24-70 F2.8 IS or 14-24 F2.8 would make my day
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 very believable rumor, Sony has been outinnovating them for a while now and if it's costing them sales they surely aren't going to take it lying down. Digic V with better video is almost certain (I hope they get rid of the moire and increase detail before they try and get any bright ideas about 1080/60p; given the 1Dx's specs I'd say that's probably reasonable to assume). It would be nice to see built-in HDR but Canon seems hell-bent on making you do it by hand (which is sooo five years ago).
You forgot to factor in what Nikon does as well.
The D700 already has a 51 point system which is IMO better than everything currently available on the market besides the 1DX
Not really. As I've stated before, the real competition between the two companies plays out on the battlefield of P&S cameras and entry-level dSLRs. By the time comsumers are considering a high-end or pro body, most are invested in a system and inertia means they won't switch (empty threats on internet forums notwithstanding).
Why is the D700's AF better? It's got 51 points, but if that's the basis, then more MP automatically make a camera better, too. Physics and geometry tell us that the wider the baseline for a triangulation measurement, the more accurate the measurment. AFAIK, all Nikon AF systems use f/5.6-sensitive line sensors. Canon systems have up to f/2.8-sensitive line sensors, which are more accurate than f/5.6-sensitive points. Just one more thing to consider...
There is no chance we will see a new 5D for at least a year. It just doesn't make any sense to release it anywhere close to the 1X. Not to mention, the traditional difference in release has been 5D a year after 1Ds ii, and 5D mkii a year after 1Ds iii.
Yeah it does if you actually look at who would potentially buy a 5D MkIII v a 1D X ... its all in who they are marketed too and what is on offer within the bodies.
Canon will not look to butcher their line up by making similar bodies ... there will be significant differences that will be enough for anyone even considering a FF to disseminate between the two (and any other FF they may bring to market).
In many ways, the 5DII 'butchered' the 1DsIII sales, and many 1Ds customers got a 5DII instead for the video and other reasons. I agree that Canon will want to avoid that in the future.
The thing is, as the saying goes, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Canon does have to differentiate the 1D X from the 5DIII, and there are a couple of ways to do that. One is time - the 5DIII comes out a year, or more (!) after the 1D X. The other is features, and especially if the 5DIII is going to have more MP, count on it being substantially crippled in other ways - most likely frame rate and the AF system. From a marketing standpoint, the two ways are probably on a continuum, i.e. the closer in time that the 5DIII comes compared to the 1D X, the more crippled is has to be.
So...people waiting for a 5DIII - do you want it announced on November 3rd, if it has 26 MP, 4 fps and the exact same AF as the 5DII? Do you want it announced in March when the 1D X comes out, if it has 30 MP, 4.2 fps, and the 9 cross-type points of the xxD line? Or do you want to wait for a late 2012 announcement with 2013 availability, if it has 36 MP, 4.5 fps, and 15 cross-type points?
Shooting action at f8? No thanks.
I shoot VERY high speed action (200+mph model aircraft) at f/9 all the time. It's a perfectly practical thing to do in direct sunlight.
This R/C plane was going over 200mph, and this was shot at f/9, ISO 400 and 1/2000th.
that's 70-200 + 1.4 tc and 20D
Actually, that's 70-200/2.8L IS + two 1.4x TCs (one of them isn't visible to the lens and therefore doesn't end up in the EXIF data).
This makes so little sense that I feel compelled to not even enumerate why.
1Ds4 vs D4 should be interesting.... 24-70 II is long overdue.
why is a second addition lens long overdue? I remember there use to be a time when people would buy a lens and never dream on needing an "updated" version. Don't you think this might just be consumerism and something that really is not needed. The only reason why I am on the bandwagon on waiting for an "updated" camera is because current dSLRs still lack the quality of film. They are getting close and on that day it is comparable, I think I will just have to run that camera into the ground.
I guess my point of what I am saying is I have known quite a few successful photographers who just shoot with one lens or just one old S___ty camera and still produce great results or have a incredible style. I guess I am just having a tough time understanding the importance an extra little gidget or gadget will make over the long run ;o)
Rumor is bullS___. If FF is 32 MP, then APS-C crop is 32 / 1,6 / 1,6 = 12,5 MP.
Now ... Imagine the guys with a FF Nikon D3S in crop mode. They get about 5.5 mp. Yet, we see people clamoring for this feature who can't do the math.
I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.
I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view.
I am starting out in sports photography, and at the moment I am doing very well in rugby with just a 500D. I am doing this for fun not for money, but still my aim is to get the best results even though I am competing against 1D and D3s pro users. I manage to do so by dedicating more time, both in the pitch and outside.
This means that the 3.4 fps and 'slow AF' of my camera can still deliver good results. But I think that for rugby, and other similar sports, better FPS and AF will improve the odds of getting a better picture. In F1, you might need to get a shot of the car in a particular spot, and timing might be more important than FPS, but unexpected expressions of faces and body positions in rugby will definitely benefit from more FPS. I can't time up to take a singe shot of a player punching an opponent
If we consider an older rumor of a 4.9fps for the 5DIII, this will give about 25% improvement from the current 5DII 3.9 FPS and I will have 25% more photos to choice from for any particular action. 4.9 FPS might not sound alot, but the 25% extra photos, is a good improvement, and I will just say thanks and won't whine since I know this camera it's not a 1D, but I won't be happy with a 4.2 fps !!!
My only hope, is the pressure Sony is doing on Canon, with their cheap entry level cameras with 7 and 10 fps. I hope that when the A77 is released, it will be a big success, resulting in Canon big heads getting scared from Sony's A850/A900 replacement and release a 5DIII with better specs.
5D series is not designed for sports or speed. Get a 7D - Much better for your needs. Cropped sensor for more distance, better autofocus for tracking moving subjects and 8fps. 18mp on a cropped sensor crops well too for post process cropping.
5D is a portrait/landscape/wedding camera. It should excel at what it is meant for - not please everyone.