Nikon D5 vs. Canon EOS 1D X Mark II specifications comparison

Nikon-D5-vs.-Canon-EOS-1D-X-Mark-II-specification-comparison
The title says it all - this is a specifications comparison between the Nikon D5 and the new Canon EOS 1D X Mark II:

Nikon D5 Specs Canon EOS 1D X mark II
2x CF OR 2x XQD, serviceable Recording media 1x CF + 1x Cfast 2.0
unspecified Filesystem exFAT
Nikon D5 Photo stats Canon EOS 1DX mark II
EXPEED 5 Processor Dual DIGIC 6+
unspecified Custom Modes 3
1/8000 to 30s max shutter range 1/8000 to 30s
1/250s flash sync speed 1/250 (x-sync)
unspecified, assumed all Dual Card Modes Overflow, Mirror (including RAW+JPG), Quality-separate
12bit, 14-bit RAW depth 14-bit
5568 x 3712 (APS-C 3648 x 2432) Resolutions (RAWs) 5472 x 3648
4176 x 2784 (APS-C 2736 x 1824) 4104 x 2736
2784 x 1856 (APS-C 1824 x 1216) 2736 x 1824
20.8 Megapixels 20.2
~6.466 microns Pixel Pitch ~6.579 microns
12 fps (14 mirror-up) Max burst rate 14 fps (16 mirror-up)
200 (XQD, RAW+JPG) Max RAW buffer (at best) 170 (Cfast 2.0)
unspecified Max RAW buffer (CF) 73 (UDMA7)
100-102400 (power 0-10) ISO 100-51200 (power 0-9)
50 (power -1, L) Low 50 (power -1, L)
3,280,000 (power 15, H5) High 409,600 (power 12, H3)
-3 ± 20 EV (Matrix or center-weighted metering); 0 to 20 EV (Highlight-weighted metering) Metering Range EV 0 to +20 (@ 73°F/23°C, ISO 100, evaluative metering)
Nikon D5 AF system Canon EOS 1DX mark II
"EV -4 to +20 (@ 68°F/20°C, ISO 100)" Detection Range "(center point) EV -3, down to f/8"
180,000 pixels resolution 360,000 pixels
153, 99 cross Points 61, 41 cross
15 (unspecified types, 9 selectable) f/8 points all (21 cross)
unspecified additional points 5x f/2.8+5.6 dual-cross
unspecified 20x f/4+f/5.6 cross
unspecified 21x f/5.6 cross
unspecified 20x f/5.6 horizontal
~100% (APS-C 97%) Viewfinder ~100%
~0.72x Magnification ~0.76x, 35.1 deg angle-of-view
3.2" Display 3.2"
Playback Only Touchscreen Live-view only
2.359 Mpix Resolution 1.62 Mpix
LCD Type LCD
Nikon D5 Video stats Canon EOS 1DX mark II
unspecified AF drive active servo, DPAF
unspecified Max ISO 12800 (power 8) (4K), 25600 (H1, power 9) (others)
HDMI micro (resolution unspecified) video interface HDMI micro, output at 1080p
MOV Container MOV
H264, Linear PCM audio Codec Motion-JPEG (4K only), H264, AVC, Linear PCM audio
unspecified Bitrate see below
5568 x 3840 in ~1.45 crop 4K 4096 x 2160 in ~1.33 crop, in-camera framegrab (8.8Mpix)
n/a 4K 60/50fps intraframe JPEG, 60/50fps @ 800Mbps (5733 MB/min)
progressive (3 mins max) 4K 30/25/24fps intraframe JPEG, 30/25/24fps @ 500Mbps (3587 MB/min)
n/a 1080 120/100fps intraframe ALL-I @ 360Mbps (2585 MB/min)
progressive HQ (10 mins max) 1080 60/50fps intraframe ALL-I @ 180Mbps (1298 MB/min)
progressive Normal Quality (20 mins max) interframe IPB @ 60Mbps (5733 MB/min)
progressive HQ (20 mins max) 1080 30/25/24fps intraframe ALL-I @ 90Mbps (654 MB/min)
progressive Normal Quality (30 mins max) interframe IPB @ 30Mbps (225 MB/min), Lower mode @ 12Mbps (87 MB/min)
progressive (20-30 mins max) 720 60/50fps unspecified
progressive (30 mins max) 420 30/25/24fps unspecified
see above (external recording limits unspecified) max recording length Card space (29:59 tax unspecified); external recording
4GB (split-file unspecified) Internal Overflow uninterrupted
Nikon D5 Others Canon EOS 1DX mark II
400,000 Rated Shutter Life 400,000
GP-1A GPS Built-in
WT-5A/WT-6A WIFI WFT-E8A, IEEE 802.11ac/n/a/g/b, 2.4GHz/5GHz
Nikon WMU (iOS, Android) App Canon Camera Connect (iOS, Android)
unspecified, Dust-and-Weather-resistant Build Magnesium-Alloy, Dust-and-Weather-resistant
160mm x 158.5mm x 92mm Dimensions 158mm x 167.6mm x 82.6mm
1405g (XQD), 1415g (CF) Weight 1530g
EN-EL18a Battery LP-E19
3780 CIPA; 110 mins HD footage performance per charge 1210~1020 viewfinder, 260~240 live-view CIPA; Video recording performance unspecified
USB 3.0 micro-B, Ethernet Data Interface USB 3.0 micro-B, Ethernet
$6,496.95 SRP (USD) $5,999 (incl. free 64GB memory card & reader after a $300 instant savings)

Via Reddit

This entry was posted in Nikon D5. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Always wondered how Canon’s perform in the battery/power consumption department…

    • Eric Cheng

      I shoot a D750, and for a wedding an EN-EL15 lasts about 2000 shots NEF. I used to also borrow a 5D3, and I’d get roughly the same amount of CR2’s out of a full charged LP-E6. For good measure, I had to shoot small Jpegs for a dance competition, and a LP-E6 consistently shot well over 5000 shots, interchanging two of them for about 25K shots.

      • Eric Calabros

        so your style of shooting is different than CIPA test 🙂

        • Eric Cheng

          I don’t think anyone realistically shoots like a CIPA test xD But you’re right. As far as I’m concerned, both Canon and Nikon both have lasting batteries… unlike *cough* Sony *cough* 😉

          • Eric Calabros

            All camera makers are lazy in making efficient live view (mirrorless is a always live view camera). Today smartphones can keep the display on for 8 hours with batteries even smaller than camera batteries (3000mAh in 3.7 volt vs. EN-EL15 1900mAh in 7 volt).

            • CERO

              yeah, except phones do not have a monster sized silicon sensor working fully at same time as the expeed or digic processors (driving the AF and sensor feed)

            • Eric Calabros

              Smartphones also have to power their chip, which is not a task specific DSP, but a desktop class CPU/GPU. they also read out the full sensor data and downsample it for video recording, that around 12-16mp@30-60fps these days. While their WiFi/BT/LTE modems sending or receiving data at the same time. However, in live view, you skip lines, most of EVFs shows only 1megapixel of your sensor.

            • No, smartphone CPUs are definitely not desktop class, by any stretch of imagination. And they don’t record 8 hours of video… plus their sensor is smaller for when they do record.

            • Eric Calabros

              so you certainly haven’t seen A9X benchmarks

            • I haven’t seen any Apple-thing benchmarks as I don’t care about Apple, but quickly searching: “The A9X on the iPad Pro manages to not only outperform every other mobile device, as should be expected, but also takes a good lead over
              Apple’s 2015 MacBook powered by Core-M and manages to almost match performance by other, older notebooks powered by Intel’s Core i3 and Core i5 processors.”

              Almost match performance of older *notebook* parts; that’s not the same thing as desktop-class. And I would really be surprised for it to be so, when a mobile processor has a TDP of what, below 10W? Compare to 65W or more for desktop class.

            • Eric Calabros

              so only 65W cpu blongs to desktop? When Core M is able to run Lightroom, so its desktop class CPU, and we now have mobile CPUs can match it. Simple as that.

            • No, I didn’t say that. And because Core M is able to run Lightroom, it doesn’t mean it’s a desktop class CPU – where did you came up with that criterium from? Or if you want to use that as a differentiator, then smartphones can’t run (the desktop version of) Lightroom, hence they’re not desktop class CPUs 🙂

            • Eric Calabros

              A9 can run it, its software limited by OS. There are already people who expect Apple to replace Intel CPUs with its Ax in entry level Macbooks. You are free to deny that %90 of jobs people want to do with their laptops can be done with sub 8W CPU. But technology never wait for your approval.
              BTW, the point was Japanese camera chips are very inefficient. Period.

            • You keep changing your point. I never said that people can’t do with a low power CPU, all I said is that smartphone CPUs are not desktop CPUs, which was your claim.

              What this has to do with Apple *laptops* I still don’t understand.

            • Eric Calabros

              Desktop class CPU is a CPU that can handle desktop level tasks, if not OS limited. Editing RAW files in LR has been a desktop level task. Now we can do that with mobile CPU/GPUs with high bandwidth DRAM. I don’t know why it annoys you 🙂

            • Ken Elliott

              That has nothing to do with being a desktop class CPU. Desktop class cpus can perform cpu-intesive tasks for long periods of time, and tend to consume a lot more power, and require more cooling. Laptop-class cpus can handle such workloads for short periods, but lack cooling for longer periods. Phone-class cpus are super-efficent with power, and are designed for bursty workloads. This is more like comparing phone cameras vs full frame vs a Phase One. Just because all do fine making a Facebook picture on a sunny day, that doesn’t put them in the same class.

              Let’s face it – you can’t run Lightroom 6 on your iPad.

            • Eric Calabros

              Face what? Your denial? Of course it can. It already running 3D games more GPU intensive than a GPU optimized photo editor. Next generation of Apple A series will reach Core i3 territory.

            • Ken Elliott

              The iPad can run Lightroom Mobile, but not the full-blown Lightroom 6 – that’s x86/x64 only. I’ve done my share of assembly language programming, so I have a pretty good idea of what goes on inside a microprocessor. But if you prefer to think a tablet processor is “desktop-class”, you go right ahead. But don’t expect some of us to go along with your non-standard classification.

            • Eric Calabros

              a particular company resistance to release a specific app with your wish-list capabilities on iOS, does prove nothing in this case (they are the same company that even their legacy desktop version is so not-optimised-not-efficient that everybody is complaining about its resources allocation, let alone making a smooth yet powerful mobile app). and as I said in another comment, a full-blown LR needs lots of ram, with lots of bandwidth, and it will rise the cost, which is more important for a $400-500 device. though they constantly increasing the bandwidth. the app I use on my android phone is limited to 30mp photos, but I can apply curves to DNG files below that resolution. I’m not a programmer, I’m a photographer, and I’m doing things with my photos on my phone that were certainly “desktop-only” few years ago. so these phone CPUs are desktop class for me.

            • I’m not a programmer, I’m a photographer, and I’m doing things with my
              photos on my phone that were certainly “desktop-only” few years ago. so
              these phone CPUs are desktop class for me.

              Ah, that explains it. For your information, this kind of misuse of terms for programmers is similar to, let’s say, the following: a smartphone nowadays can create pictures of high enough quality, matching profesional cameras from a decade ago. Does that mean a smartphone is a professional camera device, ignoring the fact that is has very few lens options, very few flash options, etc. etc. etc.?

              I hope you see why your statement is so strange and unexpected to other people.

            • Eric Calabros

              Yes, smartphone can be used as Professional camera, as long as “pro” means getting paid for photographs.
              BTW, apparently I have to put this link everywhere in this thread:

              http://www.anandtech.com/show/9766/the-apple-ipad-pro-review/4

              They are not photographers, they are programmers, computer geeks, and industry experts.

            • Ken Elliott

              I said you couldn’t run LR6 on your iPad, and you said it could. Now you say it can’t. Let’s face it – you don’t know what you are talking about, and admitted it (quote: “I’m not a programmer, I’m a photographer”), yet you refuse to listen to those of use who DO KNOW. Please consider that several people have tried to explain this to you.

            • Eric Calabros

              You need to read brother. You need to read:

              “Against Intel’s slowest chips A9X is competitive, but as it stands A9X can’t keep up with the faster chips. However by the same metric there’s no question that Apple is closing the gap; A9X can compete with both Broadwell and Skylake Core M processors, and that’s something Apple couldn’t claim even a generation ago.”

              Page #4 is for people like you:

              http://www.anandtech.com/show/9766/the-apple-ipad-pro-review/4

            • Ken Elliott

              Uh… Core M is Intel’s mobile processor, not their desktop processor. Those are Intel’s slowest chips, certainly not “desktop”. Second, those tests are integer tests, not floating point – that’s a huge deal. Once again, you clearly don’t understand the subject matter.

              Perhaps you believe that a motorcycle beating a 18-wheeler tractor trailer in a drag race means it has a more powerful engine, but when you need to move a house load of furniture across the country, you’ll discover that the drag race benchmark was not an accurate way to judge them.

            • Eric Calabros

              No, I didn’t compare a motorcycle with a 18-wheeler. I compared that with a urban compact car. The point is “its car”. But you sound not believing its car after all 🙂

            • I think Eric is using “desktop class” very differently than us, so I don’t think he’ll ever agree that his mobile device is not “desktop class”.

            • Ken Elliott

              Yeah, I think he read some fanboi article and doesn’t grasp the difference. If your benchmark of excellence is the ability to make a B&W print, then I’m in the same league as Ansel Adams. (I know I’m far from it).

            • The only thing that annoys me is people misusing terminology, nothing else.

              Desktop class to me means : supporting a specific number of I/O lanes and specific overall I/O throughput, target memory bandwidth and features (and e.g. supporting ECC memory), being able to work at 100% utilisation for practically unbounded time without thermal throttling, etc.

              It seems to you, desktop class means simply being able to run a certain specific workload, and this is the first time I hear that classification. That’s fine, and I’ll back down from this conversation now, but I’m still surprised about this specific way to classify CPUs (or GPUs, for that matter).

            • CERO

              This guy has no idea what he is talking about.
              Even worse if he dares to compare a simple mobile gpu compared to a full desktop solution (like a Fury X)

            • http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/11/ipad-pro-review-mac-like-speed-with-all-the-virtues-and-limitations-of-ios/4/

              My takeaway is that the A9X performs comparably to pretty nice Intel-powered laptops (e.g. a $1500 Surface Pro — maybe 50-75% as fast at multicore CPU benchmarks, and actually faster at GPU). The A9 in the iPhone 6S is not as powerful GPU-wise, but still — not bad. Today’s laptop is certainly giving a two year old desktop a run for its money — and the laptops being compared are not typical PC laptops (which are far worse). Also, the iPad isn’t going to do better than a good dedicated GPU (although the performance of the dedicated GPUs on recent Apple and Windows laptops has actually been kind of mixed).

              That said, Apple is a _long_ way ahead of Nikon, Qualcomm, et al in terms of performance per watt. They can’t get A9s to put in their cameras.

            • CERO

              what surfaces? note that the first surfaces were awful, only the next (3 onwards) ones were decent. Also what kind of benchmarks are we talking about? to really compare apples to apples.. the same benchmarks should be applied to BOTH systems.
              If you run specified benchmarks optimized for certain architecture.. of course the system in question will win.

              Note that the intel processors have LAUGHABLY BAD gpus.
              If you want to talk about “desktop” gpus, you should talk about AMD’s or Nvidia’s.
              Also, you’re again missing the point.
              Pretty sure the biggest draw(power wise) is still the monstrous sensor using older tech gen for bigger pixels.

            • I don’t think anybody disagrees here that, at least in bursty workloads, today’s mobile device CPUs and GPUs are indeed quite powerful. But Eric didn’t say “desktop *performance*”, he said “desktop *class* CPUs”.

              Let me know when the ipad/iphone/android whatever has ECC memory, can sustain in excess of 1-2GB/s to storage and the same to networking devices, and can run for 30 hours at full speed without throttling. Then we talk about “desktop class”.

            • stormwatch

              Desktop class CPU/GPU?….yes, but in 2004.

            • Eric Calabros

              The actual number is 2011. You can check the benchmarks.

            • stormwatch

              Can it render 4k in real time? No, thank you very much.

            • Um, yes. They can shoot 4K, view it, and edit it.

            • stormwatch

              Really? Nme me at least three 4k editing applications on Android and their speed in comparison with the real time playback and the difference in quality between the recorded material and the final output.

            • Eric Calabros

              Yes, Sony Z5 Prime already play 4k video on 4k display.

            • Play ≠ render. He said rendering, not simply playing a movie.

            • stormwatch

              Playing 4k video on 4k display is not exactly the same as the rendering 4k video in the real time and having a quality output. I would like to se Z5 Prime dealing with Panasonic 100mbit DVX200 files :-)))))

            • Eric Calabros

              iPhone is already dealing with 50mbit, I don’t think 100mbit is such a hurdle as you think. moreover, it also depends on memory bandwidth, you cant blame CPU/GPU for that.

            • stormwatch

              It depends from many things, but no current smartphone is nearly as ready for the task of quality 4k editing and output.

            • Eric Calabros

              They will in next 12 months, and then you will say “no current smartphone is ready for 8k, so their CPUs are not desktop class”.

            • stormwatch

              You’re being too optimistic. Nowadays smartphones, even the fastest ones are just good as the high class PC was for the SD video production in 2004. That’s it.

            • CERO

              what the hell are you talking about? are you serious saying smartphones have desktop class cpu gpu? lol.

            • Eno

              Actually I almost get 1200 shots out of Gh4 so not all mirrorless suck in battery department. 🙂

            • Eric Calabros

              Photography includes spending time watching the world through viewfinder. Your mileage of that time spending may vary

            • Eno

              1200 shots with time spent through the electronic viewfinder as you said. 🙂

            • My iPhone 6 display could not be on for 8 hours on one charge. Where are you getting this info?

            • Eric Calabros

              Your 6 is not at top of the chart. There are phones with 10 hours of display on time 🙂

            • Name one that is…

            • Eric Calabros

              Huawei Mate 8 (Anandtech also confirms that) but it has huge battery. in normal capacity range, Sony Z3 Compact is the king.

              http://www.gsmarena.com/battery-test.php3

            • Those phones have non replaceable batteries. So once dead you have to go and plug in, not that useful.

      • fanboy fagz

        sony needs to up their level. they dont last long. but theyre just small. the canon and nikon cameras dont have issues with battery consumption. theyre very good

    • Martin Kozák

      Despite the new battery, battery life stays the same as 1DX: CIPA rated 1200 shots. In reality around 1600 shots :-/

    • Brian

      I shoot wildlife and the Canon gang are always having to change batteries. I get thousands on my D4S battery.

      • nikonian

        Iv’e done over 4200 on one charge before on mine (stills + a few videos). Love the battery life.

  • Bendik

    Isn’t the bitrate on the D5 is 144mps @ 30/25/24 internally, and uncompromised externally?

    • CERO

      regardless of that.. the canon’s 500mbps is pretty insane..

      • Moose1414

        800mbps at 60p. Still, its apples to oranges a little bit regarding bitrates because the codec’s are so different. MJPEG is extremely inefficient so high bitrates are the order of the day there. Will be interesting to see the difference in quality once real world samples are around. But yes, all things being equal i’d expect the Canon to stomp on the Nikon still for video.

        • Moose1414

          What is frustrating is that both companies face the same challenges with delivering 4k due the the weather sealing on these bodies. Nikon chose to limit the video in the D5 to 3 minutes and cry its not their fault because of the heat. Canon had a workaround for this 4 years ago in their last 1D, solved it by using MJPEG. In the interim they couldn’t solve the engineering challenges of encoding 4k so just used logic again and kept MJPEG and were able to give their users awesome specs for 4k.
          Arguably, with its dual XQD slots the D5 has greater internal potential than Canon to deal with high bitrate MJPEG but they choose not to take that path. Lagging Canon on an important spec simply because.. who knows?

          • jtan163

            Because Nikon is not really a video company.
            They make a good effort and have been first with some video features (no video product like/division to protect), but Nikon can’t fall back on a video division (like Pannie or Canon) and access/re-use the video technology that the dedicated video divisions have developed for their dedicated video products.

            • Moose1414

              Nikon is in every sense a video company. If I am not mistaken they have put video into every DSLR they have made since the D90 [except the DF] and that was in 2008, 8 years ago.
              Thats nearly a decade as a company making camera’s that are used to shoot video. Moreover, every company in the camera business competes in the same space in which video is an important piece of the picture. Nikon are trying hard to stay in 2nd place to Canon, the reason they do video at all is because if they turned their back on it they would be less competitive in the marketplace. It is surely nice for them to have people leap to their defence every time they are criticised and argue that Camera’s are for taking pictures not video, but thats not reality.

              My observation though was in fact that they are making things harder for themselves than they have to be. What Canon have done in the D1x2 is in fact easier to do than what Nikon have tried, and failed, to do in the D5. MJPEG is an ancient codec, its easier to implement that H.264 because it doesn’t require the same hardware to encode. The reason Canon are using it and Nikon aren’t has nothing to do with the hard limits of engineering but merely one of not having the appetite for offering their customers a proven solution to a common problem.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Every car manufacturer puts some kind of sound system in their vehicles but they are in NO WAY audio system companies.
              That’s not to negate the rest of your post, just your original premise.

            • Moose1414

              They are not audio system companies because they don’t make audio systems, they buy them from a third party. Are Nikon not a real camera company because they buy their sensors from Sony?

              Nikon are an imaging company, their Camera’s are made to make images. Video is moving images. A car is a lot more complex than a Camera. A radio in a car is a lot less significant in the scheme of things as an image [moving] is in a Camera. So your example is a bit of a false equivalency.

              The point is: now that Canon have revealed their specs, and Nikon are seemingly committed to tackling the 3 minute limit before the D5 ships anyway, maybe it wouldn’t hurt to consider implementing MJPEG as a way of dealing with the processing challenges of 4k.

            • Thom Hogan

              Nikon also buys their video compression from others, too. So let’s put this a different way: exactly what video ability does Nikon produce themselves using their own proprietary technology?

            • Moose1414

              Nikon Flat picture profile maybe?
              How about putting it this way: exactly what video compression does Canon use in the 1Dx2 that is proprietary and unavailable to Nikon?
              I’ll defer to your greater knowledge Thom but I assume both Can/Nikon pay a licence fee on H.264, and I think MJPEG may even be open source?
              Assuming the Expeed 5 processor in the D5 is as powerful as Canons Digic 5 from 2012 then I’m not seeing a technical reason, or indeed a licensing one, why MJPEG couldn’t be used given the internal bandwidth provided by dual XQD.
              The comparison to cars and radio’s is getting a bit silly, and i’m similarly not interested in rehashing the eternal “why video?” arguments either. I’m merely questioning what is wrong with exploring different options in codecs.
              And on that note, something thats quite interesting is the role that RED has played in crippling video advances for all players in the industry, Sony included, by attaining a Patent back in the day obstructing anyone else from using a wavelet compression for video- a technology they didn’t develop themselves but merely adopted first. But thats a whole other can of worms.

            • Thom Hogan

              Sure, Flat Picture Control. But why isn’t it S-Log, a video “standard”? (I put standard in quotes because even though it is a standard, there seems to be open interpretation about where to place skin tones between makers.)

              For the most part, I wouldn’t argue that ANY of the still camera makers are doing anything in the way of proprietary video capabilities, though you might argue that Canon and Sony are designing sensors with video very much in mind.

              Thing is, ask a video pro what it is they want that they’re not getting directly in the DSLRs. I’ll bet that true S-Log, raw video, and ProRes/Avid compressions are at the top of the list. From there you’ll get XLR support, quality mic/line amps, and a host of other things that you find in the pro video range these days. Maybe SDI.

              What the DSLRs are producing is “good enough” video, best case. Now maybe that’s what they should be producing, but I’m not seeing a lot of attention to topping out the video, even in the pro cameras.

            • Moose1414

              I think when the codec is 8-bit and being compressed down to such small files sizes such as in H.264 there isn’t a lot of point to Log. Which is what i think a lot of users discovered when they bought the Sony FS5 and found the image very wanting in log mode, just not enough information being kept to achieve the benefits of log format. Flat Picture is actually not a bad way for Nikon to go over true log for that reason.

              You are preaching to the covered on the advantages of a dedicated video camera with an electric viewfinder, XLR, inbuilt ND’s and all the bells and whistles. Especially these days where a quality 4k dedicated video camera can be had or the same price as a D5. I’m not trying to make any of those arguments. Nikon have used video in their products for the best part of a decade, the D5 is their flagship camera and includes the arrival of 4k video in their marketing materials for the D5, I’m simply saying look at how the grass is a little greener on the other side. The 1Dx isn’t a video camera either, but Canon are able to offer a pretty nice video spec by making a trade off between files size and compression to get around the heat problems Nikon too are encountering. MJPEG being large files because they are less compressed, therefore creating less heat. I’m comparing only D5 to 1D not either or both to a RED or Sony FS.

              But while I have got your attention I wish I could ask for an opinion of a different issue for Canon and Nikon in future regarding frame per second for stills. I believe the current generation of cameras are now shooting 14 and 16 frames a second. With Jpegs apparently the Canon can shoot at that rate independent of the buffer, for as long as it takes to fill the card. And Nikon mirrorless cameras can shoot stills at 24 frames for short periods too, making them quasi 4k video cameras. The 1Dx is essentially just shooting 8Mpx Jpegs at up to 60 frames and calling it video. It is theoretically possible Nikon could achieve similar things on the D5 using sRaw compression to make video from a series of 8Mpx frames.
              But as I hinted before, RED has patented the use of RAW files captured at 24 frames and beyond, and RAW compression at speeds of 24 frames and above. Which seems to me precludes both of them doing things with video they probably could already achieve from a technical standpoint.

            • Thom Hogan

              True. If you’re going to capture at 8-bit 4:2:0 and then compress, your post processing options are pretty narrow. Banding is very easy to trigger, in my experience, and the lost data is already very severe, which limits you.

              As to frame rates of still cameras, this is going to get interesting. Half of the folk wanting high frame rates are actually in venues where “video rights” are sold to the highest bidder, and those rights holders aren’t going to want “still” cameras shooting video. There’s a bit of a detente at the moment, and the still photographers have been fairly careful to not actually sell “motion” out of their captures, but it’s really only a matter of time before someone jumps over the bar.

              We also have Nikon and now Apple wrapping a still in a motion container, so you end up with both a still and a short video. At some point, rights holders will be keeping video-capable still cameras out of those venues, I think. It’s the only real way of dealing with the problem.

              As for RED’s raw video patent, I’d argue that it isn’t valid. To my knowledge, the others doing raw video aren’t licensing it, either.

            • Moose1414

              I’d argue it isn’t valid either. But as Sony found out, RED don’t exactly see it that way and have been keen to litigate. So far those doing raw video haven’t been game to compress, which kind of makes it pointless. Canon filed patents for a different kind of compressed raw video back in 2012 but so far we haven’t seen anything of those either.
              Good point on the mix of stills and video in the live event arena. The ability to take 8Mpx stills from the 4k video stream on the 1Dx could make that quite interesting indeed.

            • Doug Henry

              agree, all this “video in dslr” stuff is just the typical ramp up of specs crammed in to a SLR camera. no “video people” want to use dslrs, but they have become fashionable because they are much cheaper than traditional “pro” video equipment. All the video people I know that use dslrs, use them as a way to generate a video signal, the encoding/storage capabilities are not useful. They all use external recorders (atomos/red/etc) to get prores/avid, large fast storage (they record directly to SSD hard drives), and a better monitor. the rest is an exercise for post processing. hook up an atomos ninja/assassin/shogun, and you can record all day with almost any dslr.

            • Moose1414

              Doug there are many reasons video people want to use DSLR’s. A coupe are: they are smaller and less conspicuous than video cameras and can be used in circumstances where this is an advantage, which are many. They are able to shoot full frame which is a look many people enjoy. They shoot nice stills, some people do both. They are vastly superior to virtually ever video camera for high ISO shooting. They are at the cutting edge for video autofocus.
              Also FYI, the video signal coming out of HDMI is in fact encoded, and external recording offers negligible improvement to the video image so I think you would find external recorders are less widely used or admired than you think. And on price, a Canon 1Dx is price adjacent to many entry level video camera’s, and the reason someone might choose to buy one instead of say a Sony FS5 is the internal image on the Canon is likely superior, certainly cleaner, and dual system audio is quite common for a lot of video work so XLR’s are irrelevant. None of REDs camera’s come with XLR audio nor does ARRI’s Alexa Mini, for this reason.

            • Doug Henry

              Moose, thanks for the info.

            • Eno

              S-Log is a Sony proprietary Log format and not an universal one. It’s like Canon’s C-Log and Panasonic’s V-Log etc.

              You are totally right about audio but efficient codecs like h.264 or h.265 are also desired for event shooting, run and gun documentaries, concerts etc. Raw and pro res are very good but also very space demanding. I wold personally opt for both options if possible.

            • Thom Hogan

              Yes, but those all try to match a common definition in the video standards. Strangely, they all seem to disagree slightly on where skin tone falls, though NTSC is pretty clear where that is.

            • CERO

              Considering how newer Canons have DUAL digic 6 processors, I dont think so.

              Also, the limitations could not only be related to cpu power or bandwidth, but also comprehension of the codes, heat and battery drain.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Again, I have to disagree with your premise. A lot of components for automobiles are outsourced but integral to their primary product. Radios don’t fall into that category.
              Any individuals assessment of the relative importance of video in a camera will be based on their needs and experience. Collectively, video is RELATIVELY unimportant for a camera. That’s not to say it’s irrelevant but certainly not the main selling point COLLECTIVELY. There are a lot of us who NEVER shoot video. I can’t believe anyone is buying a non-video camera and never shooting stills.

            • PhilK

              No offense intended but I think you are speculating about engineering issues of which I don’t think you are qualified to speculate about. Specifically, Nikon to a great extent are constrained like many non-vertically-integrated companies by the characteristics of the component parts they source externally to build their products. Since ExSpeed is reputedly based on a Fujitsu DSP, if Fujitsu has not engineered certain capabilities into their architecture (eg UHD, various codec support and so on), it’s not particularly likely Nikon will be able to just tack such capabilities onto an architecture that was never designed to support it. Canon and Sony, on the other hand, are large chipmakers in their own right, with vastly greater electronics engineering, design and production resources than Nikon has. Which means they are not likely to be nearly as constrained about supporting a brand-new or more esoteric video capability since if the silicon necessary doesn’t currently exist they will probably just go build it or have it built for them.

              And to reiterate my previous comment, I also do not believe Nikon has either the engineering or industry depth, nor management interest to be honest, to stay even with companies like Canon and Sony when it comes to cutting-edge video functionality. These are companies which have been producing a broad spectrum of professional video equipment for many years, who have all sorts of hands-on-deck in the industry and stay on the cutting-edge in that field. Nikon does this for sure when it comes to the still photography, micrography and silicon chip industry photolithography fields, but they just never have done this with the video/cinematic field. Nor do I personally think it’s critically necessary. I certainly don’t require my cameras to do those things, and I’m not unique in that regard.

            • Moose1414

              We’re talking about motion jpeg. The D5 doesn’t have a chip that encodes jpeg?

            • PhilK

              I was making a general point, that a company like Nikon is constrained to some degree by the electronic and firmware building-blocks that they obtain from 3rd-parties to make their products. The fact that a feature does or does not exist is in no way *automatically* because Nikon doesn’t care or wants it that way, they have to work with what is currently available in the marketplace to some extent.

              Whereas a company like Samsung in many cases is nearly vertically integrated, they literally produce most of the important building-blocks that go into their electronic devices. That gives them a substantial competitive edge in some ways. In terms of direct competitors, Canon for example is the 3rd-largest owner of US patents in the world behind Samsung and IBM. Nikon isn’t even in the running. That technology base benefits them in a variety of ways. Nikon has some great technology in certain areas of expertise, but nowhere near the breadth of a company like Canon, Sony or Panasonic.

              And that is why Nikon has a tougher road to hoe these days compared to 30 years ago when distinctions between cameras were more in terms of the mechanics than the electronics.

          • Jonathan

            Also of note, from canon’s EU website:

            When shooting movies or capturing images continuously via high-speed mode for a long time without breaks, the CMOS sensor and Dual “DIGIC 6+” processors deal with a massive amount of data, which in turn generates a significant amount of heat. This heat is transferred from the sensor and processors to the top of the battery chamber and dissipates via a special heat pipe, ensuring the camera is always ready for use.

            The EOS-1D X Mark II heat dispersal system, along with the powerful processors, enables continuous 4K video recording of up to 29 min 59 sec.

            • CERO

              id love to see a inner diagram of the new canon to see the heatpipe design!

            • Jonathan

              this is about the best I think anyone can do right now… http://www.canon-europe.com/images/Heat-Dispersal_tcm13-1349195.jpg

            • CERO

              thank you! seems like a flat copper heat pipe? Surprised they only used one.

            • PhilK

              Thanks for that photo, that’s interesting. I imagine you need that heatpipe so you don’t burn your nose off while shooting video. 😀

          • CERO

            Pretty sure that the 3 minute limit was because they are using FAT32 filesystems.. which limits to 4Gb files.
            also pretty sure they mean 3 minute PER file. So continuous files shouldn’t be a problem like with the D500.

            Nikon already said a firmware for the D5 is on the way to extend the video.

            • PhilK

              My recollection is that was an off-the-cuff “maybe” not a “definitely”. I doubt Nikon would have just “oopsed” an important spec like that in the beginning, if the technical constraints were not significant.

          • Papirclips

            Nikon has i firmware update to record 29:59 4K in the camera comming

        • CERO

          I actually wonder if the higher bitrate and less comprehension will let you manipulate the videos better with Canon’s codec.

        • PhilK

          I think people who know the history could likely predict with their eyes closed that pretty much all Canons will stomp on all Nikons in video shooting performance, because outside of the fact that the D90 was the first DSLR to include video shooting, Nikon never has been much of a cinema or video product producer, it neither interests them nor do they have much industry and engineering talent in that field. Those things are Sony, Panasonic and Canon’s forte, all of which have been producing a large range of video equipment for many decades. In the case of Panasonic (Matsushita), back to the 1930s and the very early days of TV, for Sony going back to the 1950s, and Canon perhaps the 1960s or 1970s.

          At the moment I think Nikon is implementing video in their cameras as a “tickbox item” more or less – because certain customers expect it – but they don’t seem particularly interested expending lots of engineering resources pushing the envelope. (Which is perfectly fine with me, because I personally have little to no interest in using a still camera to shoot videos and would prefer they focus their resources on the still photography side)

  • drpeters

    In the right hands, either of these beasts will do just fine.

    • Ritvar Krum

      it is not about that – I am sure that in right hands D3 still does just fine… but here they are 2016. – we compare them to determine witch has less PR fluff in specs, wich has more bang for buck and where will be direction of lower end cameras for next few years

      • fanboy fagz

        nikon should be the same as the canon.

        • Eric Calabros

          Because?

          • fanboy fagz

            if dont know why, then just stop.

            • Eric Calabros

              If don’t have the answer, then just stop 🙂

            • fanboy fagz

              I dont have patience to school you on why. go back to helicopter school. ask them there.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Are you naturally angry or is there something about this site that brings it out in you? Seriously.

            • hurd300403

              giant troll here. nothing to see… move along.

            • CSIROC

              “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.” – Albert Einstein

            • peter w

              sometimes a simple explanation is so simple that it is simply not true…
              😉

        • Shutterbug

          The D5 has far better spec in a lot of key areas (like AF, buffer, real card slots, and connectivity), it’s not hard to justify a $4XX price premium especially on such a high margin pro body. $4XX isn’t going to turn any buyers over to another brand haha. Honestly I think most people would pay the tiny premium just to get two real card slots instead of one crippled one (I know I would), never mind the other reasons. Your trolling is growing tiresome.

          • fanboy fagz

            Im not canon. im not buying the D5 anytime soon. my D3 D3s and D4 do a great job as is. I think for competitiveness they should price it the same. and they were, till the D4s came out and they bumped it another 500

        • PhilK

          Actually I think Canon’s decision to wait until the D5 was announced and then price their product $500 below the D5 is a VERY good indication that they do not feel they have the upper-hand in product appeal compared to the D5.

          Because of that and unlike so many other competitive scenarios between Canon and Nikon products, I think Nikon should just stand pat in this case. No one in the market for a $6000 camera is going to switch brands and all their expensive lenses over a $500 per body price differential.

          You should go to the Canon fan sites and read the discussions there lately. There is hand-wringing aplenty over the “meh” 1DX-2 upgrade compared to what Nikon did with the D5. Nikon, for once, is sitting pretty and I think they should bask in that halo.

    • br0xibear

      Yeah you’re right.
      Most photographers who are looking to buy a flagship model have likely started with other cameras from that manufacturer and worked their way up, so they have various lenses and accessories, and are therefore unlikely to be switching. Since the D3 appeared I don’t know anyone that’s switched either way.
      The cameras are so good now, it perplexes me when people complain about them.
      It’s an interesting spec comparison that shows the slightly different ideas and approaches from Nikon and Canon, I’ve nothing against Canon, but I’ve always used Nikon and they suit me better.
      From a design pov I always thought Nikons were better, but again that’s a personal thing.
      At the end of the day as long as the camera does what you need and is totally reliable in what you ask from it, then that’s all that matters, for me anyway.

      • Patrick O’Connor

        Scott Kelby changed but then, he DID say it had nothing to do with Canon endorsing him. Curiously, a few of his employees switched shortly afterward. 🙂

        • of course it has to do with endorsement

          • Patrick O’Connor

            I wish Discuss supported html formatting. I thought capitalizing “DID” would convey sarcasm but…

        • br0xibear

          Hi Patrick,
          Sorry I wasn’t clear, I meant photographers that I knew personally or professionally.
          Before the D3 came out a few friends who wanted to get into digital quickly, went to Canon, they stayed with Canon, too much expense involved in changing again for no real reason.

          • Patrick O’Connor

            You were very clear and I agree completely. My comment was meant to be funny (I’m sorry that I wasn’t clear).
            On a side note, it is a rare (and appreciated) occurrence for someone to be so polite (“Hi Patrick”)! Now I feel bad for my relative crudeness. 🙂

      • Ned Gerblansky

        “Since the D3 appeared I don’t know anyone that’s switched either way”

        I know one guy that has. Sports photog Mark Rebilas dumped all of his Nikon gear a couple years ago and went all Canon after shooting Nikon for years. They pissed him off enough that he dumped them and spent a ton on three 1Dx bodies and a bunch of glass. I can’t imagine it costing him less than $50K to make the switch.

        • br0xibear

          Hi Ned,
          Yeah photography has never been cheap, whether amateur, professional or whatever.
          Personally I wouldn’t switch to Canon even if it were paid for by Canon themselves, not because I’ve got anything against them, but because I just don’t believe any benefit would be worth the upheaval for me, for others of course it would.
          I do envy Canon users one thing though, those f/1.2 lenses.

  • Doug Laurent

    Nikon and Canon should both make mirrorless versions of their flagships asap (without changing body size or mounts!!!), so we can have best of both worlds. That should not be too expensive to develop and give them a sales boost as well.

    Unfortunately the worst thing for a camera manufacturer is to deliver a camera that the users might never want to replace. So i fear it will take until the next decade until they finally have no other choice than realizing this very simple idea.

    • Ritvar Krum

      dude – do your homework before comenting – read about cameras and market a little

      • Doug Laurent

        You are right, I was probably able to afford 50+ cameras and 200+ lenses and work with them because I’m a complete idiot who knows nothing about cameras and markets -unlike you, genius of all camera forums and master communicator. Irrational fanboy people like you are the reason why brands can slow down their innovation processes and make users pay much more over time than they wanted.

        • Owning 50+ cameras and 200+ lenses doesn’t prove that much. A wealthy person can own more than that and still know nothing.

          • Doug Laurent

            This is why I added “and work with them”. Luckily not all the time under the pressure of paid projects, which leaves enough room for me to compare Sony, Nikon and Canon products. I see that most of the 60+ pro people i rent stuff to don’t have the time for that and of course also don’t have all these tools available, which means hardly anybody does experience the real differences of all the products.

            This leads to the situation that my comments do contain insights and opinions that might seem unusual, but they are not an insult to users, they are a message to the manufacturers. In the past I might have been much more critical about Canon in Canon forums by the way. These big companies do charge a lot of money and show no mercy, so they need to accept tough criticism as well.

            • Dea Sua Tia

              Idk man…. Although I think they should put mirrorless more seriously, I’m not sure about the lens mount/size. They shouldn’t put a same fringe distance as DSRL in Mirrorless, I think, because doing so they would bring a big mirrorless with no AF advantage over DSRL.

              I’m not against making a big mirrorless, but what’s the point of that if it’s not as good as the DSRL? EVF addition is nice, but I’m not sure if it’s nice enought.

              Low end DSRL could be replaced with a Mirroless option, I guess, but for high end, I think ditching mirrorbox only makes sense when those companies achieve an awesome-enough sensor based AF.

              Other option is to change mount, while releasing an affordable and good adapter. This is the approach Canon is taking, but they haven’t invested enough and haven’t released a FF model.

            • Doug Laurent

              An EVF is excellent for photos, because you can have focus peaking and zoom in the picture – and of course for video it can be much more usable than the monitor as well.

              With yesterdays’s announcement of the Sony E-Mount 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 it seems technically you can’t built such lenses much smaller and lighter, even if it’s mirrorless. It’s also not possible to add a second card slot, or much more battery power in a small size body like the A7 series.

              This is why just keeping the DSLR size and formfactors and mounts, and adding the best elements of the mirrorless world would be the ideal solution. I am 100% sure that this will happen – and the combination is so obvious that I really wonder why nobody is talking about it.

            • Dea Sua Tia

              Agreed Doug. But the problem is that Canikon doesn’t have (or they are hiding) sensor AF tech solution that works as good as DSRL. Sony is more able to do that, since they have developed and keeps researching sensor AF that seems to be approaching fast the DSLR AF performance.

              Without good sensor AF, I’m not sure EVF benefit is good enough to ditch the mirrorbox + AF module. For low end, though, maybe it would be interesting to go that route, with full F mount compatibility.

              Another route is to go for dedicated non-action camera, like 5DS. It would be interesting to have a lighter mirrorless camera, with exposure, histogram, focus peaking, EVF, with high MP count, silent shoot without vibration, full F mount compatibility, even without super über sensor AF.

            • Doug Laurent

              The sad thing is that it will still take several more years until products are available you can use forever – like in the audio world, where you simply buy high end speakers, the best microphone etc and you are set for 20 years. Some tools like 4k monitors are already quite close to what could be perfection for eternity.

    • Aldo

      I guess it’s like the electric car… we know it’s the future but it’s not quite there yet… that doesn’t mean you can’t buy an electric car right now.

      • Eric Calabros

        With a little difference that the cost of electric car is higher than conventional car. But mirrorless has lower cost to make.
        But I admit I have no clue how much a 5million dot 120Hertz OLED display with only 3milliseconds lag for EVF would cost for a not-display-maker companies like CaNikon.

        • Aldo

          Thing is man… we bash on sony all day long about their poor battery life… and to tell you the truth.. when I shoot video clips with the d750 I go through batteries like crazy… the live view kills them quick. Also sony makes great batteries… I use sony video cameras to record events… they last forever. so what this tells me is that the the live view component or the EVF in mirrorless cameras simply eats the sh*** out of batteries. So, it’s not so much that dslrs have better battery life… but that they obviously draw much less power with their optical viewfinder. I think when you put this in prospective and ponder about making a ‘flagship’ mirrorless camera for either nikon or canon… this is the single greatest limitation.

          • Eric Calabros

            Camera makers don’t use the state of the art displays I guess. LG G4 5+ inch 2.5k IPS LCD needs less than 700mAh at %50 brightness. It’s even worse in EVFs, they pack lots of pixels in a tiny area, which requires more power to have decent brightness. Nikon once filled a patent to put the LCD in where now focus screens are placed in DSLRs, and you see its image through mirrors. If they do it with F mount there will be enough room to use larger screen.

            • tharealmb

              Try your LG G4 with the camera on… and see how long it will last. It’s not gonna last long. Reading the info from the sensor and displaying it just takes a lot of CPU power.

        • CERO

          probably the biggest problems of all mirrorrless is the battery drain imho.
          having the evf + screen + active sensor getting data all the time..
          plus the heat ?

    • aarif

      No but make another version without the grip

    • CERO

      Quality attracts customers.
      Hence why a lot of people buy high end stuff.. to last and be reliable.

  • Eric

    I’m a Nikon user, but even I must admit that the Canon 1Dx mk2 is probably the one to go for.

    • Certainly got me thinking.

    • I think the otherwise. For me Nikon has the edge.

      *I don’t give a damn about the 4K capabilities of the D5, it’s a stills camera anyway, there are far more better and dedicated 4K cameras in the market. I don’t understand why people “needs” it so much. I’m in a field of photography where everyone I know holds a D4s or a 1DX, but no one aimed to use it for video. And I bet the same will happen to both new cameras.

      • Aldo

        Why put 4k in it then? and 3min limit? oh wait they are putting out a firmware that lets you record more? I’m not sure what nikon is doing… the scarier thing is that maybe THEY don’t even know what they are doing.

        That being said… I think the nikon will have a better sensor for stills… but maybe canon will surprise who knows.

        • The manufacturers [Canon & Nikon] has just to add something to spice up their new products. 4K is not new this 2015-2016, it is being offered already by other brands. Stills cameras are at the verge of ultimate perfection (based on technology can offer), Canon and Nikon has to hold up features so they can bring something “new” to the table.

        • EGGZZ

          Its quite simple actually.

          This is a stills camera for Pro photojournalists. Videographers would never use a DSLR for film unless they are mentally impaired. However, there Can be situations where filming is required, and for that, the 3 min. limit would rarely be a problem. But the 4K gives WAY better looking 1080p when downsampled. Makes perfect sense.

          • Aldo

            I dont think so… Its not that simple… nikon introduced video to ‘pro’ bodies with the d800/d4. It was quite popular but it was also obvious they had work to do in that department. You seem to see video strictly from a photographers perspective. Nikon markets strongly for video in these two new cameras. They want to compete. They dont just want people to take foot note-type clips. As for the 3min limitation… it is true it wouldnt affect certain style of shooting… but to go out and defend this limitation is a little nikon-fan-boyish.

            • PhilK

              Until someone does a credible survey of how many DSLR buyers actually use the video capabilities of their cameras to a significant degree (I’d wager not very many), it’s a little outrageous to call someone “fan-boyish” simply for repeating the frequently-stated point that they don’t think video is important in a DSLR.

              For the record, I don’t think it’s important either. There are a number of posters here who say the same. It may only seem like an irrelevant stance to you if you studiously filter-out all the contrary opinions you don’t agree with. 🙂

            • Aldo

              My opinions go beyond speculation and are backed up with years of experience both in the photographic and video field. Because of the nature of what I do… I bump into many photographers and videographers regularly. I dont need to survey them… I see right then and there what they are using week after week. Dslr’s are used for video a lot more than you seem to be aware of… they brought the ‘cinematic’ style to the masses…. as far as the 3min limitation I’ll say it again… defending this limitation is fanboyish. It should not be… and nikon is on it even before they release the camera.

              I am fine with disagreeing and everyone is entittle to their opinions… but there is little objectivity when speculation deems opinions a fact. An open mind would seem more logical in such situations.

            • PhilK

              And once again I reiterate that it’s offensive to keep calling people “fanboyish” for such reasons.

              Do you honestly believe that Nikon just arbitrarily limited the recording-time on the D5 because they “didn’t care” or “didn’t know” that any customer would be concerned with such things? If so, then I think you’re even more naive than I thought.

              Personally I’d give it about about a 95% likelihood that the 3-min limitation was a *technical/physical limit*, imposed by the nature of the component parts that Nikon uses to build the camera, some of which Nikon does not have direct control over. Just because you want to wave that all away and opine that it’s so simple to just “choose different parts or design” does not make it so. I rather doubt you actually have much idea about what goes into designing such products.

              In addition, the fact that there is a rumor that Nikon will just release a magic firmware update to “fix” this issue also does not necessarily mean that this limit was an “intentional error” – they may simply decide to degrade performance in some (possibly undocumented) way in order to extend the recording time. Or they may exceed their original standards for product reliability by pushing the components harder, and thus making it more likely they will overheat or fail. The same way the company that makes your automobile may well be able to push the motor components to allow a 15% higher top speed by removing the rev-limiter that is part of the design, as long as they don’t care about the likelihood of the engine blowing up and killing their customers on a regular basis. Their decision to include that rev-limiter therefore does not constitute an “error” on their part, it is simply responsible product design.

            • PhilK

              In fact Canon Rumors did do a recent survey regarding what percentage of Canon DSLR shooters use their camera’s video capability, and the result was that 71% have either never used it at all or they have shot a total of less than 5 hours of video on it, and an additional 17.8% of users have shot less than 100 hours of video, making it 88.8% of users have shot somewhere between zero to 100 total hours of video on their DSLR.

              Which is pretty much what I expected, especially considering the fact that their userbase is much more likely to be “avid” users that closely follow technology trends than the entire population of DSLR owners.
              Sony found in their own survey in 2012 that fully 2/3 of DSLR users were afraid to take their DSLR out of “green” full auto snapshot mode, fearing that they would need professional training in order to feel comfortable doing so.

          • Ken Elliott

            Uh, the Alexa doesn’t fit the space on a car dashboard very well. Perhaps we are not the ones with mental impairments. 😉

            • EGGZZ

              Neither does the D5 😉

            • Ken Elliott

              Actually, it does.

            • EGGZZ

              No it doesn’t

            • Ken Elliott
            • EGGZZ

              No it doesn’t

            • EGGZZ

              No, joke aside 😀

              My point is that there are much better alternatives. Both smaller and cheaper that offer MUCH better image-quality when it comes to filming.

              In that respect, your dashmount seem foolish…..

              I am a Nikon stills shooter myself, but I wouldn’t Dream of making my movies with my Nikons 🙂

    • Aldo

      It does seem slightly better in the video department…. but we have to see how the sensors perform… my money is on the nikon sensor though… unless Canon had a break through in sensor tech.

      • fanboy fagz

        high iso, nikon is king. sharpening is better in the canon but the waxy look isnt appeaing. video wise, canon is king in every way. they ARE a video company. they have the upper hand. and I know a few photogs who shoot both still and full weddings video. while the size and weight is limiting ti use with stabilizers it needs to be there and the best for that price. I dont expect it to be the best in everything but video shouldnt be a compromise. they did that already with the D4/S and DF and 600/10

        • Aldo

          I think that logic is sound… Seems like a wedding videographer who shoots slr style would greatly benefit from having the camera thats strong in both departments.

          • fanboy fagz

            I could have dealt with the crap af in the DF but they should have added video in it. it would have sold quite some more than now. many wedding pros do video shooting when they shoot the bg prep.

            im curious why they dont use the D4 sensor in other cameras. lifespan wasnt that long

            • Aldo

              Imagine the D5 sensor in a Df body with video? killer.

            • br0xibear

              Hey Aldo,
              Don’t know about it being in a Df type body, but CES 2017…a D810 type body with the D5 sensor could be Nikon’s next big surprise after the D500.
              A “proper” D700 replacement.

            • Aldo

              I think I will be ‘forced’ to trade my d750 for that!

  • Nikon, please rethink this D5 or give us a D5S first.

    • CERO

      the D5 is not even out and you guys screaming for a D5s? I dont get you guys..

      • I agree, the D5 (based on specs) is one of the most remarkable cameras ever built for its purpose. Please wait until it is shipping to ask for the replacement.

      • Shutterbug

        Standard trolling, just ignore it.

        • CERO

          back in my day.. trolling meant something.

  • fanboy fagz

    besides 4k having better rez in the D5, I hope their 1080p is top notch, because the D4/D4s has shittier video quality than their cheapest DX camera, thats pathetic and a shame. same with this 3min limit. and theres a $500 premium for this camera over the canon. ripoffs

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxHK5OSUXr0

    just go to the 1:45- what a joke nikon

  • gamer

    Canon has 2 significant advantages over Nikon:
    1. Canon’s Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology (aka on-chip phase-detect autofocus) which makes shooting video a real delight. Furthermore live view focusing is super quick.
    2. Magic Lantern – а real magic.

    • Eric Calabros

      I’m pretty sure pro shooters who will pay $6000 for these cameras never fuck with its firmware.

  • SVPhotography.ca

    Wonder how the Mkii release will affect the 1D C line?

    I believe that Nikon is still on the FAT system – hence why the D500 creates a new file for every 3 mins of video recording. The D5 should be able to do the same with some firmware updates…

    Also interesting is that Canon went with a new battery but didn’t switch the connector points like Nikon did when they switched batteries between D3 to D4 – the new Canon battery is required if you want the 14 fps. I think you get 12 fps if you use the MkI battery.

  • Rudi

    I know it’s the least important argument here, but I didn’t know how ugly the Canon looks besides the D5.

    • David Weinehall

      Good point 🙂 Yeah, from a usability point of view it is of course irrelevant, but you’re right, that Canon is fugly.

    • Curtis

      I always thought the Canons are prettier, although this one seems to have grown a wart on it’s nose.

      This reminds me of the Df review where the guy says, “Now we will take some sample images” and then pulls out an iPhone and takes pictures of himself holding the Df and other cameras.

    • Scott

      And arguably, that’s subjective.

      • Rudi

        Of course. It’s always a matter of taste.

    • PhilK

      It is truly the worst looking camera cosmetically that I’ve seen from them in a very long time.

      Supposedly that bump on the top is for the GPS sensor, but man.. when you build a product for people whose hobby or profession is the visual arts… please don’t make it really ugly to look at..

      • captaindash

        Good thing they didn’t.

        • PhilK

          As you can see by various comments here, a lot of people disagree with that. 😉

  • Nikon would do well to sell their product at the same price as the canon. It’s one of the first things people consider in the back of their mind, but if you remove the price difference suddenly the only thing to consider is stats, ability and comfort.

    • fanboy fagz

      on the face of it they are equally specced..more or less. actually the nikon has the XQD upper hand with buffer (although I doubt there is anyone even using the canon amount which is no slouch) and most likely high iso. the canon everywhere else

      • More or less, but the Canon battery seems to be a joke (especially in live view mode) compared to NIkon’s.

        • Shutterbug

          Canon battery life has always been fairly terrible (compared to others anyway), I am not sure what makes them so power hungry and inefficient. Maybe the dual processors.

      • Having same card vs two different card is big I think. The slower card dictate the buffer usually when both cards are active (writing to both simultaneously). I have no clue Canon went this way as Nikon did with D4. It was a pain.

        • Canon seems to be insistent in taking nikon route AFTER nikon has realised and corrected it’s mistakes. E.g. 2 models, with and without OLPF. And now this.
          P.s. The different cards slots make sense though as it provides a less steep upgrade route.

          • Allen_Wentz

            I do not buy different card slots as facilitating upgrade because a) new cards are faster/cheaper, so we buy new cards with new cameras and b) the old cards just live with the older slower cameras.

            Personally I prefer XQD and dislike having 2 different cards in one camera. However I capture RAW to the big card and JPEG to the lame card, and I admit it is convenient to instantly know which card has which format on it.

          • It could be expensive if they are buying 100’s of GB cards. I don’t know how much pros buy. I’m also not sure how many people use second card as backup. I always do since I lost some images in the past. But never had a card crash since I started using the backup. I know it will happen again the moment I stop using it :).

          • Shutterbug

            This is a pro camera though – very few of them probably care about having to buy a few new memory cards to upgrade to CFast. With the two different slots, Canon has taken away the ability to shoot in backup mode (critical for events IMHO) and maintain a decent buffer. The buffer drops to only around 70 frames when the slower CF slot is used alone or in conjunction with the CFast. As a pro shooting once in a lifetime events this may even be a deal breaker for some.

        • Indeed, it annoys me on the D800 a lot. Basically I’m not using one slot at all except once in a blue moon.

    • The people who use THESE cameras, either don’t care about price, or have so much money that it doesn’t matter.

      • Sawyerspadre

        Yup, if you are a true pro, this is an investment in having the right tool for the job. Price is a ROI calculation. If the tool is going to make you money, you buy it.

    • Shutterbug

      Meh, I think most people buying either camera would not turn around and buy the other one due to a small cost differential, especially since anyone buying these cameras likely already has huge lens investments and isn’t even considering the other brand. Also, the 1DX II is just a small incremental update on the 1DX, kind of like the D4 was to the D4S. The D5 is more of an overhaul, with an all new class leading AF module, metering system, literally double the low light AF sensitivity of the 1DXII in continuous focus mode (probably will end up being it’s best improvement), RAW 4K output, two real card slots (different cards is annoying especially for pros, and the 1DXII only has a competitive buffer with the single CFast slot), Wifi, bluetooth, etc. It’s easier to justify the price increase on the D5 IMHO, assuming everything works as advertised.

  • nukunukoo

    We do know that Canon’s Dual Pixel sacrifices a bit of sensitivity and DR and tis interesting to see how the formal tests would play out in the real world as far as IQ and post edits are concerned.

    • This is the first time I see no “2 stops better” statement with Canon’s official announcement. Either there’s no improvement or they stopped doing that because it was only in JPG. I’m curious too.

      • Shutterbug

        For the longest time Canon has been saying DR doesn’t matter beyond what they already offered. Promoting that in their new sensors would be extremely hypocritical and probably not the best marketing tactic, admitting that everyone else has had a 1-up on them for all these years. That is just a guess though as to why they mention nothing. The other thing is that their actual sensor DR has never been the issue, but rather the effective DR you actually get with real use has been dismal due to their previous ADC implementation. I still think the D5 is going to win on the sensor front, but I also expect the 1DXII to improve having finally graduated to 2008+ ADC sensor tech.

  • VivaLasVegas

    I am OUTPERFORMED by X!

    • PhilK

      Depends on what your interests are. As a strictly still photographer, I think the D5 wipes the X off the map.

      • Westview

        PhilK – LOL. How fanboyish. Neither camera will wipe the other off the map, both will be used by many professional photographers, they are so similar in specs – it really comes down to lens collection.

  • peter w

    Battery-life of the Canon is either a mistake or a joke.
    That would make me think twice.

    • Shutterbug

      Have you used a 5DS? Haha, battery life isn’t exactly Canon’s forte these days. I’m sure the 1DX2 will still last for several hours of shooting, but battery life has never been their strong point compared to the competition.

      • peter w

        I have no real life experience with recent Canons. The last ones I used intensively were A1 and AE1. (I studied the specs of 10D ~ 7D intensively thought, and most friends had those, now they have 5D ii or iii. Nice camera’s.)

    • PhilK

      I think Nikon has made a very smart move to optimize the power efficiency of the D5, because that is one of the glaring weaknesses of the mirrorless products, and it highlights one of the key reasons to choose a DSLR instead.

      Pity the 1DX-II battery life is so poor even without being mirrorless..

  • David Weinehall

    Now, there’s absolutely no possibility for me to afford (or justify buying) a D5/EOS 1DXmk2, (ouch, what a mouthful) but if I could, then I’d — based on specs alone — buy the D5 — why? Because I take photos, I’m not a videographer.

    If you’re doing video as your main job, then buying the D5 as a workhorse doesn’t make sense at all based on these specs. But if you’re gonna be doing photography, the D5 seems like an absolutely excellent choice.

    Meanwhile I’ll be waiting for either the D750 to drop in price enough to allow me to buy it, or someone foolish enough to want to get rid of their D500 while it still has some 50k actuations of expected lifetime left… IOW no new camera for me for another few years (unless I stumble upon a heavily price-reduced D7200; until then my D7000 will have to do).

  • Jonathan

    Don’t discount the “anti-flicker” mode for constantly changing indoor lighting. It’s pretty great.

    • Mark

      Good thing both cameras have it 🙂

      • Jonathan

        I didn’t realize that. Don’t remember hearing about it for the D5. Thanks!

        • Shutterbug

          You’re welcome – both the D5 and D500 have it!

          • guibo

            Incorrect. Inexplicably, only the D500 has this ability, not mentioned anywhere for the D5.

  • Ornery

    biggest difference to me is that the Canon uses Digic ‘SIX’ while the Nikon only has Expeed ‘FIVE.’ Clearly 6 must be better than 5. Everything I learned in school tells me this is true.

    • WZ3F

      Yeah, but that logic would then dictate that D”5″ is better than “1”D…!

      • CERO

        but noone has 5 D’s.. you’re a mutant.. most men have only 1 D! XD

        • WZ3F

          Shut up.

          • CERO

            yes mooooooom.

      • Yes. Also alphabets come later than numbers so D5 is more advanced than 1D.

        • WZ3F

          Yes, ha ha! And ten years from now, the monikers will be Nikon D7, and Canon EOS-OS-OS-OS 1DXYZYXYZ Mark III-IV-V-6-7-8-IX…

  • Mark

    One correction to the above, the 1DX II center point is only -3.0 EV in single shot mode (longer sampling time) – it is only -2.0 EV in AI-Servo.

  • Horshack

    At this point there isn’t much to distinguish one flagship from another. Lenses however are a different story. Canon’s lightweight tele-exotics, superior 24-70mm, 70-200mm and 200-400mm are pretty compelling. Both have a nice of primes, esp. the newer, lower-priced offerings.

    • Shutterbug

      Nikon’s latest exotic tele’s (400, 500 & 600mm) are all lighter than the Canon versions. Safe to say neither brand has much of an edge here – those lenses are world class. The 300/2.8 will likely be next to get it’s “FL E” update. The 24-70/2.8E VR is better in some ways (eg. edge to edge sharpness and at 24mm) and sightly worse in others (Eg. center sharpness & at 70mm) – depends what you’re after. Canon’s 200-400 is $11K, I should hope the newer lens with a $4,000 premium over the Nikon variant buys you more than a 1.4 TC haha. Nikon’s 70-200/2.8 II still more than holds it’s own, but is due for an update (possibly this year?). Where Nikon really has no competition is the F1.8G primes, budget super-tele, and fast wide angle zooms.

      • Horshack

        You’re right, I forgot about the newer tele Nikkors. They’re about equal in weight, a bit more expensive for being newer. For the 24-70’s the difference in edge resolution of the improved Nikkor is roughly equal to the difference in center up through 50mm. The f/1.8G primes are nice esp the 20mm but Canon’s 24mm is very good and I’m particularly fond of their 35mm f/2 IS.

        • Shutterbug

          Yeah the lenses argument is pretty much moot these days unless you are after something very specific. I’d think most people in the market for a new flagship don’t care since they aren’t going to leave their system anyway, assuming they are heavily invested.

        • I haven’t shot with the any of the 24-70 lenses, but from the reviews I read, the new 24-70 VR is slightly less sharp in the center but quite a bit better across the outer ⅔ field. And the MTFs I see do seem to confirm this (e.g. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=787&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=1008&FLIComp=1&CT=AVG, see at both 24mm and 50mm).

          So I’m curious, have you shot with the Nikon 24-70 VR and find the the consistency across the field not that good? (Honest question)

  • waterengineer

    Can someone please explain what “(power 1-10)” on the ISO line means. Is that some measure of gain? I have never seen that before. Thanks.

    • Shutterbug

      It’s just the amount of stops worth of native ISO. The D5 goes from ISO 100 – 102,400 (10 stops) where the 1DX II only has 9 stops of native ISO (100 – 51,200).

      • waterengineer

        Thanks.

  • The main difference to me is battery life! 😉 Nikon >>>>>>> Canon

    • It’s a huge difference. I think they measure it differently. I know why the difference between D500 and 7DII is big. 7DII is measured with flash. But what’s it with D5?

      • Shutterbug

        I believe both measurements are CIPA standard – I think everyone has to measure the same way now.

        RE: Your comment about flash, if you look at the D810 (which has a flash) it maintains the same huge CIPA battery life lead over the Canons that do not have a flash. The D500 and D810 have almost identical battery life and use the identical battery. Flash isn’t the reason for the difference. Look at the 5DS/R as well, battery life is awful (perhaps the worst of all Canons and far less than the flash-included competition), and it has no flash.

        • AlphaTed

          Those Digic (and there’s two of them) processors do used up a lot of amps.

      • PhilK

        As Shutterbug mentioned, there are standards for measuring battery life, namely the CIPA standard.

        When Nikon uses their own parameters to rate battery life in continuous shooting mode (which CIPA does not publish a standard for) rather than single-shot mode, the battery-life estimate goes up to 8160 shots per charge. 🙂

  • Steve Perry

    The spec sheets really don’t mean that much. I have to think that most people using a flagship camera are probably so invested in their respective systems that changing over for a minor spec isn’t really going to happen.

  • I thought the same. But have you tested it?

  • saywhatuwill

    I can’t wait until some youtube person takes both cameras and put them on perpetual high speed continuous mode to see when their cameras will break. Then after 250,000 – 500,000 cycles when they fail they’ll say “oh that other camera was a piece of crap because it stopped working.”

    • D700s

      I don’t get it.

      • saywhatuwill

        Check out this video and the numerous others just like it:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOMfNbPEgZ8

        and

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SykRSCF7xeA

        People just don’t seem to understand that these are tools and not frickin’ toys. Then after the thing breaks then they complain about how cheap or flimsy the thing was to break so soon after they purchased it. A camera with over 250,000 shutter clicks in 1 month is the same as if it were done in 5 years yet people think that if it breaks in 1 month it’s a piece of crap.

        • D700s

          Got it. The video cleared things up.

  • omrx

    With the D5 and D500 release I feel my new D7200 like an old and obsolete system.

    • Jaroslav Charvát

      Why so?

      • omrx

        I am happy with the D7200, excellent 51 focus points, incredible IQ, ergonomic design, great view finder, solid body, but, but, but The D500 is simple amazing, only that.

  • Unrest

    Specs aside, the Canons are getting uglier. The Nikon looks better.

  • Allan Smith

    How does 5472 x 3648 = 20,200,000?

  • Kyle Medina

    Both are all complete beast, lets just get that out of the way. The tipping point if I was in this level of photography gear. I would have to say is the Canon having all the points being f/8.

    • It’s intersting though: Canon has all points to f/8, however it only focuses down to -3EV (centrally, otherwise -2EV) vs -4/-3. I’d say shooting with lenses with f/8 maximum aperture is less common than having to focus down to -4/-3 EV.

      • Kyle Medina

        Well I was speaking more for me and my field. The EV is negligible spec. We been fine with -2/-3. Its like having the 100+ focusing points, not really needed. More likely to need f/8 than to be shooting when its pitch black.

        • Well, to each their own – I don’t shoot with f/8 lenses (or lens/teleconverter combos), but I do shoot in dark conditions. -4EV means that the camera is more likely to achieve faster focus in -2EV. Anyway, to each their own.

          I just find it interesting how Canon and Nikon optimise for different purposes, that’s all.

  • PhilK

    The reason some companies do not incorporate ExFAT is because it is proprietary Microsoft IP and they require a license payment for each product you ship that uses it. That’s not the case with FAT32. (Also a Microsoft tech but free to use)

    May not impact Nikon much (particularly on higher-end models where the licensing fee component is a small factor), but it is on some products where margins are thin.

  • PhilK

    Update/correction: Nikon D5’s shutter life is also tested to 400,000 cycles. (Source: D5 brochure)

  • PhilK

    Both annoying and hilarious: after reading several hundred posts, and as I predicted, Canon coming out with a flagship model that uses 2 different, incompatible memory-card types garners nary a single complaint from blog posters or commenters from what I can tell.

    Whereas when Nikon did the same with the D4, they were lambasted from here to eternity.

    I hope pro photographers appreciate the lengths to which Nikon went to accomodate everyone with the D5 design in that regard. That will cost them significantly in terms of logistics, inventory costs, and causing the D5 to be larger than it would have needed to be without the exchangeable memory-card module. (But still significantly smaller/lighter than Canon’s new flagship)

    • fanboy fagz

      and those memory slots are interchangeable. u can go dual cf from dual xqd if one would like to. id have no issue dual cf cards and upgrade later when prices of the cards drop and have a sale. even my simple d3 does well with cf and only 9 measly fps. i shoot bursts at CL

      • PhilK

        Speaking of CL, I have to wonder if the fact that Canon chose a rather nonsensical speed of 12fps for their “CL” setting on the 1DX-2 isn’t a sort of dig at Nikon. LOL

        • fanboy fagz

          12fps in cl? haha

          • PhilK

            I figure their engineers are hoping that people start referring to it as “D5 mode”. hehe

  • Richard Krawec

    Just curious did anyone see what Sony just pulled outta the bag with the a6300 release in response to Nikon’s press release about mirrorless never keeping up with traditional mirror DSLR’s with auto focus ? Kinda amazing what they did

    • PhilK

      Make sure you figure in the size/weight of all the extra batteries you’ll have to carry around. 🙂

      • Richard Krawec

        totally agree i am just in shock of what they did….lol kind of a smack in the face…… no???

        • PhilK

          Well, we will have to wait until people report on how it actually works when shooting. I’m actually more amazed by how many people are proclaiming that model the emperor of all things photographic when no one in the public including themselves have ever even held one. 😉

    • In response to Nikon’s press release? I don’t think so – they had this planned for a long time. The specs of the new camera are amazing – just like any other Sony product.

      • QuantalQuetzal

        Actually, except for the AF, I don’t reeeeally see the improvements worth >1200€. Even though, I got to admit that it’s quite a nice camera.

        @NikonRumors:disqus Do you think there is a chance that Nikon releases anything remotely comparable (a6xx or a7) within the next 2 years?

        • Yes, very good chance for a large sensor mirrorless camera.

          • Admin, all I’ve seen reported by you was 1″ mirrorless or compacts. Do you have new rumours about actually large mirrorless? (Or maybe I just missed some posts?)

      • Richard Krawec

        Gotta say even if the af on the a6300 hits at 75% clip in drive mode – a 1100.00 camera versus a 6500.00 is kinda hard to swallow if I’m Nikon .
        This is great for us consumers cuz it keeps companies striving – just hope Nikon doesn’t drop the ball and get left behind . watching the presentation of the Sony stuff the other was impressive . I just hope staying loyal to Nikon doesn’t make me feel like an old Olympus shooter that got burned when micro 4/3 hit the scene – the trinity line cost me a ton . But everything must evolve – – – – NO???

        • I think the a6300 and the D5 are in two completely different categories. I doubt you will see somebody shooting the Olympics with a a6300 🙂

          • omrx

            lol

          • Richard Krawec

            Very very true but hey its the shooter not the camera right??? Lol

      • Richard Krawec

        If you get a chance to check the presentation of Sony’s a6300 and lenses at the 9:30 mark they take a indirect shot at Nikon with out really saying the – lol just interesting companies are pushing one anothers buttons .

        • yes, both companies are trowing jabs at each other – this why Nikon has to come up with a good mirrorless solution

  • Sjarlatan

    I would get the D5. It’s got more megapixels.

  • Russell Ferris

    Looking through 16fps on a computer trying to find the keeper sounds like a nightmare, “I only snapped off 2000 photos today and need a dozen”.

    • eric

      16 fps is in mirror lock up only. It does 14 fps in normal usage.

  • Omesh Singh

    How deep is the 1DX-II buffer if you slow down the shooting speed from 14fps to 12fps?

  • kparseg

    It’s good to compare them side by side, but I guess both Nikon and Canon try to convince the existing customers to upgrade. There will be too few shooters who would prefer d5 vs. 1dxii and vice versa.

  • PizzaKing

    NIkon…just give up

  • Cool. But what I am asking is if you can exceed the fat32 limit of 3.9 gb ?

  • TheDudeofDudes

    Neither has selfie stick compatibility. What junk.

  • I know all that. What I was asking was ” have you used EXfat partitioned card in your nikon camera and exceeded the 4 GB file limit on a video file” ? I guess, we will be able to test it on D500.

  • TylerChappell

    To simplify for all those that wonder:
    ~2359k dots = 1024×768 or XGA resolution, 3 dots/pixel (1024x768x3)
    ~1229 dots = 640×480 or VGA resolution, 4 dots/pixel (640x480x4)
    ~931k dots = 640×480 or VGA resolution, 3 dots/pixel (640x480x3)
    ~460k dots = 480×320 or HVGA resolution, 3 dots/pixel (480x320x3)
    ~230k dots = 320×240 or QVGA resolution, 3 dots/pixel (320x240x3)
    ~115k dots = 240×160 or HQVGA resolution, 3 dots/pixel (240x160x3)

  • Catastrophile

    Specs –> unspecified –> Nikon

  • autofocus

    I shoot a D610 & i like Nikon

  • Back to top