« on: December 11, 2011, 05:24:35 PM »
If this rumour did turn out to be true, it'd make you wonder if Canon and Nikon had signed a cooperation agreement. Apparently, quite a lot of that goes on in Japan anyway...
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.
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
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 â€œproâ€ landscape photographer would be using medium or large format:
either 4â€ x 5â€ or 8â€ x 10â€ film (which is very affordable compared to digital a system),
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
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.
Do you think Ansel Adams would use a digital camera for landscapes?
Interesting that they've decided to make the body out of Lego...
5 Smites?! Guys, that was humour. Take a closer look at their photo:
Man, tough crowd...
mine gets left all over!! half seems to be on my desk right now... maybe i should have a better system for storage!
I will admit that it's possible that the 5DIII will use the 7D-type AF, but you seem to be suggesting they'll re-use the actual AF sensor from the 7D, without compensating for the larger frame. If they compensate for the larger frame, it means developing a new sensor. If they don't, it means the 5DIII would have more AF points, and better ones, but the area coverage would be even less than that of the 5DII, as you can see in the attached image (5DII in blue, 7D in black). Canon has expressed a willingness to take things away from new models, as discussed above with f/8 issue. But the AF area coverage of the 5DII was already not a strong point. When they released the 5DII, they touted the fact that the horizontal point spread was the same as the 1DsIII, conveniently ignoring the fact that the vertical spread was a full row shorter. The 7D's AF sensor on the 5DII would mean the loss of a horizontal row, as well.
Heck, even 5DIII's sales would suffer because of it's increased price (highly advanced AF would obviously cost more). Why would Canon take such a risk?
If so then we could expect the next D4 to be low in MP like the 1DX and maybe also expect a new body from Nikon between the D4 and the D800 with smaller MP (like a D4) and a smaller form factor compared to the D4 right?
The D300s replacement (D400?) would fit perfectly in that spot, in the 18-24MP range, to compete with 7DII
I also expect D4 to be quite close to 1DX, in almost all areas.If this is true, then Nikon are being very strange as well... This D800 will more or less kill off the D3x.
andThe D4, which will presumably be presumably lower resolution to get better high ISO & frame rates for action shooters, is due for release first (Olympic year)? So maybe it's both Canon and Nikon that see no future for a large body, high resolution camera? Roll on the 5D MkIII at 30 0MP+!
It will kill the D3x but not the D4, no, they will be in different leagues.