R5.

I have a C500mkii and need a gimbal/B cam to match up as close as possible. Currently use my 1DC as gimbal/B cam but need 4K 50fps. Never upgraded to 1DXmkii due to cropped 4K and negligable improvement in image. Same reason didn’t get the EOS R, but do like the smaller size for gimbal.

Can live with RS as will primarily use at 50fps on gimbal or 25fps with the DPAF for simple walk and talks or interview B cam.

Needs to have good low light for events and fine with no zebras/histogram as use a monitor when on gimbal.

Will also use it for time lapse and some photography but nothing like sports.

My question is obviously hypothetical, but will the EOS R5 likely outdo the 1DXmkiii for the above needs or is the 1dxmkiii the camera to get. I’ve tried other brands but would prefer to stick with a full frame Canon to match my A cam as much as possible.

 

 

I do mostly sports/action so not sure is helpful my experience.

I use 1Dx III quite a bit on a Ronin S and if I want shallow DOF I use 50 1.2 and 24 1.4 so the mode that I pick is 5.5k 24 or 25 and on a gimbal I never notice the RS.
I did track so far Parkour, MTB, Horse, rollerblades and never notice RS issue. If I don't need shallow DOF and/or need wider I use the 16-35 and f5.6 or above so I then switch to 5.5k 60 fps to have slow motion.
In case I need both I use 4k 60fps crop.
As you have the 1DC the weight size is about the same so you know what it means on a gimbal plus you are used to MF so using 1Dx III 5.5k 50-60 is not an issue for you.

The big question is how are the 4k FF 25,60 and 120 modes of the R5... if they are very good I think the R5 is even better than the 1Dx III....... if the FF 4k modes are binned and not super quality then the 1Dx III is better especially if you need 50-60 fps....

R5 advantage over 1Dx III (mostly guesses😞
- less weight
- flippy screen (not too helpful on a gimbal but is good to have)
- zebra
- 8k vs 5.5k
- quite cheaper

disadvantages:
- less battery life
- 60fps max out at 4k, if binned it will be less quality too
- if it has a 1-1 crop it will be 2x
- larger file size in RAW
- no RAW > 30 fps
- probably no dual card video recording (on 1Dx III the only dual recording mode is when in RAW.... as it does RAW in one card and whatever 4k mode you select on the other (from 8bit h264 to 10 bit h265 LOG).

If you are not in a hurry I would wait the first reviews hopefully will be in July .... and if you are undecided maybe rent both.... 

[Andrew Reid]

I am having problems with the jog wheel on my 1DX3 popping every full rotation, so there is a mechanical problem there and so my body is going to have to be returned for a refund and the full review is off for now.

Here's my brief first impressions with it -

• The 4K/60p full frame with DIS is a favourite mode of mine, great for handheld work. The Leica SL2 does full frame 4K/60 as well but only in 8bit Rec.709. Here, it is 10bit LOG.
• There are not many int. recording 5.5K RAW 60p full frame cameras for $6k around
• Canon LOG and colour science are as good as ever - but surprised to see no Canon LOG 2 in 10bit mode
• 10% crop of DIS enabled is very small and yet the stabilisation is surprisingly effective, almost IBIS like. Panning is smooth. When combined with mild slow-mo conforming 60p to 24p, it is going to look very cinematic.
• The approx. 1.3-1.4x crop mode (depending on UHD or DCI4K) allows you to use the 1DX3 "as advertised" without the stupid issues. You get 4K/60p and Dual Pixel AF, with 16ms rolling shutter. No RAW but at least file sizes are manageable. Downsides? With this mode not being S35 1.5x, your S35 lenses may vignette and you lose the look of those, and corner sharpness too. Using full frame lenses you reduce the look of those too. People forget that 16:9 is already a crop of a full frame sensor vertically. Add on top the 1.35x crop and you are now into a very narrow crop vertically of the full frame image circle, losing the beautiful rendering in the corners. Also, the DSLR EF mount is much less adaptable than mirrorless to lenses designed for S35. So there are no vintage Arriflex or PL beauties on this camera. In 4096 x 2160 aspect ratio 17:9 - the vertical crop is even more, although active sensor area is a bit wider.
• You can get the extra reach of around 2x crop with DIS on full enhanced mode and 4K in crop mode - but image is soft
• The DSLR form factor has pros and cons. Brilliant grip and control layout. Fantastic OVF, fantastic for stills. But I do miss articulated screen & EVF.
• A great shot getter and a great stills camera

Here is the bad -

• 5.5K Canon RAW file sizes are almost unmanageable, especially in 60p. Compatibility is also less than stellar depending on the NLE.
• 32ms rolling shutter is appalling in the non-60P full frame 4K and 5.5K RAW
• Disabling Dual Pixel AF in full frame 4K and 5.5K 60p modes seems unnecessary
• There is a bug which messes up DIS when you switch back and forth between video and stills live-view
• 3.2" screen feels pokey and small in 2020 on such a big body
• $6k camera, and it has much more competition than Canon 1D C did back in 2012

And here is the competition people should consider -

For full frame 10bit 4K and 5K there is the Leica SL2. The 5K is an anamorphic mode. So that's one over on the 1DX3 already.

For 10bit 4K with very good autofocus, there is the Fuji X-T4. Far less rolling shutter and more features. Better ergonomics. IBIS. EVF. Metabones EF Speed Booster expected to have very good AF too (if Fringer EF adapter is any guide) and the camera + adapter is around $4000 cheaper than the 1DX3.

The 1DX3 does have the autofocus going for it over the Panasonic cameras, but then it has terrible rolling shutter in these modes.

Panasonic - The S1 has a compelling 10bit full frame 4K image, which is every bit the equal of the 1DX3 in my early impressions of it, and Canon's codec. The Canon codec does have a higher bitrate though, and ALL-I.

The Panasonic S1H on the other hand, bumps everything up - higher bitrate codec, ALL-I, 6K. This, for 24p, is hard to beat. But it doesn't have the autofocus side that the 1DX3 has and to be honest the 1DX3 body design is much sexier and feels better in the hand, even though it's a DSLR! There is also no fan on the 1DX3 so it's more robust and better weather sealed.

In terms of pure cinema...

Fuji GFX 100. This maintains the full frame image in 16:9 and 17:9, because with the larger medium format sensor, the active vertical image sensor area is as large as the 1DX3 in 3:2 full frame stills mode. At the left and right frame edges you will get softness or vignetting with certain lenses, but it's about finding the right lenses. So as a "super full frame" 10bit 4K camera the GFX 100 takes some beating. The ergonomics for video are superior to the 1DX3. The autofocus is on-chip phase-detect but doesn't work very well, so this is a 1DX3 advantage once again. However, there is no better manual focus cinema camera in small form factor than the GFX 100. Nothing. Also, the 100MP stills are in a different league to the 1DX3. There is no 4K/60p or 120fps 1080p on the GFX 100, but it may be getting ProRes RAW and a big firmware update. You can get one for around £8300 used. Is it worth £2000 more than the 1DX3? Yes, yes and yes.

In terms of just good full frame 4K/24p with good autofocus - there is the Nikon Z6, Sony A7 III and Sony A9. All are pretty cheap these days.

So, a lot of competition to the 1DX3 in many aspects of the spec sheet.

It is unique in certain ways.

A) It is the best DSLR ever made. Nikon D6 does not touch it. It is almost as if Nikon didn't have an answer and re-badged the D5!

B) It is much more a video orientated 1D C Mark II than the 1D X II was. Nothing comes closer to the classic 1D C look or handling as a highly video capable DSLR.

C) It is the only full frame stills camera that does 10bit 4K/60p and 12bit 5.5K RAW internal recording. Although Panasonic S1H runs it VERY close.

D) There is no other full frame 10bit camera on the market with as capable autofocus in video mode

E) There is no other camera on the market with 10bit 4K in a DSLR body with OVF

Do you need it? Do you need to spend that $6K? Probably not. In terms of cinematic 4K/24/25p 10bit I still believe there are better value for money crop sensor choices out there - X-T4, GH5S, GH5. There are also much cheaper 10bit full frame 4K options from Panasonic - S1 especially, but even buying an S1H is cheaper.

All far less rolling shutter too.

[Andrew Reid]

Here is the take on the stills side...

 

[gt3rs]

18 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am having problems with the jog wheel on my 1DX3 popping every full rotation, so there is a mechanical problem there and so my body is going to have to be returned for a refund and the full review is off for now.

Here's my brief first impressions with it -

• The 4K/60p full frame with DIS is a favourite mode of mine, great for handheld work. The Leica SL2 does full frame 4K/60 as well but only in 8bit Rec.709. Here, it is 10bit LOG.
• There are not many int. recording 5.5K RAW 60p full frame cameras for $6k around
• Canon LOG and colour science are as good as ever - but surprised to see no Canon LOG 2 in 10bit mode
• 10% crop of DIS enabled is very small and yet the stabilisation is surprisingly effective, almost IBIS like. Panning is smooth. When combined with mild slow-mo conforming 60p to 24p, it is going to look very cinematic.
• The approx. 1.3-1.4x crop mode (depending on UHD or DCI4K) allows you to use the 1DX3 "as advertised" without the stupid issues. You get 4K/60p and Dual Pixel AF, with 16ms rolling shutter. No RAW but at least file sizes are manageable. Downsides? With this mode not being S35 1.5x, your S35 lenses may vignette and you lose the look of those, and corner sharpness too. Using full frame lenses you reduce the look of those too. People forget that 16:9 is already a crop of a full frame sensor vertically. Add on top the 1.35x crop and you are now into a very narrow crop vertically of the full frame image circle, losing the beautiful rendering in the corners. Also, the DSLR EF mount is much less adaptable than mirrorless to lenses designed for S35. So there are no vintage Arriflex or PL beauties on this camera. In 4096 x 2160 aspect ratio 17:9 - the vertical crop is even more, although active sensor area is a bit wider.
• You can get the extra reach of around 2x crop with DIS on full enhanced mode and 4K in crop mode - but image is soft
• The DSLR form factor has pros and cons. Brilliant grip and control layout. Fantastic OVF, fantastic for stills. But I do miss articulated screen & EVF.
• A great shot getter and a great stills camera

Here is the bad -

• 5.5K Canon RAW file sizes are almost unmanageable, especially in 60p. Compatibility is also less than stellar depending on the NLE.
• 32ms rolling shutter is appalling in the non-60P full frame 4K and 5.5K RAW
• Disabling Dual Pixel AF in full frame 4K and 5.5K 60p modes seems unnecessary
• There is a bug which messes up DIS when you switch back and forth between video and stills live-view
• 3.2" screen feels pokey and small in 2020 on such a big body
• $6k camera, and it has much more competition than Canon 1D C did back in 2012

And here is the competition people should consider -

For full frame 10bit 4K and 5K there is the Leica SL2. The 5K is an anamorphic mode. So that's one over on the 1DX3 already.

For 10bit 4K with very good autofocus, there is the Fuji X-T4. Far less rolling shutter and more features. Better ergonomics. IBIS. EVF. Metabones EF Speed Booster expected to have very good AF too (if Fringer EF adapter is any guide) and the camera + adapter is around $4000 cheaper than the 1DX3.

The 1DX3 does have the autofocus going for it over the Panasonic cameras, but then it has terrible rolling shutter in these modes.

Panasonic - The S1 has a compelling 10bit full frame 4K image, which is every bit the equal of the 1DX3 in my early impressions of it, and Canon's codec. The Canon codec does have a higher bitrate though, and ALL-I.

The Panasonic S1H on the other hand, bumps everything up - higher bitrate codec, ALL-I, 6K. This, for 24p, is hard to beat. But it doesn't have the autofocus side that the 1DX3 has and to be honest the 1DX3 body design is much sexier and feels better in the hand, even though it's a DSLR! There is also no fan on the 1DX3 so it's more robust and better weather sealed.

In terms of pure cinema...

Fuji GFX 100. This maintains the full frame image in 16:9 and 17:9, because with the larger medium format sensor, the active vertical image sensor area is as large as the 1DX3 in 3:2 full frame stills mode. At the left and right frame edges you will get softness or vignetting with certain lenses, but it's about finding the right lenses. So as a "super full frame" 10bit 4K camera the GFX 100 takes some beating. The ergonomics for video are superior to the 1DX3. The autofocus is on-chip phase-detect but doesn't work very well, so this is a 1DX3 advantage once again. However, there is no better manual focus cinema camera in small form factor than the GFX 100. Nothing. Also, the 100MP stills are in a different league to the 1DX3. There is no 4K/60p or 120fps 1080p on the GFX 100, but it may be getting ProRes RAW and a big firmware update. You can get one for around £8300 used. Is it worth £2000 more than the 1DX3? Yes, yes and yes.

In terms of just good full frame 4K/24p with good autofocus - there is the Nikon Z6, Sony A7 III and Sony A9. All are pretty cheap these days.

So, a lot of competition to the 1DX3 in many aspects of the spec sheet.

It is unique in certain ways.

A) It is the best DSLR ever made. Nikon D6 does not touch it. It is almost as if Nikon didn't have an answer and re-badged the D5!

B) It is much more a video orientated 1D C Mark II than the 1D X II was. Nothing comes closer to the classic 1D C look or handling as a highly video capable DSLR.

C) It is the only full frame stills camera that does 10bit 4K/60p and 12bit 5.5K RAW internal recording. Although Panasonic S1H runs it VERY close.

D) There is no other full frame 10bit camera on the market with as capable autofocus in video mode

E) There is no other camera on the market with 10bit 4K in a DSLR body with OVF

Do you need it? Do you need to spend that $6K? Probably not. In terms of cinematic 4K/24/25p 10bit I still believe there are better value for money crop sensor choices out there - X-T4, GH5S, GH5. There are also much cheaper 10bit full frame 4K options from Panasonic - S1 especially, but even buying an S1H is cheaper.

All far less rolling shutter too.

 

Fair and honest review! 

To nip tick comparing used vs new prices is not really representative as in a few months there will be some 1Dx III used so then the gap will be different.

You like a lot the GFX 100 that seems a really good camera and probably targeting the opposite audience than the 1Dx III (high res MF sensor vs low res sport camera)... I'm not up-to-date at all on GFX 100 but isn't the RS quite bad there too like 28ms or so?

The data rate at 5.5k 60fps  is 10%-20%  than a RAW cinema camera so not that bad but yes they are huge.
As comparison at 60fps on a 512 GB card you get 26 min for the 1Dx (5.5k), 30 min for the C500 II  (5.9k) and 33 min for RED (6k) 7:1, BM (6k )(194 MB/s at 24fps) if it would be 60fps would be around 30min too.....  high res RAW are big.
C500 II the ratio is fixed on RED and BM you can go higher compression but at least on RED people seems not to go higher that 1:7 - 1:9.... komodo will be 30min HQ and 50 min LQ but 39 fps so if it would do 60fps would be in the same ballpack. 
RAW is definitely not for everyone.... 

 

[Trek of Joy]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am having problems with the jog wheel on my 1DX3 popping every full rotation, so there is a mechanical problem there and so my body is going to have to be returned for a refund and the full review is off for now.

Here's my brief first impressions with it -

This is pretty close to a full review, should be a blog post. Can't wait for the R5/R6 announcements in about a month as I'm not going back to a DSLR.

Cheers

Chris

[Andrew Reid]

I am doing a YouTube video for the 1D X III review. Mattias Burling style.

[currensheldon]

Really hard to know without knowing final specs for R5 or R6. I have a feeling the R6 may be the best bet because it will give you all of the advantages of the mirrorless system but perhaps bypass all of the giant features that I'll rarely use (8k raw, 5.5 raw). I'm most interested in 10-bit 422, full-frame 4K (both in 400mbps All-I and 150mbps LongGOP). Would be great to get it in 60fps or 120fps as well, but up to 30fps in 10-bit is a must.

Hoping the R6 is closer to a 1DX III but without the 5.5k raw. 

Either way, despite the fact that the 1DX III has great video specs, it is still their premier PHOTO camera - sports, wildlife, journalist, conflict zone camera. The R5 and R6 should both be more usable for video, I would think. 

[Andrew Reid]

I put my thoughts into a YouTube review.

This is my first one, but one of MANY! Please don't expect too much  

The video also compares it to:

Fuji X-T4

Panasonic S1H and S1

Fuji GFX 100

I won't spoil the conclusion for you.

There is some Formula One bonus footage at the end from the GFX 100, and a show-stopping problem with my 1D X III.

[Video Hummus]

On 6/4/2020 at 4:25 PM, gt3rs said:

What are you talking about? Every review is very positive, yes it has limitations as every camera but what are you expecting a C500 ii merged with an Alexa in a rather small weather sealed body at 1/3 or 1/5 of the price?

Is a FF 5.5k RAW with a great AF alternatives?

C500 II, Fx9 (no raw)

For a $6,000 camera you still don’t get FF 4K with acceptable rolling shutter and DPAF. You have to shoot in 1.33x crop which is kinda of a big bummer for a FF camera. Hence my original comment. Video focused people could do better for $6K. I’m not into RAW unless I can get 8:1 compression. 10-bit 4K with a balanced bit rate is my preferred shooting mode.

[Rinad Amir]

16 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I put my thoughts into a YouTube review.

This is my first one, but one of MANY! Please don't expect too much  

The video also compares it to:

Fuji X-T4

Panasonic S1H and S1

Fuji GFX 100

I won't spoil the conclusion for you.

There is some Formula One bonus footage at the end from the GFX 100, and a show-stopping problem with my 1D X III.

Exuse my language but i fecking love it Andrew epic review😆

[gt3rs]

10 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

For a $6,000 camera you still don’t get FF 4K with acceptable rolling shutter and DPAF. You have to shoot in 1.33x crop which is kinda of a big bummer for a FF camera. Hence my original comment. Video focused people could do better for $6K. I’m not into RAW unless I can get 8:1 compression. 10-bit 4K with a balanced bit rate is my preferred shooting mode.

So if you don't need RAW or 5.5k but you want FF, AF and 10 bit, good for you as there are many more alternatives (exactly 3 🙂 ):

- FX9 11'000 USD, 21 ms RS

- C500 II 16'000 USD, 16 ms RS

- C700FF 33'000 USD

Suddenly 6500 USD camera is almost a bargain ..... but yeah RS in FF with AF is bad, no ND, no XLR, etc....

 

You don't need AF then you have a few more choices below 6'500 usd (exactly 1)

- SH1 (at 6k the rolling shutter is not great either, 29.7!!, and at 4k 24.2). If you don't need AF the SH1 is a better camera for video for sure...

The reality on this forum is that people expect any camera vendor to offer C500 II spec + 4k 120fps of the C300 III but on FF + the image quality and DR of an Alexa with some kind of lossless fantasy RAW compression 20:1 on really cheap SD cards in a Sigma Fp fan less submergible body with an on body battery that last 12h and a 10'' inch screen and should be below < 2000 USD 🤣😂 and with a coupon with a guarantee to win the Oscar.

[BTM_Pix]

24 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

The reality on this forum is that people expect any camera vendor to offer C500 II spec + 4k 120fps of the C300 III but on FF + the image quality and DR of an Alexa with some kind of lossless fantasy RAW compression 20:1 on really cheap SD cards in a Sigma Fp fan less submergible body with an on body battery that last 12h and a 10'' inch screen and should be below < 2000 USD 🤣😂 and with a coupon with a guarantee to win the Oscar.

I think you are being unfair labelling every one on this forum as some sort of fantasist demanding that exact spec for under $2000 as the reality is very few of us would want the 10 inch screen  

[Mokara]

On 6/6/2020 at 4:06 AM, gt3rs said:

Please read a sensor specification sheet.

In sensor’s specification there is the scan time / fps for every mode, windowed and not. Some they mention in ms some they mention in fps with comma precision eg. 128.21 fps....  go check some sensor specs.

Even in single shoot mode the RS stay the same and you have all the time to process the photo buffer.

So A9 sensor is more than twice as fast to scan ca 6-7ms than the 1Dx iii ca 16ms. But Canon can process 60 fps almost full res 17:9 where Sony not so an educated guess the processing power of the 1dx iii is > A9 but sensor readout is exactly the inverse.

That is just the mode they set the sensor at. If they wanted to read at higher fps they could make it do that. The limitations come from the ability to process the data generated while at the same time doing whatever else the camera needs to do. Obviously you don't create a spec for the sensor that your processor can't meet. The two are designed around each other, and if the sensor is repackaged to be sold to third parties, those third parties get whatever specs were imposed on the design by the processors Sony had available.

The absolute speed the sensor can be read is kind of irrelevant if the processor has to do other things at the same time, which is what is happening with the 1DXIII. The sensor clearly can be read faster, since it does exactly that at 60fps, but not when the processor is doing AF at the same time (AF has a heavy computational load associated with it). AF processing has to be done constantly, with other data being read in-between, it can't just stop while the sensor is being read, if it did then AF response times would become much longer and you would get sluggish AF performance. So, a sensor frame read would go something like data...AF....data...AF.....data....AF etc, they are interleaved. Those spaces in-between during which AF functions are going on is why rolling shutter is 30+ ms. The frame read data is being spread out to allow AF functions to happen in timely matter instead of coming all at once. Basically AF gets priority over the sensor read. if you had fewer AF sites that needed to be polled and data processed, then you would have lower RS with the same sensor. The problem for Canon is that DPAF has a bucket load of AF sites that require attention, hence the RS, while other manufacturers are using conventional PD sites which are far fewer in number. Fewer PD sites = less AF processing overhead = less time needed to complete the frame read = lower RS. 

Not rocket science.

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, gt3rs said:

The reality on this forum is that people expect any camera vendor to offer C500 II spec + 4k 120fps of the C300 III but on FF + the image quality and DR of an Alexa with some kind of lossless fantasy RAW compression 20:1 on really cheap SD cards in a Sigma Fp fan less submergible body with an on body battery that last 12h and a 10'' inch screen and should be below < 2000 USD 🤣😂 and with a coupon with a guarantee to win the Oscar.

I would just like a £6000 camera that actually works as advertised!

Have you got a link to where you are getting those rolling shutter timings from?

[gt3rs]

On 6/7/2020 at 1:12 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Have you got a link to where you are getting those rolling shutter timings from?

Quick google search

https://***URL not allowed***/panasonic-s1h-lab-test-dynamic-range-and-rolling-shutter-results/

https://***URL not allowed***/canon-c500-markii-lab-test-dynamic-range-latitude-rolling-shutter/

https://***URL removed***/reviews/fujifilm-gfx-100-review/2

https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Sony-PXW-FX9---Vollformat-Bildqualitaet-fuer-Broadcast-und-Cinema---Rolling-Shutter---Dynamik--Belichtungsspielr.html