« on: February 07, 2015, 03:49:31 AM »
It is on Canon Australia's site, it's certainly a camera I will have a look at when they are in store
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I really think Nikon has nailed the potential of diffractive optics with their new lens and hope that Canon will follow suit.
So...you hope that Canon decides to release a DO lens where they have to warn in advance about flare problems, claim those problems can be minimized by a post-processing software correction, and provide an example of that correction where the resulting shot still suffers badly from veiling glare? To each their own, I guess...
The actual Canon financial statement is not as bleak as that news article. See http://www.canon.com/ir/results/2014/rslt2014q3e.pdfAgain here is the actual financial statement, people should read this before making up things.
Now you wouldn't expect a Company to be too negative in their own financial statements, regarding the camera market they expect low end digital cameras to not do well, but are expecting recover in the interchangeable section.
Overall as a company they are still forecasting profit.
Do you read the figures differently?
So if the 5d3 doesn't meet your needs why stick with canon? Or is it that it does meet your needs and want more?I'm trying to think what features I would need in a MkIV and I can't think of any. The MkIII is a totally satisfactory stills camera for me, whereas the 5DII obviously had its shortcomings (AF, banding noise, and the little known internal mirror reflection with 'off-stage' light sources. The latter also occurs with the MkIII but very much less so.
The banding on the 5D3 is about as bad as that on the 5D2. Whilst it is good to hear that the 5D3 meets all of your needs in a stills camera, for others (especially those that have used ML), it does not even come close.
Not sure if this post was joking, but there are plenty of worthwhile upgrades from the 5d2 to 5d3 they may just not have been what you want.
None I ever noticed when using the two. But of course YMMV. More precisely I'd say you would have to have a very specific reason to prefer the one over the other.
I did not not see any improvement in any aspect of my photographic results (it did however have some noticible improvements in its handling which I miss on the 5DII).
Looks like I'm the only one who's looking forward to a high MP 5DM4. Add in GPS and the 7DM2's focus and I'm sold. Canon needs to respond to the competition. So many Canon users have defected to Sony and Fujitsu because Canon is no longer meeting their needs.
You are most certainly not!
5DIII had nothing worthwhile compared to 5DII as an upgrade so the wish list remains very long before Canon even matches the competition. I trust we will se a lot of real improvements this time and not a half hearted effort.
One remark not much noted from the Canon Exec. in the latest confirmation of a high pixal Canon body "soon" was that new bodies would be fewer - but each of them would be a significant step upwards.
5DIV should not only have a lot more megapix to work with but also better low iso, excellent native iso up to at least 50K, better dynamic range, gps and wifi, markedly better AF than the 5DIII, 5.5 fps+ with a boatload of cross-type focus points and some of the smart AF tracking programs that makes the competition's AF run circles around what Canon currently offers.
Am I dreaming? No. All this would only put Canon more or less on par with the competition. We should believe Canon will try to do even better. Especially since they acknowledge that they have ground to make up towards the competition.
And oh. The price. If the same as the asking price for the 5DIII at launch its specs better be really, really good news.
Canon - I have my check ready - impress us!