The 5D3 is worth every buck. Bought it last August. Great value even at the 3.5k back then...Or you sit it out and wait for the 5D3n as mentioned in current the Big Megapixal main thread ;-)
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.
A faster update? One suggestion from a known source is that Canon has loose plans to replace and/or update the EOS 5D Mark III quicker than the previous iterations.
Speculation: The 7DII will have newer sensor technology. The 6D has lower read noise than the 5DIII and the 1Dx has lower read noise than the 6D. If the 7DII is even better, then the 5DIII will be looking very dated compared to the rest of the lineup in this area. So they might want to put out a 5DIIIn or something with just a sensor update.
You're 28. You don't have a car. How you gonna carry that thing to places to use it?
You're 28. Take the money you'd use for the lens, invest it in your retirement future. Trust me, trust everyone who tells you that. Even a modest investment now, will give you financial freedom when you're older. A good thing! (from one who lives it)
Rent the lens when the urge happens.
As a side note - there are places in the wilds, here in Florida, that I would not bring a long L lens without also bringing a handgun. Just sayin'.... and its not for fear of alligators or bears, but for getting robbed. Its happened.
So I was reading the rumor on Canon's roadmap for 2013 and got me to thinking... Is the 1DX really Canon's workhorse?
I'm a beginning fashion and beauty photographer that is working to get bigger and higher profile jobs. I currently have a 5D Mark II which has served me quite well for many things in this arena. However it's not as great an all-arounder that I would like for my non-fashion jobs which helps circulate my name and get me some additional income.
The 5D Mark III is a great camera. But the lack of a user-replaceable focus-screen and no pro body is a downside. It's fast enough and the AF is more than adequate. But not sure if it's something I would be happy with for 4 or more years. Which is what I expect from a pro camera.
The 1DX is what I want except that it doesn't have the higher MP of the 5D series. Well, I was a little disappointed when it didn't have built-in WiFi... But overall, it's pretty darn nice. The way I look at it, as long as I have the appropriate lens, it can pretty much handle anything I throw at it. Which would allow me to take more jobs that I know technical limitations won't be an issue.
However, I'm a little concerned about the 18MP. For publication in large format magazines, I think 18MP would still be fine. For fashion and beauty, is there a big advantage to go with 22MP? The only step-up I see would be Medium Format which I don't see a need for at least a couple of years. How much of an advantage would that be over a 1DX/5D3 in the fashion/beauty markets?
Take it from me. I've been shooting Canon DSLRs since 2006 and have owned two 16-35 2.8 IIs, and probably half a dozen 17-40Ls over time shot on full frame 5D mark I and Mark II bodies as well as Rebels and a 40D.Thanks a lot for this mini field review. Although my signature still says something else, reading these things I can imagine to go for the 16-35 instead of waiting on a phantom. As I do low light photography wide open, your experience is crucial for me. So I better burn an additional US $ 280.00 for a 10 stop ND filter instead of a 1000 more for a highly priced WA-zoom that doesn't even exist Your insightful post is highly appreciated. Cheers, Pedro.
The 17-40L and 16-35LII are optically Canon's best ultra-wide zooms. They both perform equally as far as sharpness goes and both look identical stopped down. (the photo on the front page of my site was shot with the 17-40 and 5D2 and even at 1900 px wide, that image is super sharp corner to corner. Shot at F/22 too!
The 16-35 Mark II shines obviously in low light and wide open is SUPER SUPER sharp in the center (excellent for casual/fun portraits) it's just a JOY to use in ALL situations whereas the 17-40L is a joy to use in SOME situations. the 17-40L is softish wide open especially in the corners. the 16-35LII shows excellent center sharpness wide open and good in the corners.
Is it worth the extra 7-800 bucks? YES YES YES. I am so happy with my 16-35L II and it's going to stay with me likely forever.
Hi CR folksthanks pj for these informations and your hermeneutics on it. So what Canon could do with a 7DII is to equip it with the 6Ds FF sensor and built in 1.6 crop mode, improve the weather sealing and they're done. Anyone?
I think people should not be reading more into what Masaya said than what he ACTUALLY said. Remember, the unquoted parts of that interview are simply DPReview's 'take' on it... nothing more (and nothing less, I have respect for DPReview). Quite a bit of what is written in this post assumes incorrectly.
What Masaya actually said about 70D and/or 7DmkII in the interview is very little, and not concrete about those models nor related to the possibility of which models will still be produced, and when, etc, but rather he is talking about market segmentation.
So, careful and critical reading and analysis of what Masaya said specifically regarding APS-C and 70D / 7DmkII is required. His words are in bold in this part of that link / article, which I'm copying & highlighting below:
DPR: ... the future of APS-C at the semi-pro level is in doubt, he says:
'That's something we're considering at the moment. From our semi-pro users there's still demand for APS-C but in the future, I think we will see an increase in the number of full-frame models.'
DPR: Either way, that doesn't close the door on an EOS 70D though - when asked when we can expect one, Maeda promises: 'some day in the future. Without fail.
I'm a manager in the Australian Government, and part of my job is to write very specific documentation / policy and to read critically. (I'm not trying to boast, just applying some of my skills here).
So, my take on what Masaya actually says is as follows:
- Canon realises a significant proportion of semi-pros currently demand APS-C
- In the future, Canon believes there will possibly be more demand from semi-pros for FF
- That doesn't mean some or many semi-pros will still want / prefer / need / demand an APS-C
- Which in turn means that Canon needs to determine how to market future models like 70D and 7DmkII
- the feature set and segment positioning of the 70D (& 7DmkII) might be quite determined by the 700D / entry level Canon APS-C DLSRs
- A 7DmkII is still likely on the cards. I think planning, research & development of the 7DmkII has happened some years ago, and R&D are being finalised soon - then ready for production (nowhere does Masaya hint that a 7DmkII is off the cards)
- the 7D has been a popular and long-living successful camera for Canon (ie good profit). I think Canon realise if they create another successful, and perhaps 'noticably improved in some aspects' 7DmkII, they can get a lot of mileage out of it, that is: good profit again.
- Canon is smart and would be very conscious about brand loyalty, and if they remove a 'top of the line APS-C, while the competition offer good top of the line APS-C sized DSLRs, then some folk who don't want to (or can't afford) the jump to FF, may go to other brands.
- equivalent FF lenses are often significantly more expensive than APS-C (when I write 'equivalent' - I mainly mean in terms of 'effective' focal length. (I do realise there are many other aspects to be considered than focal length, but I don't want to write pages here on that!)
Well... feel free to comment on what I've written and determined from the interview!
Totally apart from DPReview's interview - I believe we'll see some high level APS-C cameras. There are serious Canon EF-S lenses (eg 15-85mm, 17-55mm, 10-22mm, 60mm macro, etc) and many EF lenses (eg 70-300mm L, 100mm macro, etc) that just work so well on APS-C too!
Cheers and regards. Wishing all a wonderful weekend... it's Friday evening here in Australia! YAY!!
I sure hope that they price the big MP camera is priced in line with the D800. At $8-10K, it may be worth my while to switch.
I kind of doubt that because that is the 5D MIII price range, if they did then they would have to dumb down the features in order to not have the two compete with each other which I don't see Canon doing. I wouldn't be surprised to see it possibly fall between the 5D MIII and the 1DX with the large MP but the specs of the 5D MIII.
Cameras are obsoleted in 3-5 years, often sooner. Having a 3K body with fixed lens that will be obsolete in 5 years or less seems like overkill. I'd prefer to buy a good lens that will last for 20 or more years, and a cheap body that can be sold in 4 or 5 years. With Sony's record of poor product support, they will likely walk away from it in three years.Mt Spokane: That's what drove me away from Sony some 7 years ago. Started digital photography with a humble DSC-P 30 3.2 MP cam. Moved on to the DSC-F 828. While other Sony's came out they all of a sudden changed their memory cards. So no way to rely on a system here. The R1 was announced as the new big thing and soon forgotten. When I dropped the F 828 I switched to Canon. Nice lenses. Slightly cheaper bodies back in the day (2007 - 30D purchase). So here I am with a 5Diii since past summer and I don't regret it.
I think this is a very limited product, aimed at those with money to burn.
It would be nice to have an update on the 50mm f/1.4 - at least I am curious about it.
AF on Jupiter, seriously?
It's easily visible as the brightest "star" in the sky. AF easily using live view
yes, it is. Even without LV.
Boys AF on Mars to get more candy bars.
Girls AF on Jupiter to get more...
hate to say it, but maybe the 14-24 will be a F/4 instead of 2.8.I'm guessing a high quality f/4 version would be more attractive generally. Lower price, smaller size & weight. The ultra-wide range of 14-24 is very cool, but how many of us really need it to be f/2.8 and want to pay extra for it to be f/2.8 and want to carry the a big bulbous design that f/2.8 requires? I'm sure some people want it to be f/2.8, but I'm guessing many would be as happy or even much happier with with an f/4 version.
I would be happier with the price and range, but 2.8 helps a bit in nightscapes. For daytime shots, not so much; after all general rule for it, places the apt in the f5.6-f11 range.
With that in mind, what about a 1.4 or 1.8 UWA prime? a 16mm focal would be fine with me
I too think it is a fake picture. But I am not sure since I am no expert.
I do love to see an updated Canon 50mm version (presumable it is f/1.4) and love to see the comparison with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4