December 03, 2016, 11:02:50 PM

Author Topic: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]  (Read 67342 times)

SDsc0rch

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #135 on: January 29, 2012, 03:27:04 PM »
hahahaha! yep!

now that i've read around (this isn't the only thread on this topic) i've seen other ppl have also made that observation

i registered to this site just to post that!lol

i just got a 7D and i'm really liking it - and with the 5d3 release possibly around the corner.. its just kindof an exciting time :)

good looking camera, whatever this thing is - maybe "someday" i'll be able to afford it!!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #135 on: January 29, 2012, 03:27:04 PM »

Canon-F1

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #136 on: January 29, 2012, 03:33:27 PM »
Well done, indeed.  You two are about the 56th and 57th, respectively, to post about 'discovering' this on CR alone.

there are more intelligent people out there then you would think.....   ;)

well_dunno

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 356
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #137 on: January 29, 2012, 04:43:24 PM »
22MP is really horrifying news. I will not buy that. Compared to my mk2 I need higher dynamic range, better high ISO performance and higher resolution. I think 48 MP would have been a good choice. Perhaps I will have to consider to switch to D800 if it is really 36MP.
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

The specification also doesn't make sense. I don't see the market segment between 1DX and 7D. What we need is high resolution, high dynamic range, high ISO performance and no banding. Of couse also improved AF compared to mk2. High speed isn't important since that area is covered by 1DX and 7D. Anyway with 48MP (or 36MP) there would have been possible to make a crop mode with higher speed.

I believe better DR and ISO performance are preferred by many considering higher resolution generally deteriorates ISO performance (keeping the sensor size the same with higher resolution causing higher noise). Basicly "if we can have two, those should be the two" kind of statement IMO. Especially if bigger prints are not needed... Thus I do not see anything stupid about that...

Cheers!

waving_odd

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 152
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #138 on: January 29, 2012, 05:05:42 PM »
22MP is really horrifying news. I will not buy that. Compared to my mk2 I need higher dynamic range, better high ISO performance and higher resolution. I think 48 MP would have been a good choice. Perhaps I will have to consider to switch to D800 if it is really 36MP.
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

The specification also doesn't make sense. I don't see the market segment between 1DX and 7D. What we need is high resolution, high dynamic range, high ISO performance and no banding. Of couse also improved AF compared to mk2. High speed isn't important since that area is covered by 1DX and 7D. Anyway with 48MP (or 36MP) there would have been possible to make a crop mode with higher speed.

I believe better DR and ISO performance are preferred by many considering higher resolution generally deteriorates ISO performance (keeping the sensor size the same with higher resolution causing higher noise). Basicly "if we can have two, those should be the two" kind of statement IMO. Especially if bigger prints are not needed... Thus I do not see anything stupid about that...

Cheers!

Well-Dunno, it is well-said!   ;)
« Last Edit: January 29, 2012, 05:07:25 PM by waving_odd »

Axilrod

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1374
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #139 on: January 29, 2012, 05:20:02 PM »
22MP is really horrifying news. I will not buy that. Compared to my mk2 I need higher dynamic range, better high ISO performance and higher resolution. I think 48 MP would have been a good choice. Perhaps I will have to consider to switch to D800 if it is really 36MP.
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

The specification also doesn't make sense. I don't see the market segment between 1DX and 7D. What we need is high resolution, high dynamic range, high ISO performance and no banding. Of couse also improved AF compared to mk2. High speed isn't important since that area is covered by 1DX and 7D. Anyway with 48MP (or 36MP) there would have been possible to make a crop mode with higher speed.

So how horrified were you when the 1DX was only 18MP?
5DIII/5DII/Bunch of L's and ZE's, currently rearranging.

waving_odd

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 152
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #140 on: January 29, 2012, 05:38:48 PM »
I talking about a 22MP sensor vs a 48MP with the same dynamic range and high ISO performance

Do you mind reminding us which production or rumored FF model(s) that has/have both 22+ in MP resolution and high ISO performance?

Nikon D3x?  Its ISO 1600??

Nikon D800 and its rumored ISO 6400??

Kernuak

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1102
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #141 on: January 29, 2012, 05:43:10 PM »
22MP is really horrifying news. I will not buy that. Compared to my mk2 I need higher dynamic range, better high ISO performance and higher resolution. I think 48 MP would have been a good choice. Perhaps I will have to consider to switch to D800 if it is really 36MP.
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

The specification also doesn't make sense. I don't see the market segment between 1DX and 7D. What we need is high resolution, high dynamic range, high ISO performance and no banding. Of couse also improved AF compared to mk2. High speed isn't important since that area is covered by 1DX and 7D. Anyway with 48MP (or 36MP) there would have been possible to make a crop mode with higher speed.

So how horrified were you when the 1DX was only 18MP?

Very! But would not have bought it anyway because of cost.
Increased resolution results in increased noise. While technology has resulted in improvements with each sensor generation, there are limits. Most people are looking at full frame sensors for cleaner and sharper images. Another disadvantage of 48MP, would be the high pixel density (higher than the 7D). Higher pixel densities result in greater diffraction limitations, due to the effect of Airy Disks, which cause interference with small pixels, resulting in increased affects by diffraction, which softens the image at smaller apertures. Landscape photographers in particular use smaller apertures, so the diffraction limit starts affecting overall image quality, thus negating one of the important reasons for them going with a full frame sensor. Even medium format cameras, with their larger sensors are only around 40MP, so 46MP in a DSLR would be pusing the boundaries.
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #141 on: January 29, 2012, 05:43:10 PM »

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4547
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #142 on: January 29, 2012, 06:03:03 PM »
22MP is really horrifying news. I will not buy that. Compared to my mk2 I need higher dynamic range, better high ISO performance and higher resolution. I think 48 MP would have been a good choice. Perhaps I will have to consider to switch to D800 if it is really 36MP.
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

The specification also doesn't make sense. I don't see the market segment between 1DX and 7D. What we need is high resolution, high dynamic range, high ISO performance and no banding. Of couse also improved AF compared to mk2. High speed isn't important since that area is covered by 1DX and 7D. Anyway with 48MP (or 36MP) there would have been possible to make a crop mode with higher speed.
DITTO! and perhaps they can make a new 5-500mm f2 Lens as a kit all for $2000 :P
APS-H Fanboy

Wrathwilde

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
    • Anarchy Photography
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #143 on: January 29, 2012, 06:34:21 PM »
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

Donny you're out of your element!

Unless there is some tremendous new breakthrough that negates the laws of physics... you only get to pick two. 

If you want amazing DR and ISO performance then you have to sacrifice Resolution. 

If you want high ISO and Resolution then your DR is really going to suffer. 

If you want DR and Resolution then you're going to have to take a hit on ISO. 

Sure we would like all three, but until we can negate the laws of physics in regards to CMOS sensors, you only get to pick two priorities, or a compromising balance of all three, and that's exactly what the 1D X supposedly is, the sweet spot between all three.

I suggest you read up on how CMOS sensors actually work, there are actually physical limits to the photon collecting ability. But the gist is... the smaller the pixel, the less light it will take in, and consequently a lower ISO.

Sensor Technology - http://dpbestflow.org/camera/sensor 

Fundamentals of Image Sensor Technology - http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse567-11/ftp/imgsens/index.html


See for yourself that higher resolution can cause diffraction that actually lessens the image quality...
« Last Edit: January 29, 2012, 07:12:47 PM by Wrathwilde »

bigblue1ca

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 173
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #144 on: January 29, 2012, 06:53:23 PM »

You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.


Wow, talk about how not to make friends and influence people.

Kahuna

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #145 on: January 29, 2012, 08:16:42 PM »
I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

...but until we can negate the laws of physics in regards to CMOS sensors...

+1 Thank you Wrathwilde

BDD

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #146 on: January 29, 2012, 11:02:51 PM »

You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.


Wow, talk about how not to make friends and influence people.

OUCH!! Not cool thing to say to any one.

For me I want "high ISO + DR". I would be happy if the MP on the 5D3 is still 21MP. I thought the same way about the D3s when it was first introduced. It only has 12MP but does everything else I want (no I didn't buy it). Now we have the D4 and the 1D-X. 2 great sports/photo-journalism shooters. Which comes out ahead in practice...we'll have to wait and see.

I was so hoping the D800 wouldn't be high MP "focused" but it is. Sacrificing low-light shoot-ability. Plus it's priced too high for both versions IMHO. So my money is on the 5D3...just hoping it borrows the native ISO range of the 1D-X offering 100-51,200 (or a max of 204,xxx). If not...then D3s vs. D4 vs. 1D-X.

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4753
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #147 on: January 30, 2012, 02:15:39 AM »

Donny you're out of your element!

Unless there is some tremendous new breakthrough that negates the laws of physics... you only get to pick two. 

If you want amazing DR and ISO performance then you have to sacrifice Resolution. 

If you want high ISO and Resolution then your DR is really going to suffer. 

No, no it does not have to.
The 7D actually has BETTER DR per area of sensor than the 5D2 by a little bit....
Some P&S shoot have had better SNR per sensor area than some of the DSLR.

To fix up low ISO DR Canon needs to fix their read noise, less random read noise and a lot less banding noise.

High iso middle gray SNR might get a touch worse with a higher MP sensor than a lower one but with the sorts of difference we talk about here in terms of MP I doubt that it would cost more than 1/3 stop.


Quote
See for yourself that higher resolution can cause diffraction that actually lessens the image quality...

That's a terribly misleading demonstration of diffraction, that just shows that the point where you can't maximize what you can best get out of the sensor hits earlier but it implies that you actually do worse in the general sense of a normalized comparison even though you do not do worse from diffraction with the higher MP camera. Shoot the same scene with the same lens at the same f-stop and you never pull in worse detail with the higher MP sensor be it f/1.4 or f/64. It may be that you don't pull in any extra detail once you are at f/64 but you won't do worse and you will pull more detail at lower f-stops and dont; forget that the limit is not a hard limit you slowly gain less and less EXTRA detail the higher you raise the f-stop.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #147 on: January 30, 2012, 02:15:39 AM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4753
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #148 on: January 30, 2012, 02:25:40 AM »

Actually his hints fit these specs pretty well. He was misinterpreted to hint at higher resolution but he did not. And he did not call it a 5D III. If anything he hinted it was a union of the 5D and 7D line.

But didn't he say one of three main specs in that one guy's list were wrong? That guy listed:
6fps
22MP
19 pt AF with Digic 4 assist

Two of those specs don't appear to match this CR2 info.

He has an interesting reputation. He drives people crazy but he is one of the most informed forum participant I've seen on most forums with regard to industry trends and if you know his batting average he is very credible - but he doesn't say as much people read into his posts. He seems to have a special interest in Canon and is up front that he has to be very careful of what he says due to an NDA agreement. He did say the speculated specs seemed close but he believed one detail was wrong. But he did not refer to one specific spec list and there are several variation even in that thread. He did confirm the grip in the pictures was not integrated  ;D (duh!) but he was even careful to say that can be derived from the photos to abide by his NDA (and he postulated that the Canon employee may now be the hunted rather than the hunter on the game reserve)   ;D.

Yes, most of us are probably read into his hints wrong. If I ignore them and pick among
22MP, 18MP, 32MP, 6fps, 7.5fps, 7D AF, 7D+ AF, 7D++ AF,1DX AF then the most sensible guess to me might be:

32MP, 6fps, with 7D+ AF

Some are counting the zoom box dimensions and size of the mini location finder dot in the box and finding 30MP counts much easier to come up with than 22MP counts and much, much easier than 18MP counts, but that is dicey going.

(if not that, then I would say 18MP, 7.5 fps, 7D++ AF but the above seems more likely to me)

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4753
Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #149 on: January 30, 2012, 02:27:55 AM »

-  I also expect we won't see any more than a doubling of the ISO speed, probably up to 12,800, but much more usable and probably software limited just to keep it from eating into the 1D X sales. Hopefully we'll see a nice jump in the DR too. But expect the 1D X to trounce the 5DMK3 when it comes to low light and DR performance, even if Canon has to kneecap the upper ISO select-ability of the 5DMK3 to do so. I don't think Canon will let the selectable ISO be anywhere near the 51,200 of the 1D X, even if the noise levels for the two look identical up to 12,800... the 5DMK3 will just not have anything higher available.

I don't think so, Canon has never once intentionally crippled sensor performance.

You misunderstand me, I'm not talking about crippling sensor performance, I'm sure it will be phenomenal, it's just they will impose a limit to the selectable ISO. Who knows it may even remain exactly where it is for select-ability, just that the resulting images will all be much more useable.

And yes Canon has crippled performance of cameras by not including a robust firmware. See the following link. The 300D has the same sensor as the 10D, but the 300D was firmware limited to 1600 ISO and the 10D to 3200 ISO. A firmware hack was all that was needed to reclaim the 3200 ISO on the 300D, and other functions that had been left out.

 http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/digital_rebel_firmware_hack.html

OK true yeah they have crippled it in that way. Although that really only cripples jpg and video since you do better pushing RAW from lower ISO than using those top settings anyway (granted, it makes reading the histogram and trickier and in camera image review looks dark and nasty when you under expose and then push in post).

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« Reply #149 on: January 30, 2012, 02:27:55 AM »