Book about 5D mark III

[boon]

Hi there,

First of all, sorry for my poor english... I'm french!

I notice this morning the announce of the release of this book (date of issue : March 9th, 2012) here :
http://www.amazon.fr/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/dp/2744094382
Only in "french" Amazon (absent on .com, .it, .es...)
And there:
http://livre.fnac.com/a3762818/P-Garcia-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III

Hey, is this a clue

--

[pravkp]

i'll buy a champagne along with it. this is as surreal as it can get!

wait.. what if this is true?

[unfocused]

Release date on the second link is 9/3/12.  Depending on whether they are using the European or American convention, it could be either March 9 or Sept. 3. I'm guessing Sept. 3.

This doesn't mean the publisher has any inside information. Release dates can be changed.

[neuroanatomist]

I'd take this with a grain of salt.  Here's what happened - Pearson (the publisher of Philippe Garcia's other EOS guides) is happy with the sales of his other books, so they contracted with the author to write a book on the 5DIII.  It got entered into the feed that the publisher provides to distributors, with a default date of 4 months from the time the book was added to the list.  No one in that realm has inside knowledge of an unannounced Canon product.

Release date on the second link is 9/3/12.  Depending on whether they are using the European or American convention, it could be either March 9 or Sept. 3. I'm guessing Sept. 3.

No, it means March 9.  The top section from the second link states, 9 mars 2012 (the 09/03/2012 date is in the lower section).  But as above, this isn't inside information, it's pretty standard for the publishing business, at least, I've seen it several times for their textbooks (Pearson is a major academic publisher). 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Some writers do get advance information, but if they leak anything, they are cut off forever, so they are very careful.

Its likely a publisher error, and they will get a stern letter from Canon in short order.

The time frame seems right for a early 2012 release of the camera, thats what many now expect.

[Isaac]

I'd take that date (9th March) with a pinch of salt.

[neuroanatomist]

I'd take that date (9th March) with a pinch of salt.

Use big fingers....   

[iaind]

I'd take this with a grain of salt.  Here's what happened - Pearson (the publisher of Philippe Garcia's other EOS guides) is happy with the sales of his other books, so they contracted with the author to write a book on the 5DIII.  It got entered into the feed that the publisher provides to distributors, with a default date of 4 months from the time the book was added to the list.  No one in that realm has inside knowledge of an unannounced Canon product.

Release date on the second link is 9/3/12.  Depending on whether they are using the European or American convention, it could be either March 9 or Sept. 3. I'm guessing Sept. 3.

No, it means March 9.  The top section from the second link states, 9 mars 2012 (the 09/03/2012 date is in the lower section).  But as above, this isn't inside information, it's pretty standard for the publishing business, at least, I've seen it several times for their textbooks (Pearson is a major academic publisher).

I agree with neuro it must be a publisher error. Books are not normally released until product has hit the shelves. If not the Christmas bestseller will be be the Magic Lantern guide to the 1DX

[dilbert]

Well it gives new perspective to the price drops in the 5D Mark II.

But what about a replacement for the 24-105/f4.0?

[Tokswang]

Do you think they'll push the envelope further regarding Mp or ISO?

[dilbert]

Do you think they'll push the envelope further regarding Mp or ISO?

It is more important that they fix the known glaring issues (banding, focus) than push MP/ISO.

DR is more important than either MP or ISO.

[boon]

Well, it seems that the little Frenchie was right...

Alors, pour la petite histoire, j'avais pris la peine de pousser plus loin mes investigations, en remontant la trace de l'auteur - qui est lui-même photographe - et de l'éditeur. J'avais donc bien plus que des indices, suite aux courriels envoyés, qu'il s'agissait bien d'un leak.
Mais, bon, vu l'accueil plutôt froid à mon premier post, je n'ai pas jugé nécessaire d'y revenir... pourtant, j'avais été poli, je m'étais même excusé pour mon anglais approximatif.
Voilà, ce n'est pas un troll du vendredi, et j'accepte par avance mon bannissement !