How does Canon respond to the D800?

[V8Beast]

This is probably why the D800 is no better ISO capabilities as the 5d2 albeit it's 15 MP more. 

I'm probably the only person on here that's actually impressed by this. The 5DII is a stunning performer in the ISO department. The fact that the D800 can offer similar ISO performance despite having 15 extra megapixels is no small feat. The D700 and 5DII were similar ISO wise, so I tip my hat to Nikon for tripling the resolution from 12 to 36 megapixels without increasing noise.

Honestly, I'd be happy with a mere 1 stop ISO improvement in the 5DIII compared to the 5DII, and this is coming from someone who shoots in low light all the time That's just a testament to how good the 5DII already is in low light.   

[aaronh]

All I can say is it's going to be a long three weeks...

[cliffwang]

I will just wait for 5D3 announcement and then decide to go with 5D3 or D800.

[V8Beast]

I don't know how Canon can respond to this camera without making a huge leap in in-camera IQ improvement.
Read and see here http://cliffmautner.typepad.com/  - the guy states NO Flash, no exposure compensation... Well, if the next gen DSLR are like this then ... my goodness ! Seems that there is a lot of automatic adjustments the D800 does to improve/compensate for any high ISO noise. Yes, there will be noise but heck, the 5D2 crowd has been putting up with it quite well up till now.
Let's just hope Canon as a big camera manufacturer does not disappoint with the bells and whistles - there appears to be a lot more to digital imaging nowadays than just MP, AF points and noise management. I hope there are DIGIC5 applications in camera that will at least match the D800's.

Wow. Those D800 samples have a very 5D-like look to them. I wonder how much post processing was done, but the color, contrast, and DR is stunning!

[RedEye]

This is probably why the D800 is no better ISO capabilities as the 5d2 albeit it's 15 MP more. 

I'm probably the only person on here that's actually impressed by this. The 5DII is a stunning performer in the ISO department. The fact that the D800 can offer similar ISO performance despite having 15 extra megapixels is no small feat. The D700 and 5DII were similar ISO wise, so I tip my hat to Nikon for tripling the resolution from 12 to 36 megapixels without increasing noise.

Honestly, I'd be happy with a mere 1 stop ISO improvement in the 5DIII compared to the 5DII, and this is coming from someone who shoots in low light all the time That's just a testament to how good the 5DII already is in low light.

I'm impressed too, and I can tell by some of the video that the entire user interface is improved, and I that's a big step in the whole user experience.  With medium format the outcome is fantastic, and the user experince is lousy - I mean really, try explaining that stuff in your carryon luggage in cuba...

[V8Beast]

Regardless of all the blah, blah, go look at the published 30 MB jpegs from the D800E. The proof is in the pudding. If Canon doesn't respond by April they have just lost another customer. My 1DSIII can't hold a candle to even the jpegs out of the D800E. I've shot Canons 35s all my adult life, but I will soon be gone to Nikon.

I'm in the same boat. I've been looking to upgrade my 1DsIII, and the 1Dx doesn't suite my needs. During the "rumor" stage, the D800 seemed like a nice upgrade to my current body, and real world specs and sample images are living up to the hype. I'll wait to see how Canon specs out the 5DIII before making a final decision. I've researched how much I can sell my Canon gear for on ebay, and the money I'll have to spend to replicate my setup with equivalent Nikon glass and the D800 is very palatable.

[Bob_McBob]

Where's the "slightly higher resolution 5D2 with some upgraded features and 9 point AF" option?

At this point I am prepared to be horribly let down by Canon.  Perhaps I will get a pleasant surprise.  Perhaps not, considering the number of vocal 5D2 users who would seemingly be happy with 1 point AF.

[scrappydog]

I really want that face recognition feature of the D800.  I hope Canon integrates something similar.

[RedEye]

Where's the "slightly higher resolution 5D2 with some upgraded features and 9 point AF" option?

At this point I am prepared to be horribly let down by Canon.  Perhaps I will get a pleasant surprise. 

I think we're at that point in the movie where the good guy gets cornered, the clown is blowing things up, and beleif is in question. 

Good thing this movie is about 4 hours long

[BDD]

Canon, should respond by doing their own thing. Being original in their approach. Not getting caught up in a MP war.

Just stick to the most recently mentioned rumoured specs here on CR but add more stops of high ISO. At least to 12,800. Or better yet borrow from the 1D-X and give us 100-51,200 native ISO in the 5D3. All for an introductory asking price of $2700 USD.

This is going to be a long month. Waiting for Canon to make the announcement. Make people like me happy Canon!!

[moreorless]

Obviously, the higher the MP, the more noise you are going to get at high ISO, or at least the more the noise will be magnified.

Your statement make no sense!
The number of MP itself will not affect the amout of noise but the higher MP sensor will give a higher image quality (less noise vs resolution) than a lower MP sensor at high ISO because of the efficiency of nose reduction algorithms.

This is often repeated but to me the comparisons between the new Sony 24 MP crop sensor and the old 16 MP one seems to show that it wasnt the case. When the former was down rezed to the latters size it was clearly still the noiser of the two.

Personally I'd be looking to buy a high MP body if I did upgrade to FF but I do question how much of a market there is for that. The really high end studio/landscape users will go MF, the wedding photographers will I'd guess want more ISO first and will the typical amature user print 30X20 to make use of such resolution? will he be willing to deal with diffraction becoming a big issue?

To me if the the 5D mk3 stats we've seen are correct then it does seem to hint that the D800 has caught Canon a bit on the hop(not now but whenever they discovered its stats) and has convinced them to shift across more of the 1DX features than they were planning to. Ultimately I'd guess losing a few 1DX sales is less important to them than potentially having users switch brands or indeed tempt Nikon users who arent satisifed with a high MP body to do so.

[torger]

I repeat this message now and then here -- up to ISO6400 small pixels performs well. Only at ISO12800 and above current tech requires large pixels to perform well. So if you don't feel the need to shoot at ISO12800 - ISO51200 you should not need to be worried about high pixel count. Canon also have the sRAW and mRAW formats so you can get reduced size RAW files when you don't want the bulk of the resolution.

My guess though is that 5D3 will be a slow/crippled 1DX, and compared to D800 have less resolution (20-22 MP), less advanced AF, higher fps (6-7), slightly better ISO performance but still no setting above ISO25600 to avoid competing with the 1DX.

[darkmatter2k12]

I am not sure we need something similar to Nikon d800. 21-24 mp is ok if coupled with excellent high iso performance. When i saw Nikon d800 sample images first reaction was - wow,  its amazing. But carefully examining high iso images changed my mind. I think D800 is excellent for low ISO studio shots, but not as versatile as all-around camera (for wedding for example). It is slow considering frame rate. But if Canon 5d mark 2 replacement will be released with a same ugly auto focus i will jump to Nikon boat without any regret.

[Astro]

The difference in high ISO nosie is less than the difference in size so yes the 7D outperforms 5Dmk2, in this regard, per area unit.

you compare two different sensor generations.

im more interested in how a 22 MP FF sensor and a 36 MP FF senor of the SAME generation compare.

[Ivar]

I myself am currently pretty sensitive about the Canon's next step - this time any form of modesty is not going to do it for me. Nothing should feel like "holding back". It is not necessary to have an SLR for the sake of SLR, it must make a (photographic) statement.