canon rumors FORUM

Rumors => EOS Bodies => Topic started by: Canon Rumors on December 05, 2011, 08:48:33 PM

Title: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Canon Rumors on December 05, 2011, 08:48:33 PM
It’s been awhile I hadn’t heard much about the 5D Mark III for a while, after the excitement surrounding the 1D X and C300, I can understand why.

The information below comes from various sources on the web and in my inbox.

Specs? Two different pieces of information put the camera above 30mp. I get the idea there is more than one sensor being put through the paces. It will not have a pro AF system. It was suggested by one person that the AF will actually be a lesser version of the 7D autofocus system. The camera would not have a crazy frame per second rating, something in the 3-4fps range like the current 5D Mark II. It will be equipped with the DIGIC 5+ processor and be aimed at high megapixel/high ISO performance. The 5D Mark III will not be the 4K Cinema EOS prototype Canon previously announced was in development. There were no details given about the video functionality of the camera.

Most everyone is saying do not expect an announcement until at least March when the 1D X should be shipping. Announcement dates can always change though. It may depend on what Nikon does with the D800.

cr

5D Mark II @ B&H

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: eaw213 on December 05, 2011, 08:57:14 PM
"...aimed at high megapixel/high ISOÂ performance."

Seems counterintuitive. That aside, the thought of the AF being less than the 7D is a downer.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Ricku on December 05, 2011, 08:57:43 PM
I refuse to believe this.

If the rumor about AF is true, then I probably wont buy the 5D3. The biggest reason to why me and many other photographers want to upgrade from 5D2 to 5D3, is becaus we are hoping for dramaticly improved AF.

Surely Canon must understand that they can't put half assed AF in the 5D line AGAIN?

Why should I own pro lenses worth thousands of dollars if my camera cant make them focus properly?



Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: dr croubie on December 05, 2011, 09:04:51 PM
Given what I've read lately in other posts, about "waiting to see 1DX sales figures" and the mythical 36MP D800 that still is nowhere to be seen, I reckon Canon are sitting on a few prototypes and they haven't actually decided which one to release yet, waiting on sales figures for all of the 1DX, D3X/D4, D800 before they decide which one to release.

Still, this agrees with what i've been thinking. I'm putting 99% probability on:
- no RAW video, xlr inputs, probably not even mic-input gain setting, that's for the cinemaEOS whatever it will be called.
- no video better than C300, full stop. Video as good as 7D/60D, maybe one or two minor features better. Don't expect wonders.
- Either 1DX's 18MP sensor, or a 32MP+ that will shrink to worse-looking images than 1DX at 3200iso and above (in which case it will be called the 2/3/4D and priced $3500-4k)
- 7D-or-worse AF. Don't expect 45pt. Ever. I'm half not even expecting 19pt. Either 15pt as current (but all 15 selectable), or they'll re-use the 7D's 19pt to save R&D costs (but then the points will be very close to the FF centre-of-frame). (maybe even use some rejected 7D-sensors with 4-8 points disabled?). It's not a sports-camera, get used to it.
- 1 digic 5 or 5+, no more than 4fps. It's not a sports-camera, get used to it.
- FF, ungripped, no flash pentaprism, obviously.
- I'd really like to see dual-cf slots, or 1 cf slot. I definitely don't want to see 1cf+1sd, that's a recipe for the death of CF and i'd like my investment to stay valuable.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: pwp on December 05, 2011, 09:06:21 PM
Quote from: Canon Rumors
It will not have a pro AF system. It was suggested by one person that the AF will actually be a lesser version of the 7D autofocus system.

Without 7D level AF as a minimum, a 5DIII looks way behind the competition.
Plenty of 5DII shooters may not see enough for them in the new camera, and be perfectly happy to punt along with the 5DII for another couple of years.

For a lot of us, AF performance is the Achilles heel of the 5DII and the 5D classic before it.

Paul Wright
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: dr croubie on December 05, 2011, 09:11:51 PM
For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)

The "better-AF" is probably the most-read debate about the 5D3 besides the "32+MP vs 18MP high-iso" debate.
For anyone who bought the 5D2 upon release (or within a year), was the AF good for you then? Did it only get worse once the 7D came out? If they come out with 19pt AF and then the 7D2 has 27pt AF, will the 5D3 be useless then too?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Ricku on December 05, 2011, 09:12:59 PM
It is as if they are saying: "If you want good auto focus in your DSLR, you must either go for the 7D crop camera, or for the "super heavy" 7000 dollar 1DX.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Wahoowa on December 05, 2011, 09:16:16 PM
For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)

The "better-AF" is probably the most-read debate about the 5D3 besides the "32+MP vs 18MP high-iso" debate.
For anyone who bought the 5D2 upon release (or within a year), was the AF good for you then? Did it only get worse once the 7D came out? If they come out with 19pt AF and then the 7D2 has 27pt AF, will the 5D3 be useless then too?

Well, more cross-type sensors is the first thing. I hate it when I use 5D2 and many times I couldn't use the outside focus points to focus.

I don't mind if it's gonna be less than 19, but I would want a similar focus system in 7D. Otherwise, I will just snag a used 5D2 when the new 5D3 comes out.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jrista on December 05, 2011, 09:28:23 PM
"...aimed at high megapixel/high ISOÂ performance."

Seems counterintuitive. That aside, the thought of the AF being less than the 7D is a downer.

I wouldn't say that. As I've mentioned in a previous answer, a 5D III with around 30mp would still be LESS DENSE than the 7D at 18mp. It would take a 46.7mp FF sensor to achieve the same pixel density as the 7D (which, while it doesn't have superb ISO performance, isn't terrible until around 3200). A 30mp sensor would be 16.7mp away from that maximum. Combine that fact with the improved design and readout electronics of the 1DX style sensor, and I don't see a 30mp sensor with better noise characteristics than any current 20mp+ sensor on the market today being "impossible" or even "implausible".
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jrista on December 05, 2011, 09:38:45 PM
For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)

The "better-AF" is probably the most-read debate about the 5D3 besides the "32+MP vs 18MP high-iso" debate.
For anyone who bought the 5D2 upon release (or within a year), was the AF good for you then? Did it only get worse once the 7D came out? If they come out with 19pt AF and then the 7D2 has 27pt AF, will the 5D3 be useless then too?

While I agree the 9-point AF sensor in the 5D II with its single cross-type sensor in the middle (which is, as far as I can tell, the same AF system in all of canon's consumer-grade cameras) is ATROCIOUS for a professional-grade camera, I don't think it needs to be replaced with a super-duper top of the line system either. I don't think anyone can really expect the advanced sports-and-action capable AF system of the 7D. The 7D line is designed for a different purpose than the 5D line, so it doesn't really make sense to me to include an advanced action-tuned AF system in a camera that is more designed for low- or no-action work like landscapes, studio portraits, etc.

I think something similar to the 7D's 19 cross-type system would be useful, and help keep the cost of the camera from reaching $4000. A 19-point AF system with perhaps only 9 cross-type sensors (a cross in the center plus the four outer points) would certainly be an improvement on the existing AF in the 5D II, and should improve focusing for wedding, portrait, and even wildlife/bird photography sufficiently (although I think most serious wildlife/bird photographers would opt for the 7D anyway for the greater reach.)

I certainly don't see much beyond my own intended use for a 5D III, though, which is all nature-oriented (landscapes, macro, still wildlife, astrophotography). I can't really say how much a better AF system might really be needed by other types of photographers who need an affordable full-frame camera.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 05, 2011, 09:53:27 PM
It is as if they are saying: "If you want good auto focus in your DSLR, you must either go for the 7D crop camera, or for the "super heavy" 7000 dollar 1DX.

That's exactly what Canon has been saying, for years.  Nikon, OTOH, has been putting pro-level AF in semi-pro bodies - but if you want a high resolution sensor (in the current lineup, rumors about a high-MP D800 are still just rumors), you have to get APS-C or an $8000 D3x, while Canon 'gives away' the same 21-MP sensor from the 1DsIII in the 'affordable' 5DII. Different brands, different strategies for internal differentiation. You pays your money and you makes your choice...

This spec rumor sounds very, very logical to me (but maybe too logical, given the 1D X?).
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: wickidwombat on December 05, 2011, 09:55:47 PM
I'd rather see the 5D 3 come in at a higher price point with a proper AF system to compete with the D700, D800 line from nikon, I don't think it will canabilise 1DX sales if frame rate stays at 4FPS that is just fine with me

I really want to see

- Beef up the AF system
- Beef up the weather sealing pro build
- leave the form about the same size (i'm loving the no grip of the 5D2)
- leave 4FPS
- 30MP would be nice but I'd be happy if they just stayed at 21 and improved the sensor tech even further into better ISO territory, Even shooting landscapes 21 if fine for me if i want bigger MP then i shoot panoramas anyway with tighter AoV lenses
- would like a little more customisation option over the controls more like the 1D
- upgrade AEB to at least give us 5 bracket sets
- I would like the battery to stay the same and remain compatable with the 7D line
- Oh and improve the live view, live view histogram would be nice, but at least put a border on the histogram in the screen display so we can see where the edge is :P
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: JR on December 05, 2011, 10:08:02 PM

That's exactly what Canon has been saying, for years.  Nikon, OTOH, has been putting pro-level AF in semi-pro bodies - but if you want a high resolution sensor (in the current lineup, rumors about a high-MP D800 are still just rumors), you have to get APS-C or an $8000 D3x, while Canon 'gives away' the same 21-MP sensor from the 1DsIII in the 'affordable' 5DII. Different brands, different strategies for internal differentiation. You pays your money and you makes your choice...

This spec rumor sounds very, very logical to me (but maybe too logical, given the 1D X?).

Exactly!  So the price point of the new D800 will be important.  If it too include a high rez sensor (like we all expect) with a pro-level AF (like we all suspect) then this will be a different proposition then their current D700.    The only argument then for Canon to keep their existing AF system in the 5D replacement would be if its price point is very different form the D800 (assuming the 5D is also high rez MP).  If D800 is ~$4000 like previously rumored while a 5d III be priced at say ~$3000, then Canon might get away with it. 

If the prices are similar however, I think Canon will have a harder time against the D800.  So maybe, just maybe, there is room in Canon's lineup for another FF camera with a price point between a 5D III and a 1Dx with pro-level AF...

That said, for now I guess if I want pro-level AF, I will need to buy the 1DX  :o
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: JR on December 05, 2011, 10:09:21 PM
I'd rather see the 5D 3 come in at a higher price point with a proper AF system to compete with the D700, D800 line from nikon, I don't think it will canabilise 1DX sales if frame rate stays at 4FPS that is just fine with me

I really want to see

- Beef up the AF system
- Beef up the weather sealing pro build
- leave the form about the same size (i'm loving the no grip of the 5D2)
- leave 4FPS
- 30MP would be nice but I'd be happy if they just stayed at 21 and improved the sensor tech even further into better ISO territory, Even shooting landscapes 21 if fine for me if i want bigger MP then i shoot panoramas anyway with tighter AoV lenses
- would like a little more customisation option over the controls more like the 1D
- upgrade AEB to at least give us 5 bracket sets
- I would like the battery to stay the same and remain compatable with the 7D line
- Oh and improve the live view, live view histogram would be nice, but at least put a border on the histogram in the screen display so we can see where the edge is :P

+1, or a new model between a 5D and a 1DX with those features...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 05, 2011, 10:14:37 PM
That said, for now I guess if I want pro-level AF, I will need to buy the 1DX  :o

Which is exactly I'm waiting for B&H to start taking 1D X pre-orders...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: dr croubie on December 05, 2011, 10:21:35 PM
That said, for now I guess if I want pro-level AF, I will need to buy the 1DX  :o

Which is exactly I'm waiting for B&H to start taking 1D X pre-orders...

Which is exactly why i'm waiting for people like Neuro to dump their 5D2s second-hand around March-April next year...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Meh on December 05, 2011, 10:22:11 PM
It is as if they are saying: "If you want good auto focus in your DSLR, you must either go for the 7D crop camera, or for the "super heavy" 7000 dollar 1DX.

That's exactly what Canon has been saying, for years.  Nikon, OTOH, has been putting pro-level AF in semi-pro bodies - but if you want a high resolution sensor (in the current lineup, rumors about a high-MP D800 are still just rumors), you have to get APS-C or an $8000 D3x, while Canon 'gives away' the same 21-MP sensor from the 1DsIII in the 'affordable' 5DII. Different brands, different strategies for internal differentiation. You pays your money and you makes your choice...

Well said.  +2
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: V8Beast on December 05, 2011, 10:32:48 PM
For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)



I don't give a $h!t how many AF points, cross-type points, blah, blah, blah that the 5D3 will have. All I want is an AF system that locks focus quickly, accurately and consistently, especially with moving subjects. Low light AF performance needs to be upgraded substantially as well. In other words, I just want an AF system that doesn't get in my way. I couldn't care less how many AF points, cross-type points, or processors it takes to make it happen. As long as something works well for my shooting needs, I don't give a rat's ass what the specs may be. 
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Ricku on December 05, 2011, 10:41:50 PM
For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)



I don't give a $h!t how many AF points, cross-type points, blah, blah, blah that the 5D3 will have. All I want is an AF system that locks focus quickly, accurately and consistently, especially with moving subjects. Low light AF performance needs to be upgraded substantially as well. In other words, I just want an AF system that doesn't get in my way. I couldn't care less how many AF points, cross-type points, or processors it takes to make it happen. As long as something works well for my shooting needs, I don't give a rat's ass what the specs are.

+1

As long as it works accurately and consistently, everything is fine.

I dont think anyone would want a flash that did not work consistently, right? Or what about inconsistent aperture?

If I do everything right, I SHOULD get my perfect shot, without having to worry about AF doing crazy things.



Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 05, 2011, 11:39:01 PM
It is as if they are saying: "If you want good auto focus in your DSLR, you must either go for the 7D crop camera, or for the "super heavy" 7000 dollar 1DX.

Yeah that's how I feel.  Full-Frame should be well doable at a pro-level in a half-sized body by this point.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: pedro on December 06, 2011, 05:25:09 AM
Well, in relation to the Rebel rumor posted yesterday, is there still a possibility for a 5D3 below 30+MP? Let's say if they had a 24 MP 1Dx-type-sensor at hand for implementation in the upcoming body? Or is that unlikely? This would  mean a slight increase in MP only and still could beat Nikon by price and improved quality compared to their rumored 36 MP attempt. Wouldn't that be a wise move? Calling the experts here: Is that a mere dream of mine?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Nejko on December 06, 2011, 06:06:21 AM
i really don´t see a reason why Canon doesn´t put the old 45-AF system combined with the 4fps.. it is utterly useless for sports.. but kicks ass in AF.. being Canon likes to reuse stuff... NO WAY are they going to dump the all new 1D mk4 AF system after one camera model.. either one of the 7D or 5D get the 45-AF.. or.. the 2/3/4D might come to be.. one day... a FF 7D with the 1Dx sensor, 45-AF and 6-8fps for 4k€...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2011, 06:31:47 AM
I don't give a $h!t how many AF points, cross-type points, blah, blah, blah that the 5D3 will have. All I want is an AF system that locks focus quickly, accurately and consistently, especially with moving subjects. Low light AF performance needs to be upgraded substantially as well. ... As long as something works well for my shooting needs, I don't give a rat's ass what the specs may be.

Hopefully you don't give a rat's ass about cost, either, because you're just described the behavior of the AF system in a 1-series camera.  So...problem solved - get a 1DsIII, 1D IV, or a 1D X when it comes out.  I can almost guarantee that, given the requirements you outline, you're not going to be happy with the AF of the 5DIII.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: torger on December 06, 2011, 06:56:26 AM
Ahhh... at last a 5Dmk3 rumour more along my lines :-).

I think it is unlikely to see a "cheap" fullframe with similar specs to 1DX. They must differ significantly. High res, slow, simple AF seems logical. A 7D2 with its smaller sensor as differentiator could have AF close to 1DX though. A 5D / 7D combo like I have today may be a good combo also in the next generation.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 07:35:22 AM
I don't give a $h!t how many AF points, cross-type points, blah, blah, blah that the 5D3 will have. All I want is an AF system that locks focus quickly, accurately and consistently, especially with moving subjects. Low light AF performance needs to be upgraded substantially as well. ... As long as something works well for my shooting needs, I don't give a rat's ass what the specs may be.

Hopefully you don't give a rat's ass about cost, either, because you're just described the behavior of the AF system in a 1-series camera.  So...problem solved - get a 1DsIII, 1D IV, or a 1D X when it comes out.  I can almost guarantee that, given the requirements you outline, you're not going to be happy with the AF of the 5DIII.

neuroanatomist, there comes a point where planned obsolescence and the forced withholding and temporary suppression of iterative tech upgrades for marketing/product line purposes and colluding with the competition to compete softly in the market will backfire in the faces of the offenders.  Canon should be happy to have an opportunity to dominate and make riches in a period in time where no one deserves to be rich, something that can be taken away virtually overnight if it's mistreated or gambled.  Why am I saying this to you?  Because it sounds like you've gotten to the point where you believe the marketing bullshit is as sound and real world as your photographic mathematics and science.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: PerfectSavage on December 06, 2011, 07:35:53 AM
There is no way Canon is going to put an AF system in a 5D series camera that is a lesser equivalent of - if not better than - the 7D AF; that source is bogus.  Secondly, the other information is solid (if obvious) and anyone who thinks the Cine version DSLR Canon rolled out at the C300 launch is going to be a 5DIII must remember one simple thing; Canon announced it, branded it and placed it directly beside the C300 in HollywoodTHAT is the market that camera (when/if it comes to market) is intended for, Hollywood B/C cam setups supporting the C300...Indie types etc.  It is not designed for the same market as the 5DII/III etc and while it might be awfully similar to a 5DIII (think 7D/60D differences) when it comes out, it will be different and targeted at a different market and probably available in a PL mount option like the C300.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 07:46:57 AM
I thought that new C camera was 1D sized and rumored to perhaps be even APS-C cropped.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: scottsdaleriots on December 06, 2011, 07:50:07 AM
Here are the 'basics' that I'd like to have in the 5dmII;
* at least 25MP (IMO I cant justify spending $US7000 or whatever it will be for a FF 18MP, I have a 7d and i'm content with the 18MP it has)
*pro-AF which focusses rapidly, locks on
* dual digi V
* higher/better video capacities
* the fps I dont really cant about, though about 5fps would be good
* 1Dx's ISO or something similar to it

More than anything I want canpn to announce AND release the 5dmkII ASAP coz i'm studying photography next year - first year is $10,000 alone, not including the material costs, etc. f**king expensive as course and they're forcing us to buy and use a FF camera. i dont want to and i dont see the logic in buying the 5dmkII only to have the mkIII get announced/released 6 or so months later. that's just a total waste of money IMO, I dont care if it retains most of its value. I've been holding out for a mkIII for a long time and want it to be my first FF camera.

stupid canon, release official specs already!!!! >:(
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: traveller on December 06, 2011, 08:08:21 AM
Isn't it a bit sad that if this and the current Nikon rumours prove true, then this time next year we will have to buy a 1D X to get a camera that is even remotely as good as the equivalent Nikon? I guess we'll heve to wait and see.  Is anyone else beginning to wonder if they've bought into the wrong system?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: infared on December 06, 2011, 08:13:54 AM
From what I am reading here I see no reason to buy a 5DMark III.  I own the II and I do not need 30MP. Now if the focusing on the III was like the 7D and I got 7 frames per second ...keep me at the 21MP with those improvements and that is a camera I would buy...hmmmm....Looks like I will just hang out and get a deal on another 5D Mark II when the prices go down.
Thanks Canon.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: JR on December 06, 2011, 08:26:28 AM
Isn't it a bit sad that if this and the current Nikon rumours prove true, then this time next year we will have to buy a 1D X to get a camera that is even remotely as good as the equivalent Nikon? I guess we'll heve to wait and see.  Is anyone else beginning to wonder if they've bought into the wrong system?

I dont.  Not now anyway.  We are all speculating on cameras from both Canon and Nikon that have yet to be announced.  If I look at what is available today on the market, I am quite happy with my 5D mkII and I really like the lens lineup that Canon has.  I would not trade my current gear for a D700 and Nikon lenses.  With what is available today, I would pick Canon again in a hearth beat.

Of course some of the spec of the rumored Nikon camera are very compelling, but lets wait and see how good it is when we have RAW files.  One pro shooter I met recently which shoot with both Canon and Nikon told me he was eager to get the 1DX and that this is what he will use for now.  I replied to him well what about the rumored D800, and his responce was that he did not beleive the IQ will be as good as we think.  At 38MP, high ISO has to suffer compared to Canon ...

I will be concerned if Canon next line up is not competitive with Nikon, but Canon likely has several sample with different spec on test and am sure they will pick the right one to compete with Nikon...(wishful thinking)

 ???
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: infared on December 06, 2011, 08:33:37 AM
Yo...scottsdaleriots (doubtful) What is with all of the anger with the posts everybody? ....you are so angry in your bold print you state "I want canpn to announce AND release the 5DMarkII ASAP coz I'm studying photography next year". First lets hope you are studying English this year.  Canon is a cap and check your spelling.  Second I think you are referring to the 5D Mark III in your rant. Also...if you are a new student to photography a 5D Mark II is plenty of camera...plenty..... if creating, processing and printing excellent photography is what you had in mind. Save yourself some money and concentrate on the knowledge and art, not the machine. Its not ALL about the camera.
If this is where Canon is headed with the 5D...I am going to keep the one I own (unbelievable camera) and hang in the wings and pick up another body at a discount. I do not need 30mp.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: MartinvH on December 06, 2011, 08:49:48 AM
Why would you need 'superior' autofocus in a 5D mark 3 ??
It is a high resolution portrait and landscape camera , so that is what its made for.
You want both worlds buy an extra 7D or just one 1D-X and sell the rest of your camera's.

People (i am talking amateurs here) are just never satisfied , we always want something better, newer and more expensive which does rarely improve your pictures.
It just makes you lazier in your technique!

Would not we al buy the new Canon 1D-X + lenses if we could so easily afford it ?
And end up spending over 10.000 euro's just to get more great (but everso always the same) pictures of your running kids inside your lowlighted house or the same pictures of your favorite area:)

Yesterday I was just walking around sundown without a tripod and got lucky to get some of the best landscape pictures I ever did.
No lens or camera can make up for a that split moment when weather ,light and circumstances come together in just a minute window or so.
A simple T2i plus a very old 75/300 lens got the job done.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: ghosh9691 on December 06, 2011, 08:52:54 AM
What is with all of the anger with the posts everybody?

'coz his ain't bigger or better than his neighbor! The anonymity afforded by the internet makes you braver/studiper and you can say anything you want, rant at anyone you want...


Its not ALL about the camera.
If this is where Canon is headed with the 5D...I am going to keep the one I own (unbelievable camera) and hang in the wings and pick up another body at a discount. I do not need 30mp.

Well said!!! Quite seriously, I am sick of people moaning about high ISO and/or high MP! Just go out and take some photographs. Remember, higher ISO or higher MP will not make you a better photographer!

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2011, 08:54:03 AM
Here are the 'basics' that I'd like to have in the 5dmIII;
* at least 25MP
* pro-AF which focusses rapidly, locks on
* dual digic V
* higher/better video capacities
* the fps I dont really cant about, though about 5fps would be good
* 1Dx's ISO or something similar to it

Here are the 'basics' that I'd like to have you're likely to get in the 5dmIII;
* at least 25MP 18 MP (but maybe more if they decide not to reuse the 1D X sensor)
* pro-AF which focusses rapidly, locks on
* dual digic V
* higher/better video capacities
* the fps I dont really cant about, though about 5fps 4 fps would be good
* 1Dx's ISO or something similar to it
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Bob Howland on December 06, 2011, 09:30:09 AM
Remember, higher ISO or higher MP will not make you a better photographer!

Wrong! If high ISO allows you to use a 24-70 zoom lens at 70mm instead of having to use a 24 f/1.4 lens, and an exposure of 1/60 sec and f/2.8 instead of 1/15 sec and f/1.4, then it most certainly can make you a "better photographer".
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 09:38:05 AM
Neuro...  -realistically, what physical/manufacturing cost savings would leaving out a reasonable auto-focus system provide?  I'm thinking in terms of raw material it's next to no extra costs, and in terms of manufacturing techniques, it's nominal for them to make the extra effort
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: torger on December 06, 2011, 09:38:15 AM
Remember, higher ISO or higher MP will not make you a better photographer!

Wrong! If high ISO allows you to use a 24-70 zoom lens at 70mm instead of having to use a 24 f/1.4 lens, and an exposure of 1/60 sec and f/2.8 instead of 1/15 sec and f/1.4, then it most certainly can make you a "better photographer".

I agree, good equipment does make some shots possible which otherwise are impossible or extremely hard to nail. Good AF in sports for example. Low light photography. Beautiful short DoF photographs does require large aperture lenses. Etc.

Those that say that equipment is not important still often have top-of-the-line equipment themselves by some reason...

I think a better saying is that even with good equipment you can make poor pictures :-).
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 09:50:33 AM
torger, I think someone just wanted to rail into a student and bully them about spelling and grammar, because that's probably what someone did to them when they were young and eager to learn and be playing with exciting new equipment

Although I would say to that student that if your budget is tight, getting a used 5D Mark ONE isn't an altogether horrible idea depending on your budget, espeically if you end up having to wait for a Mark III release.  I'd also say that photography school in a digital age, is questionable. 

I'd take the $10 grand, bank it, spend a small amount on cheap but good (ef-s) equipment and spend your time scouring the internet and camping out at Barnes & Nobles/your local libraries and online book repositories in the photography sections.  There isn't anything a school can teach you in photography that isn't written in a book or in a youtube video at this point.  Then once you have taught yourself you can spend all that extra cash on high end kit that you will know how to take advantage of the day you test it out in the camera store while you study your purchase with experience.  Just my ten sents (and I spelled that wrong on purpose just to annoy the other guy)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: whatta on December 06, 2011, 10:10:18 AM
Neuro...  -realistically, what physical/manufacturing cost savings would leaving out a reasonable auto-focus system provide?  I'm thinking in terms of raw material it's next to no extra costs, and in terms of manufacturing techniques, it's nominal for them to make the extra effort

how much did they save when they decided to remove AF-MA from 60D? Nothing, but they did ;)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: redeyedfly on December 06, 2011, 10:12:07 AM
This is absurd.  If these are the specs then why would anyone upgrade?  Only high megapixel/ISO performance?...I do that with software these days, I don't need a whole new camera just for that.

This rumor is obviously fabricated to throw off the Nikon d800 announcement.  For a camera that is considered a benchmark in the dslr world i seriously doubt canon would release anything with such a minimal improvement.  Especially considering the anniversary of the EOS this coming year...This is no way to showcase a revolutionary camera on the anniversary as the mark II did when it was released. 

If these specs are true I'll wait for a nikon d800, heck I'll even consider buying a used d700.  If canon can't release a revolutionary camera to include many major upgrades then why should I stay loyal to them?  I don't mind selling all of my canon lens and flashes if I don't have a decent high performing platform to use them on.

Pay attention Canon....You can't force people to buy a $7k 1DX camera...the 5DmkIII is critical to your consumer base, you better get it right.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 10:28:19 AM
Neuro...  -realistically, what physical/manufacturing cost savings would leaving out a reasonable auto-focus system provide?  I'm thinking in terms of raw material it's next to no extra costs, and in terms of manufacturing techniques, it's nominal for them to make the extra effort

how much did they save when they decided to remove AF-MA from 60D? Nothing, but they did ;)

I get the "realist's" approach on not having high expectations when it comes to corporate spoon-feeding, but I'm not a fan of making it easy for them.  It's bad enough the competition all soft-plays against each other like poker pro's hunting salmon.  I at least attempt to fight against our corporate induced mass Stockholm syndrome, and it would be nice if I had a little help
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: arussarts on December 06, 2011, 10:46:59 AM
I for one am delighted at this rumor.  Slightly better AF, above 30MP and even better high iso perfomance... Awesome!  These hardly seem like incremental improvements when you consider you're probably still only going to pay $2500.

If I wanted/needed a pro level AF system and high ISO, I'd suck it up and buy a 1Dx.  But I don't shoot sports so a speed demon of a camera is not important to me.  In fact, just about every architectural photographer I know currently uses a 5d2 because it's better than "good enough" and it doesn't cost $8000.  Thus, we can buy two and make more money, getting more shots.

Honestly, it sounds like a lot of the high iso/low megapixel crowd simply want a full frame 7D.  Why not?  Could be a great camera but I think we all know Canon learned their lesson on releasing an affordable version of their flagship camera.  No 1Dx's for $2500 would be my guess.  But I'd buy it if they did!

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Stuart on December 06, 2011, 10:52:45 AM
AF type? Nikon seems to have a better AF approach - will canon improve theres for live view?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2011, 10:58:28 AM
Neuro...  -realistically, what physical/manufacturing cost savings would leaving out a reasonable auto-focus system provide?  I'm thinking in terms of raw material it's next to no extra costs, and in terms of manufacturing techniques, it's nominal for them to make the extra effort

Handicapping the 5DIII AF isn't a production cost-saving measure, it's a marketing strategy to drive differentiation.  As whatta correctly points out, including AFMA in the 60D would have been essentially free (there's no hardware component, and the algorithm was already done), but they chose not to do that.  Fundamentally, they need to have market separation between the 1D X and the 5DIII (and between any other lines, as well), and AF performance is one way to do that - it's one that Canon has a long history of using.  IMO, especially if Canon puts a >21 MP sensor in the 5DIII, they'll need to have other ways to differentiate it more strongly from the 1D X than if they use the same 18 MP sensor as the 1D X. 

Think of features as a set of sliders like you see in financial/loan calculators, and set has to sum to a fixed final ranking.  So, the 1-series has all the sliders pegged to the right-hand side (100%), and the xxxxD has them all pegged to the left (0%).  For models in between, think of xxxD at 25%, xxD at 50%, and xD at 75%.  Compare 7D to 5DII - the 7D has sensor size and MP bumped down (APS-C is not as good as FF, 18 vs. 21 MP), so the frame rate and AF sliders are bumped up, as is weather sealing.  If the 5DIII has FF, higher MP, equivalent AF as 7D, 5 fps, better sealing, etc., it becomes 90%, not 75%, and that's too close to the 1D X.  In other words, the better the sensor in the 5DIII, the worse (relatively) the other features.  For example, a 5DIII with a 28 MP FF sensor with the ISO improvements approaching the 1D X would likely mean using the exact same AF as the 5DII, lower FPS and perhaps even reduced build quality/sealing.  These trade-offs aren't necessarily determined by costs, but rather by marketing strategy.

AF type? Nikon seems to have a better AF approach

True - Nikon doesn't differentiate the pro line from the semi-pro line with AF.  Instead, they differentiate based on sensor resolution.  You can get 'pro' AF short of the D3x, but then you're limited to 16 MP APS-C or 12 MP FF.  If you want high MP and pro AF, you're stuck with the $8K D3x.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 11:11:39 AM
thanks Neuro
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 06, 2011, 12:33:31 PM
Just to play devils advocate with the removing the AFMA with the 60d... it is a tough recession, not just for us little people but big corporations... and when they added the AFMA they weren't deep in a recession or just starting to get into one which no one would reasonably say anyone could have predicted just how bad it would be... I could argue that the average person who had that option didn't need to spend money to have canon recalibrate their cameras/lenses and or seeked other repair options for their equipment... So perhaps while it didn't have them anything to remove it, it was a way to drive more revenue in their repair facilities? 
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: AprilForever on December 06, 2011, 12:49:44 PM
Hmmm... this seems interesting... but not enough to get me to jump... maybe some used 5fII's will flood the market...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: mccrum on December 06, 2011, 12:54:36 PM
Hmmm... this seems interesting... but not enough to get me to jump... maybe some used 5fII's will flood the market...
If the autofocus isn't improved and the MP are, you won't be seeing mine on the market.  I have a feeling a lot of people will feel the same way. 

I shoot low-light and the AF is the biggest flaw.  I don't want more points, as I can just use the center cross point and recompose I want a *better* point.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 01:08:50 PM
Just to play devils advocate with the removing the AFMA with the 60d... it is a tough recession, not just for us little people but big corporations... and when they added the AFMA they weren't deep in a recession or just starting to get into one which no one would reasonably say anyone could have predicted just how bad it would be... I could argue that the average person who had that option didn't need to spend money to have canon recalibrate their cameras/lenses and or seeked other repair options for their equipment... So perhaps while it didn't have them anything to remove it, it was a way to drive more revenue in their repair facilities?

Daw...  Those poor Canon share holders.  How will they ever survive the rough economy.  I hope they have somewhere warm to sleep during the coming cold winter months...  Let's not pretend like the hired inventors, engineers and factory workers make the bulk of the profit from their creative and laborious works here.  Well paid, I'm sure some of them are, but they are just employees, punching the clock.  Hell even million plus $ paid CEO's at large companies like this aren't even seeing the real green.  I've got my eyes set on the day when we collectively decide to obliterate patent law.  Anyways, I don't really want to get into politics or economics, but change is in the wind.  This just isn't cutting it anymore, and global economy(s) that are rapidly imploding on themselves suggest as much.  Removing features for which the R&D is already complete, simply to artificially bolster a forced product line is not acceptable or sustainable behavior.  It's wasteful, and in a sane system would be considered a form of pollution.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jbwise01 on December 06, 2011, 01:59:09 PM
Its seems like the 5D Mk III News is all over the board... One week its definately not over 18MP, the next its it seems like 30MP... with news like this its hard to either get excited or upset over this cameras potnetial specs...

We should think of what this camera should be and wait for more credible specs to be released.

Please be realistic about what the 5D is actually meant to do. And the market it is intended to address.

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
-   to be a sports camera
-   to make large prints similar to 4” x 5” + film

The market for a 5D Mrk III is for:
-   photo-journalist type work
-   wedding/event photographers
-   walk around FF camera (landscape enthusiasts)
-   indie videographers
-   making most photos less than 16” x 20”

Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 06, 2011, 02:24:22 PM
Its seems like the 5D Mk III News is all over the board... One week its definately not over 18MP, the next its it seems like 30MP... with news like this its hard to either get excited or upset over this cameras potnetial specs...

We should think of what this camera should be and wait for more credible specs to be released.

Please be realistic about what the 5D is actually meant to do. And the market it is intended to address.

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
-   to be a sports camera
-   to make large prints similar to 4” x 5” + film

The market for a 5D Mrk III is for:
-   photo-journalist type work
-   wedding/event photographers
-   walk around FF camera (landscape enthusiasts)
-   indie videographers
-   making most photos less than 16” x 20”

Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

+1  amen
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: blacktiger0802 on December 06, 2011, 02:26:04 PM
I'm sure Canon got a lot of the Hasselbad market by releasing the 5D mark 2. ^

About what Mr. Baldy is saying on this site, I agree.

5D mark 3 will have a crazy high MP, something along the lines of 30-40. I don't doubt that and they'll stick in a crippled AF system too. Why? People who want the 7D mark 2 are going to have to wait too.

Now when you have a really high MP camera, you can see the flaws in the lenses optical quality, so I can bet you 2012 will be the year which Canon L lenses will be upgraded because when you have a 30 MP sensor and a 16-35, you can drastically tell the difference between the 2.

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 06, 2011, 02:35:03 PM
Just to play devils advocate with the removing the AFMA with the 60d... it is a tough recession, not just for us little people but big corporations... and when they added the AFMA they weren't deep in a recession or just starting to get into one which no one would reasonably say anyone could have predicted just how bad it would be... I could argue that the average person who had that option didn't need to spend money to have canon recalibrate their cameras/lenses and or seeked other repair options for their equipment... So perhaps while it didn't have them anything to remove it, it was a way to drive more revenue in their repair facilities?

Daw...  Those poor Canon share holders.  How will they ever survive the rough economy.  I hope they have somewhere warm to sleep during the coming cold winter months...  Let's not pretend like the hired inventors, engineers and factory workers make the bulk of the profit from their creative and laborious works here.  Well paid, I'm sure some of them are, but they are just employees, punching the clock.  Hell even million plus $ paid CEO's at large companies like this aren't even seeing the real green.  I've got my eyes set on the day when we collectively decide to obliterate patent law.  Anyways, I don't really want to get into politics or economics, but change is in the wind.  This just isn't cutting it anymore, and global economy(s) that are rapidly imploding on themselves suggest as much.  Removing features for which the R&D is already complete, simply to artificially bolster a forced product line is not acceptable or sustainable behavior.  It's wasteful, and in a sane system would be considered a form of pollution.

All politics aside, not trying to be sympathetic towards shareholders and such, but the reality is when companies see profits decline, even assuming they are still making profits nonetheless, they start cutting... cutting jobs, cutting marketing, cutting benefits, cutting operating expenses, etc... I shoot professionally as a commercial photographer and I see this every day not just from Canon but my other clients who are cutting advertising, cutting here and there even though they are still solvent but not making projected margins... It's made my job very ahhh, lets say interesting the last 3 years dealing with said companies and drumming up new work... Plus if Canon isn't proving to be as profitable to their shareholders, someone has to pay... whether it's the loss of jobs at a repair center meaning longer turnaround times for customers, longer production cycles, maybe less upgrades per new cameras, or maybe loss of product lines...  Like it or not that is the way the business is.. It sucks at times but we gotta roll with the punches and become better people/photographers from it. 
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Jettatore on December 06, 2011, 03:00:26 PM
Judging by the overwhelming demand for this new camera, I don't see how your points apply.  This camera is theoretically going to be a massive profit unless people decide not to buy it, and I don't see that happening regardless.  But I digress, I'm bowing out until the next day/rumor, I don't want to get too deep into this sort of conversation.  cheers
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Drizzt321 on December 06, 2011, 03:03:37 PM

The market for a 5D Mrk III is for:
-   photo-journalist type work
-   wedding/event photographers

This is where I'm at most of the time. This is where better AF system (I don't expect 1D-X) would be great. Heck, the 7D would probably be good enough from what I hear. And really, if the 1D-X AF system doesn't vastly out perform the 7D's, there's something wrong with it. So putting in the 7D's AF system would still keep a good differentiation between the 5Dm3 and 1D-X.

Plus, at least keep the high ISO performance, or improve it. More MP, great, sure, I'll take it as long as the the ISO performance is the same or better.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 06, 2011, 03:04:55 PM
Judging by the overwhelming demand for this new camera, I don't see how your points apply.  This camera is theoretically going to be a massive profit unless people decide not to buy it, and I don't see that happening regardless.  But I digress, I'm bowing out until the next day/rumor, I don't want to get too deep into this sort of conversation.  cheers

No worries... these are all rumors/speculation and should be taken with a pinch of salt...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2011, 03:14:57 PM
Just to play devils advocate with the removing the AFMA with the 60d... it is a tough recession, not just for us little people but big corporations... and when they added the AFMA they weren't deep in a recession or just starting to get into one which no one would reasonably say anyone could have predicted just how bad it would be... I could argue that the average person who had that option didn't need to spend money to have canon recalibrate their cameras/lenses and or seeked other repair options for their equipment... So perhaps while it didn't have them anything to remove it, it was a way to drive more revenue in their repair facilities?

All politics aside, not trying to be sympathetic towards shareholders and such, but the reality is when companies see profits decline, even assuming they are still making profits nonetheless, they start cutting... cutting jobs, cutting marketing, cutting benefits, cutting operating expenses, etc... someone has to pay... whether it's the loss of jobs at a repair center...

I grant that the current global economic situation has forced cutbacks.

The problem with this argument is the timing.  When do you usually notice a problem that AFMA could correct, assuming your camera has that feature?  Either when you buy the camera, or when you buy a new lens, right?  Since that means warranty coverage applies, for any repairs performed by Canon the cost would be borne by Canon, not by the customer.  Providing warranty service means a net loss for the manufacturer - the only one who profits is the shipping company.  Thus, the elimination of a feature which would likely mean lower costs for the repair division must be driven by the expectation that it will lead to greter revenues elsewhere (i.e. a Marketing-driven differentiation decision).
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 06, 2011, 03:20:44 PM
Just to play devils advocate with the removing the AFMA with the 60d... it is a tough recession, not just for us little people but big corporations... and when they added the AFMA they weren't deep in a recession or just starting to get into one which no one would reasonably say anyone could have predicted just how bad it would be... I could argue that the average person who had that option didn't need to spend money to have canon recalibrate their cameras/lenses and or seeked other repair options for their equipment... So perhaps while it didn't have them anything to remove it, it was a way to drive more revenue in their repair facilities?

All politics aside, not trying to be sympathetic towards shareholders and such, but the reality is when companies see profits decline, even assuming they are still making profits nonetheless, they start cutting... cutting jobs, cutting marketing, cutting benefits, cutting operating expenses, etc... someone has to pay... whether it's the loss of jobs at a repair center...

I grant that the current global economic situation has forced cutbacks.

The problem with this argument is the timing.  When do you usually notice a problem that AFMA could correct, assuming your camera has that feature?  Either when you buy the camera, or when you buy a new lens, right?  Since that means warranty coverage applies, for any repairs performed by Canon the cost would be borne by Canon, not by the customer.  Providing warranty service means a net loss for the manufacturer - the only one who profits is the shipping company.  Thus, the elimination of a feature which would likely mean lower costs for the repair division must be driven by the expectation that it will lead to greter revenues elsewhere (i.e. a Marketing-driven differentiation decision).

Disclosure this was devils advocate/hypothetical, but then there's always that used market... people flood ebay/craigslist with used gear all the time.... most probably are out of warranty... Just saying/floating the idea...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: lol on December 06, 2011, 03:33:52 PM
While this rumour sounds like the camera I'm more likely to buy than the recycled 1D X sensor version, I think fundamentally there's room for two full frame cameras, either of which could be called the 5D3. I want the high MP model, but equally it makes perfect sense for Canon to re-use the 1D X sensor in something lower down.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: MartinvH on December 06, 2011, 03:49:52 PM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neogomo on December 06, 2011, 03:51:43 PM
I always thought, that  I'd like to have a higher MP count 5D Mk III, but after checking many current lenses real world resolution capabilities, I wonder if it somehow might not be better to just go with 18 MP, where every pixel has more valuable information, than 32 MP where a pair of pixels has the same (not so clean) information in it.

Although for color resolution a higher Megapixel count may still be beneficial (because of the Bayer-pattern).

Well, let's be surprised, maybe there will be some new superresolution "L"-lenses that justify the use of a higher MP sensor.  8)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: danbroom on December 06, 2011, 04:58:43 PM
I'm totally losing faith in this site.

1. 30+mp sensor: what rubbish! Canon has shown that performance and resolution are more important to it than Megapixels it'll be 18+ like the X or slightly more than 21+full frame sensor. If there was a 30+mp sensor around we'd know. Nikon doesn't have it either!
2. Video wise it'll offer added features, more codecs, audio monitoring and a flip out screen like the 60d. I don't think they'll be adding XLR!
3. auto focus lesser than the 7d? The main criticism of the 5d iii has been it's sluggish autofocus I would have thought this would have been top of their list from the start.

what do you think?I would ignore this as disinformation and look to the 1dx to see whats in the pipline :)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Matthew Saville on December 06, 2011, 05:18:20 PM
I think this is inevitable.  Especially with the Nikon D800 rumors coming out with 36 megapixels and no AF improvements either.  It just sounds like both brands are trying to make up for the fact that, given this economy, there is no market for an $8K high-res camera anymore.  They've realized that the best market for high-res is in the $3-4K range.  The 1Ds mk3 and D3X sold well, but not as well as the 1DX and D3s will sell / have sold.  And not nearly as much as a 5D mk3 / D800 would sell.

HOWEVER, don't forget that Nikon still has a D4 coming, and Canon still has the opportunity to make an affordable 1DX.

It's pretty understandable that Canon will NOT be able to make an "affordable version of the 1DX" right at the same time as the 1DX hits shelves.  Like the D3 and 1Ds mk3, we'll have to wait about a year for the affordable version.

So, after the 1DX this march, I'm predicting a 5D mk3 shortly afterwards, as well as a Nikon D4, (in time for the summer olympics, right?) and THEN, within 12 months of next march, we'll see the lower-resolution, "affordable" versions of the 1DX / D4.

The only question is, will these cameras be super-cheap, with 60D / D7000 body parts, or will they be high-end, like the "3D" or 6D (basically, a 5DX) rumors have been saying?  I dunno, but I'm hoping for the latter!

By the way, I posted more thoughts about this particular rumor on http://slrlounge.com ...as well as my 2012 Canon predictions in general.  (24-70 mk2, etc.)

=Matt=
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: parsek on December 06, 2011, 05:20:08 PM
If these rumors hold true, I will be very very pleased. Sounds like a camera to me. Especially if added dynamic range and proper weather sealing is part of the package.

I doubt Canon would fit a 7D inferior AF system in 5DmkIII. It seems unlikely. That said, I could not care less about an insane ultra fast AF system. I am aware that this is crucial to a lot of sports and wild life photographers. I´ve shot weddings, concerts and photo journalism using very OLD AF systems or none with no problem. I don´t see why so many current photographers constantly whine about the limitations of AF. Hire a focus puller if you are that bad ;) [it was a joke, get with it]

Video with rolling shutter! Who cares for any serious work anyway?

I certainly hope video stays "a very neat blooming gimmick" with the 5DmkIII. Personally I want a camera, not a video camera, therefore I want Canon to not spend money on R&D and fitting of an upgraded video system for a 5D series camera. The arrival of C300 is a happy one and should ensure the increments and improvements on the video aspect stay negligible.

I´d like a 5DmkIII that excel in sublime single frame output thanks. One that can even push current L-series glass and that of tomorrow, plus blow away the dynamic range of low contrast print film.

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: dr croubie on December 06, 2011, 05:21:28 PM
Canon has shown that performance and resolution are more important to it than Megapixels.

Have they? I think they've picked the market very well, if the market wants a low-light body, that's what the flagship (and flagship pricetag) delivers very well.

Think about it this way: If you really really want a low-light body, for weddings and events (ie, where waterproofing, 61pt AF and 12fps aren't exactly needed), why would you buy the 1DX when you can get the same sensor in a 5D3? Exactly. The 1DX sensor might trickle down the chain eventually, but not for a year after 1DX-release.

The more people talk up how much they want a low-light body, the more likely it's going to be that the 5D3 will not be, if you want low-light so badly, buy the 1DX. If you can't afford a 1DX, jump ship. But jump ship to what? To the also-high-megapixel (presumably) D800? To the 3-year-old-and-only-12MP D700/D3s, or the discontinued a850/900, the aps-c K5/a77? (if you were going to, why haven't you already?)
If there's no low-light competition from nikon, pentax, sony, or from within canon, and you really really need full-frame low-light performance in more than a 12MP body, then you're forced into the 1DX.

Well played, Canon marketing, well played.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: UncleFester on December 06, 2011, 05:37:58 PM
Just faster. More points is pointless but better control over AF speed is really all the 5D  line needs, imo.


For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)

The "better-AF" is probably the most-read debate about the 5D3 besides the "32+MP vs 18MP high-iso" debate.
For anyone who bought the 5D2 upon release (or within a year), was the AF good for you then? Did it only get worse once the 7D came out? If they come out with 19pt AF and then the 7D2 has 27pt AF, will the 5D3 be useless then too?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: UngerPhotography on December 06, 2011, 05:52:12 PM
Why would you need 'superior' autofocus in a 5D mark 3 ??
It is a high resolution portrait and landscape camera , so that is what its made for.
You want both worlds buy an extra 7D or just one 1D-X and sell the rest of your camera's.

People (i am talking amateurs here) are just never satisfied , we always want something better, newer and more expensive which does rarely improve your pictures.
It just makes you lazier in your technique!

Would not we al buy the new Canon 1D-X + lenses if we could so easily afford it ?
And end up spending over 10.000 euro's just to get more great (but everso always the same) pictures of your running kids inside your lowlighted house or the same pictures of your favorite area:)

Yesterday I was just walking around sundown without a tripod and got lucky to get some of the best landscape pictures I ever did.
No lens or camera can make up for a that split moment when weather ,light and circumstances come together in just a minute window or so.
A simple T2i plus a very old 75/300 lens got the job done.

Very well said.

I would love to be able to purchase the 1D X, but I don't need it for most of my photography. For sports, I am waiting to hear about the 7D II or whatever is going to replace that, but for portraits, landscapes, and studio work, the 5D II does an incredible job. For sports and wildlife, the 7D does an incredible job.

People want a 1D X for the price of the 5D, and that isn't going to happen.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2011, 06:12:30 PM
I doubt Canon would fit a 7D inferior AF system in 5DmkIII. It seems unlikely.

Flash back. It's early 2008, the 40D with its 9 cross-type AF has been out for some time and everyone in the Interverse believes a 5D successor is coming soon.  Most people are sure the 5DII will a better AF system, since it seemed quite 'unlikely' that Canon would fit a 40D-inferior AF into their new 5-series body.

The 5DIII will not be a 'baby 1D X' with all the features at a fraction of the price. The 5DIII will not be a 'full frame 7D'.  The 5DIII will be an incremental update to the 5DII - significant improvements in limited areas, minor or no changes in many others.  Canon's marketeers will say otherwise, but that's the reality.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Picsfor on December 06, 2011, 06:15:42 PM
As i've oft said, and also to Canon directly, the issue with the 5D2 AF is not that it doesn't match the 7D, 1D4 or 1DX, it is just that it has a single centre focus point of any use.

I do not expect an AF system to match any of the cameras, but it should at least make all 9 points cross hairs, or usable. Centre point is fine for a landscape - but portraits and weddings etc really do need to be able to select an outer point and know it's not going to hunt for a lock whilst the precious moment goes by.

I do not believe that is too much to ask, whether it comes with 21mp or 36mp, with it comes with  usable iso of 6400 or 51k.

It is the same focusing system i had on the 30D and 40D - and yet i would argue that the 40D focusing was far superior in most cases - certainly from my experience.

But i do not think that amending all 9 AF points in to full cross hairs is worth any increase in price - given that it would still be largely inferior to what Nikon give away on most of their cameras.

As for what is 'my type' of camera - i think i'm a bit of an all rounder, so what would that suggest as my ideal camera? a 5D2 and a 7D?

Just that i can't get on with the 7D - so my next option is?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 06:40:12 PM
"...aimed at high megapixel/high ISOÂ performance."

Seems counterintuitive. That aside, the thought of the AF being less than the 7D is a downer.

Even more so when there is talk of Nikon improving upon their already pro-level D700 AF for the D800 and giving it a way to get to 6fps. Hate to say it but if the D800 are remotely close and these 5D3 specs are correct I think it's going to get ugly really fast.
And since this body will be meant to last at least anotehr three years we would be talking 3+4+3 at least a decade for them to even have a chance to get 5 series above 3.9fps, in any fashion, an to get to even a semi-pro AF level.
I guess they want to leave people feeling they also need a 7D2, but I wonder if they don't end up with people just sticking with their 5D2 and upgrading the less expensive 7D series model instead (or some migrating to Nikon).

Anyway, this is just CR1, but just in case it is a feeler from Canon marketing.... FAIL.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 06:42:18 PM
Given what I've read lately in other posts, about "waiting to see 1DX sales figures" and the mythical 36MP D800 that still is nowhere to be seen, I reckon Canon are sitting on a few prototypes and they haven't actually decided which one to release yet, waiting on sales figures for all of the 1DX, D3X/D4, D800 before they decide which one to release.

Still, this agrees with what i've been thinking. I'm putting 99% probability on:
- no RAW video, xlr inputs, probably not even mic-input gain setting, that's for the cinemaEOS whatever it will be called.
- no video better than C300, full stop. Video as good as 7D/60D, maybe one or two minor features better. Don't expect wonders.
- Either 1DX's 18MP sensor, or a 32MP+ that will shrink to worse-looking images than 1DX at 3200iso and above (in which case it will be called the 2/3/4D and priced $3500-4k)
- 7D-or-worse AF. Don't expect 45pt. Ever. I'm half not even expecting 19pt. Either 15pt as current (but all 15 selectable), or they'll re-use the 7D's 19pt to save R&D costs (but then the points will be very close to the FF centre-of-frame). (maybe even use some rejected 7D-sensors with 4-8 points disabled?). It's not a sports-camera, get used to it.
- 1 digic 5 or 5+, no more than 4fps. It's not a sports-camera, get used to it.
- FF, ungripped, no flash pentaprism, obviously.
- I'd really like to see dual-cf slots, or 1 cf slot. I definitely don't want to see 1cf+1sd, that's a recipe for the death of CF and i'd like my investment to stay valuable.

Maybe so but I think this time quite a few might just stick with their 5D2 and not even bother if that is all they can do after four years. Maybe some will get a 70D or 7D2 for reach and the improved video. Maybe some will even finally say hello to Nikon.

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 06:48:57 PM
For all you people who want better AF in the 5D3, what do you mean by better?

- More points, no matter how they perform?
- More f/2.8 and cross-type points? (regardless of how much light and how many total points there are)
- Points that work in less light? (regardless of how many there are and what aperture they are sensitive to)

The "better-AF" is probably the most-read debate about the 5D3 besides the "32+MP vs 18MP high-iso" debate.
For anyone who bought the 5D2 upon release (or within a year), was the AF good for you then? Did it only get worse once the 7D came out? If they come out with 19pt AF and then the 7D2 has 27pt AF, will the 5D3 be useless then too?

While I agree the 9-point AF sensor in the 5D II with its single cross-type sensor in the middle (which is, as far as I can tell, the same AF system in all of canon's consumer-grade cameras) is ATROCIOUS for a professional-grade camera, I don't think it needs to be replaced with a super-duper top of the line system either. I don't think anyone can really expect the advanced sports-and-action capable AF system of the 7D. The 7D line is designed for a different purpose than the 5D line, so it doesn't really make sense to me to include an advanced action-tuned AF system in a camera that is more designed for low- or no-action work like landscapes, studio portraits, etc.

I think something similar to the 7D's 19 cross-type system would be useful, and help keep the cost of the camera from reaching $4000. A 19-point AF system with perhaps only 9 cross-type sensors (a cross in the center plus the four outer points) would certainly be an improvement on the existing AF in the 5D II, and should improve focusing for wedding, portrait, and even wildlife/bird photography sufficiently (although I think most serious wildlife/bird photographers would opt for the 7D anyway for the greater reach.)

I certainly don't see much beyond my own intended use for a 5D III, though, which is all nature-oriented (landscapes, macro, still wildlife, astrophotography). I can't really say how much a better AF system might really be needed by other types of photographers who need an affordable full-frame camera.

Who ever said the 5 series MUST be held to being solely a nature, tripod camera it's been 7 years and will be a decade to 5D4, at least, and it should take that long to get a FF body with even semi-pro performance after all the bragging Canon did about how Nikon was pathetically far behind them when it came to FF in every conceivable fashion?
Maybe they don't have to go 8fps with it but they can surely match 40D fps and response by now and with the 1DX getting a super new-fangled AF, they sure as heck can do better than a crippled 7D AF, come on. I mean for some things under some conditions I can't even say I trust my 7D AF as much as I do my 5D2 AF!

If they want to take the market by storm and pressure out Nikon even a little now they could think a better performing 7D AF system or 1D4 AF module. Heck, if they had gone all out with everything a few years back Nikon might barely even be here at this point (although that actually might eventually have turned out to a very bad thing for everyone).

If the rumour is true and they stick with this version I can't help but imagine a decent chance the Nikon effort will make this one look pretty silly.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 06:53:52 PM
i really don´t see a reason why Canon doesn´t put the old 45-AF system combined with the 4fps.. it is utterly useless for sports.. but kicks ass in AF.. being Canon likes to reuse stuff... NO WAY are they going to dump the all new 1D mk4 AF system after one camera model.. either one of the 7D or 5D get the 45-AF.. or.. the 2/3/4D might come to be.. one day... a FF 7D with the 1Dx sensor, 45-AF and 6-8fps for 4k€...

Indeed if they want to grab everyone's attention plop the 1D4 system into it, if they absolutely had to, to make 1DX owners feel better, they could lock out f/8 AF in firmware or something.
I really think they need to get it to the 6.3fps of the 40D level as well. That's just enough to be useful in a poor man's performance sort of way but it is definitely not enough to make the serious pro sports/action shooters give up their 8-12fps beasts. 8fps pretty much guarantees that you get two key frames from most action sequences while 6fps only sometimes does so they won't to risk that. OTOH, unlike 4fps which never does and in that sense is almost semi-pointless at least with 40D speed it's enough to be useful at times.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 06:55:08 PM
I don't give a $h!t how many AF points, cross-type points, blah, blah, blah that the 5D3 will have. All I want is an AF system that locks focus quickly, accurately and consistently, especially with moving subjects. Low light AF performance needs to be upgraded substantially as well. ... As long as something works well for my shooting needs, I don't give a rat's ass what the specs may be.

Hopefully you don't give a rat's ass about cost, either, because you're just described the behavior of the AF system in a 1-series camera.  So...problem solved - get a 1DsIII, 1D IV, or a 1D X when it comes out.  I can almost guarantee that, given the requirements you outline, you're not going to be happy with the AF of the 5DIII.

neuroanatomist, there comes a point where planned obsolescence and the forced withholding and temporary suppression of iterative tech upgrades for marketing/product line purposes and colluding with the competition to compete softly in the market will backfire in the faces of the offenders.  Canon should be happy to have an opportunity to dominate and make riches in a period in time where no one deserves to be rich, something that can be taken away virtually overnight if it's mistreated or gambled.  Why am I saying this to you?  Because it sounds like you've gotten to the point where you believe the marketing bullS___ is as sound and real world as your photographic mathematics and science.

+1
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 06:57:31 PM
Here are the 'basics' that I'd like to have in the 5dmIII;
* at least 25MP
* pro-AF which focusses rapidly, locks on
* dual digic V
* higher/better video capacities
* the fps I dont really cant about, though about 5fps would be good
* 1Dx's ISO or something similar to it

Here are the 'basics' that I'd like to have you're likely to get in the 5dmIII;
* at least 25MP 18 MP (but maybe more if they decide not to reuse the 1D X sensor)
* pro-AF which focusses rapidly, locks on
* dual digic V
* higher/better video capacities
* the fps I dont really cant about, though about 5fps 4 fps would be good
* 1Dx's ISO or something similar to it

And here is what Nikon is about to get.... more sales.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: parsek on December 06, 2011, 06:58:11 PM
I doubt Canon would fit a 7D inferior AF system in 5DmkIII. It seems unlikely.

Flash back. It's early 2008, the 40D with its 9 cross-type AF has been out for some time and everyone in the Interverse believes a 5D successor is coming soon.  Most people are sure the 5DII will a better AF system, since it seemed quite 'unlikely' that Canon would fit a 40D-inferior AF into their new 5-series body.


I had no idea this was the case. Thanks for illuminating this. Still this is not a real drawback for me, since AF does not matter much for me.

I very much agree on your take on the 5DmkIII.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 06, 2011, 07:05:05 PM
I doubt Canon would fit a 7D inferior AF system in 5DmkIII. It seems unlikely.

Flash back. It's early 2008, the 40D with its 9 cross-type AF has been out for some time and everyone in the Interverse believes a 5D successor is coming soon.  Most people are sure the 5DII will a better AF system, since it seemed quite 'unlikely' that Canon would fit a 40D-inferior AF into their new 5-series body.

The 5DIII will not be a 'baby 1D X' with all the features at a fraction of the price. The 5DIII will not be a 'full frame 7D'.  The 5DIII will be an incremental update to the 5DII - significant improvements in limited areas, minor or no changes in many others.  Canon's marketeers will say otherwise, but that's the reality.

Quite a gamble though that +9MP alone will be worth the potential upgrade cost of $1500+ since 21MP isn't THAT low so people are partially satiated, although many wouldn't mind more reach but maybe they say may as well just get it in 7D2 then which will also bring the better video, even more reach and 8fps and maybe finally truly solid AF and cost less than 5D3. If they at least give it a much improved AF and 40D speed then it becomes enough of an all around to mayeb really get a wide variety of people interested.

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Benpunta on December 06, 2011, 08:48:48 PM
Hello - I'm new here in the forum.... but been visiting the site for years :)

Anyway.... I've got to agree with the comments from 'neuroanatomist' .....basically Canon are ultimately a business in it to make profit pure & simple, ....we might of all complained about how bad the 5D & 5D2 focussing was (even after reading reviews)... but hey, they still sold a shed load!

I recently got to spend about 1 hour playing with the new 1DX the other day :D  .....and chatting with the guy from Canon, who was closely guarding it.

As always (obviously)... he wasn't giving away any new possible info about future cameras (particularly my questions about the possible 5D3 !) ....but one thing he did mention, was that Canon certainly weren't going to make the same mistake they did with cannibalising sales of the 1Ds3.... when they released the 5D2.

The 1DX will be the 'Ferrari' of their line-up..... (his words)  .......he also mentioned..... that Canon IS listening and evaluating all the feedback!

I suppose it's nothing we didn't already know..... but it just re-confirms the comments from 'neuroanatomist'

That the 5D3 .....will have to be substantially different this time for Canon not to not have a repeat performance, so unfortunately IMO - the autofocus will probably remain the same if not only marginally better.

I own a 5D & 5D2.... and just as much as everyone else, I would love to have autofocus that nailed it dead on every time, in low light (EV - 2), without the need to use an ST-E2 as a focus assist! ...and that also works on moving subjects - (not running sports like subjects! ...just walking towards camera in low contrast like situations would be fine). Obviously it's not all that doom & gloom, as the images it produces are amazing..... you just learn to work with it's shortcomings, and occasionally get disappointed when it misses a moment because of it.

For me & my business (commercial & weddings)... personally the 1DX is probably looking like it will be the perfect camera! ...18mp is ideal in terms of file size, I pretty much only shoot on SRAW1 anyway, unless the client really needs large files. The ISO improvement looks amazing (from what I could see) hopefully the dynamic range is too (though I'll pass judgement on both of those on the final release product & reviews) ....and the speed of the autofocus was just sublime & so natural in your hand, especially coming from the 5D2 center point re-compose method! Selecting your focus point is just ridiculously fast!!

So what's the issue....?? .....for me (and probably lots of people) - it's just the price! ...I realise it's never going to be in the ball park of 5D2 prices but if it was £1000 less.... I'd be pre-ordering now!

But this just makes me want to work harder and save more! ...I reckon it will come down slightly after a few months, and start to level off (as does any new camera at launch) but it's starting price (which apparently according to the - Canon Rep) ...is still liable to change before March, as economic and competition factors still play a major part in deeming what it's final price will be at launch.

5D3 - whatever it will be! ......IMO - I just can't see it being the camera for me now..... and especially after handling and knowing what the 1DX can do.... and then thinking logically about how Canon have played their cards in the past.   

So come on Nikon - where's your new D4... at a reasonable price?

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: hambergler on December 06, 2011, 08:59:38 PM
Neuro...  -realistically, what physical/manufacturing cost savings would leaving out a reasonable auto-focus system provide?  I'm thinking in terms of raw material it's next to no extra costs, and in terms of manufacturing techniques, it's nominal for them to make the extra effort

Handicapping the 5DIII AF isn't a production cost-saving measure, it's a marketing strategy to drive differentiation.  As whatta correctly points out, including AFMA in the 60D would have been essentially free (there's no hardware component, and the algorithm was already done), but they chose not to do that.  Fundamentally, they need to have market separation between the 1D X and the 5DIII (and between any other lines, as well), and AF performance is one way to do that - it's one that Canon has a long history of using.  IMO, especially if Canon puts a >21 MP sensor in the 5DIII, they'll need to have other ways to differentiate it more strongly from the 1D X than if they use the same 18 MP sensor as the 1D X. 

Think of features as a set of sliders like you see in financial/loan calculators, and set has to sum to a fixed final ranking.  So, the 1-series has all the sliders pegged to the right-hand side (100%), and the xxxxD has them all pegged to the left (0%).  For models in between, think of xxxD at 25%, xxD at 50%, and xD at 75%.  Compare 7D to 5DII - the 7D has sensor size and MP bumped down (APS-C is not as good as FF, 18 vs. 21 MP), so the frame rate and AF sliders are bumped up, as is weather sealing.  If the 5DIII has FF, higher MP, equivalent AF as 7D, 5 fps, better sealing, etc., it becomes 90%, not 75%, and that's too close to the 1D X.  In other words, the better the sensor in the 5DIII, the worse (relatively) the other features.  For example, a 5DIII with a 28 MP FF sensor with the ISO improvements approaching the 1D X would likely mean using the exact same AF as the 5DII, lower FPS and perhaps even reduced build quality/sealing.  These trade-offs aren't necessarily determined by costs, but rather by marketing strategy.

AF type? Nikon seems to have a better AF approach

True - Nikon doesn't differentiate the pro line from the semi-pro line with AF.  Instead, they differentiate based on sensor resolution.  You can get 'pro' AF short of the D3x, but then you're limited to 16 MP APS-C or 12 MP FF.  If you want high MP and pro AF, you're stuck with the $8K D3x.

By your logic the D3s should not even exist then since is no difference from the D700 and the D3s since they have the same MP and same AF system.

I for one am planning on getting 1DX but with a poor AF system I would not consider getting a 5D III in tandem with it whereas if it had a pro level AF system I would probably end up getting both.  That is assuming it is not just a dumbed down version of the 1DX and actually has a high MP FF sensor
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2011, 10:20:01 PM
By your logic the D3s should not even exist then since is no difference from the D700 and the D3s since they have the same MP and same AF system.

We're those the only features I mentioned?  No.  Frame rate and build are others.  More 'sliders' could be viewfinder, number of card slots, and at the time, HD video with a FF sensor, etc.  Also, there was a much smaller relative price difference between the D700 and the D3s than the 5DII and 1DsIII, and smaller than people are certainly hoping for in the differential between the 5DIII and 1D X. As I've stated before, Canon could bring the 5DIII feature set closer to the 1D X, but then they'd have to make up for that by raising the price.  How many people who want 28 MP, 7D-like AF, and better sealing would pay $4K for a 5DIII?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: arussarts on December 06, 2011, 10:37:58 PM
Its seems like the 5D Mk III News is all over the board... One week its definately not over 18MP, the next its it seems like 30MP... with news like this its hard to either get excited or upset over this cameras potnetial specs...

We should think of what this camera should be and wait for more credible specs to be released.

Please be realistic about what the 5D is actually meant to do. And the market it is intended to address.

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
-   to be a sports camera
-   to make large prints similar to 4” x 5” + film

The market for a 5D Mrk III is for:
-   photo-journalist type work
-   wedding/event photographers
-   walk around FF camera (landscape enthusiasts)
-   indie videographers
-   making most photos less than 16” x 20”

Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

I respectfully disagree with much of your post.   :)  I am a "pro" land photog and a "pro" arch photog and have used everything from LF Film to LF Digital to a D3x (begrudgingly) and my preferred camera to take out is my 5d2.  It's "good enough" to make  the savings in cost and the savings in weight worth leaving those other behemoths in the studio.

Could it be improved?  Absolutely!  Most of what I shoot (architecture) requires a LF Dig Cam, but with the new 17mm TSE I could practically stop using the LF Dig.  I'd certainly like to.  The only thing that stops me is that my clients demand more resolution.  My landscape work, demands more resolution.  I want the next 5D iteration to be more than "good enough" both in ISO and MP.  AF would be nice, but I can't say it's important to me.

I can't honestly see how the 5d2, or coming 5d3, ever became so valuable to wedding/sports/journalist shooters.  It's just not the camera for that and never was.  The 7D I can see.

So what's my fantasy?  All full frame...

- 45MP - with 1Dx specs
- 18MP - 1Dx
- 35MP - 5D3/3D - 2 + Stops in ISO - Could care less about AF
- 18MP - 7D2/6D - Full Frame, 2 + Stops in ISO


Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: MRW on December 06, 2011, 11:49:58 PM
Its seems like the 5D Mk III News is all over the board... One week its definately not over 18MP, the next its it seems like 30MP... with news like this its hard to either get excited or upset over this cameras potnetial specs...

We should think of what this camera should be and wait for more credible specs to be released.

Please be realistic about what the 5D is actually meant to do. And the market it is intended to address.

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
-   to be a sports camera
-   to make large prints similar to 4” x 5” + film

The market for a 5D Mrk III is for:
-   photo-journalist type work
-   wedding/event photographers
-   walk around FF camera (landscape enthusiasts)
-   indie videographers
-   making most photos less than 16” x 20”

Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

I respectfully disagree with much of your post.   :)  I am a "pro" land photog and a "pro" arch photog and have used everything from LF Film to LF Digital to a D3x (begrudgingly) and my preferred camera to take out is my 5d2.  It's "good enough" to make  the savings in cost and the savings in weight worth leaving those other behemoths in the studio.

Could it be improved?  Absolutely!  Most of what I shoot (architecture) requires a LF Dig Cam, but with the new 17mm TSE I could practically stop using the LF Dig.  I'd certainly like to.  The only thing that stops me is that my clients demand more resolution.  My landscape work, demands more resolution.  I want the next 5D iteration to be more than "good enough" both in ISO and MP.  AF would be nice, but I can't say it's important to me.

I can't honestly see how the 5d2, or coming 5d3, ever became so valuable to wedding/sports/journalist shooters.  It's just not the camera for that and never was.  The 7D I can see.

So what's my fantasy?  All full frame...

- 45MP - with 1Dx specs
- 18MP - 1Dx
- 35MP - 5D3/3D - 2 + Stops in ISO - Could care less about AF
- 18MP - 7D2/6D - Full Frame, 2 + Stops in ISO

I completely agree with you. But I am also an Interiors / Arch / Landscape Pro.
I don't need a fast camera just a bit more resolution would be great. I crop to 4x5 so I always lose a bit.
Maybe less noise with long exposures. ISO 25 would be a nice feature as well.

Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: eaw213 on December 06, 2011, 11:58:16 PM
"...aimed at high megapixel/high ISOÂ performance."

Seems counterintuitive. That aside, the thought of the AF being less than the 7D is a downer.

I wouldn't say that. As I've mentioned in a previous answer, a 5D III with around 30mp would still be LESS DENSE than the 7D at 18mp. It would take a 46.7mp FF sensor to achieve the same pixel density as the 7D (which, while it doesn't have superb ISO performance, isn't terrible until around 3200). A 30mp sensor would be 16.7mp away from that maximum. Combine that fact with the improved design and readout electronics of the 1DX style sensor, and I don't see a 30mp sensor with better noise characteristics than any current 20mp+ sensor on the market today being "impossible" or even "implausible".


I can see what you're saying, and it's true if you approach the issue from that direction, but I prefer to approach it from the other. Yes, when compared to a 7D's relative density, the theoretical 5D MkIII density is still spaced enough to give it an advantage over the 7D's ISO, but I don't think I would call that high ISO performance. I consider it higher ISO performance than the 7D. The 1DX on the other hand has (I will assume) high ISO performance. Compared to that, the theoretical 5DIII won't have as good a performance, if only because it would lose it in the MP jump.

I don't mean to nitpick and say you're wrong, because you're not. "High ISO performance" really is a relative term based on who is hearing the comment, and as a 5DII owner looking for even better performance, all I can do is expect something relative to the 1DX. :)



As for the AF, what I REALLY REALLY want is more of the center AF type placed elsewhere in the frame. That's it. AF groups, modes, and algorithms be damned, I just want a solid AF point I can choose in single point mode that lies much nearer the Rule of Thirds lines. If the 5DIII had 5 total points, one in the center and one for each intersection of the thirds lines, I'd be happy. It's so limiting to use my 85 f1.2 and 135 f2 because I either can't trust my outer points to focus well, or I can't trust my subject to stay in focus after using the focus-shift technique.

I really don't think that asking for better quality points elsewhere in the frame is asking for much of Canon, much less asking for pro level AF since that entails a lot more beyond what I've said. If Canon can't muster the "courage" to at the very least give a few better points outside the center nearer the corners, then they've produced a garbage camera as far as I'm concerned. These kind of statements are always taken out of context though, so let me restate that it's as far as I am concerned. This means for me, given what I have, what I want, and where I stand on my own upgrade path, a 5DIII with AF of limited quality is garbage. This is not a "I'm jumping to Nikon" statement either, because I won't. I'll stick with Canon. That doesn't mean I can't be critical of them though. I'm an investor in them through my purchases, and I have every right to call it how I see it.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Crackson on December 07, 2011, 12:04:37 AM
Kinda wish there was a slightly quicker frame rate than my 2fps on the 5D. Is it so much to ask?
5-6fps would be great.  :-[
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: BaconBets on December 07, 2011, 12:32:19 AM
By your logic the D3s should not even exist then since is no difference from the D700 and the D3s since they have the same MP and same AF system.

We're those the only features I mentioned?  No.  Frame rate and build are others.  More 'sliders' could be viewfinder, number of card slots, and at the time, HD video with a FF sensor, etc.  Also, there was a much smaller relative price difference between the D700 and the D3s than the 5DII and 1DsIII, and smaller than people are certainly hoping for in the differential between the 5DIII and 1D X. As I've stated before, Canon could bring the 5DIII feature set closer to the 1D X, but then they'd have to make up for that by raising the price.  How many people who want 28 MP, 7D-like AF, and better sealing would pay $4K for a 5DIII?

A lot.

If people have been harping on something for 3 years, that is the first clue that they are willing to pay up for it.
The 5D2 cannabalized the sales of the 1D line anyways...do you not think if Canon put a 7D-like autofocus and better sealing in the 5D2 they could have easily padded each camera $500 or more and people would have been tripping over themselves to pay it? I bet green money that if Canon had re-released the 5D2 as the 5D2s when the 7D came out and added those specs, they could have upsold the hell out of it. But alas, half the people settled for something less...and the other half still has their money in their mattress ready to buy a camera that doesn't exist (but easily could).

I'll make it easy for you Canon:
Break the small form factor full frame prosumer line into 2:
1) Speed Demon (12mp, High ISO, AF, FPS, Sealing, Movie)
2) Megapixel Monster (with current AF, sealing)
Charge $3500 for each then sit back and count all your money
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Blaze on December 07, 2011, 01:10:50 AM
By your logic the D3s should not even exist then since is no difference from the D700 and the D3s since they have the same MP and same AF system.

We're those the only features I mentioned?  No.  Frame rate and build are others.  More 'sliders' could be viewfinder, number of card slots, and at the time, HD video with a FF sensor, etc.  Also, there was a much smaller relative price difference between the D700 and the D3s than the 5DII and 1DsIII, and smaller than people are certainly hoping for in the differential between the 5DIII and 1D X. As I've stated before, Canon could bring the 5DIII feature set closer to the 1D X, but then they'd have to make up for that by raising the price.  How many people who want 28 MP, 7D-like AF, and better sealing would pay $4K for a 5DIII?

My ideal camera would be something like an updated 7D with a 1DX sensor (AF and frame rate are critical for me), or equivalently a slightly downgraded 1DX in a smaller body. I'd definitely rather pay $4k for the specs you mentioned than $3k for what you are predicting (most likely correctly) for the 5DIII. I'm sure plenty of others would too. This would leave a nice price gap to introduce a 'cheap' $2000-$2500 FF for those who don't need the same speed, AF, and build quality.

I'd like to upgrade my 7D to a FF camera, but not sure if I can afford a 1DX and the 5DIII doesn't sound promising for indoor sports shooting.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: moreorless on December 07, 2011, 01:43:58 AM
One thing to consider is that the 7D mk2 could potentially move up in the market, if its AF and FPS are advanced further then that leaves room for a 5D mk3 to improve those areas without stepping on its toes.

Really though the market for me seems to be more suited to 2 5D sized cameras than one...

Cheaper body - $2500 - 1DX sensor, 6 FPS, slightly improved AF.

More expensive Body - $4000 - 30+ MP sensor, 3 FPS, slightly improved AF, 100% viewfinder, pro level build.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: wickidwombat on December 07, 2011, 05:48:18 AM

  How many people who want 28 MP, 7D-like AF, and better sealing would pay $4K for a 5DIII?

I would in a heart beat as long as the high iso performance was still at least as good at the mk2
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: cinq1 on December 07, 2011, 07:10:17 AM
Hello to every one,

nice to read you from Paris.

Why question is after all

I own a 60D, which is good and not.

I start to work a lot since few week in the photo industry.

i need to get a second body.

So, i like to go on something like 7D + 5D II

when do you think one of this body will get upgrade.

I ll be able to afford for either, new 7DII plus Old 5DII or actual 7D plus new 5DIII or 6D, or eahter 3D

hard to know what canon will lunch in 2012

Cheers.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 07, 2011, 08:03:42 AM
As for the AF, what I REALLY REALLY want is more of the center AF type placed elsewhere in the frame. That's it. AF groups, modes, and algorithms be damned, I just want a solid AF point I can choose in single point mode that lies much nearer the Rule of Thirds lines. If the 5DIII had 5 total points, one in the center and one for each intersection of the thirds lines, I'd be happy. It's so limiting to use my 85 f1.2 and 135 f2 because I either can't trust my outer points to focus well, or I can't trust my subject to stay in focus after using the focus-shift technique.

I really don't think that asking for better quality points elsewhere in the frame is asking for much of Canon, much less asking for pro level AF since that entails a lot more beyond what I've said.

I do think we'll see better quality points elsewhere in the frame - the 5DIII will almost certainly have many (if not all) its points as cross-type, and the center point will likely be the dual cross type. 

But, as much is it needs greater point spread, I don't believe that the 5DIII will get greater point spread.  Canon made a promotional statement that the lateral spread of the 5DII AF points was the same as the 1DsIII, but of course neglected to mention that the vertical spread was much less, meaning the 'corner points' get no where near the 'rule-of-thirds' intersections.  The 1D IV and 7D are about tied for maximum horizontal-vertical extent relative to frame, and both get an AF point adjacent to the 'rule-of-thirds' intersections.  Even though Canon touts the 1D X as having the most AF coverage area, while the horizontal extent is the same as the 1D IV (and thus greter than the 1DsIII), the vertical extent is actually less than the 1D IV, meaning the 1D IV is actually getting closer to (and a little beyond in one dimension) the 'rule-of-thirds' lines.  You can see the relative coverages with and without the grid in the mouseovers in this article on TDP (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx).

AF point spread is as much of a differentiator as number/type of points, and thus is another way for Canon to differentiate lines.  I don't think we'll see greater spread in the 5DIII.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: JR on December 07, 2011, 08:10:36 AM

  How many people who want 28 MP, 7D-like AF, and better sealing would pay $4K for a 5DIII?

I would in a heart beat as long as the high iso performance was still at least as good at the mk2

I would but for me ISO performance would need to be a bit better than the current 5DII.  For me ISO and AF are more important than adding a few more MP...but I would pay that kind of money for a small form factor (ie pro-body without a grip) body.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: JR on December 07, 2011, 08:16:27 AM
I do think we'll see better quality points elsewhere in the frame - the 5DIII will almost certainly have many (if not all) its points as cross-type, and the center point will likely be the dual cross type. 

But, as much is it needs greater point spread, I don't believe that the 5DIII will get greater point spread.  Canon made a promotional statement that the lateral spread of the 5DII AF points was the same as the 1DsIII, but of course neglected to mention that the vertical spread was much less, meaning the 'corner points' get no where near the 'rule-of-thirds' intersections.  The 1D IV and 7D are about tied for maximum horizontal-vertical extent relative to frame, and both get an AF point adjacent to the 'rule-of-thirds' intersections.  Even though Canon touts the 1D X as having the most AF coverage area, while the horizontal extent is the same as the 1D IV (and thus greter than the 1DsIII), the vertical extent is actually less than the 1D IV, meaning the 1D IV is actually getting closer to (and a little beyond in one dimension) the 'rule-of-thirds' lines.  You can see the relative coverages with and without the grid in the mouseovers in this article on TDP (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx).

AF point spread is as much of a differentiator as number/type of points, and thus is another way for Canon to differentiate lines.  I don't think we'll see greater spread in the 5DIII.

Is there any chance then that a new 5D III at least have a better Servo mode AF?  I mean I know it is supposed to be a studio and landscape camera, but I bet you a good portion of the current 5D buyers are amateur enthousiast and from time to time it would be nice to be also able to shoot moving targets like our children with that camera.

Currently my 5D II does not do that well at all.  I know I could buy a 7D for that or wait for the 1DX, but without a full blown pro level AF, I would be happy with a new 5D III where at least the center sections as a wider and improve Servo AF performance.

Maybe I am dreaming and maybe Canon wants me to buy two bodies (or one 1DX for this - but the problem is what is we want a small form factor for these type of shooting?)...

If I could have that with the 5D, then I dont care how many points and all, I would never complain about its AF system...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: whatta on December 07, 2011, 08:29:44 AM
You can see the relative coverages with and without the grid in the mouseovers in this article on TDP (http://ww.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx).

cool, thanks
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: photogaz on December 07, 2011, 09:00:58 AM
By your logic the D3s should not even exist then since is no difference from the D700 and the D3s since they have the same MP and same AF system.


I'll make it easy for you Canon:
Break the small form factor full frame prosumer line into 2:
1) Speed Demon (12mp, High ISO, AF, FPS, Sealing, Movie)
2) Megapixel Monster (with current AF, sealing)
Charge $3500 for each then sit back and count all your money

They won't be getting my money:

I want 18-21MP, High ISO and decent AF
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: mccrum on December 07, 2011, 10:02:57 AM
By your logic the D3s should not even exist then since is no difference from the D700 and the D3s since they have the same MP and same AF system.


I'll make it easy for you Canon:
Break the small form factor full frame prosumer line into 2:
1) Speed Demon (12mp, High ISO, AF, FPS, Sealing, Movie)
2) Megapixel Monster (with current AF, sealing)
Charge $3500 for each then sit back and count all your money

They won't be getting my money:

I want 18-21MP, High ISO and decent AF
Um, actually, it sounds like you'd want Option 1 there.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 07, 2011, 10:29:20 AM
Is there any chance then that a new 5D III at least have a better Servo mode AF?  I mean I know it is supposed to be a studio and landscape camera, but I bet you a good portion of the current 5D buyers are amateur enthousiast and from time to time it would be nice to be also able to shoot moving targets like our children with that camera.

Currently my 5D II does not do that well at all.  I know I could buy a 7D for that or wait for the 1DX, but without a full blown pro level AF, I would be happy with a new 5D III where at least the center sections as a wider and improve Servo AF performance.

Sure, there's a chance.  There's a chance pigs will fly, and a chance it will snow in hell, too.   :P  Ok, I exaggerate.  Apparently, Canon did have that in mind with the original 5D.  As I mentioned, the 5DII came out after the 40D, the latter having 9 cross-type points vs. just the one of the 5D/5DII.  I recall reading a statement from Canon (not sure where) to the effect that they considered using a 40D-like AF sensor, but decided to stick with the sensor from the original 5D specifically because the 6 invisible AF assist points resulted in better AI Servo performance.  Granted, if the 5DII's AI Servo consitiutes 'better'.....  I've never used a 40D, but I wouldn't say the 5DII is substantially better at tracking subjects than the T1i which I started with, and people who've used both 5DII and a recent xxD have claimed the tracking is better with the xxD body. 

But the point is, some within Canon do recognize that a decent level of AI Servo performance is needed - after all, it's not jsut a studio/landscape camera, it's a wedding camera, too...and brides do move (just not very fast).  But it will remain a fact that if you want an AF system that will deliver the best keeper rate, you need a 1-series body. 
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jbwise01 on December 07, 2011, 11:33:59 AM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

Actually you are somewhat correct, I'm not saying the 5D Mk II wont produce great results as a landscape camera. You must realize my point, the quality of a digital sensor at 21.1 MP is NOTHING compared to 4" x 5" film processed with a pro scanner. A real professional landscape photographer can get prints for museum displays and large prints over 3' x 4'. You absolutely CANNOT get high quality large prints using the 5D Mk II, the larget print you could get at 300 dpi is about 13" x 19".

source = http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)

Using 4" x 5" film and a high quality drum scan process, you can get an approximately a 500 MP image. The quality difference is simply to great.

Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: traveller on December 07, 2011, 01:36:08 PM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

Actually you are somewhat correct, I'm not saying the 5D Mk II wont produce great results as a landscape camera. You must realize my point, the quality of a digital sensor at 21.1 MP is NOTHING compared to 4" x 5" film processed with a pro scanner. A real professional landscape photographer can get prints for museum displays and large prints over 3' x 4'. You absolutely CANNOT get high quality large prints using the 5D Mk II, the larget print you could get at 300 dpi is about 13" x 19".

source = http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)

Using 4" x 5" film and a high quality drum scan process, you can get an approximately a 500 MP image. The quality difference is simply to great.

Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?

Even Ansel Adams moved to medium format in his latter years as film emultions improved and he got too old to lug around a huge pack full of large format kit.  Go and have a look at the weight of a large format camera system and compare it to a DSLR, not to mention the amount of set up time required for each shot (and the expense of the film).  That's not to say that the quality of large or medium format isn't better, it's a trade off of quality versus convenience (if you don't agree -why aren't you carrying around a 8" x 10" instead of mere 4" x 5"?).  There are plenty of landscape photographers out there using DSLRs or digital medium format as it allows them to be more experimental and prolific in their shooting style.  It's far better to get the shot on a smaller, faster format than to miss it messing around trying to set up large format kit.  Large format is already on the wane as more landscape photographers move to the ever improving digital medium format systems.  It's all about convenience...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: traveller on December 07, 2011, 01:37:31 PM
But the point is, some within Canon do recognize that a decent level of AI Servo performance is needed - after all, it's not jsut a studio/landscape camera, it's a wedding camera, too...and brides do move (just not very fast).  But it will remain a fact that if you want an AF system that will deliver the best keeper rate, you need a 1-series body Nikon!!!

 ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 07, 2011, 01:52:35 PM
Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

No, I don't understand the reasoning behind your statement, but I do understand that you are easily swayed by fatuous opinions and pseudofactual babble.  Ever used a tripod?  If so, KR thinks you're an idiot (yes, that's a direct quote). The clause, 'great article by Ken Rockwell' is an oxymoron.  KR himself is just the plain old vanilla sort of moron. 
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: arussarts on December 07, 2011, 02:34:27 PM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

Actually you are somewhat correct, I'm not saying the 5D Mk II wont produce great results as a landscape camera. You must realize my point, the quality of a digital sensor at 21.1 MP is NOTHING compared to 4" x 5" film processed with a pro scanner. A real professional landscape photographer can get prints for museum displays and large prints over 3' x 4'. You absolutely CANNOT get high quality large prints using the 5D Mk II, the larget print you could get at 300 dpi is about 13" x 19".

source = http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)

Using 4" x 5" film and a high quality drum scan process, you can get an approximately a 500 MP image. The quality difference is simply to great.

Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?

You're right technically speaking.  Here is another article discussing film vs. digital that I think illustrates why us high-MP people want more MP's:  http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/Cramer.shtml

I think it's interesting to note that both of these articles were written in 2006.  Arguably, much has changed within the digital realm, and while technically speaking you're right, the 5d2 is incapable of producing 300dpi prints at 30x40.  I can assure you, from experience, a 30x40 from 21MP is still a beautiful print coming off of an Epson 9880.  Most consumers do not pixel-peep like we do and do not notice the difference.  Realistically, a 30+MP camera would be acceptable considering all the other variables and the ongoing obsolescence of film.

I think we, and by we I mean, REAL working pro landscape photographers, absolutely use the 5d2 for exhibition prints.  But it still isn't as good as we'd like it to be.  I'd love to have 300dpi at even 20x24.  To me this would be more than adequate for exhibition printing.  Anything over that and you're standing too close anyway.

I think it really comes down to form factor.  Why drag a ton of gear and film out when we can pop everything we need  into a backpack and really get to the rarest places on earth.  Not to mention, it's getting harder and harder to find places to process our film.

As to the Ansel/Digital question... I believe he would absolutely be shooting digitally!  Probably with a P45, but definitely digitally.  The man is best known for his beautiful landscapes but what often gets lost in his history is that he was a technological innovator.  He was literally pushing, and pulling, film and printing to its limits.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jbwise01 on December 07, 2011, 02:37:47 PM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

Actually you are somewhat correct, I'm not saying the 5D Mk II wont produce great results as a landscape camera. You must realize my point, the quality of a digital sensor at 21.1 MP is NOTHING compared to 4" x 5" film processed with a pro scanner. A real professional landscape photographer can get prints for museum displays and large prints over 3' x 4'. You absolutely CANNOT get high quality large prints using the 5D Mk II, the larget print you could get at 300 dpi is about 13" x 19".

source = http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)

Using 4" x 5" film and a high quality drum scan process, you can get an approximately a 500 MP image. The quality difference is simply to great.

Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?

Even Ansel Adams moved to medium format in his latter years as film emultions improved and he got too old to lug around a huge pack full of large format kit.  Go and have a look at the weight of a large format camera system and compare it to a DSLR, not to mention the amount of set up time required for each shot (and the expense of the film).  That's not to say that the quality of large or medium format isn't better, it's a trade off of quality versus convenience (if you don't agree -why aren't you carrying around a 8" x 10" instead of mere 4" x 5"?).  There are plenty of landscape photographers out there using DSLRs or digital medium format as it allows them to be more experimental and prolific in their shooting style.  It's far better to get the shot on a smaller, faster format than to miss it messing around trying to set up large format kit.  Large format is already on the wane as more landscape photographers move to the ever improving digital medium format systems.  It's all about convenience...

I don't dispute that the 5D II is a more than capable landsape camera. It is quite good at many things, which speaks to its popularity amongst photographers worldwide. The landscape photographers that use the 5D II seem to crave more MP for obvious reasons.  Canon will most certainly introduce a medium format digital in the near future to fill this void and compete with pentax and hasselblad.

My point is that the main purpose of the 5D series is to be a photo-journalism camera/event/ walk around full frame AND an HD video camera.  Many people forget that the 5D II was the digital SLR with full HD video recording capabilities. Canon sticks to its roots and will most certainly improve on the video cpabilities of the 5D in the next upgrade.  The 5D III will also be a great landscape camera, but I don't expect it to be a 30+ MP camera.  I expect the camera to greatly improve ISO perfromance which would drastically improve the cameras video capabilities and low light perfromance. I expect a minimal auto-focus upgrade, an articulating screen like the 60D (but maybe not bc of weather sealing issues), and some minor viewfinder improvements.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: briansquibb on December 07, 2011, 02:38:12 PM
If I use the 5DII for landscape I take multiple shots and stitch them. A 5 photo lanscape has IQ as good as a MF (except perhaps the DR)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jbwise01 on December 07, 2011, 02:43:42 PM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

Actually you are somewhat correct, I'm not saying the 5D Mk II wont produce great results as a landscape camera. You must realize my point, the quality of a digital sensor at 21.1 MP is NOTHING compared to 4" x 5" film processed with a pro scanner. A real professional landscape photographer can get prints for museum displays and large prints over 3' x 4'. You absolutely CANNOT get high quality large prints using the 5D Mk II, the larget print you could get at 300 dpi is about 13" x 19".

source = http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)

Using 4" x 5" film and a high quality drum scan process, you can get an approximately a 500 MP image. The quality difference is simply to great.

Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?

You're right technically speaking.  Here is another article discussing film vs. digital that I think illustrates why us high-MP people want more MP's:  http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/Cramer.shtml

I think it's interesting to note that both of these articles were written in 2006.  Arguably, much has changed within the digital realm, and while technically speaking you're right, the 5d2 is incapable of producing 300dpi prints at 30x40.  I can assure you, from experience, a 30x40 from 21MP is still a beautiful print coming off of an Epson 9880.  Most consumers do not pixel-peep like we do and do not notice the difference.  Realistically, a 30+MP camera would be acceptable considering all the other variables and the ongoing obsolescence of film.

I think we, and by we I mean, REAL working pro landscape photographers, absolutely use the 5d2 for exhibition prints.  But it still isn't as good as we'd like it to be.  I'd love to have 300dpi at even 20x24.  To me this would be more than adequate for exhibition printing.  Anything over that and you're standing too close anyway.

I think it really comes down to form factor.  Why drag a ton of gear and film out when we can pop everything we need  into a backpack and really get to the rarest places on earth.  Not to mention, it's getting harder and harder to find places to process our film.

As to the Ansel/Digital question... I believe he would absolutely be shooting digitally!  Probably with a P45, but definitely digitally.  The man is best known for his beautiful landscapes but what often gets lost in his history is that he was a technological innovator.  He was literally pushing, and pulling, film and printing to its limits.

Trust me, I would absolutely love for the 5D III to have 30 MP, 4-5 FPS, ISO 25600 + expanded, 45 opt AF, and be less than $3000, but i think if we are being realistic, we would know taht Canon can't make this happen. The would have to choose between high ISO, Pro AF and High MP. I think they will chooose high ISO becase of the benifit to video recording.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: JR on December 07, 2011, 03:03:40 PM
Trust me, I would absolutely love for the 5D III to have 30 MP, 4-5 FPS, ISO 25600 + expanded, 45 opt AF, and be less than $3000, but i think if we are being realistic, we would know taht Canon can't make this happen. The would have to choose between high ISO, Pro AF and High MP. I think they will chooose high ISO becase of the benifit to video recording.

Why not have Canon launch such product for $5000?  Call it 3D or 2D or whatever you want, or even 1DXs but I think there is room for more than one EOS pro body (currently only the 1DX) with the spec you described.

I would buy one... :P
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: eaw213 on December 07, 2011, 03:22:12 PM
As for the AF, what I REALLY REALLY want is more of the center AF type placed elsewhere in the frame. That's it. AF groups, modes, and algorithms be damned, I just want a solid AF point I can choose in single point mode that lies much nearer the Rule of Thirds lines. If the 5DIII had 5 total points, one in the center and one for each intersection of the thirds lines, I'd be happy. It's so limiting to use my 85 f1.2 and 135 f2 because I either can't trust my outer points to focus well, or I can't trust my subject to stay in focus after using the focus-shift technique.

I really don't think that asking for better quality points elsewhere in the frame is asking for much of Canon, much less asking for pro level AF since that entails a lot more beyond what I've said.

I do think we'll see better quality points elsewhere in the frame - the 5DIII will almost certainly have many (if not all) its points as cross-type, and the center point will likely be the dual cross type. 

But, as much is it needs greater point spread, I don't believe that the 5DIII will get greater point spread.  Canon made a promotional statement that the lateral spread of the 5DII AF points was the same as the 1DsIII, but of course neglected to mention that the vertical spread was much less, meaning the 'corner points' get no where near the 'rule-of-thirds' intersections.  The 1D IV and 7D are about tied for maximum horizontal-vertical extent relative to frame, and both get an AF point adjacent to the 'rule-of-thirds' intersections.  Even though Canon touts the 1D X as having the most AF coverage area, while the horizontal extent is the same as the 1D IV (and thus greter than the 1DsIII), the vertical extent is actually less than the 1D IV, meaning the 1D IV is actually getting closer to (and a little beyond in one dimension) the 'rule-of-thirds' lines.  You can see the relative coverages with and without the grid in the mouseovers in this article on TDP (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx).

AF point spread is as much of a differentiator as number/type of points, and thus is another way for Canon to differentiate lines.  I don't think we'll see greater spread in the 5DIII.

Agreed about the spread on the 5D MarkII, but it's somewhat relative. If you took a 1.6x or 1.3x crop from the center of the frame, then the points would be closer to where you see them on the 7D. Still, as long as whatever points they give me at the corners are much better quality, I'd be happy.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 07, 2011, 03:30:42 PM
Quote
You're right technically speaking.  Here is another article discussing film vs. digital that I think illustrates why us high-MP people want more MP's:  http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/Cramer.shtml

I think it's interesting to note that both of these articles were written in 2006.  Arguably, much has changed within the digital realm, and while technically speaking you're right, the 5d2 is incapable of producing 300dpi prints at 30x40.  I can assure you, from experience, a 30x40 from 21MP is still a beautiful print coming off of an Epson 9880.  Most consumers do not pixel-peep like we do and do not notice the difference.  Realistically, a 30+MP camera would be acceptable considering all the other variables and the ongoing obsolescence of film.

I think we, and by we I mean, REAL working pro landscape photographers, absolutely use the 5d2 for exhibition prints.  But it still isn't as good as we'd like it to be.  I'd love to have 300dpi at even 20x24.  To me this would be more than adequate for exhibition printing.  Anything over that and you're standing too close anyway.

I think it really comes down to form factor.  Why drag a ton of gear and film out when we can pop everything we need  into a backpack and really get to the rarest places on earth.  Not to mention, it's getting harder and harder to find places to process our film.

As to the Ansel/Digital question... I believe he would absolutely be shooting digitally!  Probably with a P45, but definitely digitally.  The man is best known for his beautiful landscapes but what often gets lost in his history is that he was a technological innovator.  He was literally pushing, and pulling, film and printing to its limits.

I was fortunate to watch a live feed of Canon's booth at the PhotoPlus Expo in New York a month or so ago thanks to Canon CPS... They had pro's such as vincent and such shooting 5d's and 7d's and outputting directly to the new Canon pro printer pumping out 20"x30" natively.  I dont know off hand if they upscalled the print to 300DPI mind you or if they printed at native resolution but printed at 150DPI or lower?  However from what I could see on the live feed they were great prints and basically canon wouldn't display such large prints from the camera if they weren't confident in the output.  That being said, I think that size from these cameras are the exception to the rule. 

I am torn on the debate on larger MP... I would love 30+ MP that could print gallery style prints and half the weight and gear of a MF or LF camera, however at a compromise where diffraction of the lenses become a nightmare, Noise and IQ performance, and other compromises in quality, I dont know how I'd feel about that option vs plunking 10k down on a digital back for my MF camera... Everything comes at a cost and a compromise... The problem Canon has with the 5d3 is everyone is hoping/wanting this to be the "dream" camera with all this extra goodies and want to pay the 5d2 price point... When canon misses a feature or three, they will denounce the camera as a disappointment/failure and Canon cant win...
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: arussarts on December 07, 2011, 03:33:42 PM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
or
a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system or  $9,995 penta 645D. Im sure pentax and hasslblad arehaving a hard to meeting the demand for these cameras!

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

Actually you are somewhat correct, I'm not saying the 5D Mk II wont produce great results as a landscape camera. You must realize my point, the quality of a digital sensor at 21.1 MP is NOTHING compared to 4" x 5" film processed with a pro scanner. A real professional landscape photographer can get prints for museum displays and large prints over 3' x 4'. You absolutely CANNOT get high quality large prints using the 5D Mk II, the larget print you could get at 300 dpi is about 13" x 19".

source = http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php (http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php)

Using 4" x 5" film and a high quality drum scan process, you can get an approximately a 500 MP image. The quality difference is simply to great.

Here's a great article comparing a digital cameras to film, after reading maybe you will under stand the reasoning I had behind my statement.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm)

Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?

You're right technically speaking.  Here is another article discussing film vs. digital that I think illustrates why us high-MP people want more MP's:  http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/Cramer.shtml

I think it's interesting to note that both of these articles were written in 2006.  Arguably, much has changed within the digital realm, and while technically speaking you're right, the 5d2 is incapable of producing 300dpi prints at 30x40.  I can assure you, from experience, a 30x40 from 21MP is still a beautiful print coming off of an Epson 9880.  Most consumers do not pixel-peep like we do and do not notice the difference.  Realistically, a 30+MP camera would be acceptable considering all the other variables and the ongoing obsolescence of film.

I think we, and by we I mean, REAL working pro landscape photographers, absolutely use the 5d2 for exhibition prints.  But it still isn't as good as we'd like it to be.  I'd love to have 300dpi at even 20x24.  To me this would be more than adequate for exhibition printing.  Anything over that and you're standing too close anyway.

I think it really comes down to form factor.  Why drag a ton of gear and film out when we can pop everything we need  into a backpack and really get to the rarest places on earth.  Not to mention, it's getting harder and harder to find places to process our film.

As to the Ansel/Digital question... I believe he would absolutely be shooting digitally!  Probably with a P45, but definitely digitally.  The man is best known for his beautiful landscapes but what often gets lost in his history is that he was a technological innovator.  He was literally pushing, and pulling, film and printing to its limits.

Trust me, I would absolutely love for the 5D III to have 30 MP, 4-5 FPS, ISO 25600 + expanded, 45 opt AF, and be less than $3000, but i think if we are being realistic, we would know taht Canon can't make this happen. The would have to choose between high ISO, Pro AF and High MP. I think they will chooose high ISO becase of the benifit to video recording.

Sounds like we basically agree... Canon needs to fill the void with two cameras!
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: studio1972 on December 07, 2011, 04:51:01 PM
This rumour sounds like a bad move for Canon. They have a great sensor from the 1DX and decent AF from the 7D. Simply combining these two would be a winning combo and make it a great upgrade from the 5D2.

30+ MP means higher cost, real world ISO similar to the 5D2, and huge RAW files. This will only apeal to a niche crowd and the like of wedding photographers will just stick with the 5D2 IMHO.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: wickidwombat on December 07, 2011, 06:06:51 PM
Trust me, I would absolutely love for the 5D III to have 30 MP, 4-5 FPS, ISO 25600 + expanded, 45 opt AF, and be less than $3000, but i think if we are being realistic, we would know taht Canon can't make this happen. The would have to choose between high ISO, Pro AF and High MP. I think they will chooose high ISO becase of the benifit to video recording.

Why not have Canon launch such product for $5000?  Call it 3D or 2D or whatever you want, or even 1DXs but I think there is room for more than one EOS pro body (currently only the 1DX) with the spec you described.

I would buy one... :P

if it had a 1 in front of it it would be big fat heavy with integrated grip
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: dr croubie on December 07, 2011, 07:00:39 PM
Can I just point out something that's been bugging me? I'm not sure how many people realise it or not, but I hear a lot "just pull the 7D AF system and put it straight in the 5D3".
Yeah, that's not going to happen.
Why?
It's too small.

I've just made some images, not sure about the exact position of AF points on the 5D2, but the 7D points should be fairly close because I could reference to the gridlines.
First image is the 7D's 19pt AF, all f/2.8 cross type, second is the 5D2's 9pt AF (without servo-assist points), centre f/2.8 crosstype, rest f/5.6 lines.
Third image is what happens when you block copy-paste the 7D's 19 points to a Full Frame sensor. They're all chocked up together, because the 7D is an aps-c sensor.


"But why can't they just copy-paste it and increase the spacing". Yes, possible. I'm an electronic engineer, more specifically I design circuit-boards. We (especially I) love copy-paste. But it doens't always work like that. There's a lot more engineering work that goes into it than just a few key-presses, I've had systems that have taken more time to copy-paste from older designs that I was probably better off designing from scratch.

Now, I don't design AF sensors for a living, but these are just some of the problems that occur. In actual fact, you're more likely to see the 1Ds' 45-pt AF copy-pasted with a lot of points deactivated/removed than a copy of the 7D. Even if the 5D3 does (but i doubt it) come out with 19 f/2.8 cross-type points, you can bet that it was still at least 80% new effort with only 20% copied from either the 7D or 1Ds' R&D.


Plus, don't forget processing power. 1D, 1Ds, and 7D all have dual-digic. The 1Ds3 to 1DX has reduced the megapixels, gone from dual digic3 to dual digic5+, and even then they needed another digic4 just to handle the AF increase from 45pt to 63pt (plus all the fancy face-tracking stuff)
The 5D2 has (and i'm putting money on 5D3 will also have) only a single Digic. Bumping the AF to 19 cross-type points (don't forget that a cross-type point takes twice as much processing power as a single-line point, ie 19-cross-types, 38 lines, takes 3.8x the processing power of the 8-single + 1cross = 10-lines of the 5D2), plus any megapixel increase are going to take a lot of processing power, more than you'd get from the increase from a single digic4 to digic5. Make the 5D3 dual-digic and you're bumping up the cost by a few hundred dollars, the battery life down, and then add to that the cost of a brand-new AF-system R&D...


Now, if you will excuse me, I just received a 40-year old Takumar 50/1.4 in the mail from ebay, and i'm going to go mount it on my 7D, and use all 0 of its 19 AF points.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: wickidwombat on December 07, 2011, 07:22:21 PM
I personally like the 1Dmk3 AF 45 point with 19 selectable and the ability to drop it to 9 selectable, too many points to select means you have to mess around alot getting to the point you want, In reallity i only probably use 5 points but the same 5 points all the time its the invisible extra points that really help out with focus tracking and everything else. improving the ability of the points you can select is what is absolutly needed.

I definately think a rework of the 45point AF is the best way for them to go for the 5D3
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: eaw213 on December 07, 2011, 09:45:13 PM
Agreed about the spread on the 5D MarkII, but it's somewhat relative. If you took a 1.6x or 1.3x crop from the center of the frame, then the points would be closer to where you see them on the 7D. Still, as long as whatever points they give me at the corners are much better quality, I'd be happy.

Can I just point out something that's been bugging me? I'm not sure how many people realise it or not, but I hear a lot "just pull the 7D AF system and put it straight in the 5D3".
Yeah, that's not going to happen.
Why?
It's too small.

Exactly what I was trying to say. Thanks for making it more visual. :)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 07, 2011, 09:51:40 PM
FWIW, here are the 7D's AF points (in black, with frame) accurately scaled onto the 5DII's AF points (in blue, with frame). 
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Wrathwilde on December 08, 2011, 03:49:57 AM

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

  Just because some professionals use it as such, doesn't mean this was the purpose of the camera. In business, decisions are made, usually, to appeal to the largest possible market, and I guarantee you the wedding/portrait professional market dwarfs the professional landscape market, at a ratio probably greater than 500:1. That the 5DMk2's so-so AF keeps it from being the ultimate wedding/portrait camera, doesn't mean that landscape was it's intended target.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LifeAfter on December 08, 2011, 09:27:58 AM
``I personally like the 1Dmk3 AF 45 point with 19 selectable and the ability to drop it to 9 selectable, too many points to select means you have to mess around alot getting to the point you want, In reallity i only probably use 5 points but the same 5 points all the time its the invisible extra points that really help out with focus tracking and everything else. improving the ability of the points you can select is what is absolutly needed.

I definately think a rework of the 45point AF is the best way for them to go for the 5D3``

Exactly, that's right, too many points are not needed for 5dIII, maybe 19 or 45 reworked as you say. But more than 1 point that works good, not only the middle one.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jbwise01 on December 08, 2011, 10:25:17 AM
I think most of this discussion has proved that there is a need for 2 cameras. If we look at this from a business perspective, i think it's much easier to anticipate features and price points of potential cameras.

EOS "x"D Lineup 2012

1D Line
1Dx - $6,800; 18.1 MP FF, 14 FPS, 61 pt AF, ISO 51200 Native, 2012
1Ds - $6,999; 21.1 MP FF, 5 FPS, 45 pt AF, ISO 1600 Native, 2007
1D IV - $4,999; 16.1 MP FF, 10 FPS. 45 pt AF, ISO 12800 Native, 2009

5D Line
5D III - no price/specs released
5D II - $2,499, 21.1 MP FF, 3.9 FPS, 9 pt AF, ISO 6400 Native, 2008

7D Line
7D - $1,400, 18.1 MP APS-C, 8  FPS, 19 pt AF, ISO 6400 Native, 2009

So looking at lineup shows me that there is a void between the the 1D and 5D which could be filled with a 3D which would probably feature ~25 MP FF, 4 FPS, 19 pt AF, ISO 12800 at about $3,999. This wouldn't completely cannablize the 1Dx bc it lacks the features some of the 1Dx market (sports) would be looking for, much lower FPS, ISO and AF performance.

Comparing across the line up also makes me realize that the price of the 5D III will most likely be in the $2,499-$2,999 range. Knowing that, it will probably feature 18 MP FF, 4 FPS, 19 pt AF, and an ISO bump up to about 12800 - 25600.

So from a business perspective.. the 5D III would get a healthy bump in ISO and AF perfromance over the 5d II. This makes sense, and considering the 1Dx stays is at 18.1 MP, I wouldn't expect a MP bump in the 5D III. Now if canon were to go for a medium format digital about 40MP,  it would most likely intro above the EOS line at around $8,999 and price upwards from there. Canon has indicated that they have interest in develop such a product, but would not want to undercut the 1Dx or compete with that market.

SO.. maybe canon releases an M300 (made up name) at $8,999, with a new 40 MP sensor, 3.5 FPS, 9 pt AF, and ISO 6400.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: V8Beast on December 08, 2011, 12:12:51 PM
Hopefully you don't give a rat's ass about cost.

Not really. Cost is a secondary issue. Besides, new bodies make good tax writeoffs.

Quote
you're just described the behavior of the AF system in a 1-series camera.

Not really. The 7D's AF system trounces the 5D's. No one is dumb enough to expect a 1D-caliber AF system in a 5D. Many people would be content with an AF system at least on par with the 7D.

Quote
So...problem solved - get a 1DsIII, 1D IV, or a 1D X when it comes out.  I can almost guarantee that, given the requirements you outline, you're not going to be happy with the AF of the 5DIII.

I appreciate your generosity in trying to solve my problem for me, but I've already got it handled. I already own a 1DsIII. I'd just like to pick up a 5DIII as a backup, and for situations where it's smaller form factor is advantageous. There are many instances during a shoot when I have to rig my gear off a moving car. Fortunately, I haven't lost a body yet, but I'd much rather sacrifice a 5D than a 1D. The 5DII is great for this, since it's smaller size and lighter weight make it easier to rig, and it's IQ is outstanding. Unfortunately, whenever the subject moves just a bit, it struggles to readjust focus, which is a big problem when you're  triggering it with PocketWizards since you can't actually look through the viewfinder.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: awinphoto on December 08, 2011, 12:49:30 PM
Besides, new bodies make good tax writeoffs.

True dat... =)  I wish I had your disposable income for a new camera... Even though I shoot professionally, every camera purchase for me has to be debated for by my boss (aka wife) =)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: V8Beast on December 08, 2011, 12:53:50 PM
Besides, new bodies make good tax writeoffs.

True dat... =)  I wish I had your disposable income for a new camera... Even though I shoot professionally, every camera purchase for me has to be debated for by my boss (aka wife) =)

I'd hardly call my equipment budget sizable. The IDsIII is like 200 years old now  :) Trust me, every equipment purchase is a big deal. It certainly requires cutbacks in other areas!
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jbwise01 on December 08, 2011, 02:52:20 PM
I think most of this discussion has proved that there is a need for 2 cameras. If we look at this from a business perspective, i think it's much easier to anticipate features and price points of potential cameras.

EOS "x"D Lineup 2012

1D Line
1Dx - $6,800; 18.1 MP FF, 14 FPS, 61 pt AF, ISO 51200 Native, 2012
1Ds - $6,999; 21.1 MP FF, 5 FPS, 45 pt AF, ISO 1600 Native, 2007
1D IV - $4,999; 16.1 MP FF, 10 FPS. 45 pt AF, ISO 12800 Native, 2009

Huh? Where have you been hiding for the last year or so? The 1Ds has been MIA for quite some time now.

As of the 1DX, (not 1Dx), The 1Ds line is finished as is the 1D.
Pardon Me for my lack of capitalization on the "x", I figured the audience on here could percieve that 1Dx meant 1DX, and while the 1Ds has since past its prime, I mentioned it as a way to show the evolution of the 1D lineup and consistency of its price point. Obviously the 1Ds and 1D Mark IV will not be purchased at retail (possibly by collectors) with the arrival of the 1DX.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 09, 2011, 12:50:23 PM
Quote
you're just described the behavior of the AF system in a 1-series camera.
Not really. The 7D's AF system trounces the 5D's. No one is dumb enough to expect a 1D-caliber AF system in a 5D. Many people would be content with an AF system at least on par with the 7D.

I actually find the 5D2 center point more reliable at times than with the 7D. Only the 1 series seem to come close to being really consistent though.

And speaking of the 1 series AF, it would be nice to be able to get 1 series AF without having to get a giant, clunky brick along with it. Nikon allows that now. Sony is doing their best. Canon used to do it. So why is it always considered sooo insane that Canon do it now?

And once again, I will say that they really, REALLY, need to get this thing to 6fps. That would be reasonable and yet hardly threaten as a truly top pro action cam since those guys all insist on 8fps+ for the main body (and would Canon rather have a few who don't go for another 1DX/1D4 for their second body nab a new 5 series body or some old, used copy 1 series body? or think Nikon?)
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on December 09, 2011, 01:06:45 PM
So looking at lineup shows me that there is a void between the the 1D and 5D which could be filled with a 3D which would probably feature ~25 MP FF, 4 FPS, 19 pt AF, ISO 12800 at about $3,999. This wouldn't completely cannablize the 1Dx bc it lacks the features some of the 1Dx market (sports) would be looking for, much lower FPS, ISO and AF performance.

Wow, so now you spend $1300-1400 more than a 5D2 release price point and same sluggish mirror and fps and only 4MP more and a few cross and assists added using the old 7D AF? That would even more of a fail than the rumor for the 5D3 since it offers nothing more but a few extra assists and yet has a much higher price and less MP. Those would be joke specs even for the 5D3 at the 5D2 price point! If all they do is toss in the 7D AF and add such a marginal amount of MP it has got to at least hit 6fps then, not stay at 3.9.

If they are going $4000 for it it has to hit 6fps and need something even better than 7D AF. 6fps is still a far cry from 12fps nevermind 10fps or even 8fps and even 1D3/1D4/improved 7D AF should be a big step from 1DX AF, so how much do you need them to protect the 1DX? They will protect it right into everyone just sticking with their 5D2s or maybe nabbing a 70D or 7D2 on the side as a less expensive way to get some more fps/the improved video or think seriously about Nikon bodies (where rumors are their top line AF, 6fps (with grip), 36MP, improved video).

Quote
Comparing across the line up also makes me realize that the price of the 5D III will most likely be in the $2,499-$2,999 range. Knowing that, it will probably feature 18 MP FF, 4 FPS, 19 pt AF, and an ISO bump up to about 12800 - 25600.

So you want people to sell their 5D2 and then buy this, say at $3000, so they spend around $1500 new money or so and get a loss of 3MP (doesn't matter a real ton, but) and the same slow fps and sluggish shutter and long mirror black out, maybe 1/2  to 2/3 stop better SNR and a bit better in some ways but perhaps even a trace worse in other ways AF system (sometimes I find 7D AF less reliable than 5D2 for certain things). And they also know that these are the improvements they have for the next 3-4 years.

Sure the video may be much better, but it surely will on the new Rebels and xxD and 7 series and maybe people just buy one of those cheap, if it's just the better video they care about, they nab a 70D or Rebel. If they care about fps and reach they will need an xxD or 7 series anyway and are people going to want to spend on a new 70D/7D2 and then also spend $1500 to get just a semi-minor update to their 5D2 (and maybe even call it minor when you consider the improved video they can get from their xxD/7 or maybe even Rebel purchase)? I bet a lot just keep their 5D2. I bet people not entrenched in a system go Nikon (of course it remains to be seen how the Nikon rumors pan out).

Quote
So from a business perspective.. the 5D III would get a healthy bump in ISO and AF perfromance over the 5d II. This makes sense, and considering the 1Dx stays is at 18.1 MP, I wouldn't expect a MP bump in the 5D III. Now if canon were to go for a medium format digital about 40MP,  it would most likely intro above the EOS line at around $8,999 and price upwards from there. Canon has indicated that they have interest in develop such a product, but would not want to undercut the 1Dx or compete with that market.

But where are they going to get the 2+ stops better SNR from? There is no shockingly different tech in their new sensors and look at the current efficiencies in light capture and even how Canon says a good bit of the 1DX SNR improvement is just for in camera jpgs due to better in camera jpg NR. Early signs show hints that they may not have even been able to clean read noise enough and reduce banding enough to get the improved low ISO DR of the Sony sensors, although this remains to be seen and is clearly something they could reasonably techinically accomplish.


Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: mccrum on December 09, 2011, 03:57:39 PM
Unfortunately, whenever the subject moves just a bit, it struggles to readjust focus, which is a big problem when you're  triggering it with PocketWizards since you can't actually look through the viewfinder.
You should look into tethered shooting with a laptop and use Remote Capture (it's on the CD in the box).  For those times you can't look through the finder but still want to see what the camera sees it's a huge help.  You even have control over everything on the camera, from ISO to focus.  There's a little lag because it's using the USB cable connection but you're adding functions and a new USB cable is certainly a whole lot cheaper than PocketWizards.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: viaissimo on December 11, 2011, 11:41:29 AM
I don’t get it why Canon is that much eager to get rid of their customers in the ambitious hobby segment, just let me point out my story.
I have seen a lot of Canon EOS cameras, beginning with EOS 10 (to measure camera-shaking would be useful for IS too), 5, 50E to EOS 3 and 1V and therefore have a lot of lenses and accessories for full-frame. Besides my 28-135 EF IS I did like my Sigma 12-24 most (ok, you can say “switch to the 8-16” on APS-C instead), with telephoto-lens (75-300 IS) I did work quite seldom (so much on the “advantage of the crop-factor”). Switching to digital APS-C format was a very heavy drawback for the wide-angle-lens-range. I did find myself at the first well priced digi-cam (EOS 300d) in an awkwardly shifted focal-range at lenses and system-flashes confronted with some plastic EF-S lenses as crappy workaround. The APS-H format is nearly the same petty with crop. So I started to wait for a full-frame digital and went along with film in the meanwhile. Nevertheless waiting for developed slide-films and scanning them in was not very thrilling compared to the speed and workflow for digital, especially RAW pictures.
So end of 2009 I was confronted with the decision between EOS 500D, 50D and 5D Mk 2. 500D was no option of the missing upper LCD, so 50D vs. 5D Mk 2 were left. I have to say I do photography in a broad range, doing some studio-tabletops, studio-portraits but also portraits on location, rock-concerts (there I suffer from the AF at low light), cities & landscapes, parties, weddings, night-shots, experiments. I don’t earn a single cent with my photos (never tried), that’s all for fun. So the money I spend is of course quite a lot in total, but still limited when it comes to the decision for single components, as you have to go for family, house and living as well. So I would say I’m the typical hobby-photo-enthusiast, who spends quite a lot of money on that hobby but wants to get an above-consumer-level-average-allround-camera, let’s say I want to get value for money. And you can say I’m one of the “half having my money in my mattress waiting for the camera that doesn’t exist” as mentioned above.
I don’t need highend framerates (3-4 fps is really enough), I don’t need that robust cam-bodies (but some weather-sealing would be very nice), I don’t need a second CF-card-slot (I don’t want to switch to SD as well), I don’t need 45 AF-sensors (even when I did like them with eye-control in EOS 3 we haven’t ever seen since digital EOS, except for focus-tracking that much sensors make no sense without eye-control, and, shame on the “inventor” Canon, Nikon is doing 50+ area-AF in nearly all mid- to high-range-cams), I don’t want a built-in portrait-battery-grip (that’s great to have for portraits, but sometimes it’s unnecessary bulky & heavy), I don’t need video (maybe just for playing around a little bit), I don’t need 20+ MPx (not for photo-prints, not for computer-monitor; I would like to see higher ISO instead, clean 12.800 would be really great; lower MPx together with small framerates lowers cost in terms of less need for DIGIC-power), I don’t want to buy every accessory new (e.g. like battery and memory-card if you switch from 50D to 60D, ok 60D was intended as marketing-gag to get x00D-users up a notch in the product-line as Canon did hope to get 40/50D-users to 7D) or take two kinds of accessories with me if I take a second camera for backup with me (as I wouldn’t sell my 50D for a new cam). That’s to point out where there is room for segmentation in the EOS-lineup and not to say I want the highend EOS 1D xy for 100 bucks. By the way, view-finder shouldn’t be less than 100% in digital era, 90-100% was ok for cropping on film.
If you did compare 50D to 5D Mk2 two years ago you’d get a 50D for 850 EUR and the 5D Mk2 for about 1.900 EUR, that’s twice as much. But it’s not worth it, as you get “only” video and high-MPx on full-frame for extra 1000 EUR, but you suffer built-in-flash (ok, bad light, but on occasion I like to get a bad picture compared to get no picture at all; I also thought remote-control of flashes as in 7d would bring built-in-flash to the top-lineup, but 1DX), AF-assist-beam (I don’t get it why this is only done via system-flash in a camera featuring 6.400 ISO without high-range, it seems Canon has never heard the word “available-light-photography” before), no DEP-program (I’m sorry to don’t even see the much worse DEP-A anymore in the EOS-lineup; DEP, a seldom used, very often misunderstood, but hard to substitute great feature of Canon EOS), lower X-Sync (of course out of the larger format), worse light-meter-range, worse AF-sensors (as this has been discussed once again above, there are 6 additional AI-Servo-Sensors, but less cross-type and no X-type-sensor compared to 50D, not to speak of the 7D; of course for the phase-AF there also is the advantage of the larger full-frame-format; but low-light and tracking of movement suffers a lot at 5D Mk2 I hear, not the 7D made the difference, the AF was complaint about also in 5D Mk1; remember also, with limited budget you don’t spend money for 2.8-(zoom)-lenses all the time (I do have some 1.8 fixed ones), so AF should work at 5.6 or even 8.0), to mention the major drawbacks. So you can say a photo-video-hybrid (there would be much smaller sales-figures for the 5D Mk2 if it wouldn’t have quite a lot of pure video-users, so the DSRL-market is I think split up in two parts; the (indie) video-guys pushing prices as they come from the more expensive pro-videos down to the 5D, the still-guys pulling the prices from the value-for-money lower EOS-segments) with a pro-1D-sensor in a x00D-housing for a lot of money. As mentioned above, of course APS-C format is 2.5-times more dense compared to full-frame, that’s I guess the reason why 50D just goes up to 12.800 ISO where the 5D Mk2 saves one full stop with about half its pixel-density, one more reason for me to go with full-frame!
I would in some way agree to the decision between 7D crop and expensive 1DX mentioned above. I would like to see in some respect a kind of “7D full-frame”, but with this rumor I fear the “mid-range-full-frame-gap” won’t be filled even with a 5D Mk3 (hope I’m wrong). Can’t Canon start to sell customized cameras like car-sellers do (when you go through this blog there are nearly as much different opinions on what’s needed as there are writers), “I want the FF 5D with 12MPx, not the 21MPx or 36MPx version, max. framerate 3fps, but 100k high ISO, no video, good 9-point AF, flip-screen LCD, 100% viewer,… What will it cost and when can it be shipped?” I think the 5D Mk3 will be the second time when I start thinking about moving to Nikon, as some Pros I know have done in the last 2 years, but this time I’m not going to wait another 3-4 years for my “full-frame value for money cam”.
Maybe this is only one of the rumors Canon just throws to test us, the community, and decide which of the prototypes to release in the future – Canon, I hope you take the right decisions also for ambitious hobbyists!!!
P.S. one word on the money: I’m always puzzled how easy some of you guys say “just go and buy a 1DX”.I think I don’t get paid that bad, but 6.000+ EUR for a camera, I wouldn’t even think one second about buying a camera in this price-segment! Don’t know where you guys get the bucks from, at least if you don’t do photos for living…
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: Fleetie on December 11, 2011, 11:49:46 AM
Er, this is to be taken as constructive criticism or as a helpful suggestion:

Posting that much text as one solid block of text will put many or most people off reading it. Honestly, I can't be bothered jumping into that brick-wall-of-text.

Firstly, do you need to write that much in one post anyway?

Secondly, try to break up text into distinct paragraphs separated by one blank line.

Honestly, you will find that you get more interest if you make your text less daunting!

Not trying to be nasty; just trying to make a suggestion. I hope you don't mind.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: elflord on December 11, 2011, 12:21:32 PM
Quote
If you did compare 50D to 5D Mk2 two years ago you’d get a 50D for 850 EUR and the 5D Mk2 for about 1.900 EUR, that’s twice as much. But it’s not worth it, as you get “only” video and high-MPx on full-frame for extra 1000 EUR,

The 5D Mark II is full frame. If you wanted a full frame camera, what were your other choices and how much did they cost? If you didn't/don't want a full frame,  buy an APS-C  and don't worry about how expensive full frame is.

Quote
P.S. one word on the money: I’m always puzzled how easy some of you guys say “just go and buy a 1DX”.I think I don’t get paid that bad,

Well, given your stated requirements, that seems like the right model for you. You're not the only one who would like a beamer on a kia budget, but it's not going to happen, so the rest of us need to pick  our own sweet spot in the price continuum. For me (and many  others it seems) the 5D Mk II makes sense. For others, the Rebel offers excellent value. For those who just have to have it all, the flagship model and the associated sticker price is the only choice.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: candyman on December 11, 2011, 01:27:39 PM
Can’t Canon start to sell customized cameras like car-sellers do (when you go through this blog there are nearly as much different opinions on what’s needed as there are writers), “I want the FF 5D with 12MPx, not the 21MPx or 36MPx version, max. framerate 3fps, but 100k high ISO, no video, good 9-point AF, flip-screen LCD, 100% viewer,… What will it cost and when can it be shipped?”

As customer I really understand this. I really do! I would love to have this freedom.

Ah, but you see in order to continue to sell products and be competitive, a company must have a competitive (costs/productionsimplicity/quality/marketshare etc) strategy. Which is, supply strategy and NOT demand strategy (customised offers). This is a development in many companies worldwide.
Now, having a range of limited amount of products based on supply strategy means the company has to make choices but MUST be based on customers / market demands - "what is it our customers want". And of course, you can't always please everyone. And surely, one product is easier to offer in different flavours than other products. yes, you can order a car in different colors, option packages etc. But, productionwise might not be cost effective for camera's.

just my 2cents

ps pardon my english, it is not native so I may have expressed myself not as well as I would do in my native language.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: jrista on December 11, 2011, 03:02:24 PM
Can’t Canon start to sell customized cameras like car-sellers do (when you go through this blog there are nearly as much different opinions on what’s needed as there are writers), “I want the FF 5D with 12MPx, not the 21MPx or 36MPx version, max. framerate 3fps, but 100k high ISO, no video, good 9-point AF, flip-screen LCD, 100% viewer,… What will it cost and when can it be shipped?”

Not a chance. Comparing a DSLR manufacture to car manufacture is like comparing apples to rambutan. Cars are easy to customize. They are huge, composed of thousands of parts, and key functionality is often a composition of many interchangeable parts. Its possible to have or not have ABS, its possible to have or not have a CD player in the stereo, etc. The vast majority of features people want to customize are in the sensor...a SINGLE PART! The megapixels, the ISO, the max readout speed, etc. are all fabricated using incredibly high tech light etching processes in ungodly-expensive crystal wafers. The same goes for the processing chips, such as DIGIC, that handle things like AF, video, etc. Manufacturing dozens of different varieties of the same basic sensor or DIGIC chip would increase the average cost to the customer by ten fold at least. Cars are easy...thousands of interchangeable parts. DSLR's are not, with few highly integrated parts.

Not a chance.
Title: Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]
Post by: tt on December 11, 2011, 04:04:43 PM
sales may correlate with marketshare, but not necessarily indicate profit share of the total market or submarkets.
e.g. Amazon Kindle Fire will soon have a chunk of the tablet market. But they're barely breaking even on the sale of the product. Or Sony making a loss on HDTV sales.

Anyone know the difference in profit between the dSLRs out and the recent bridge cameras?