Will the suggested 5d III specs satisfy your photograpy needs?

[DavidRiesenberg]

the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point.

This argument would have sounded reasonable in 2007, not 2012. The 5DII already proved that top of the line IQ can be delivered for $3K back in '08. There is absolutely no technical reason that suggests that they aren't able to do so now as well.

Secondly, the idea that video is moving to the "big boys" is misleading. The one that are moving to the big (and expensive) boys are the ones that made a name for themselves in recent years, mostly with 5DIIs and now can afford the luxuries that dedicated video cameras offer. But as they once were starting out without the possibility to drop 10k-20k on a camera rig, there are new filmmakers that cannot do that now. If Canon will "abandon" them in favor of the more grossing Cinema line, there are other manufacturers that will take their place and that will hurt Canon in the long run. At this point it seems that Panasonic is but a year or two away from unleashing a killer product which could severely  hurt the Canon if they are not paying attention.

[Quasimodo]

I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.

True, true... It's just that there will never be THE camera that satisfies everyones needs, and I think that what we already have even before the launch of the 1DX and 5D whatever, we are already at a good thing.

BTW: Neuro I have a question for you, if you have time, but this thread is not the right one.. It's about fluorite.

A simple rangefinder camera and a 50mm lens were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.  Glass plates in a large, cumbersome view camera were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. 

Having said that, I like tools that make what I do easier and more enjoyable.

[Neeneko]

I hope so. I'm sure video will remain built in forever but hopefuly they'll focus on making better still images. We're still shooting with sync speed limiting physical shutters, prisms, darn noisy slapping mirrors, and same old point based AF. And all I hear is 4K, 4K, 4K. Jez, I haven't even seen a freaking 4K tv in my life or a tv channel that has that. Meanwhile I have to put up with 250ms sync speed because nobody has cared to get rid of the noisy shutter. All the RD is video video.

Actually, I saw someone doing a DIY camera project that used a re-purposed LCD screen as a shutter.  Their idea was to get exotic aperture shapes (kinda like lensbaby) but I could easily see a similar method being used to get really fast shutter speeds.   It is a pity innovation in cameras really seems to have moved off-shore.

[smirkypants]

As a full-frame camera it's great and I'm actually thrilled with the specs and will likely buy one. One really gets accustomed to a great AF system and whenever I used a 5D2 I always became frustrated by how 20th century it seemed. I do some event photography but it just couldn't keep up with the way I learned to love framing and shooting.

Yes it will fill my FF desires but my money-maker is the crop. Still waiting for that one. If they could they just drop a 22MP APS-H in this one, I'd buy two and take them both home to meet mommy.

[dadgummit]

not likely but possible 

1. I have a 7d now and don't really need all 19 of the AF points so 61 seems silly (My opinion only) unless you are trying to track a dragon fly in flight or something.  I would be fine with 9 or 19 af points as long as they are more sensitive (less hunting in dark/ low contrast situations) and f8 would be nice but that is probably reserved for 1D bodies only.  My opinion on this is we are paying for an expensive af system I would never use.

2. Stepping from 7d to full frame it would be nice to at least be able to do a 1.6X crop and still end up with 18mp which means the camera would need to be about 29mp.  22MP would be good If and only IF the high ISO noise and DR are FAR ahead of the already excellent 5d II.  In my eyes to justify $3500 this camera would have to have the same noise at ISO 3200 or 6400 as the 7D has at ISO 100 or 200.

3.  FPS, I have used the 7d's 8 FPS like twice and it was kind of cool (kid sliding down a slide) but if the new camera has 6.9, 6 or even 4 that would be fine too as long as the AF keeps up. 

4.  Dual card slots...  Good for a wedding photog but useless otherwise.  If I did want dual slots I would not be excited over a second SD slot though I would want a second CF. 

5.  100% Full Frame Viewfinder is EXCELLENT!! a big plus in my eyes as long as the user can change out the focus screen if they want.

6.  3.2" LCD.  Bigger is better but .2" is not much different.


So in my eyes the 100% viewfinder is a plus but my purchase decision  COMPLETELY relies on the utter speculation that this camera will be many stops better in High ISO noise than the 5D2 for it to justify the huge price jump. 

[jalbfb]

Answer:  Yes

[neuroanatomist]

BTW: Neuro I have a question for you, if you have time, but this thread is not the right one.. It's about fluorite.

I sent you a PM (Messages tab along the top).

[yunusoglu]

The CR3 confirmed specs are unfortunately not enough for me to upgrade from 5D Mark II...

I'm sure the new 5 series camera will be great and if I didn't own Mark IIs, I wouldn't hesitate on the purchase but, I ask myself; what will I get in return for the $3500?

+1MP? Not worth the trouble...
Super-duper ISO performance? Don't care under studio lighting...
7fps frame rate? Irrelevant...
+0.2" LCD? No use for me...
61 points AF? I'll still be using center AF point if it had 661 AF points.

That would be $3500 spent for everything I don't need so I definitely see no point in upgrading.

Do I even consider switching to Nikon for the D800? No, not at all. I've invested too much in Canon gear to switch now. Plus, today D800 appears to look like what I need but what happens tomorrow, you never know...

I don't know if it's wishful thinking but somehow I believe that Canon will also announce a camera aiming at studio/landscape photographers, weighing heavier on the megapixels rather than low light capability and speed.

[zim]

Need to see the full specs and raw comparisons but potentially absolutely yes. Happy to let the street price settle and see what if anything else is released this year though so no rush decision from me.

[iaind]

Need to see the full specs and raw comparisons but potentially absolutely yes. Happy to let the street price settle and see what if anything else is released this year though so no rush decision from me.

Probably wont be available until Photokina so a few more months to save up. By then hopefully the photojournalists will have found all the potential faults in the 1DX and the first of many firmware updates will have been released. Why pay for the privelidge to be a guinea pig.

[briansquibb]

not likely but possible 

1. I have a 7d now and don't really need all 19 of the AF points so 61 seems silly (My opinion only) unless you are trying to track a dragon fly in flight or something.  I would be fine with 9 or 19 af points as long as they are more sensitive (less hunting in dark/ low contrast situations) and f8 would be nice but that is probably reserved for 1D bodies only.  My opinion on this is we are paying for an expensive af system I would never use.

2. Stepping from 7d to full frame it would be nice to at least be able to do a 1.6X crop and still end up with 18mp which means the camera would need to be about 29mp.  22MP would be good If and only IF the high ISO noise and DR are FAR ahead of the already excellent 5d II.  In my eyes to justify $3500 this camera would have to have the same noise at ISO 3200 or 6400 as the 7D has at ISO 100 or 200.

3.  FPS, I have used the 7d's 8 FPS like twice and it was kind of cool (kid sliding down a slide) but if the new camera has 6.9, 6 or even 4 that would be fine too as long as the AF keeps up. 

4.  Dual card slots...  Good for a wedding photog but useless otherwise.  If I did want dual slots I would not be excited over a second SD slot though I would want a second CF. 

5.  100% Full Frame Viewfinder is EXCELLENT!! a big plus in my eyes as long as the user can change out the focus screen if they want.

6.  3.2" LCD.  Bigger is better but .2" is not much different.


So in my eyes the 100% viewfinder is a plus but my purchase decision  COMPLETELY relies on the utter speculation that this camera will be many stops better in High ISO noise than the 5D2 for it to justify the huge price jump.

1. When the AF point is used for metering then the extra points are useful for correct exposure .

2. The 5DII noise dramaticaly increases after iso 3200. So a clean iso 6400 would seem to be at least a one stop improvement. Until tested we cant really tell - though  the 1d4 was acceptable with care to 12800, so I would hope it matches that.

3. Why wouldn;t the AF keep up?

4.  fair enough - could be a space issue - although more likele because the 2 card unit was already being produced for the series 1 bodies. It works fine.

5. and 6 - standard improvements

[dadgummit]

1. When the AF point is used for metering then the extra points are useful for correct exposure .

2. The 5DII noise dramaticaly increases after iso 3200. So a clean iso 6400 would seem to be at least a one stop improvement. Until tested we cant really tell - though  the 1d4 was acceptable with care to 12800, so I would hope it matches that.

3. Why wouldn;t the AF keep up?

makes sense.  I thought the metering for exposure and the AF sensors were totally different.  My 7d has 19 AF sensors and  63-zone dual-layer metering.  But it would make sense to have the AF sensors report distance too the camera because that would help with exposure. 

I was only mentioning the stuff in "2" to say that if they did not improve the MP count I am hoping they dramatically improved the 22 mp sensor's capabilites over the older 21mp sensor. 

[wickidwombat]

Yes it will fill my FF desires but my money-maker is the crop. Still waiting for that one. If they could they just drop a 22MP APS-H in this one, I'd buy two and take them both home to meet mommy.

I'd be right behind you in the que for that bad boy

[briansquibb]

1. When the AF point is used for metering then the extra points are useful for correct exposure .

2. The 5DII noise dramaticaly increases after iso 3200. So a clean iso 6400 would seem to be at least a one stop improvement. Until tested we cant really tell - though  the 1d4 was acceptable with care to 12800, so I would hope it matches that.

3. Why wouldn;t the AF keep up?

makes sense.  I thought the metering for exposure and the AF sensors were totally different.  My 7d has 19 AF sensors and  63-zone dual-layer metering.  But it would make sense to have the AF sensors report distance too the camera because that would help with exposure. 

I was only mentioning the stuff in "2" to say that if they did not improve the MP count I am hoping they dramatically improved the 22 mp sensor's capabilites over the older 21mp sensor.

It is an option for series 1 bodies to link the AF point to metering - so what you focus on is what is metered. I suspect that most 5D2 users AF on the centre point which is the metering point and why the 5D2 has the reputation for good metering 

Series 1 bodies also have the capability of individually selecting up to 8 af points for metering - very usefull for weddings, groups  and landscapes. If the 5DIII AF is based on the 1DX AF then hopefully these features will come too.

I would see 1 stop improvement as very significant to be good at iso 12800 would be excellent

[dtaylor]

Most of us want great low light quality and i can't see the d800 being as good as a 22mp 5d mk3 in low light.

It's a myth that lower pixel density = superior noise for the total image. Total image noise is driven by total sensor surface area and technology level until you reach the pixel densities we see in P&S sensors. Unless Canon has made a leap beyond the technology available to Nikon, I honestly expect the D800 to match the 5D3 in high ISO noise.

Pixel size is related to DR because smaller pixels saturate faster. But I doubt this is an issue with either. If Canon's now "old" 18 MP crop sensor can pull 10-11 stops, a D800 can probably yield 12 or more. That's getting into color portrait film territory.