December 08, 2016, 07:34:31 PM

Author Topic: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]  (Read 71795 times)

dtaylor

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 842
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #120 on: November 30, 2011, 06:55:32 PM »
Quote
Did you even read the entire post?

yeah yeah your workarounds are nice. :)

They're not just nice, they work. If I could buy a 36 MP DSLR and a T/S lens and consistently produce larger, more detailed prints then I can now for less then I would have to spend on a MF body alone, why wouldn't I?

And again I will point out that diffraction does not hit any format more than any other, and I don't often jump through special hoops to get the full 18 MP out of APS-C. That means I could be getting 45 MP out of FF if it was available.

f/11 should work actually.

that would be a near limit of 1.62m if my tables are correct.[/quote]

DoF calculator shows f/11 would just work with a focus distance of 5.7 ft. In the field it's not always possible to be so precise so you would probably be at f/13 for that example. But it is an extreme example.

Quote
what i think is that the "leaves counter" are to enthusiastic when it comes to more MP.
it´s not as if you get the 36MP for free.

I'm not counting leaves. I want larger prints and I'm on a budget.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #120 on: November 30, 2011, 06:55:32 PM »

UncleFester

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #121 on: November 30, 2011, 07:53:26 PM »
Yeah, that's touching and all, but we still won the war. ;)


tu non hai capito un sola parola.....idiot.. giusto?

Name callin' now, eh? Tsk tsk.

Not a word of it, to answer your question. Let me guess...23, 24ish?

dealaddict

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #122 on: November 30, 2011, 08:09:07 PM »
Although I like it to be 18MP, I find it hard to believe.  In fact, i don't think Canon will "go backwards" to put a sensor with less resolution than today.  I think at the minimum, they will keep it the same.  Unless they want to reduce the resolution to increase the burst rate, which also unlikely IMO.  I think the weakest link of the 5D2 compared to Nikon D700 is the AF.  If Canon can keep resolution the same, improve the high ISO noise further, and improve the AF, then it is good for me. 

samueljay

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
  • 5D Mk III
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #123 on: November 30, 2011, 08:27:25 PM »
I still don't understand the people who are saying that putting Auto Focus into movie mode will make it's way into Hollywood, and make the role of a focus puller redundant. In films you need to have someone pulling focus because the focal point often changes within the one shot, how can auto focus know when to pull from person A to person B when it's their turn to be in focus? Unless it all becomes electronic and you can pull focus without actually turning the focus ring, you would still need someone to select the focal point, which wouldn't get rid of a focus puller, just change the way they do things.
Gear: 5D Mk III <> 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L IS II USM <> 50mm ƒ/1.2L USM <> 8-15mm ƒ/4L  USM <>  100mm ƒ/2.8L  Macro IS USM <> 40mm ƒ/2.8 <> 24-70mm ƒ/2.8L II USM

gene_can_sing

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #124 on: November 30, 2011, 09:22:04 PM »
There's no substitue for a good manual focus pull, especially in Cinema. It would be hard for a computer to replicate

With that said, Auto focus in video has it's place also. For example, I was doing this macro video shot of these little crabs running around. It was really had to manually focus because they were moving so fast. That's when autofocus might be a benefit.

AprilForever

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 749
    • AprilForever.com
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #125 on: November 30, 2011, 09:46:01 PM »
I usually shoot my 7D around f1.4-5.6. If shooting landscape, I may shoot 8-11. But that is it. I really don't need to shoot super high f-stops unless I want to (waterfalls at day time with a polarizer...)

The point very simply is, that I really do need cropping power, and the more the merrier. 24-28mp would be the jam! Those who don't want that big a file can shoot mRaw! And those who want smaller mp count do have a D300s available... ;D
What is truth?

AprilForever

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 749
    • AprilForever.com
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #126 on: December 01, 2011, 12:49:57 AM »
If I were a photojournalist, I would be interested in the 1Dx. If I were a wedding phorographer, I would be interested in the 1Dx. Since I am a wildlife and nature guy with a cheap bent and a love for hand-holding, I love my 7D and its crop sensor. I hope that the megapixels grow evermore and ever more. I would lose My 300 2.8 would be much shorter on a 1Dx...
What is truth?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #126 on: December 01, 2011, 12:49:57 AM »

moreorless

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 753
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #127 on: December 01, 2011, 01:59:58 AM »
I'm skeptical of an 18 mpix sensor for 5D3.  Why would Canon put its new flagship 1Dx sensor in a lower class body right away?  Doesn't make sense to me.  I'm still thinking 36 Mpix.  Canon will respond to Nikon in this regard.

The 1DX is in rather a different situation to the 1Ds mk3/5D mk2 though, the flagship body this time is being marketed more to a sports/jurno/wildlife crowd with both FPS and AF being big selling points aswell as the sensor

A 5D mk3 with 18 megapixels, and maybe marginal improvements in AF and FPS sold relatively cheaply wouldnt really be much of an alternative to the 1DX for those users. I could see it being very sucessful at the lower end of the market aswell since combined with a 24-105 it would provide a very versatile system without the need for large appatures.

I do have trouble believing that Canon will just give up on megapixels though given that they've released a number of lenses clearly geared to the studio/landscape market(and indeed to coping with the effects of difftraction) in recent years such as the new versions of the 14mm and the TSE's. The problem I'd say might be that trying to please former 1Ds users and FF newbies with a single body is simpley not possible. If Canon were to fudge it then they could end up with a camera too expensive to appeal to the lower end of the market and not high spec enough for the higher end.

The 1DX to me seemed like less an effort to merge the 1D userbase and more an effort to merge the sports, jurno,wildlife userbase onto one body(and get them all buying more expensive lenses). I could see Canon doing the same thing with the landscape/studio market aswell, ditch the dual grip and high end AF from the 1Ds that most of those users don't need and give them a 5D sized body with 1D build, a 100% viewfinder and high megapixel count that they do at a cheaper price, but still one significantly more than tradisional 5D levels.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2011, 02:04:38 AM by moreorless »

Gcon

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #128 on: December 01, 2011, 02:41:25 AM »
I wouldn't be surprised if the 5DIII is just a incremental bump in AF, weather sealing and a "downgrade" to the 18MP sensor to save costs rather than developing a whole new sensor.

The only fly in the ointment with this theory is the purported 36MP in the Nikon D800.  Really though is video that big a market that they need dedicated video cameras and bang on about video in the stills cameras? As a stills-only landscape shooter I'm not feeling the love from Canon - seriously thinking of going the Nikon way with a D800 if they don't look after me.


AprilForever

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 749
    • AprilForever.com
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #129 on: December 01, 2011, 02:48:29 AM »
I wouldn't be surprised if the 5DIII is just a incremental bump in AF, weather sealing and a "downgrade" to the 18MP sensor to save costs rather than developing a whole new sensor.

The only fly in the ointment with this theory is the purported 36MP in the Nikon D800.  Really though is video that big a market that they need dedicated video cameras and bang on about video in the stills cameras? As a stills-only landscape shooter I'm not feeling the love from Canon - seriously thinking of going the Nikon way with a D800 if they don't look after me.

What is hilarious is that Nikon was the low MP one (D700 only 12MP!!! D300s only 12MP!!!). Now Canon wants to jump on the bandwagon Nikon is leaving!?!?!

Technology advances. And will continue to advance. And hopefully, the pixel count will decide to advance in the next offings instead of fail backwards. A 5d mkII is interesting to me. An 18 MP 5D would be boring and useless to me. And a less than 18 MP 7D anathema!

So, anyway, it will be interesting to see where this will go... But, seriously, I can totally see a whole lot of people jumping to the darkside if the 5D3 has only 18MP...
What is truth?

Jettatore

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #130 on: December 01, 2011, 03:02:35 AM »
What I find clear from this conversation is that two 5D sized cameras are needed.  And not because they are actually needed IMO, but because that's what people seem to be demanding.

One group wants 36mp FF images, and are saying they care about that more than bleeding edge ISO performance, which became possible by keeping the pixel size larger which requires lower mp total.  This same group doesn't seem to care about video features either.  Makes perfect sense then to just give them what they want...  Maybe this can be done cheaper, perhaps not.  I suspect there is very little if any actual cost savings here but perhaps there is a way.

Smaller form factor 5D sized body with ISO improvements and improved generation 2 video, in FF, and you have the other group covered nicely and I suspect this is also what all the 'new' customers that gathered to the 5D out of no-where during the video boom and others as well have come to expect out of a next-gen replacement.

Between the two, I'll take the second one.  I don't care if it comes out in early 2012 or not for another year, that bit really doesn't make or break anything for me.

Problem solved, close the conversation.  lol.

UncleFester

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #131 on: December 01, 2011, 03:13:10 AM »
Not everybody shoots the same. Some could use more data, others find they could use better iso performance.

I, for one, don't see an iso problem with the current model. It's an incredible performing cam, even w/o lights, and even better with.

However, the way I shoot, more megapixels really frees up my creativity in pp. I'm now used to it and more will take me a step further. Providing IQ follows. 


torger

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #132 on: December 01, 2011, 03:46:16 AM »
What I find clear from this conversation is that two 5D sized cameras are needed.

I agree. Or they could make a "1DXs", a high res version of 1DX, and make 5Dmk3 more consumer-like, smaller body etc. I don't think they can in the long term ignore the professionals that seek a 135 system that can fulfill their medium format needs, if Nikon will provide. There are 1DsIII users (studio, landscape ,architecture) out there wondering if Canon are abandoning their market just because their share is smaller. There is a value in being a complete provider of camera equipment, that is having a product for all segments and uses, rather than just the best selling categories (I guess then they would only do compacts...).

For me personally (I'm an amateur) I'd like to see a high res camera a bit higher end than current 5Dmk2 (which I find a bit toyishly built, I like the 7D build more), but less than 1DX to not make it too expensive. Say a price around $3500 - $4000, the extra dollars would pay for build quality and ergonomics.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #132 on: December 01, 2011, 03:46:16 AM »

dr croubie

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1382
  • Too many photos, too little time.
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #133 on: December 01, 2011, 03:49:42 AM »
One group wants 36mp FF images, and are saying they care about that more than bleeding edge ISO performance... This same group doesn't seem to care about video features either.

Smaller form factor 5D sized body with ISO improvements and improved generation 2 video, in FF, and you have the other group covered nicely and I suspect this is also what all the 'new' customers that gathered to the 5D out of no-where during the video boom and others as well have come to expect out of a next-gen replacement.

So which will be called the 5D3, and which the 2/3/4D? (i'd say 5D3 should be the high-iso see in the dark, 3D should be the Megapixel monster). And which will be priced as what? (More importantly, what happens if the 36MP shrinks to a better-looking file than the 18MP at the same ISO?)

Speaking of which, has anyone shrunk a 24MP D3X photo to the same size as a 12MP D3s and made any comparisons?
« Last Edit: December 01, 2011, 03:51:32 AM by dr croubie »
Too much gear, too little space.
Gear Photos

torger

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #134 on: December 01, 2011, 04:07:26 AM »
Speaking of which, has anyone shrunk a 24MP D3X photo to the same size as a 12MP D3s and made any comparisons?

You can look at dxomark and select "print" in comparison mode to get that type of comparison. D3x is then better at base ISO, and about 2/3 stop worse at high ISO. The real use of high ISO performance is however generally not slightly less noise in the range ISO200-ISO3200, but that you can get useful pictures at and above ISO6400. D3s can produce decent pictures at ISO25600, which is valuable for photojournalism etc.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« Reply #134 on: December 01, 2011, 04:07:26 AM »