What would make $3500 for 5DmIII justifiable for you?

[meli]

My vote would be for a fully fledged wireless connectivity, so, what would make it for you?

ps1. MPs to fps was loosely based to 144mbs throughput (perhaps 7-8 would be for an APS-H subselection?)
ps2. Wireless would be a full feature, means flash controller/ file transmission /remote control
ps3. some would prefer a 500$ voucher included but lets keep it to features people!

edit:
i would like also you guys that already preordered to chime in;
I do understand that many of you have your reasons or that you'll have upgraded eitherway cause M3 does sound like a fine camera. What do you think? What would balance the +500$ over the competition?*


*Ofc we dont know anything about the real qualities of these cams, We dont really know how good AF or IQ etc might be, so lets just consider that both cameras perform half good as expected and then some!

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If it had:

1. hit the 7-7.5fps of the rumors

or

2. if it had 30MP plus the 6fps that it does have (and the 3x3 perfectly sampled video would be like from a 1.3x crop or something)

without either of those the $3000 D800 price seems a lot more reasonable (if by some horror the low ISO DR is worse than the D800 and the new AF is worse than the new Nikon AF and since the metering is worse then it would need to be the old $2700)



If it somehow manages to match the DR of the D800 (a tall order than Canon has yet to come close to, but I hope they finally have) and if they AF should prove to work much better and if the D800 video ends up having moire/aliasing then the $3500 might be justified with specs as is though.

(The 5D3 shutter lag is worse, it has no built-in interval meter or flash, inferior metering, 50% less MP, uncompressed video out of HDMI out are some things I see that is does have less for sure.  DR and SNR remain to be seen as do video and audio quality and AF ability. It does have better fps in FF mode but the D800 matches in DX mode with extra cost.)

[justsomedude]

With the AF and ISOs, I think it's hard to balk at the price.  The 5D3 is a sweet machine that will allow for unmatched low-light photography.  And as some have already noted - considering inflation it's actually less than the 5D2 was in 2008.

But, if you wanted to do straight comparisons - I don't think a jump to $3,500 from $2,700 over 4 years is enough to warrant pulling out the pitchforks.  $800... that's $200/year, or a couple of portrait gigs. 

Anyway - I voted that the price is justified.  Considering I just sold my 5D2 for $2,000, having to come up with $1,500 for the latest and greatest technology in pro-photography is not too much to ask, at least in my opinion.

[aRodriguezPixL]

 i wanted to $800 USD rebate to your poll 

[meli]

i wanted to $800 USD rebate to your poll 

sorry mate, features only 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It might also help if they say offered it in a kit with the 24-70 II instead of just the 24-105 (which I do not want ever again) for a nice big discount, say $500 for the combo. $3500+$2300 for the pairing is a bit nuts. A kit with a big discount would start making the pricing look a bit more sensible.

[meli]

With the AF and ISOs, I think it's hard to balk at the price.  The 5D3 is a sweet machine that will allow for unmatched low-light photography.  And as some have already noted - considering inflation it's actually less than the 5D2 was in 2008.

But, if you wanted to do straight comparisons - I don't think a jump to $3,500 from $2,700 over 4 years is enough to warrant pulling out the pitchforks.  $800... that's $200/year, or a couple of portrait gigs. 

Anyway - I voted that the price is justified.  Considering I just sold my 5D2 for $2,000, having to come up with $1,500 for the latest and greatest technology in pro-photography is not too much to ask, at least in my opinion.

I've no doubt that you 'll enjoy 5D3 cause its a pretty solid offer.

Concerning the price, consider there's a competing product from another brand from the same country! And its not that upon launching it a week ago there was noise about it being 500$* cheaper despite the inflation!

Perhaps the fuss about the price is getting amplified cause all Canon's latest offerings were pinched up, some by a serious margin



*even more actually, i think d700 had higher MSRP than 5dII

[Bennymiata]

From a report I read from a pro photographer that has had a 5D3 for a couple of weeks, he reckons it is a big step forward, especially for high ISO photos.

You can read it here.
http://blog.jeffascough.com/photographers/2012/03/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review.html

To me, the 5D3 is really most of a 1Dx for a lot less money.

[kapanak]

I would never have switched to Nikon, but for me, the 5DIII had to be in the same league as the D800.

Specifically, the D800 received the D4's AF and Metering. I expected the 5DIII to received the full AF/Metering of the 1DX. Please do not feed me the "Canon needs to differentiate" line. I am sick of reading that here and there for over 4 years.

I love my 5DII, and there is nothing wrong with it (other than the AF), and I will continue to use it. I have no particular use for more pixels, and I like the 22mp sensor on the 5DIII.

However, OP asked what would have justified an upgrade for me, and in response I say the AF/Metering and small tweaks that would have made 5DIII a match for features of the D800.

Had these features been in the 5DIII, I would have gladly pre-ordered one online and one in my local camera shop (and kept the one that got here first of course, no need for two, can't even afford two) at the $3500 price.

I would have also liked to see a new 24-105 with better optics and the new IS that my 70-200 f/2.8 II has.
On the other hand, IF the 5DIII had the above features, and there was a kit with the new 24-70 II, I would have paid $5000 to $5500 for such a kit.

The new Speedlite is interesting though.

[meli]

...
To me, the 5D3 is really most of a 1Dx for a lot less money.
...

that's the thing Bennymiata, 5d & d800 are supposed to have tech from the corresponding top models. The point is how much of this tech trickles down, how it combines with original features to create a round product and for what price each company is willing to let it go.

In this sense it seems to many that Nikon's offer to their userbase is much more sound.

And of course a company doesnt have to have any kind of loyalty towards its userbase, but thats not a reason for people to not get pissed off with'em!

[meli]

It might also help if they say offered it in a kit with the 24-70 II instead of just the 24-105 (which I do not want ever again) for a nice big discount, say $500 for the combo. $3500+$2300 for the pairing is a bit nuts. A kit with a big discount would start making the pricing look a bit more sensible.

doubt if the combo will fall below 5k any time soon; I can see MarkIII dropping in price rather soon, be it cause of the market or production cost, but 24-70 might hold its premium for quite awhile

[EYEONE]

 I think Canon justified the price with the 61point AF and the sensor. The ISO performance from that sensor is incredible. $3500 is a lot, and is certainly more than I expected but I don't think it's overpriced. It might be a tad unfortunate for us but fair. I plan on buying one as soon as I can.

[mikef2]

A reduction of about £600 ...robbing B*****s !!

..sorry.. but canon need to rethink !!

[motorhead]

In truth, maybe 48 MP, 61 AF points, no video, no fps (none at all), no extreme ISO, but super clean low ISO, better DR at 50ISO.

And so on. In other words, throw out the current Canon obsession with a camera that will shoot "a black cat in a coalmine on video" business model and instead give me a still landscape 'togs dream camera.

[meli]

I think Canon justified the price with the 61point AF and the sensor. The ISO performance from that sensor is incredible. $3500 is a lot, and is certainly more than I expected but I don't think it's overpriced. It might be a tad unfortunate for us but fair. I plan on buying one as soon as I can.

I do get the feeling that Canon's priorities for the new sensor were more towards pleasing the video community rather than the photographer, im really really curious about the low Iso DR