canon rumors FORUM

Rumors => EOS Bodies => Topic started by: Canon Rumors on May 20, 2011, 07:51:27 AM

Title: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Canon Rumors on May 20, 2011, 07:51:27 AM
Spec rumors I haven’t heard much about a 5D Mark III in a while, but I did receive some specs this AM. Might as well post them!

It was stressed that below is one prototype, and two others exist.

Specifications

This is apparently coming before any 1Ds replacement.

cr

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: hlphoto on May 20, 2011, 07:58:49 AM
Only because of the high-ISO settings it already sounds like a bunch of crap to me.
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

I would bet a few dollars on the 5D Mk3 having 19-point autofocus and native ISO 12800 (with at least H2 for 51200 ISO).

I'm hoping we'll get RAW video and maybe even 2K or 3K, but do realise most dreams won't come true ;)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: alipaulphotography on May 20, 2011, 07:59:23 AM
Specs sound good for me.

I want to know ISO performance and cross type AF points.

And for it to have a bloody release date!
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Ricku on May 20, 2011, 08:53:20 AM
I like all the specs except 32mp. Please no..

And also "New autofocus while filming."

Ok, new autofocus is very wanted. But only while filming?!?  :o
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Wahoowa on May 20, 2011, 08:57:08 AM
32MP? Where am I gonna put all these images into? I just went to Rome for 6 days and I've taken over 64 GB of images! I guess I will need two new 3TB hard disks along with this 5DIII (one for original and one for backup).

I don't mind if Canon will keep it at around 24-27 MP range. I would like to see the noise performance of the current 5DII at ISO 3200 at, say, 6400 or 12800 of the new 5DIII.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: endigo on May 20, 2011, 09:03:20 AM
I like all the specs except 32mp. Please no..
I struggle with this too, here are my thoughts...

If large file size is an issue then maybe a full frame is not the right option. In order to get the same pixel density as the 7D, the file size has to be larger.

Also,
You don't have to always shoot with the full size image. 
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on May 20, 2011, 10:06:22 AM
It was stressed that below is one prototype, and two others exist.

Translation: "I made this up and emailed it to CR, and I'm covering my butt in case my wild-ass guess is completely off base."
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: motorhead on May 20, 2011, 10:19:23 AM
Unlike others, I'm all in favour of as many mp as possible. Storage is cheap and getting cheaper by the day. No, the only problem I have with this rumour is the very last line. I've been holding my breath long enough for the 1Ds mk4 and it's waaaaaay past it's replacement date. The only good news for me is that if the 5D gets 32MP, the IDs will get more. So the 40MP plus rumour is looking possible.

But if Canon wait much longer, they will have to withdraw it yet again because by that time even 40MP will be old hat. I fully understand the current problems in Japan, but don't understand why Canon had not finalised the specs for the 1Ds4 long before that and got it to market.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: torger on May 20, 2011, 10:23:16 AM
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

When you start having more than one value in the raw file per electron in the sensel, it does not make much sense to increase the amplification further, you can just scale in software. Unity gain (1 raw value = 1 electron) happens quite early, say around ISO 1600 or so. Why some cameras still do "native" amplification past unity gain I don't really know, perhaps there are some read noise advantages or something.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: torger on May 20, 2011, 10:44:12 AM
Unlike others, I'm all in favour of as many mp as possible.

Me too :-). I think 40 - 60 megapixels would be ideal for full-frame 36x24mm sensors. Past that the sensor is too small to support it well, and resolution will be higher than needed for most applications. I'd like to be able to produce pictures that can fill a book spread at glorious 400 ppi, which current full-frame cameras can't because resolution is too low. If you shoot detailed landscapes today you'd want a medium format system, which of course are way too expensive for hobbyists. Anyway 32 megapixels is a step in the right direction from my point of view.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1] @torger: Unfortunately ...
Post by: pedro on May 20, 2011, 10:54:29 AM
english is not my native language. and as I do not understand too much of technique and physics I'd like to ask you if you could translate your obviously intresting post into a more comprehensible one for a non anglo? Hope you don't mind.

So, intuitively I'd take a guess: Even though the native ISO remains ISO 3200 (once read that there is no so called native high ISO beyond that value) it must be a lot cleaner than all what has been seen before.
Is that correct?
If so, is it likely as ISO's remain the same, that ISO 3200 looks pretty much like ISO 400 on my current 30D? In this case, I wouldn't care too much about not being able to shoot above ISO 25600 as there exist the +1 or + 2 EV possibility. Don't know the term...Is that exposure value compensation?

Thanks and regards
Peter
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: unruled on May 20, 2011, 10:57:07 AM
32MP? Where am I gonna put all these images into? I just went to Rome for 6 days and I've taken over 64 GB of images! I guess I will need two new 3TB hard disks along with this 5DIII (one for original and one for backup).

I don't mind if Canon will keep it at around 24-27 MP range. I would like to see the noise performance of the current 5DII at ISO 3200 at, say, 6400 or 12800 of the new 5DIII.

64gb in a few days?

excuse me?

besides, there is always sRAW if you want.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: pgabor on May 20, 2011, 11:00:36 AM
Translation: "I made this up and emailed it to CR, and I'm covering my butt in case my wild-ass guess is completely off base."

My first thought was exactly the same :D
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: J. McCabe on May 20, 2011, 11:11:25 AM
I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but ...

1) Some software packages, like DxO, can't process sRAW & mRAW, so some photographers would be forced to use the full sized raw even though they don't want or need the full resolution.

2) The APS-C sensors today are pretty close in resolution to the 5DmkII - the 600D, 60D, and 7D are all 18MP. It seems Canon is increasing the resolution on the APS-C sensors as well. I don't think 5DmkII owners would be happy to replace it with a 1100D.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: zerotiu on May 20, 2011, 11:13:45 AM
hmm I like this news.. ::)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: hlphoto on May 20, 2011, 11:48:05 AM
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

When you start having more than one value in the raw file per electron in the sensel, it does not make much sense to increase the amplification further, you can just scale in software. Unity gain (1 raw value = 1 electron) happens quite early, say around ISO 1600 or so. Why some cameras still do "native" amplification past unity gain I don't really know, perhaps there are some read noise advantages or something.
Not sure what this means exactly, can you explain further? >> My experience is that when you pitch up in software you lose lots of dynamic range, same as when you pitch downward. ISO 50 on the 5D Mk2 gives me exactly one stop less headroom then the same picture has at ISO 100. If they would make a 5D Mk3 with native ISO 1600 which would go up to ISO 25600 (=H4), that would mean I lost 4 stops of DR in my image. Not very nice..

Of course, if I am missing something technically, please do explain! Always willing to learn :)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: motorhead on May 20, 2011, 12:09:30 PM
Unlike others, I'm all in favour of as many mp as possible.

Me too :-). I think 40 - 60 megapixels would be ideal for full-frame 36x24mm sensors. Past that the sensor is too small to support it well, and resolution will be higher than needed for most applications. I'd like to be able to produce pictures that can fill a book spread at glorious 400 ppi, which current full-frame cameras can't because resolution is too low. If you shoot detailed landscapes today you'd want a medium format system, which of course are way too expensive for hobbyists. Anyway 32 megapixels is a step in the right direction from my point of view.

I read an interesting article on medium format sensors the other day. In it was a discussion on how many mp would be needed before the sensor outperformed the lens. Apparently Canon are said to be working on lenses for 36x24 "full frame" that will work happily up to 60mp, while on the Pentax 645 sensors would need to exceed 110mp before it becomes an issue. Basically, I believe that manufacturers will simply offer better lenses as the MP count creeps ever higher.

That same article was saying that in prints of A3 or bigger, the large MP sensors on good quality medium format systems produced a very obvious quality improvement over the 36 x 24mm "full frame" size sensors. Basically, bigger is still always better.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: torger on May 20, 2011, 12:15:31 PM
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

When you start having more than one value in the raw file per electron in the sensel, it does not make much sense to increase the amplification further, you can just scale in software. Unity gain (1 raw value = 1 electron) happens quite early, say around ISO 1600 or so. Why some cameras still do "native" amplification past unity gain I don't really know, perhaps there are some read noise advantages or something.
Not sure what this means exactly, can you explain further? >> My experience is that when you pitch up in software you lose lots of dynamic range, same as when you pitch downward. ISO 50 on the 5D Mk2 gives me exactly one stop less headroom then the same picture has at ISO 100. If they would make a 5D Mk3 with native ISO 1600 which would go up to ISO 25600 (=H4), that would mean I lost 4 stops of DR in my image. Not very nice..

Of course, if I am missing something technically, please do explain! Always willing to learn :)

In photography, you want to gather as much light as possible to get the best image quality. "Expose to the right" is the concept used when you are not restricted with the shutter, that is you can saturate the sensor (without overexposing important features of course).

The reason why more light equals better image quality is because light contains noise naturally (photon shot noise), but the stronger the light the smaller part of it is noise. If you reduce light with 1 stop, photon shot noise increase with 0.5 stop - the less light the lower signal-to-noise ratio.

ISO setting does not alter the sensor in any way, it only changes the amplification at readout. If we had readout electronics that precisely could count the number of electrons in each pixel/sensel, we would not need to have a ISO setting at all. It may happen in the future that the cameras will be "ISO-less".

Anyway, when you shoot high ISO it is because you need to have short shutter speeds and then we will not fill up the pixels with light, so we get more photon shot noise. Actually, the noise you see in high ISO pictures is typically dominated by shot noise, not noise from the electronics.

The sensor pixels are not perfect either though, not all photons that hit it becomes translated to electrons, so with improved efficiency of that (quantum efficiency), noise levels would be reduced for low light photography.

Yes if you multiply in software you lose dynamic range. But past unity gain it makes no difference, you've already lost the range. If your RAW value is in the range 1 - 16384 you still cannot represent 16385 electrons if your gain is >1. It could be some practical difference anyway, there must be some reason why they usually amplify past unity gain, but I don't really know why. Perhaps someone else can help us on that...
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Sdiver2489 on May 20, 2011, 01:27:17 PM
Only because of the high-ISO settings it already sounds like a bunch of crap to me.
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

I would bet a few dollars on the 5D Mk3 having 19-point autofocus and native ISO 12800 (with at least H2 for 51200 ISO).

I'm hoping we'll get RAW video and maybe even 2K or 3K, but do realise most dreams won't come true ;)

Uh, I'm pretty sure the way its written is showing its native ISO range. It then states there is the typical "expanded" ISO range. L1 = ISO 50 H1 = ISO 51200 H2 = 102,400 H3 = 204,800

Of course this could still be a random rumor made up by a fan, but I don't think he was implying the camera would only go natively to ISO3200
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Justin on May 20, 2011, 02:10:10 PM
32MP? Where am I gonna put all these images into? I just went to Rome for 6 days and I've taken over 64 GB of images! I guess I will need two new 3TB hard disks along with this 5DIII (one for original and one for backup).

I don't mind if Canon will keep it at around 24-27 MP range. I would like to see the noise performance of the current 5DII at ISO 3200 at, say, 6400 or 12800 of the new 5DIII.

Sounds like a great trip, but I don't understand why people who want to take a thousand pictures on a trip don't do so with an s-raw setting or a smaller jpg format.

For every 100 shots I take, I immediately trash half (composition, exposure, focus are all factors). A day or two later I trash half of the half (sorting for something memorable or artistic). Then a year later I'll kill another half (looking for something I haven't shot before, in a way that says something). So about a dozen shots for every hundred, and that's probably being generous with the quality of my work.

I welcome 32 mpx files. Hell I wish I could afford an 80 mpx back and camera system. You cannot have too much detail. You CAN take too many photos.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Justin on May 20, 2011, 03:25:00 PM
I welcome this rumor of a prototype becoming not a rumor and becoming an actual product. All these delays are doing is giving me more time to research and collect resources for other gear. I've tried the Pentax 645. Really a neat system. Beautiful output. Very big investment; I'd have to sell my Canon system. I've tried the GH2. Neat little camera. I don't know that I'd be satisfied with it being my primary system, but am seriously considering it as a contender for a trip at the end of the summer. There are rumors of new Olympus and Panasonic products forthcoming, including fast lenses and new bodies with new sensors. They are rumored to be released in June. I can't wait to see what June holds.

Meanwhile, Canon is stuck. They can't even release all the products announced 9 months ago (8-15, 300, 400). Let alone those announced in February (500, 600, 200-400). The 1Ds series missed its target release date last year. The 1D is a compromise many don't want to make. 5D2 is fun and still the best thing on Canon's plate, but old, compromised tech. The 7D is second best, but aps-c. The 600D is nicely spec'd, but nothing new.

The longer it takes Canon to get it together, the more opportunities I have to decide to augment my tools, or abandon my current tools altogether.

Fine by me.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: lee_hom on May 20, 2011, 03:49:48 PM
It was stressed that below is one prototype, and two others exist.

Translation: "I made this up and emailed it to CR, and I'm covering my butt in case my wild-ass guess is completely off base."

 very true 8)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: hlphoto on May 20, 2011, 05:05:56 PM
Only because of the high-ISO settings it already sounds like a bunch of crap to me.
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

I would bet a few dollars on the 5D Mk3 having 19-point autofocus and native ISO 12800 (with at least H2 for 51200 ISO).

I'm hoping we'll get RAW video and maybe even 2K or 3K, but do realise most dreams won't come true ;)

Uh, I'm pretty sure the way its written is showing its native ISO range. It then states there is the typical "expanded" ISO range. L1 = ISO 50 H1 = ISO 51200 H2 = 102,400 H3 = 204,800

Of course this could still be a random rumor made up by a fan, but I don't think he was implying the camera would only go natively to ISO3200
Does make more sense to me, didn't read it that way. 204800 ISO is a little bit over the top if you ask me, but  well ok ;)

As for the story about photon shot noise: Not sure if I agree, but don't have enough knowledge to argue either. Waiting for deeper explanation! :)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: dash2k8 on May 20, 2011, 06:02:29 PM
I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Picsfor on May 20, 2011, 06:05:13 PM
The 204k H3 iso setting is how I read it.

I'm mainly interested in better focusing & better low light IQ.
32mp - not my first option for an upgrade but I'll live with it.

Otherwise, not too fussed - as always, I'll believe it when I see it...
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: unruled on May 20, 2011, 06:22:22 PM
I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

pushing 32MP is a lot of data, so burst rates that high would be pretty tough.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: fotoray on May 20, 2011, 07:07:18 PM
I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

pushing 32MP is a lot of data, so burst rates that high would be pretty tough.

A higher burst rate could be accomplishing using dual Digic V processors like the 7D uses dual Digic IV.  This is how the 8 fps burst rate is achieved in the 7D.  Even so, the 5D is primarily a landscape camera so burst rate is a much lower priority, whereas the 7D is a sports/widlife camera where burst rate is much more important.   
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Blaze on May 20, 2011, 07:11:04 PM
I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

pushing 32MP is a lot of data, so burst rates that high would be pretty tough.

A higher burst rate could be accomplishing using dual Digic V processors like the 7D uses dual Digic IV.  This is how the 8 fps burst rate is achieved in the 7D.  Even so, the 5D is primarily a landscape camera so burst rate is a much lower priority, whereas the 7D is a sports/widlife camera where burst rate is much more important.   

At 32 MP they could implement an 8 MP 2x2 pixel binning mode. Even if shooting in full resolution is only 4 fps, with pixel binning they could easily push it to 8 fps. That size and rate would be perfect for me when shooting sports.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: nex-s on May 20, 2011, 08:55:29 PM
I just don't see the point of 32Mp. Why spoiling the burst rate because of this? Such an MP count would just momentarily fill up memory cards and your PC. And as someone mentioned before, shooting with sRAW does not work with some software. With such specs it actually seems dissapointing, because of only increased MP, ISO and AF. One of the previous topics clearly showed that between ISO, FPS, autofocus points and raw video, increased MP was the last thing people wanted. 24MP would still be ok and would give a much better FPS performance.

And if these were the only improvements Canon makes to the camera, which I doubt it will be, then I thing most of us will be very dissapointed.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: gmrza on May 20, 2011, 10:02:30 PM


I read an interesting article on medium format sensors the other day. In it was a discussion on how many mp would be needed before the sensor outperformed the lens. Apparently Canon are said to be working on lenses for 36x24 "full frame" that will work happily up to 60mp, while on the Pentax 645 sensors would need to exceed 110mp before it becomes an issue. Basically, I believe that manufacturers will simply offer better lenses as the MP count creeps ever higher.

That same article was saying that in prints of A3 or bigger, the large MP sensors on good quality medium format systems produced a very obvious quality improvement over the 36 x 24mm "full frame" size sensors. Basically, bigger is still always better.

An interesting question about that will be what lenses like that will cost.  Clearly over time, they will become cheaper, but I expect that we will initially see such lenses being quite expensive (relative to other 35mm system lenses).
On the other hand, that still gives Canon the ability to go hunting in traditional medium format territory, as such lenses might still be cheaper than medium format lenses.  I suspect that Canon (and aso Nikon) will want to hunt as many photographers from the medium format camp as they can. - Ultimately, if your clients do not need resolution of more than 60MP, why buy a 110MP medium format system is a 60MP DSLR will do?  Many photographers who previously shot medium format film have already taken that path and migrated to DSLRs.

I am not saying that there is no need for a 110MP MF camera.  I am just postulating that Canon (and Nikon and Sony) would want to encroach as much as possible into the traditional territory of MF systems, relegating MF to being a more and more specialised niche.  (That is a pity in a way, as that stands to risk MF cameras becoming even more expensive, due to smaller market scale and less competition.)

As for 32MP on a 5DmkIII - anyone who currently makes 20"x30" prints off a 5DmkII would welcome that!
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: YoukY63 on May 20, 2011, 10:04:35 PM
I just don't see the point of 32Mp. Why spoiling the burst rate because of this? Such an MP count would just momentarily fill up memory cards and your PC. And as someone mentioned before, shooting with sRAW does not work with some software. With such specs it actually seems dissapointing, because of only increased MP, ISO and AF. One of the previous topics clearly showed that between ISO, FPS, autofocus points and raw video, increased MP was the last thing people wanted. 24MP would still be ok and would give a much better FPS performance.

And if these were the only improvements Canon makes to the camera, which I doubt it will be, then I thing most of us will be very dissapointed.
Then you are not a landscape photographer. If you want burst speed, don't buy a 5D serie Camera, there are not designed for that. What you want is a 1D serie camera: lower MP and higher burst rate, + better AF.
For me, 32MP sounds very logical. I was expecting 30 to 40MP. With an increase of 2 stops of sensitivity, that camera (if informations are true) will make me happy until 5DmIV!  ;D
I shoot mostly landscape and portraits, daytime and also complete dark time. As a landscaper, I never have enough pixels to record all the smaller details from these wonderful Japanese scenery (which explain the success of medium format camera with 80+ MP in landscape community).
The increase of sensitivity will also be very welcome since I mostly use fixed focal lenses for my night pictures, but as they lack stabilisation I sometime fall short with the actual 5DmII sensitivity (even with f/1.4 lenses).

PS: also do not forgot that Sony will be presenting a 24MP APS-C sensor in a few weeks, and is expected to release a 40+ MP FF sensor around fall. Canon made a big part of its success during the past few years on high resolution DSLR, they cannot let Sony's sensors (Sony but also Nikon and Pentax cameras) win this war.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: te4o on May 20, 2011, 10:28:58 PM
Let us all be just optimistic (it improves the mood) and say, the 5D3 will have at least 32 MP, will be very adaptable and let anyone choose how many of these to use for stills and video, at a perfect ISO & DR, will give you 10.6 FPS at lower MP counts, will serve us all for another 4 years etc etc ;), and will BE ANNOUNCED in JUNE 201ouch!
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: abarraga on May 20, 2011, 11:05:25 PM
Sort of related to this posting:

I went to Fry's Electronics (to shop around) and there was a fully functioning demo version of the 5DMKII with the 24-105mm f/4L IS.  It was no surprise they did not have the body in stock, but I was offered 5% off the demo kit.

Knowing that the MK III will inevitably come (and my desire to upgrade to a full frame), should I have taken this offer?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Gcon on May 21, 2011, 12:32:11 AM
This is a very believable spec sheet.

32mp. Given that 600D, 60D and 7D are 18mp, the same pixel density on full frame is approx 46mp. Thus a move to 32mp is reasonable.

ISO to 25600. I don't expect it to go that high. I have no need for it in any case.

Digic V - to be expected. Hopefully it comes with an overhauled menu system and can do advanced things like electronic leveling.

4.2 shots/sec. A small increase from 3.9 of the 5DII. No threat to the 1DIV.

19 point AF. Taken straight from 7D.

CF card - to keep people with large investments in this card happy. Also it is appropriate for large RAW file transfer speeds.

All the video stuff I don't care for, but would imagine this is a good platform for video, as it's shot horizontal so don't need the vertical grip of the 1D series.

==========
Rant - I was hoping that Canon would bring the 5D line closer to the 1D line with a more rugged body and weather sealing, and using buttons instead of mode dial, and having an integrated viewfinder cover.

It doesn't look they will go that bold, but will keep the status quo and just bump up the features a bit to have a "full frame 7D" but without the same level of weather sealing.

This is a shame really, as Canon users need something akin to the Nikon D700, and it's imminent successor.

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: simonfilm on May 21, 2011, 04:45:59 AM
But 32mp add more problem for video processing in order to avoid line skipping Moire.

I would like a 5D3 with no heat problem, that you can have it recording video hours without heating.
Title: 5% off
Post by: danski0224 on May 21, 2011, 06:52:55 AM
Sort of related to this posting:

I went to Fry's Electronics (to shop around) and there was a fully functioning demo version of the 5DMKII with the 24-105mm f/4L IS.  It was no surprise they did not have the body in stock, but I was offered 5% off the demo kit.

Knowing that the MK III will inevitably come (and my desire to upgrade to a full frame), should I have taken this offer?

5% off isn't really much of a deal.

I would take it from a new in box item... if I was in the market. I don't think it is enough of a discount on an open item.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: epsiloneri on May 21, 2011, 07:30:06 AM
32MP? Where am I gonna put all these images into? I just went to Rome for 6 days and I've taken over 64 GB of images! I guess I will need two new 3TB hard disks along with this 5DIII (one for original and one for backup).

32MP for a 5D3 is not that much more than the 21MP of the current 5D2, given that 3 years has passed since the latter's introduction. Hard drives have increased in size much more than those 50%, and storage price has reached 5 cents per GB. You can store all your Roman holiday pictures for $6, including backup. With 32MP it would have been $9. If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP. Storing the pictures is becoming easier and cheaper with time despite the MP increases.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: epsiloneri on May 21, 2011, 07:40:28 AM
When you start having more than one value in the raw file per electron in the sensel, it does not make much sense to increase the amplification further, you can just scale in software. Unity gain (1 raw value = 1 electron) happens quite early, say around ISO 1600 or so. Why some cameras still do "native" amplification past unity gain I don't really know, perhaps there are some read noise advantages or something.

Unity gain depends both on the QE and the pixel pitch. I doubt a new 5D3 sensors would improve on the QE much, but with smaller pixels the unity gain would actually decrease, so you're right in that it wouldn't be much technical point in extending the ISO range even further (there can still be selling points in doing so however). Over-resolving the electron count can give a slight advantage for quantization reasons, since the A/D converters are basically analogue devices that do not register electrons 100% efficiently.

Read more about this at Clarkvision (http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/digital.sensor.performance.summary/).

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: motorhead on May 21, 2011, 07:54:38 AM
I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.

I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read  books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view. 

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: DavidD on May 21, 2011, 08:32:11 AM
All these specs sound reasonable.

At 32mp I'd easily upgrade from the 5d2.
At only 28mp - probably not.

I'm hoping Canon will get rid of the anti-aliasing filter
so we get sharper images. (Software can now handle
moire much better than that silly filter.)

And if the rumored "revolutionary" improvements in
noise reduction and back lit sensors arrive in the 5d3,
we'll all be celebrating.



Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: nex-s on May 21, 2011, 10:07:52 AM
Then you are not a landscape photographer. If you want burst speed, don't buy a 5D serie Camera, there are not designed for that. What you want is a 1D serie camera: lower MP and higher burst rate, + better AF.
For me, 32MP sounds very logical. I was expecting 30 to 40MP. With an increase of 2 stops of sensitivity, that camera (if informations are true) will make me happy until 5DmIV!  ;D
I shoot mostly landscape and portraits, daytime and also complete dark time. As a landscaper, I never have enough pixels to record all the smaller details from these wonderful Japanese scenery (which explain the success of medium format camera with 80+ MP in landscape community).
The increase of sensitivity will also be very welcome since I mostly use fixed focal lenses for my night pictures, but as they lack stabilisation I sometime fall short with the actual 5DmII sensitivity (even with f/1.4 lenses).

PS: also do not forgot that Sony will be presenting a 24MP APS-C sensor in a few weeks, and is expected to release a 40+ MP FF sensor around fall. Canon made a big part of its success during the past few years on high resolution DSLR, they cannot let Sony's sensors (Sony but also Nikon and Pentax cameras) win this war.

See again, I could say that what you want is a MF camera. Many would love a fast FF instead of an APS-H. And about the cost of storage. Well, HDD prices are falling, but flash memories still cost a lot of money, so... If they allow higher burst rates at a lower resolution, then I`m not that bothered.

What I am hoping is that Canon increases the weather sealing on the 5D mkIII to the 7D's level. If they don't do that, I would be rather dissapointed, cause that is what I'm looking forward to.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: NotABunny on May 21, 2011, 10:31:33 AM
Some software packages, like DxO, can't process sRAW & mRAW, so some photographers would be forced to use the full sized raw even though they don't want or need the full resolution.

So you want Canon to stop advancing its technology because of some software packages?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: DJL329 on May 21, 2011, 10:58:52 AM
If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP.

I believe you meant Moore's Law, which refers to the number of transistors on an integrated circuit (which double every two years), not storage.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on May 21, 2011, 11:41:22 AM
If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP.

I believe you meant Moore's Law, which refers to the number of transistors on an integrated circuit (which double every two years), not storage.

Wikipedia:

Moore's law describes a long-term trend in the history of computing hardware. The number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years.[1] This trend has continued for more than half a century and is expected to continue until 2015 or 2020 or later.[2]

The capabilities of many digital electronic devices are strongly linked to Moore's law: processing speed, memory capacity  , sensors and even the number and size of pixels in digital cameras.[3] All of these are improving at (roughly) exponential rates as well (see Other formulations and similar laws). This exponential improvement has dramatically enhanced the impact of digital electronics in nearly every segment of the world economy.[4] Moore's law describes a driving force of technological and social change in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.[5][6]

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: HD on May 21, 2011, 12:53:46 PM
Maybe it's time for hardware upgradable cameras. Every two years or so sensors and processing chips etc advance faster than they can design an entirely new pro and semi-pro camera model.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: WarStreet on May 21, 2011, 01:07:45 PM
I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.

I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read  books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view.

I am starting out in sports photography, and at the moment I am doing very well in rugby with just a 500D. I am doing this for fun not for money, but still my aim is to get the best results even though I am competing against 1D and D3s pro users. I manage to do so by dedicating more time, both in the pitch and outside.

This means that the 3.4 fps and 'slow AF' of my camera can still deliver good results. But I think that for rugby, and other similar sports, better FPS and AF will improve the odds of getting a better picture. In F1, you might need to get a shot of the car in a particular spot, and timing might be more important than FPS, but unexpected expressions of faces and body positions in rugby will definitely benefit from more FPS. I can't time up to take a singe shot of a player punching an opponent  :)

If we consider an older rumor of a 4.9fps for the 5DIII, this will give about 25% improvement from the current 5DII 3.9 FPS and I will have 25% more photos to choice from for any particular action. 4.9 FPS might not sound alot, but the 25% extra photos, is a good improvement, and I will just say thanks and won't whine since I know this camera it's not a 1D, but I won't be happy with a 4.2 fps !!!

My only hope, is the pressure Sony is doing on Canon, with their cheap entry level cameras with 7 and 10 fps. I  hope that when the A77 is released, it will be a big success, resulting in Canon big heads getting scared from Sony's A850/A900 replacement and release a 5DIII with better specs.

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: DuLt on May 21, 2011, 02:01:17 PM
I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.

I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read  books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view.

I am starting out in sports photography, and at the moment I am doing very well in rugby with just a 500D. I am doing this for fun not for money, but still my aim is to get the best results even though I am competing against 1D and D3s pro users. I manage to do so by dedicating more time, both in the pitch and outside.

This means that the 3.4 fps and 'slow AF' of my camera can still deliver good results. But I think that for rugby, and other similar sports, better FPS and AF will improve the odds of getting a better picture. In F1, you might need to get a shot of the car in a particular spot, and timing might be more important than FPS, but unexpected expressions of faces and body positions in rugby will definitely benefit from more FPS. I can't time up to take a singe shot of a player punching an opponent  :)

If we consider an older rumor of a 4.9fps for the 5DIII, this will give about 25% improvement from the current 5DII 3.9 FPS and I will have 25% more photos to choice from for any particular action. 4.9 FPS might not sound alot, but the 25% extra photos, is a good improvement, and I will just say thanks and won't whine since I know this camera it's not a 1D, but I won't be happy with a 4.2 fps !!!

My only hope, is the pressure Sony is doing on Canon, with their cheap entry level cameras with 7 and 10 fps. I  hope that when the A77 is released, it will be a big success, resulting in Canon big heads getting scared from Sony's A850/A900 replacement and release a 5DIII with better specs.

Are you a user that, like myself, would like to see canon dabble in the pellicle range with their cheap slr's?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: epsiloneri on May 21, 2011, 02:33:52 PM
If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP.

I believe you meant Moore's Law, which refers to the number of transistors on an integrated circuit (which double every two years), not storage.

Yes, sorry, I misspelled. Hard disk space are following Moore's law quite accurately, however, see figure:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Hard_drive_capacity_over_time.svg)

The line fit of this graph is closer to doubling the capacity every 16 months (rather than 2 years), so a quadrupling of capacity in 4 years is not far off. Absolute MP count lag behind, in contrast. The number of MP per $ is probably a better fit.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: WarStreet on May 21, 2011, 02:55:46 PM
Are you a user that, like myself, would like to see canon dabble in the pellicle range with their cheap slr's?

I think that current technology is good enough to deliver the fps needed for cheap slr's. I expect higher fps on the more expensive models. I think, currently traditional slr's is the way to go. Maybe in the future, Sony will manage to improve the SLT technology beating traditional slr's but they might fail too, so we have to wait and see.
 
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: alipaulphotography on May 21, 2011, 03:36:32 PM
I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.

I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read  books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view.

I am starting out in sports photography, and at the moment I am doing very well in rugby with just a 500D. I am doing this for fun not for money, but still my aim is to get the best results even though I am competing against 1D and D3s pro users. I manage to do so by dedicating more time, both in the pitch and outside.

This means that the 3.4 fps and 'slow AF' of my camera can still deliver good results. But I think that for rugby, and other similar sports, better FPS and AF will improve the odds of getting a better picture. In F1, you might need to get a shot of the car in a particular spot, and timing might be more important than FPS, but unexpected expressions of faces and body positions in rugby will definitely benefit from more FPS. I can't time up to take a singe shot of a player punching an opponent  :)

If we consider an older rumor of a 4.9fps for the 5DIII, this will give about 25% improvement from the current 5DII 3.9 FPS and I will have 25% more photos to choice from for any particular action. 4.9 FPS might not sound alot, but the 25% extra photos, is a good improvement, and I will just say thanks and won't whine since I know this camera it's not a 1D, but I won't be happy with a 4.2 fps !!!

My only hope, is the pressure Sony is doing on Canon, with their cheap entry level cameras with 7 and 10 fps. I  hope that when the A77 is released, it will be a big success, resulting in Canon big heads getting scared from Sony's A850/A900 replacement and release a 5DIII with better specs.

5D series is not designed for sports or speed. Get a 7D - Much better for your needs. Cropped sensor for more distance, better autofocus for tracking moving subjects and 8fps. 18mp on a cropped sensor crops well too for post process cropping.

5D is a portrait/landscape/wedding camera. It should excel at what it is meant for - not please everyone.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: asu on May 21, 2011, 04:20:54 PM
please canon make some genius upgrade, I hope 30+MP are coming with better DR and Noise...
I dont nead unuseable noise n color from iso 12800++ all I need is iso 6400 with useable picture quality...
and make serious upgrade in AF system...
 8)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: hambergler on May 21, 2011, 05:43:25 PM
I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.

I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read  books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view.

I am starting out in sports photography, and at the moment I am doing very well in rugby with just a 500D. I am doing this for fun not for money, but still my aim is to get the best results even though I am competing against 1D and D3s pro users. I manage to do so by dedicating more time, both in the pitch and outside.

This means that the 3.4 fps and 'slow AF' of my camera can still deliver good results. But I think that for rugby, and other similar sports, better FPS and AF will improve the odds of getting a better picture. In F1, you might need to get a shot of the car in a particular spot, and timing might be more important than FPS, but unexpected expressions of faces and body positions in rugby will definitely benefit from more FPS. I can't time up to take a singe shot of a player punching an opponent  :)

If we consider an older rumor of a 4.9fps for the 5DIII, this will give about 25% improvement from the current 5DII 3.9 FPS and I will have 25% more photos to choice from for any particular action. 4.9 FPS might not sound alot, but the 25% extra photos, is a good improvement, and I will just say thanks and won't whine since I know this camera it's not a 1D, but I won't be happy with a 4.2 fps !!!

My only hope, is the pressure Sony is doing on Canon, with their cheap entry level cameras with 7 and 10 fps. I  hope that when the A77 is released, it will be a big success, resulting in Canon big heads getting scared from Sony's A850/A900 replacement and release a 5DIII with better specs.

5D series is not designed for sports or speed. Get a 7D - Much better for your needs. Cropped sensor for more distance, better autofocus for tracking moving subjects and 8fps. 18mp on a cropped sensor crops well too for post process cropping.

5D is a portrait/landscape/wedding camera. It should excel at what it is meant for - not please everyone.

I don't see why they couldn't do a crop mode like Nikons though

less MP, add crop factor which in turn would yield more fps and range with some sacrifice to MP and give us the best of both worlds
Title: Re: 5% off
Post by: abarraga on May 21, 2011, 05:56:47 PM
Sort of related to this posting:

I went to Fry's Electronics (to shop around) and there was a fully functioning demo version of the 5DMKII with the 24-105mm f/4L IS.  It was no surprise they did not have the body in stock, but I was offered 5% off the demo kit.

Knowing that the MK III will inevitably come (and my desire to upgrade to a full frame), should I have taken this offer?

5% off isn't really much of a deal.

I would take it from a new in box item... if I was in the market. I don't think it is enough of a discount on an open item.

I thought so.  Thank you danski0224.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: WarStreet on May 21, 2011, 06:23:17 PM
5D series is not designed for sports or speed. Get a 7D - Much better for your needs. Cropped sensor for more distance, better autofocus for tracking moving subjects and 8fps. 18mp on a cropped sensor crops well too for post process cropping.
5D is a portrait/landscape/wedding camera. It should excel at what it is meant for - not please everyone.

Yes it's true, that's why I don't expect more than 5 fps on this camera, and did mention that I will be happy with this and won't whine. If I am doing well with a 500D, the 5DIII should be better.

I would like to get FF since I need to blur the background as much as possible. I would need low noise capability too for indoor sports and high resolving power since cropping in sports is needed while still being able to print. I use center point AF with servo and a very good number of the photos I take has good focus. The center point AF of the 5DII is better than my 500D and it's even better than the 7D, and the new 5DIII might get an improved AF too.

My current 3.4 fps just limits the pool of photos from which I can choice, but I prefer to have low fps and good image quality in low light sports, better background blurring, and higher res rather more photos all with lower quality.

I use the camera for other usage, not just for sports, and I carry it with me all the time. So a small, well priced all rounder 5DIII will for sure please me. As you said, I will miss the reach of APS-C, and I will need some bigger lenses (ouch!) I might crop a bit more too since the current 5DII has about 25% - 50% more resolving power than my 500D (from DXO)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on May 21, 2011, 08:25:24 PM
I noticed that there is apparently a new supply of 35mm L filters, prices have dropped apparently due to the increased supply.  Some stores were asking over $1600, and some as much as $1999 for them, but now we are seeing Amazon's price at $1480, which is somewhat nearer to pre-earthquake prices. I paid $1397 for mine last July, plus I received some rebates which dropped the price another $150.

It does seem that, as lens stocks appear, prices are dropping to their normal level, which is increasing year by year.  We will never see 2008 prices again, I could have bought a new 300mm f/2.8 IS in Canada when the exchange rate favored US dollars!
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: unfocused on May 21, 2011, 10:17:53 PM
Quote
Anyone that thinks that lenses will become cheaper over time has not being paying any attention to Canon lens prices over the last 2 years

Check out an interesting story on canonpricewatch.com (http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-lenses-better-stocks/) It is from back in April, but it's still pretty interesting. Basically, they've tracked lens price increases and show that lenses are "outperforming" the stock market.

Whether or not the trend will continue, who knows? But it is a fun read.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: davebean on May 22, 2011, 10:08:35 AM
No dual card slots?!??!!?  Even Nikon's prosumer models are coming out with dual card slots.  I'm assuming that the AF will be fixed and the ISO will improve, that's a given.  However, for the "once-in-a-lifetime" weddings, I need dual card slots!!!

I'm afraid that, if the 5Dm3 doesn't come with dual slots, that would be the deal-breaker for me, I'm switching to Nikon.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: traveller on May 22, 2011, 10:32:32 AM
No dual card slots?!??!!?  Even Nikon's prosumer models are coming out with dual card slots.  I'm assuming that the AF will be fixed and the ISO will improve, that's a given.  However, for the "once-in-a-lifetime" weddings, I need dual card slots!!!

I'm afraid that, if the 5Dm3 doesn't come with dual slots, that would be the deal-breaker for me, I'm switching to Nikon.

If you're a pro with a good selection of Canon glass, wouldn't switching to a 1Ds series camera be a whole lot cheaper? What do you do at the moment?!
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: UncleFester on May 23, 2011, 02:42:57 AM
Autofocus right now is the 5D Mark II's biggest problem.  Without this fixed the Mark III will be only marginally better no matter how many mega pixels it has. 

The shots that have gone soft, especially on teles, may be inherent of full frames, though, and probably not easy to correct because of moving subject out of DOF faster than the camera can lock on. Which would wouldn't take much given it's shallowness. Still unacceptable to release a body w/o this problem addressed.

Also, the autofocus just not hunting at all -no red light- which I'm sure we've all experienced. One review I read the user describing this phenomena as the auto focus "...just giving up".

This makes the 5D II somewhat undependable, imo, and can only be classified as still a prototype and not completely reliable as a prosumer level full-frame. Especially at it's current price tag.

Fix this one problem and the current 5D becomes a different animal entirely.   
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: J-Man on May 23, 2011, 03:20:15 AM
I would like to see them ditch the mirror all together, and move the Phase Detection onto the imaging sensor so that you have both Phase and Contrast Detection working together, you would gain the speed of Phase Detection and accuracy of the Contrast Detection, there are already patents for this out there.(IIRC Fuji & Samsung)

I want a 1DS the same size of a 5D, call it a 3D/1VD/5DIII/Skippy... I don't care I just want it.

For those that want insanely high pixel counts for landscapes but don't want or can't afford MF, there is a thing called the "Gigapan" look into it. :)
http://www.gigapansystems.com/
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: OnteoEOS on May 23, 2011, 07:00:40 AM
I still Think The 5D Mark III will go all the way up to ISO 102K

My Crystal Ball Says:

32 MP Sensor
19 Cross sensor AF
ISO up to 102K but native up to 25K (no more ISO 50 perhaps?)
Same Screen as 550D
4.5 FPS
98% Viewfinder
CF + SD card bay
RAW video and continuous AF

$3000


Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: minestrone on May 23, 2011, 11:14:42 AM
A lot of people on this post have issues with Canon increasing its MP count. I personally would love more Megapixels. Below I want to vent my feelings, but just know that I respect other people's wishes as well. Sorry if it sounds aggressive.

When the 5D Mark II came out with 21MP so many people said that Canon glass couldn't handle the pixel count and images would be blurry. WRONG, my images came out crisp and tack sharp beyond what my wildest expectations.

Then there are people who say, "No one needs 21mp, 8 is all you need for a good print." Yea, not true. My clients have asked me for 20x30s, 24x36s, etc. Good luck with 8MP on that one.

Improved ISO would be awesome. But I've shot some really dim lit weddings and sometimes for fun I take my 5DmII with me to very dim lit restaurants and shoot upwards of IS0 1600 with no problems. Honestly, if a camera can shoot 21MP RAW at 1600 and give me great image quality I'm happy.

I don't know when or why I would ever used ISO 6400 or higher. And the expanded ISO ranges in 12800 and 25600 are useless (to most).

Sure, if Canon's 5DmIII can shoot ISO 3200 with as much noise as the Mark II's ISO1600 I'll be stoked. I'm all for better ISO/less noise.

Auto Focus was my BIGGEST gripe about the 5D Mark II. I've missed many amazing shots because my 5DmII would hunt back and forth. I really hope they can improve on this. I'm not really too thrilled about the 7D's AF system but if that's the best they can do for the 5DMIII I'll give it a shot. I have both cameras and when they're not hunting back and forth to find the object they're slow to figure things out at low light.

Priority List

Improved AF (I think that's on most everyone's list)
Better ISO/Less Noise
Better Dynamic Range
Better Video Quality+Different Codec
More Megapixels (I don't need more but it wouldn't hurt. I'm definitely NOT ok with decreasing the count)

Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: davebean on May 23, 2011, 11:48:22 AM
No dual card slots?!??!!?  Even Nikon's prosumer models are coming out with dual card slots.  I'm assuming that the AF will be fixed and the ISO will improve, that's a given.  However, for the "once-in-a-lifetime" weddings, I need dual card slots!!!

I'm afraid that, if the 5Dm3 doesn't come with dual slots, that would be the deal-breaker for me, I'm switching to Nikon.

If you're a pro with a good selection of Canon glass, wouldn't switching to a 1Ds series camera be a whole lot cheaper? What do you do at the moment?!

I have a decent selection of glass, not everything I want.  The 1Ds bodies are much heavier than a 5Dm2.  I shoot with a 1D3 now and it's killing my wrists, carrying that around is like carrying a 15 pound barbell for 10+ hours.  Any weight savings is a miracle now... but I'm not willing to compromise my client's pictures.  My hands have become numb because I'm holding close to 15 pounds of equipment... to the point where my finger could not press the shutter when I wanted to do it because it's lacking blood due to the death grip needed to hold that much weight without shaking.

I don't need 10FPS or weathersealing... my brides are not running a sprint and will not take pictures in the rain.  What wedding folks need is double fail-safe systems. The weak link in my workflow (if I went to a 5D family) is the single card.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on May 23, 2011, 11:57:45 AM
There are a lot of things I want in a camera, but what I expect in a 5D MK III is a relativelyminor upgrade.  A few more pixels, slightly better ISO, a few video improvements, and upgrading flash card speeds, perhaps adding a second slot.

The 5d MK II is not a sports camera, and it will not be turned into one.  It has about the best low light autofocus and the most accurate autofocus of the Canon prosumer cameras.

I would value higher DR and lower noise.

I doubt, however, if there will be any features that would make a upgrade from the MK II a must do thing.

You only need look at Canon's history of model upgrades to see that they upgrade in increments, not huge leaps.  A huge leap will become a new model.  If Canon wants to expand to three FF models, for example, there might be a new middle model with lots of additional features.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: unfocused on May 23, 2011, 03:21:26 PM
Quote
what I expect in a 5D MK III is a relatively minor upgrade.

Exactly. I've been thinking the same thing ever since I read the latest rumored specs.

I think this will especially be the case if the 5D MKIII is upgraded before the 1Ds. It seems logical that these two lines will diverge, with the 5D MK III serving as a basic full-frame camera for enthusiasts, portrait and wedding shooters and as a creative alternative for video shooters. I think they'll reserve the 1Ds for the high-end of the market. It will have the latest and greatest of everything and continue to be built like a tank. I expect the 1Ds will also have sufficient resolution to compete with medium-format cameras.

This gives Canon the ability to trickle-down some of the higher-end features into the next generation of the 7D. Again, creating further divergence between their top three cameras.  (I am assuming that the APS-H format will be dropped when the new 1Ds launches.)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: fotoray on May 23, 2011, 04:47:12 PM
Quote
what I expect in a 5D MK III is a relatively minor upgrade.

Exactly. I've been thinking the same thing ever since I read the latest rumored specs.

I think this will especially be the case if the 5D MKIII is upgraded before the 1Ds. It seems logical that these two lines will diverge, with the 5D MK III serving as a basic full-frame camera for enthusiasts, portrait and wedding shooters and as a creative alternative for video shooters. I think they'll reserve the 1Ds for the high-end of the market. It will have the latest and greatest of everything and continue to be built like a tank. I expect the 1Ds will also have sufficient resolution to compete with medium-format cameras.

This gives Canon the ability to trickle-down some of the higher-end features into the next generation of the 7D. Again, creating further divergence between their top three cameras.  (I am assuming that the APS-H format will be dropped when the new 1Ds launches.)

Interesting outlook.  I think the 5DIII must have an AF system at least as good as the 7D - I think this is a major 5D upgrade, even though it is existing technology.  I have a 7D and recently used a 5DII and really missed the 7D AF performance. 
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on May 23, 2011, 08:15:21 PM
Interesting outlook.  I think the 5DIII must have an AF system at least as good as the 7D - I think this is a major 5D upgrade, even though it is existing technology.  I have a 7D and recently used a 5DII and really missed the 7D AF performance.

The 5D gives accurate autofocus, while the 7D gives fast but less accurate autofocus.  For weddings and portraits, I want accurate over fast.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: zerotiu on May 23, 2011, 11:16:34 PM
Interesting outlook.  I think the 5DIII must have an AF system at least as good as the 7D - I think this is a major 5D upgrade, even though it is existing technology.  I have a 7D and recently used a 5DII and really missed the 7D AF performance.

The 5D gives accurate autofocus, while the 7D gives fast but less accurate autofocus.  For weddings and portraits, I want accurate over fast.

until know, I'm confused about the middle cross type focus and the other focuses at 5d2. Are the outer focuses can't be reliable? Because I don't like recomposing when I shoot human, especially a moving subject. It's too slow. From10 photos, my 550d gives me 6 sharp photos by using outer focuses.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on May 24, 2011, 09:36:28 AM
The 5D gives accurate autofocus, while the 7D gives fast but less accurate autofocus.  For weddings and portraits, I want accurate over fast.

The 5DII center AF point gives accurate autofocus.  But, I don't find it to be any less accurate than the center point of the 7D.  Also, the 5DII often focuses the same lens faster than the 7D.  For example, with my 85L (where the lens elements move relatively slowly), the 5DII seems to move from wherever it is focused right to the new focal plane, while the 7D seems to overshoot slightly then move back - as a result, the 5DII is a little faster (but both are equally accurate).

The off-center points of the 5DII are not very good (less accurate and they fail in low light), whereas the 7D's off-center points are just about as good as the center point.  The 5DII's center point does better in low light than the 7D, but the 5DII's off-center points do worse than the 7D in low light.  The 7D trumps the 5DII for moving subjects. 

So overall, if you're shooting static subjects and you are using the center point only, the 5DII has better AF.  But if you're shooting anything moving, or want to use an off-center point (for example, to minimize the effect of focus/recompose with fast lenses, where that results in missed focus), the 7D's AF is better.

What I want from the 5DIII AF is a few more points (although the 15 that the 5DII has is probably enough), and for all of them to be cross-type and all of them having the low-light sensitivity of the 5DII's center AF point. 
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: zerotiu on May 24, 2011, 10:25:30 AM
The 5D gives accurate autofocus, while the 7D gives fast but less accurate autofocus.  For weddings and portraits, I want accurate over fast.

The 5DII center AF point gives accurate autofocus.  But, I don't find it to be any less accurate than the center point of the 7D.  Also, the 5DII often focuses the same lens faster than the 7D.  For example, with my 85L (where the lens elements move relatively slowly), the 5DII seems to move from wherever it is focused right to the new focal plane, while the 7D seems to overshoot slightly then move back - as a result, the 5DII is a little faster (but both are equally accurate).

The off-center points of the 5DII are not very good (less accurate and they fail in low light), whereas the 7D's off-center points are just about as good as the center point.  The 5DII's center point does better in low light than the 7D, but the 5DII's off-center points do worse than the 7D in low light.  The 7D trumps the 5DII for moving subjects. 

So overall, if you're shooting static subjects and you are using the center point only, the 5DII has better AF.  But if you're shooting anything moving, or want to use an off-center point (for example, to minimize the effect of focus/recompose with fast lenses, where that results in missed focus), the 7D's AF is better.

What I want from the 5DIII AF is a few more points (although the 15 that the 5DII has is probably enough), and for all of them to be cross-type and all of them having the low-light sensitivity of the 5DII's center AF point.

I see..thanks for the explanation  :)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: WarStreet on May 24, 2011, 10:28:09 AM
The 7D trumps the 5DII for moving subjects. 

So overall, if you're shooting static subjects and you are using the center point only, the 5DII has better AF.  But if you're shooting anything moving, or want to use an off-center point (for example, to minimize the effect of focus/recompose with fast lenses, where that results in missed focus), the 7D's AF is better.

the 7D trumps the 5DII in servo center point ?  Does this happens in both good and bad light ? Does it happens with all lenses ?

My 500D center point servo gives me very good results during rugby in good light with the 70-200 2.8 IS II @ 2.8, even when players are running towards the camera. It also works well with 1.4 TC @ f4 too. I do get some frames out of focus, but it happens only for a small number of photos and never considered the focus a limitation although not 100% perfect.

In very low light five-a-side games with 85 1.8 @ 1.8, about 80% of my photos where out of focus, but @ 1.8, and very low light you do expect this. This is one of the many sports situation where the low noise ability of the 5D will be helpful since my APS-C has too much noise. Do you think that the 5D center servo focus will give me a higher number of focused photos in such situations? I might manage to use the 70-200 @ 2.8 if i can bump up the ISO of the 5DIII as much as I am estimating, which should give me a good AF advantage.
 
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: ReyMorlu on May 24, 2011, 11:50:51 AM
If Canon has developed a aps-h sensor (a trial almost) with 120Mpx... They have Hi-tech enough to make a FF sensor with more than 40Mpx for sure, as a matter of fact, only doubling the size of aps 18 Mpx you`ve got 36 at least. 32Mpx sounds not bad but 36 to 40 sounds better... I think they won't done it, they like to dosage slightly any kind of improvement, but I actually don't know in this specific case (5-D) what kind of camera use is it designed for??
Me, I'm a technical and studio photographer that personally (after having some) do not like 1D series by many reasons...
I work nowadays with 5D-II and it has de "minimum" to me in orther to be used as a real tull for my job, medium format cameras has no market enough and versatillity to be invested money on them (cloudy future...)
So, I'd like to find a camera to be used as a medium format resolution sistem mixt to a 35mm small body, whith the optional vertical grip nor like 1D massive full time bodies. For editorial photography mainly (art work repro, architecture, people groups pictures, landescapes, fashion-model work, etc BUT... never for sports and such!!
For these kind of pictures there are many other cameras yet build, in the both prosumer and professional ranges. 7D , 1D IV / III ,
Then is imposible to have a perfect all round use camera, all those who have the needs for a fast speed sportive camera try in other place.
The real base of 5D series have being IMAGE QUALITY, COLOR RENDITION, NOISE, D.O.F. FULL FRAME LIKE, AND PRESERVING THE 35mm lens focals like in the PAST AND HISTORY of reflex 135 format (I don't like to mount my 14 / 2,8L and turn into a 24...)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on May 24, 2011, 12:01:19 PM
the 7D trumps the 5DII in servo center point ?  Does this happens in both good and bad light ? Does it happens with all lenses ?

In all the situations in which I've tried the two, yes (including bright and dim light, and with various lenses).  The 5DII's AI Servo performance just isn't that great.  I think it does a little better than a Rebel.  The inner ring of 'invisible' AF points are specifically for AI Servo), but the 7D is definitely better.  My 7D managed to keep my toddler's eyes in focus as she ran diagonally toward me across the frame - with the 85L at f/1.2, where the lens is relatively slow and the DoF is very thin.  My 5DII couldn't manage that.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: WarStreet on May 24, 2011, 02:23:04 PM
In all the situations in which I've tried the two, yes (including bright and dim light, and with various lenses).  The 5DII's AI Servo performance just isn't that great.  I think it does a little better than a Rebel.  The inner ring of 'invisible' AF points are specifically for AI Servo), but the 7D is definitely better.  My 7D managed to keep my toddler's eyes in focus as she ran diagonally toward me across the frame - with the 85L at f/1.2, where the lens is relatively slow and the DoF is very thin.  My 5DII couldn't manage that.

Thanks for the info. The 85L situation you described is very severe. I think we can say that the 7D servo is fantastic , rather than 5DII being bad. I hope they improve the center point servo on the next model.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on May 24, 2011, 02:52:36 PM
I think we can say that the 7D servo is fantastic , rather than 5DII being bad.

I'd say the 5DII is adequate, for the most part.  The 7D is 'very good' but the moniker of 'fantastic' would have to go to the 1-series bodies.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: NXT1000 on May 25, 2011, 02:32:24 AM
keep hearing  5d3 and 1ds4 have very high MB, was very happy until sigma release 9700 dollars next generation slr, i think next canon very high MB camera will be very expensive. Not many will be able to afford it
.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on May 25, 2011, 10:24:28 AM
keep hearing  5d3 and 1ds4 have very high MB, was very happy until sigma release 9700 dollars next generation slr, i think next canon very high MB camera will be very expensive. Not many will be able to afford it
.

The Sigma camera is not $9700, but at $6899,  it is still plenty expensive ( http://photorumors.com/2011/05/24/sigma-sd1-retail-price-6899/ ).  It is a totally different technology sensor, and with low production rates, is likely super expensive to manufacture.  Sigma has to recover the development costs plus try to make a profit over a relatively small number of sales.

For standard CMOS cameras, higher MP probably do not reduce yield in the manufacturing process.  30 MP is not that much more dense than 21MP, and less dense than the 18mp sensors in the T3i.

The issue is improving the sensor characteristics to get lower noise and higher DR that photographers want, plus fast video readout with less heat generation.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Dom Bolton on May 25, 2011, 07:42:39 PM
I look forward to get this camera for filming purposes, but I expected (and i think still expecting) a competition with RED.

I want to shoot 4k camera.

Even YouTube a year ago began streaming certain videos at a resolution of up to 4096 x 2304 (in the 16:9 aspect ratio) to 4096 x 3072 (4:3). Registered users at YouTube are allowed to upload videos with a resolution higher than 1080p.

Users now don't have cameras shooting higher than 1080p. Canon may be first having provided this.

If Canon has given DSLR so good video, let it make it to the fullest with all technologies at hand. I'm sure technologies let Canon make 4k DSLR for the same price for user or close.

Appropriate autofocus - is obvious expectation. As well as all other shortcomings.

I look forward to see Canon 5d more professional in video meaning first of all. They can do it.  :) How do you think?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: ReyMorlu on May 28, 2011, 01:51:13 PM
I would like to know if people actually has any idea of what means resolution!?
I have read lot of times "no more Mpx, I don't need them" And some people saying (LOL) 24Mpx or so... is quite enought!
I would like to ask you: How many pixels has a 40D?  ...about ten, isn't it? and to double the resolution (that everybody knows is not good enough for pro-work) of this camera how many Mpx do you have to have?...
FORTY Mpx my dear!!!
In fact the 5D-2 machine has only one & a half the resolution of the 40 D.

In an optical sistem the resolution determines how can be dintiguished two diferent closest points turning one single point into two, for exmp. with a telescope watching the sky. The resolution is being given in arc seconds, and can be calculated dividing the number 10,5 by the aperture of telescope (in cm). this is the linear resolution for astronomical use... (and it has the name of Dawes Limit)
In a bitmap you have two dimensions height and widht, then if you double widht resolution you need to double the height res too! 1 pixel turns into 4 !! :D

Then are you sure, photographers do not need higher res in there machines? LOL.
Why then medium format sistems use 40 to 60Mpx in there backs and larger format cameras even 1Gb in a single shot!

Amateurs please; go to TOYSRUS, to ask for your dreams. ;)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Bob Howland on May 30, 2011, 09:07:56 AM
I would like to know if people actually has any idea of what means resolution!?
I have read lot of times "no more Mpx, I don't need them" And some people saying (LOL) 24Mpx or so... is quite enought!
I would like to ask you: How many pixels has a 40D?  ...about ten, isn't it? and to double the resolution (that everybody knows is not good enough for pro-work) of this camera how many Mpx do you have to have?...
FORTY Mpx my dear!!!
In fact the 5D-2 machine has only one & a half the resolution of the 40 D.

In an optical sistem the resolution determines how can be dintiguished two diferent closest points turning one single point into two, for exmp. with a telescope watching the sky. The resolution is being given in arc seconds, and can be calculated dividing the number 10,5 by the aperture of telescope (in cm). this is the linear resolution for astronomical use... (and it has the name of Dawes Limit)
In a bitmap you have two dimensions height and widht, then if you double widht resolution you need to double the height res too! 1 pixel turns into 4 !! :D

Then are you sure, photographers do not need higher res in there machines? LOL.
Why then medium format sistems use 40 to 60Mpx in there backs and larger format cameras even 1Gb in a single shot!

Amateurs please; go to TOYSRUS, to ask for your dreams. ;)

And, of course, you can point to single or double blind tests indicating that more resolution is critical to image quality. The only one that I know of indicated that people couldn't differentiate between 13"x19" prints made from images taken with a Canon G10 P&S and, I think, a Hasselblad 40MP MF digital camera.

For most of us, it isn't that we don't want more resolution. It's that, above 12MP to 21MP, more resolution is so far down the list of priorities that it is largely irrelevant. My personal obsession is with high ISO (i.e., 51200) image quality and lots of dynamic range. Other people have other obsessions.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: torger on May 30, 2011, 09:11:20 AM
I would like to know if people actually has any idea of what means resolution!?
I have read lot of times "no more Mpx, I don't need them" And some people saying (LOL) 24Mpx or so... is quite enought!

The problem with DSLRs is that they are all-around cameras. They are supposed to be good at "everything", and thus there are compromises. For hand-held and/or low-light shooting a large amount of megapixels is just a waste, since you cannot make use of them due to shake/noise. But for still life photography you almost cannot get too much resolution.

Medium format systems are much more specialized. For example fully manual technical view cameras for product photography, architecture, landscapes. Very good for that particular task, but totally useless for any kind of action photo and cannot be hand-held.

I myself would want to have a medium format system for still life photography, but I'm an amateur and don't have the budget so what I hope for instead is a high resolution DSLR.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: torger on May 30, 2011, 09:39:54 AM
And, of course, you can point to single or double blind tests indicating that more resolution is critical to image quality. The only one that I know of indicated that people couldn't differentiate between 13"x19" prints made from images taken with a Canon G10 P&S and, I think, a Hasselblad 40MP MF digital camera.

It is quite hard to make valuable tests like this. It is no difficulty for anyone to differ between a 200 ppi and 400 ppi high quality c print (assuming good quality image with fine details), it is just a matter of how close you get to the image. There are very different opinions about which viewing distances that are relevant. I think that for reasonably large fine art images (say 13x19 inches and above) a suitable viewing distance is about the same as the width of the image. Those that think that resolution is not so important usually think about viewing distances much farther away. There's also much differing between individuals how well they can detect resolution differences. Expert photographers that themselves care about resolution are usually better than their audience, but still they want the satisfaction from making the highest quality print, although the audience would settle for less.

Some also think it is important to have high resolution to get that quality feel, that is when you get close there's still resolution there. If you get below 200 ppi, it's often possible to see pixel artifacts (or upscaler artifacts) when you get close to the paper, and that's not what you'd want on a quality fine art print even if it's normally going to be viewed from a distance.

Personally, I like to keep the prints in the 300 - 400 ppi range if possible. With current resolving power in lenses somewhere 40-60 megapixels seems suitable upper limit for full frame sensors, and then I could do say 25x17 inches in full quality before starting to need upscaling tricks to hide pixel artifacts on close inspection.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: motorhead on May 30, 2011, 10:15:33 AM
I compare those arguing against more pixels to King Canute demonstrating to his court that even a King cannot hold back the tide. It is inevitable and totally unstoppable, far better to "lie back and enjoy the ride" - As a certain female media star was supposed to have said to a senior religious figure.

I look forward to more (massively more) pixel counts because it will produce a "smoother" product, no longer will I get annoyed when pixel edges are visible because of tonal or colour changes. That is a much more obvious issue than the "resolution" issue that non-believers keep bringing up.

We can expect the MP count to keep doubling for many years to come because time and science don't stand still. I fully expect these same discussions in a few years over "Is 400 MP enough"?

But at the same time I personally hope that science offers us a solution soon to the currently apalling dynamic resolution of the present crop of digital cameras. 
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: simonnca on May 31, 2011, 10:49:32 AM
QUESTION;

when the 5D MK iii is finally announced/released will a 'body only' version be available as at launch date? Or do they normally put out kits (ie. 5d mk iii + 24-105 f4 L) for the first 6 months?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: bikersbeard on May 31, 2011, 11:18:40 AM
I would have thought so.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: simonnca on May 31, 2011, 11:57:46 AM
I would have thought so.

?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: bikersbeard on May 31, 2011, 05:24:54 PM
would of thought you would be able to get body only
 :)
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on May 31, 2011, 06:06:12 PM
QUESTION;

when the 5D MK iii is finally announced/released will a 'body only' version be available as at launch date? Or do they normally put out kits (ie. 5d mk iii + 24-105 f4 L) for the first 6 months?

You can look at the past1  The pro models have not been available on the day of the announcement.  Its usually been a month or three.  I ordered my 5D MK II on the day it was announced, and it took 3 months.  I also ordered a 7D on the day it was announced, and it took about a month to be shipped.

There are lots who say they will order one, but how many actually will order one is quaetionable.  Many will wait and see, and then will be in the 6 month waiting line.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Tastino0 on June 09, 2011, 06:34:29 AM
So, it is possible that 5dMIII will be announced in August but it will ship in December?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on June 09, 2011, 11:00:08 AM
So, it is possible that 5dMIII will be announced in August but it will ship in December?

If announced at the end of August, or early September, it would likely be shipping in November.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: zerotiu on June 09, 2011, 11:14:10 AM
So, it is possible that 5dMIII will be announced in August but it will ship in December?

If announced at the end of August, or early September, it would likely be shipping in November.

If it's true, my plan will be ruined. I've planned to buy that at my hometown so I can get discount before moving to Singapore  :o
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Tastino0 on June 09, 2011, 11:15:34 AM
So, it is possible that 5dMIII will be announced in August but it will ship in December?

If announced at the end of August, or early September, it would likely be shipping in November.

Too late timeline .. :(
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: nlrela on June 09, 2011, 12:43:50 PM
If it's true, my plan will be ruined. I've planned to buy that at my hometown so I can get discount before moving to Singapore  :o

My plan will also be ruined .... shark breaching in South Africa without cool camera   :'(
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: srika on June 09, 2011, 03:51:45 PM
Unlike others, I'm all in favour of as many mp as possible.

Me too :-). I think 40 - 60 megapixels would be ideal for full-frame 36x24mm sensors. Past that the sensor is too small to support it well, and resolution will be higher than needed for most applications. I'd like to be able to produce pictures that can fill a book spread at glorious 400 ppi, which current full-frame cameras can't because resolution is too low. If you shoot detailed landscapes today you'd want a medium format system, which of course are way too expensive for hobbyists. Anyway 32 megapixels is a step in the right direction from my point of view.
or, you could do panoramic stitches and get whatever size you want.  :D
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: bomberman on June 12, 2011, 09:32:48 AM
I need accurate data regarding the emergence of 6D or 5D mark iii  8) ... anyone know where I can get that information  ;D... and whether the calamity that struck the Japanese make the 5D mark iii delayed or dead?   :-\
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on June 12, 2011, 10:14:33 AM
I need accurate data regarding the emergence of 6D or 5D mark iii ... anyone know where I can get that information

Just email info@canon.com, or better yet, Fujio.Mitarai@canon.com.  I'm sure you'll get the accurate data you crave.  Be sure to let us know what you learn!
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: CR Backup Admin on June 12, 2011, 01:24:58 PM
I need accurate data regarding the emergence of 6D or 5D mark iii ... anyone know where I can get that information

Just email info@canon.com, or better yet, Fujio.Mitarai@canon.com.  I'm sure you'll get the accurate data you crave.  Be sure to let us know what you learn!

+1
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: Ronin on June 14, 2011, 01:19:46 PM
The thing that does not make sense to me about  the rumor that a 5D MKIII high resolution camera replacing the 1Ds MK IV (or whatever) is the weather sealing. Many pro nature & wildlife photographers comment about the excellence of the weather sealing of the 1D series of bodies. I even recall one comment about a photographer accidentally dunking his camera in the ocean, shaking it off (presumably drying the front element) and continuing shooting. Unless the 5D MK III has that level of weather sealing, I can not see that group of users being entirely pleased with it.

As far as MP count and resolution go, Jay Goodrich, posting on behalf of Art Wolfe, (April 13, 2011 entry http://blog.artwolfe.com/2009/01/equipment/ ) says that they print up to 30x40 inches using Photoshop (to size the image for printing) for images captured with Art's 1Ds MK III 21 MP camera. He also notes that Art used a tripod, cable release and sets the camera for mirror lock-up whenever possible.

I am certain that Canon will continue to increase the resolution of sensors, but it seems that, beyond about 24 MP, other considerations may attain greater influence. We shall see.
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: DJL329 on October 18, 2011, 12:00:33 AM
Okay, so now that we know what the 1D X has, what does that mean for the 5D Mark III?  Will the MP decrease?  (Is the megapixel war really over?)  Will the auto-focus and FPS improve?
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: te4o on October 18, 2011, 12:39:28 AM
Well, I guess it depends whether it will be a 5D X (whatever the X is there for) ::) - same sensor as 1D - we've had it before?
I think that plenty of readers here (if not the majority) would be happy with one DIGIC5, (+- one DIGIC4 for focusing on 20+ fields), same high ISO 51Tsd, 5-6 FPS and anywhere 18-25 MP (well more like 21-25 ;)). For 3000USD at max.
I am sad because of the release date March 2012. Seems like an eternity for me to jump onto a nextgen FF.
What next ? Are we in the dark for another 6 months until the next press release ?
Better start re-bonding to my old 40D again :'(
Title: Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
Post by: pedro on October 18, 2011, 02:25:27 AM
Let's see what New York and Hollywood will present to us... 8) Even if a 5Diii is due TBA next year...great times ahead folks...the shade a recently announced 1Dx is casting looks very promising! Cheers, Pedro.