Show Posts
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.
There is too much information that contradicts. Canon has done a bang up job of plugging some leaks. I have posted bits of information about it already.
This is going to be a pretty boring camera for the "photographer" I think.
As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice.
So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.
Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.
If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.
Apologies. I am not aware of specs regarding Nikon cameras. If they have weather sealed a plastic body, then I would certainly hope that Canon follows suite. It's not that I'm a Canon fanboy for not following Nikon cameras; but just that I have no place in my budget to even begin considering to purchase a Nikon camera, build a lens collection, and incorporate it into my shooting.
The rumored specs have me a bit confused...
For $2000 you get:
22mp 5D3 sensor?
19 point AF - Ok, this sounds reasonable.
4fps - Makes sense.
ISO 100-51200 - Taking into consideration that this camera will have a 5D3 sensor; wouldn't this mean that ISO performance at ISO 51200 would be the same as 5D3? Canon just eliminated ISO 102400... but 102400 is unusable anyway... Logic tells me that this new entry level FF camera will not perform the same as a 5D3... but then that would mean that Canon just de-tuned the heck out of the 5D3 sensor and it's capabilities... Lose money lol
3"LCD - Ok
Smaller than 5D Mark II - If it's smaller, than does this mean that there is no quick reference display on the top of the body? Or does this simply mean that it may be "slightly" smaller than a 5D2? Maybe the size of a 60D? In which case, it being the size of a 60D is pretty irrelevant information since it's not that much smaller than a 5D2...
More plastic than metal in the construction - So this camera will be packed with what sounds like great performance features but will be built like a toy?
So yeah, they should make and launch a better sensor as soon as posible.
Does majority of users need those extra features ?
looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion.
No. Having an opinion and excessive complaining about the same thing are two different things. I also seem to recall him getting nasty with Brian for voicing HIS opinion.
I have no problem with people moving to Nikon. However I do think that the constant putting down of Canon to justify moving to Nikon with so called 'facts' to justify their move is not appropriate on a Canon Rumours forum. I dont logon to this forum to join in with speculation/rumours about Nikon kit.
This site is for users interested in Canon equipment, not for people to spread the word about how good Nikon a camera in comparison to Canon's camera - especially one that is only rumoured.
I think in this case the best option would have been to post this thread on a more general photographic forum
If I want to read about Nikon I go to Nikon Rumours. I dont come to Canon Rumours to listen to the Nikon Fanboys tell me what a poor job Canon are doing.
Well there are two trolls who have come out of the closet. Go back to NR lads
So you're happy to accept that the 5Dm3 is better for people who shoot video
...and for those who shoot weddings
...and those who shoot events
...and those who shoot sports
...and of course anyone who does any of the above and studio or landscape work
And if you can't wait for it then buy a D800 or go MF both will do what you do better than a 5Dm3.
The 5dm3 isn't any worse, and it adds a lot in other areas. If those other areas don't interest you then fine, just accept that it isn't the right tool for you and get on with your life.
but we are individuals here, with individual needs
I'm a bit suprised at those saying the 5D MK III sensor is the same as the 5D MK II sensor, when anyone who owns one and pushes the ISO up can see a dramatic difference.
Sure, if you shoot in a studio with good lighting at ISO 100, there is no need for capability you do not use, but that does not mean the sensors are the same. I took dark frames from my 5D MK III when I got it and compared them to my 5D MK II, 1D MK IV, and they were worlds better. A nice smooth dark frame that was not covered with red dots and banding. At +3 EV, the MK III was black while the MK II and 1D MK IV looked horrible.
Its a big advance in sensor technology, with all new on chip electronics, 8 channel readout. Sure, its the same basic technology as the MK II, the D800, and every CMOS digital sensor ever made, So far, they all use silicon.
Umm.... I would be really suprised when one would choose Canon New Entry Level over Nikon D600 (as if reported specs of both cameras are correct) even if at the same price. There is one exception is that that person has too many Canon lens (ooopsss).
As to the sensor, you only need take a dark frame from each and boost it 3 EV in processing to see the difference.