| Introduction | Measurement | Comparisons | Conclusion |
Not surprisingly, given its newer and larger sensor, the 1D X delivers significantly better image quality than the 1D Mark IV, beating its overall sensor score of 74 by eight points, and should deliver comparable image quality to the higher-resolution 1Ds Mark III, which it beat by one point. This indicates that the 1D X is well positioned to meet its role as both Canon’s top-of-the-line studio camera as well as being the camera maker’s go-to camera for the professional sports shooter.
As previously mentioned, the 1D X’s low-light performance also backs up its positioning as a sports shooter. With an impressive score of 2786 ISO, it outstrips both its predecessors significantly, indicating that the 1D X’s combination of a larger sensor (vs the 1D Mark IV), a new metering system, and the broadest sensitivity range of the three cameras (ISO 50 to 204,800, enhanced) is delivering on its promise. Combined with the continuous shooting speed improvements, the impressive ISO performance will satisfy any sports photographer, though they may balk at the $1,800 price differential between the $4,999 1D Mark IV and the $6,800 1D X.
The 1D X’s color depth performance was also solid with a DxOMark Portrait Score of 23.8 bits. The score indicates that the camera will be able to match the 1Ds Mark III in its ability to provide a range of vivid and accurate colors. In comparison with the 1D Mark IV, it scored 1 bit higher, which translates into 2/3 of a stop better in terms of delivering maximum color sensitivity.
The Landscape Scores indicate that there should be no noticeable difference in dynamic range across the three cameras.
When comparing the 1D X with its lower-end sibling, the midrange Canon EOS 5D Mark III, we can see that the sensors are fairly similar in performance, which is no surprise as the 5D Mark III (released in a similar timeframe to the 1D X) has inherited many of its big brother’s new technologies.
The 5D Mark III’s full-frame sensor is slightly higher in resolution at 22.3 megapixels vs. the 1D X’s 18 megapixel sensor, but both turn in very similar DxOMark sensor scores. In fact, one-point difference between the overall scores of the two cameras is negligible as are the differences between the Portrait and Landscape Scores. The more significant difference is the Sports scores, where the 1D X scores ½ stop better.
The 1D X’s most obvious competitor in the professional DSLR space is the Nikon D4 and its predecessor, the Nikon D3s. Based on their sensor scores, it looks like the Nikon D4, which was announced a few months after the 1D X and also hit the market this summer, can deliver better sensor performance across the board (and sells for $800 less than the 1D X), whereas the Nikon D3s (which sells for roughly $1,600 less than the 1D X) is much more similar, though the three cameras perform similarly in low light. Keep in mind, of course that the 1D X and D4 have significantly improved features sets, with both offering higher resolution, faster burst-mode shooting, full HD video shooting at 30/25/24 fps, broader sensitivity ranges, as well as nice touches such as a second CF memory card slot, built-in Ethernet connectivity, and optional WiFi. Also note that the D4 has a lower resolution sensor than the 1D X, fewer autofocus points, and can’t match its 12 fps speed in continuous shooting mode.
The tests in which the D4 outpaced the 1D X most significantly are in dynamic range and color depth, although at just under 1 bit difference on the latter, you won’t see a dramatic difference between the two, even if it should be noticeable. The score does translate into a 2/3 of a stop benefit with the D4, but in reality any score above 22 bits is quite good.
For landscape shooters, however, the 1.3 Ev difference between the D4 and 1D X in dynamic range will translate into better details in highlights and shadows, especially at lower ISOs. At ISO 1600 and above, the differences become negligible. Furthermore, the 16 megapixel Sony APS-C sensor (in the Pentax K5 and the Nikon D7000) performs 2 stops better on this test.
|
|
Added by ag08025 |
December 16, 2012
ISO performance
but this is a conspiracy against DxO ....... still denied its results ....
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Canon-EOS-1D-X-Digital-Camera-Review/Noise-Reduction.htm Reply |
|
|
Added by ag08025 |
December 16, 2012
another denial
Opss...... another site that belies the DxO dynamic range:
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Canon-EOS-1D-X-Digital-Camera-Review/Dynamic-Range.htm Reply |
|
|
Added by ag08025 |
December 16, 2012
you are not sincere
if you click here, and understand Italian, you can see that your assessment of the noise and dynamic range is too sbilanciat in favor of NIKON.
In Reala is better the Canon ...... http://www.reflex.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Camera-TEST_Eos1Dx.pdf http://www.reflex.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Camera-TEST_Nikon-D4.pdf Reply |
|
|
Added by PhotoBazar |
November 10, 2012
1DX
Per coloro che la cura
mi è stata inviata una e-mail sostenendo i risultati dei test DXOMark di EOS-1D Canon X Saranno loro quelli veri ??????????? DxO punteggio: 90 DR: 12,8 Profondità colore: 24,9 bit ISO: 3296 Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by ag08025 |
November 14, 2012
Re: 1DXQuote: <div id="linkdxomark">This a comment for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Canon/EOS-1Dx">this page on the website</a></div>Per coloro che la cura mi è stata inviata una e-mail sostenendo i risultati dei test DXOMark di EOS-1D Canon X Saranno loro quelli veri ??????????? DxO punteggio: 90 DR: 12,8 Profondità colore: 24,9 bit ISO: 3296 DxO prova solo il sensore, o meglio, mettono in evidenza solo le caratteristiche del sensore che possono portare vantaggi alle fotocamere che loro sponsorizzano. La stessa cosa la fanno con gli obiettivi: io ho avuto il 70-200 f2.8 L USM, il 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM e adesso ho il 70-200 f2.8 II L IS USM e posso affermare con certezza che le immagini scattate con l'ultimo nato in casa Canon sono migliori già da una prima e veloce occhiata a monitor. Loro affermano che era meglio il vecchio. Conoscendo la qualità e serietà di Canon nel garantire uniformità sui prodotti (a differenza di Nikon) dubito fortemente che siano incappati in un pezzo difettoso. e' più probabile che siano i loro strumenti (o le loro menti) ad essere difettose. La differenza su NIKON, almeno in Italia, la noti subito: mancanza di rapidità degli interventi, risposte elusive a fronte di richieste di chiarimenti, prodotti non all'altezza (almeno fino a una decina di anni fa cioè da quando sono passato a Canon). Non c'è paragone Canon è su un'altro pianeta sia come qualità costruttiva che come assistenza tecnica. Reply |
|
|
Added by olyman |
November 05, 2012
EOS-1D X
My Olympus OM-D E-M5 has better dynamic range, WOW!
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by Palen |
November 06, 2012
Re: EOS-1D X
Well, you have a camera as this page is more suitable for landscape, what does not fit is that you can not take these pictures with your camera better for landscapes.
http://500px.com/photo/15129803 http://500px.com/photo/8550507 http://500px.com/photo/8663004 http://www.flickr.com/photos/bencanales/7699030104/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/lesnafi/6750723953/ Look at the photos that are taken with these cameras so bad according to DXO, does not seem true scores, but makes people happy on a website say that your camera is better, or worse yet, buy a camera so says a website. ;) Reply |
|
|
Added by sufiblade |
November 05, 2012
Not surprised
I haven't used a high-end camera from any brand, but I know that the sensor performance from Nikon's low-end is a LOT better than what Canon's low-end offers. So I don't find the 1DX scores surprising either, but I am disappointed nevertheless because I was hoping that Canon might finally work on their sensor. Having said that, the low-light performance is something to write home about.
Reply |
|
|
Added by kharvatis |
November 04, 2012
Ken
Apparently Ken Rockwell runs DxO...
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by fishnose |
November 10, 2012
Re: KenQuote: <div id="linkdxomark">This a comment for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Canon/EOS-1Dx">this page on the website</a></div>Apparently Ken Rockwell runs DxO... Yeah, and when the pope takes a shit it smells. So what? Reply |
|
|
Added by ag08025 |
November 02, 2012
New TEST
if we believe in this test tomorrow DxO say that the iPhone 3 is better than 1Dx.
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by DXOMARK |
November 05, 2012
Re: New TEST
I wish they will just close down this web site instead of letting it operate in such an appalling and irresponsible way.
Cameras especially the earlier ones are not being reviewed. I wonder what is the purpose of their web site now ? ? ! ! ! A humane action is to close this website down ........... Reply |
|
|
Added by FredB |
November 06, 2012
Re: New TEST
Well, why do you visit it, if you hate it that much ? ???
Reply |
|
|
Added by MaoMao |
November 07, 2012
Re: New TEST
FredB, do not waste your time in answering this type of guy.
He does not know what is good. ;) Reply |
|
|
Added by Palen |
November 02, 2012
World exclusive.
World News, to cover sporting events, the Nikon D800 is better than the Canon 1DX. Jajajajajajajajaj.
Reply |
|
|
Added by Palen |
November 01, 2012
I can not believe
If you follow the results of this page, a Nikon D5100 is better than a 5DMarkIII, and is at the same level of a 1DX or medium format cameras, is incredible, this more than a house of analysis seems the advertising company Nikon & Sony. More and more voices are raised against the results of this website. Nikon camera you use images to promote your software. Interestingly most professional photographers lining the 500px sales, and have a great reputation ignore these results and continue to use mostly Canon or HB for their customers. I am also disappointed with the fact that now you may become responsible for the analysis Dpreview.com lenses, Nikon surely be the best in reverse of what everyone already knows. Kind regards.
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by lumpycustard |
November 02, 2012
Re: I can not believe
I think you'll find it's around the other way. Canon is a marketing powerhouse - they probably spend more advertising than Nikon even makes in a year. This is the #1 reason why everyone wants Canon cameras. When the company with the biggest marketing budget also uses the best sensors then DXOmark will no longer go against the grain.
The objective results here do have real-world implications. Take a D5100 and a 7D out at sunset and the dynamic range difference is immediately obvious. You'll also find that you have to put the 7D to bed half an hour earlier. It's really no surprise to read the figures on this site if you use both cameras together. Finally, the one thing everyone agrees on is that individual results are more useful than 'overall score'. For example the 5DmkIII absolutely smokes the D5100 in noise, which is what you'd expect. The overall score is too dependent on the weighting given to each category. For example Canon doesn't seem to value dynamic range whereas this DXOmark weights it quite heavily. Reply |
|
|
Added by fishnose |
November 02, 2012
Re: I can not believeQuote: I think you'll find it's around the other way. Canon is a marketing powerhouse - they probably spend more advertising than Nikon even makes in a year. This is the #1 reason why everyone wants Canon cameras. When the company with the biggest marketing budget also uses the best sensors then DXOmark will no longer go against the grain. The objective results here do have real-world implications. Take a D5100 and a 7D out at sunset and the dynamic range difference is immediately obvious. You'll also find that you have to put the 7D to bed half an hour earlier. It's really no surprise to read the figures on this site if you use both cameras together. Finally, the one thing everyone agrees on is that individual results are more useful than 'overall score'. For example the 5DmkIII absolutely smokes the D5100 in noise, which is what you'd expect. The overall score is too dependent on the weighting given to each category. For example Canon doesn't seem to value dynamic range whereas this DXOmark weights it quite heavily. +1 Reply |
|
|
Added by Palen |
November 02, 2012
Re: I can not believe
Read reviews of this analysis, and search the web, Nikon DxOLabs favors. Not me, says many people, just look in google. And no one in the world to see the results of this house, just put a number, any sample image, and explain how they obtained the result of that test through the images. Result is a completely opaque, and put consumer cameras above the best professionals, gentlemen, this is completely unbelievable and untrue.
Examples: Is it better a Nikon D800 for landscapes that a Phase One IQ180 Digital Back? The answer is NO, no way. Is it better a Nikon D5100 a 5DmarkII for landscapes? The answer is NO. And for portraits, are matched? NOT. Is the Nikon D800 ISO performance better than 5DMarkIII? It is also false, in fact the Nikon is worth to cover sporting events, I know professionals who have confirmed. I could go on with a long list of scores that are out of logic but I have work, each buy what you want. P.S. Forgive the possible lack of writing, use a translator. Reply |
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.
|
By replacing two predecessors with the Canon EOS-1D X, its new flagship professional DSLR, Canon hopes to deliver both the top-notch image quality of the studio-oriented Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III and the superfast performance of the Canon EOS 1D Mark IV sports shooter. A compromise of sorts between speed and image quality, the 1D X manages to deliver enough improvements to satisfy both markets. |