5D Mark II Replacement

[L-Fletcher]

PS- I wish they would sell a more expensive 7d and 5d2 with the 5 minute video thing removed. Crazies. I know its to protect their video line. But I don't want to carry extra stuff and having both in one makes sense even if it costs more.

As I corrected myself and mentioned above: there's no 5 minute limit. It's 12 minutes at 1080p and 24~ mins at 4:3 640x480.

5 minutes is the Nikon D90's limit.

[Etienne]

I don't have many wishes for the 5DIII:

Better auto-focus
Better high ISO: too much banding in 5DII, noise could be more grain-like
Improved video features: better AF, dedicated buttons, less moire/jello, how about rack auto-focussing (that would be awesome, and could be done with firmware in 5DII)

MP is fine,
build quality is ok

[Edwin Herdman]

The comparison is very simple.

Informative, but still nothing touching my major point.  I was wrong to suggest that Nikon hasn't been consistent with specifications on its SLRs, like the AF point counts which have been remarkably stable regardless of the year or price (you'd think they could make it better as time goes on...but Canon has to catch up first, right?).  On the Canon side my point is that AF module "downgrading" is only relative to other cameras in the contemporary lineup.  By the time a 5D Mark III comes out, the 7D will be a year old.  The 5D Mark II's autofocus sensor is similar enough to the original 5D's, and it's simply time for a change.  The 5D line is apart from the "prosumer" or advanced amateur etc. lines, and it's separate from the 1D / 1Ds / 1.3x crop lines as well.

It certainly can use autofocus at least as good as the 7D, but in truth it needs to be considerably better than that.  The 5D Mark III (or whatever occupies the line) really needs continuous autofocus in movie mode, for example, given the camera's use for filmmaking, which try as they might Canon can't sway users to the more expensive 1.3x crop cameras for.  Unless Canon is hoping to aim people towards a new line entirely, or a different kind of product (like camcorders), they will simply lose a lot of friends if the AF system stays stagnant.

For what it's worth, the 7D's 19 cross-type sensors ought to beat (at least for photographs) the more impressive-sounding 51 point AF sensor-equipped cameras, when those like the D700 and D300S have 15 cross type.  By the "Nikon only builds two tiers" theory, the D7000 is placed at the very top of the low end, with just 9 cross-type sensors, 39 overall.  Not a bad argument given its price.

On the lower-tier cameras Nikon hasn't been shy about holding down costs - and cutting features:  The Multi-CAM1000 AF sensor in the D3100, released almost at the same time as the D7000, has just 11 points, none of them cross-type.  Even my poor old T1i has a cross-type sensor.

[Flake]

There's a lot more to autofocus than the number of cross points, I'm afraid there are plenty of people who believe that the 5D MkII & the original one have a better AF system than the xxD cameras.

There's no way Canon would cheapen the 5D brand by using a plastic body.  Everything in there is packed pretty tight. and if you believe Canons excuse then there's not even enough room for a larger autofocus sensor.  The probable reason the 5D MkII didn't get a better AF is because all its engineers were trying yo sort the 1D AF debacle.

Many Pros moved to Nikon for sports purely because of the 1D AF issues, not because of the sensor, and not because of superior image quality.  As for magazine covers being shot on various cameras well if they're that good might as well junk the Hasselblad, the D3x and the 1Ds, because they're all pretty pointless.  Why spend upwards of £25K on a system when you can do it for £500?  But why stop there?  Magazine covers have been shot on a G10 !


If the only people buying camera equipment were pro's then the camera companies would have gone out of business years ago.  Of course the majority of cameras sold, and the majority of a camera companies income is from the entry models, and most are first time buyers who are hugely influenced by reviewers.  Just to give an example What Digital  Camera rated the Nikon 70 - 200mm f/2.8 VR II as a better lens than Canons IS MkII purely on the grounds of the cost of the two lenses at the time of the review the Nion's price was quoted at £1630 and the Canon which had been very recently released as £2200.  The street price for the Nikon is now £1600 and the Canon at £1670.  No explanation or caveat as to the Canon's seeming £500 extra cost was given and the whole review was predicated on this price.  Proof that reviewers can be strongly biased to one brand over another. 

Every other properly condicted objective review has the Canon as a slightly better performer than the Nikon, have a look at Dpreview.

[oalali]

Here is my wish list:

a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.
dual digic IV (or V).
5-7 frames per second
Canon 1ds autofocus system . (to set it apart from the current 1d bodies)
same form factor and weather sealing as the current model.

 

[Waleed Essam]

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

[Flake]

Here is my wish list:

a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.
dual digic IV (or V).
5-7 frames per second
Canon 1ds autofocus system . (to set it apart from the current 1d bodies)
same form factor and weather sealing as the current model.

 

Why don't you just buy a 1Ds MkIII then?

[Mark D5 TEAM II]

And here's the winning and most-likely 5D3 spec, hats off to you sir  :

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

[Flake]

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

It is much more difficult than you realise!  The sensor is so significantly larger that the casre has to be completely redesigned to accommodate the shutter & mirror mechanism, then there's the pentaprism which is also significantly larger.  Plus another issue which doesn't seem to get much discussion and that is the flatness & alignment of the FF sensor & the 5D MkII has had more than a few issues with miss aligned sensors.  Because thes FF unit is so much larger it suffers dissproportionately from miss alignment in both the vertical & more in the horizontal axis, but it also suffers from warping & rippling, caused by the heating & cooling of the silicon wafers in the manufacturing process.  One company has calimed that it can produce sensors which are perfectly aligned (can't remember who though!)

ISO 12800 is not a real Iso, it is a sofware one where the camera uses Iso 6400 increases the shitter speed and then drags the exposure back by software.  High Iso performance is desireable in a digital camera, because dynamic range is the difference between clipping & the noise floor, hence there is a higher dynamic range on a High Iso performing camera.

So no chance of putting it into a 7D body, it's not much larger anyway!

[Jarveye]

anyone care to estimate a date when we will know the real spec? either by announcement or a likely time when canon wont be able to prevent a leak of info?

[traveller]

Canon is caught in a trap of its own making, as much as Nikon's. 

They can't produce a D700-like camera because they have no fast pro-level full frame model and are (rightly) worried that a lot of pros would choose such a camera over the 1D Mk4.  Similarly, the AF system in the 7D is of lower spec than the 1D series because they are afraid that an 8fps, 18MP APS-C model would be too good an alternative to a 16MP APS-H 1D Mk4 for many users considering purchasing the latter.  Had the 1D Mk4 been planned to be full frame, I believe that the 7D would probably have shared its AF system and the 60D would have got some sort of 19pt system (maybe not all cross type).   

So now, Canon have some tough choices for the next generation and what they decide for the high end models will impact upon the lower end cameras.  Should they continue to push APS-H in the 1D line, or go full frame? This isn't an easy decision for them to make; many people seem to like the 1.3 crop as a good compramise that gives them more reach with lighter lenses.  But the D3s has shown people what a lower-resolution full frame sensor is capable of and I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).  If the next 1D goes full frame, it will free up the cameras below it to be better, without stealing its market. 

[unfocused]

I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).

Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor?  If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.

[x-vision]

Canon is caught in a trap of its own making, as much as Nikon's. 

Agree 100% with your analysis.
It’s interesting what Canon will decide about the 1.3x format.

No matter how many megapixels a 1.3x camera has, it is bound to remain a specialized sports camera - good if you have a big white lens bolted on it, not so good otherwise.
At the same time, if Nikon’s D4 has 20+ megapixels, it will be an excellent general purpose pro camera, not just a sports camera.
If Canon continues with the 1.3x format, they will be competing with a specialized pro camera vs a general purpose pro camera.
The specialized camera seems to be at a disadvantage here.

So, it does make sense for Canon to move the 1D series to FF.
The thing is, this already made sense back in 2007 and yet Canon did not do it when the 1DIII was released.

But if Canon does decide to move the 1D series to FF, some very interesting opportunities will open up for the 5DIII and the 7DII.

[x-vision]

I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).

Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor?  If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.

Agree.
At the same time, a 1.3x camera will always be a specialized camera, no matter how many megapixels is has.

[traveller]

I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).

Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor?  If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Difficult subject. 

Be careful when using the calculator on this page as (just like his excellent hyperfocal distance calculator) the assumptions you make about print size, viewing distance and eyesight make a huge difference. 

I would assume quite a large print size (why the heck else would you want a 120 MP camera?), better than manufacturers' standard eysight assumption (unless you wear glasses and regularly view prints without them on).  Viewing distance is up to you:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/megapixel_myth/index.html

Versus:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/megapixel_myth/index.html

Have fun!