I just can't comprehend some of the negativity on the 5d3...

[tomscott]

I think its more expectations were not fulfilled 30% increase in price without 30% increase in features and quality.

It is an upgrade which was following an industry changing camera.

The people who complain are usually the ones you hear from the rest of the lucky people who got a 5D MKIII will be out shooting and enjoying it! and can probably use it... LOL!

but obviously there are teething problems in 3 months the small problems will be ironed out.

[unkbob]

The 5D3 is the best full frame camera for video in the world, I believe - unless you prefer the higher resolution / increased moire of the D800 (would depend on what you're shooting). But still, I was hoping for a fully resolved 1080p. Having looked at a 1DX video sample on youtube, I'm not sure if that's true 1080p either.

Shooting a wedding with the 5D3 tomorrow. Guess I'd better figure out how to use it

[CJRodgers]

From what I've seen in samples, the d800 is clearly sharper, but with worse moire and aliasing than even the 5d2. Noise looks comparable to the 5d2 but the 5d3 smokes them both.

In the end it comes down to your choice of platform and your preference over resolved detail or less moire, less aliasing, and less noise.  Neither is perfect, but neither is a slouch.

Could you show me some examples of the d800 moire vs 5dmkii please? I have heard lots of mixed opinions, but most saying it isnt as bad as the 5dmkii. So any more information on this would be great thanks. Im thinking of getting the 5dmkii seeing as i cant afford any other full frame right now. Thanks

[psolberg]

From what I've seen in samples, the d800 is clearly sharper, but with worse moire and aliasing than even the 5d2. Noise looks comparable to the 5d2 but the 5d3 smokes them both.

In the end it comes down to your choice of platform and your preference over resolved detail or less moire, less aliasing, and less noise.  Neither is perfect, but neither is a slouch.

to my eyes, the D800 does not fall victim to brick walls as easily as the 5DmkII, which totally destroy it, so they did try to improve it over the 5DmkII moire but it seems it was not a priority and they chose to go for more detail. There were filters for the 5DmkII to deal with moire which I'm sure will make its way to nikon D800 videographers. I'm REALLY on the fence because 1) I don't shoot far away brick walls and know how to avoid moire, 2) most of my video is in natural settings where the repeating patterns that cause moire are less of a concern whereas detail is prime.

Looking at phillip bloom's footage, he tries hard to argue that you can sharpen in post, but he was shooting nature and so I have to question his true level of satisfaction. It is clear that his clips would have not needed sharpening if the camera was true 1080, and that he'd have a much higher quality footage from true 1080 than from sharpened lower res footage.

Could you show me some examples of the d800 moire vs 5dmkii please? I have heard lots of mixed opinions, but most saying it isnt as bad as the 5dmkii. So any more information on this would be great thanks. Im thinking of getting the 5dmkii seeing as i cant afford any other full frame right now. Thanks

I have not seen side by side comparisons yet but I have seen plenty of horrible 5DII fotage over the year and IMO the D800 looks better in the moire department. That or it may just be perception because the footage is so much cleaner. I'm sure we'll see soon. Even if it was a the same level of awfulness as the 5DII, I think everybody knows how to work around that from the 5DII experience by now.

[mrmarks]

The latest problem found with the 5D3 is the IS noise coming from certain lens-5D3 combination. It may be the case that all these teething issues (soft focus, write error, dead pixel) can be fixed by a firmware/software upgrade but it seems that there could be some hardware issues as well. I have not seen as many issues during the 5D2 release (black dot) and it seems that Canon has dropped the ball in the case of 5D3. Nikon seem to manage their new release better. Anyway this is an excellent example of never to be an early adopter. I'm putting off my purchase of the 5D3 and hopefully all these software/hardware bugs will be resolved in 2-3 months time by Canon.

[CJRodgers]

From what I've seen in samples, the d800 is clearly sharper, but with worse moire and aliasing than even the 5d2. Noise looks comparable to the 5d2 but the 5d3 smokes them both.

In the end it comes down to your choice of platform and your preference over resolved detail or less moire, less aliasing, and less noise.  Neither is perfect, but neither is a slouch.

to my eyes, the D800 does not fall victim to brick walls as easily as the 5DmkII, which totally destroy it, so they did try to improve it over the 5DmkII moire but it seems it was not a priority and they chose to go for more detail. There were filters for the 5DmkII to deal with moire which I'm sure will make its way to nikon D800 videographers. I'm REALLY on the fence because 1) I don't shoot far away brick walls and know how to avoid moire, 2) most of my video is in natural settings where the repeating patterns that cause moire are less of a concern whereas detail is prime.

Looking at phillip bloom's footage, he tries hard to argue that you can sharpen in post, but he was shooting nature and so I have to question his true level of satisfaction. It is clear that his clips would have not needed sharpening if the camera was true 1080, and that he'd have a much higher quality footage from true 1080 than from sharpened lower res footage.

Could you show me some examples of the d800 moire vs 5dmkii please? I have heard lots of mixed opinions, but most saying it isnt as bad as the 5dmkii. So any more information on this would be great thanks. Im thinking of getting the 5dmkii seeing as i cant afford any other full frame right now. Thanks

I have not seen side by side comparisons yet but I have seen plenty of horrible 5DII fotage over the year and IMO the D800 looks better in the moire department. That or it may just be perception because the footage is so much cleaner. I'm sure we'll see soon. Even if it was a the same level of awfulness as the 5DII, I think everybody knows how to work around that from the 5DII experience by now.

Is the d800 true hd? I read about b lines meaning it didnt need as fast mb/s spped, but i didnt properly understand it.

[stabmasterasron]

I think the only people complaining are video people.  I think the stills crowd got most of what they wanted.  Everything the 5dmkii lacked for stills, the 5dmkiii has, with the possible exception of a few people wanting much higher sensor resolution.

The biggest complaint about 5dmkii for stills was AF performance.  It seems like Canon responded to that complaint with much force.  Then they made the camera even more rugged and waterproof.  For stills, I think it was a nice upgrade from the 5dmkii. 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I think the only people complaining are video people.  I think the stills crowd got most of what they wanted.  Everything the 5dmkii lacked for stills, the 5dmkiii has, with the possible exception of a few people wanting much higher sensor resolution.

The biggest complaint about 5dmkii for stills was AF performance.  It seems like Canon responded to that complaint with much force.  Then they made the camera even more rugged and waterproof.  For stills, I think it was a nice upgrade from the 5dmkii.

Yes, Canon is going to have "C" series bodies for Cinema use and to differentiate cameras intended primarily for video use from those that are primarily for stills.  C300 is only the first.  They did not startup that expensive video support center in Hollywood for just one body and a couple of lenses.
 
 

[peederj]

The biggest complaint about 5dmkii for stills was AF performance.  It seems like Canon responded to that complaint with much force.

Except for, oh, AF at f/8. 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

From what I've seen in samples, the d800 is clearly sharper, but with worse moire and aliasing than even the 5d2. Noise looks comparable to the 5d2 but the 5d3 smokes them both.

In the end it comes down to your choice of platform and your preference over resolved detail or less moire, less aliasing, and less noise.  Neither is perfect, but neither is a slouch.

http://gizmodo.com/5897098/d800-vs-5d-mark-iii-which-shoots-better-video/

Yeah, on second thought the D800 is sharper, but, as you say it has worse aliasing and MUCH worse color moire, wow, that city scape's white lights are all shades of the rainbow and the high ISO looks more of a mess on the D800. Plus, the sharpness isn't THAT much better, it's not like 300/GH2 full-on 1920x1080-looking and a nicely sharpened up 5D3 might not be far behind the D800 at all although definitely still far behind true 1920x1080 detail.

I think you have to give the video to the 5D3 over the D800. I think they could have blown it out of the water had they not watered it down to save the new cinema line (which I think is a dumb, dumb move, their revolution was in the DSLR price-class and they could it taken it to the world).

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I think the only people complaining are video people.  I think the stills crowd got most of what they wanted.  Everything the 5dmkii lacked for stills, the 5dmkiii has, with the possible exception of a few people wanting much higher sensor resolution.

The biggest complaint about 5dmkii for stills was AF performance.  It seems like Canon responded to that complaint with much force.  Then they made the camera even more rugged and waterproof.  For stills, I think it was a nice upgrade from the 5dmkii.

well the landscape stills crowd are not happy, the new cam does not one thing for them, doesn't have more MP and doesn't have the tiniest little increase in dynamic range while Nikon's non-exmor sensors went up by over a stop for dynamic range and their exmor stuff is just nuts with like nearing 3 stops better dynamic range than the 5D3

the AF and increased speed are very nice for all the stuff that uses that though

I think if they had even just increased dynamic range 1.3 stops and gotten true 1920x1080 people would be raving and if they had gone 30MP, on top (all other specs the same), then wow. But same ISO100-400 performance, still 1280x720p detail for video without zebra stripes or zoom in while recording for focus, same MP and $800 more got some complaining going.

they surely should have had the 5D3 also do a crop mode 2x2 blocking like the C300 delivering trye 1920x1080 along with the soft 3x3 blocked FF 1280-720p-ish looking video.

foolish to protect the C300 so much

[Christian_Stella]

In response to examples of the d800's moire, Gizmodo's side by side tests of the d800 and 5d3 showed an incredible amount of moire in the daytime shot of a skyline.  The camera is panning to the right and as it gets to the right there is a building that is being absolutely devastated by moire. I found this a pretty telling thing because the building hardly even looked like something that should have caused moire in the first place. It certainly wasn't a brick wall of fine details is what I'm saying.

In all honesty though, aliasing is my biggest concern.  In the entire feature film I shot on the 5d2, only 2 shots display any moire (using only sharp Zeiss wide angles and a singh-ray variable ND)... But nearly all shots display some amount of aliasing.   This is what was great about Phillip Bloom's review of the 5d3, while the nature wasn't the best example for moire, it's a wonderful example to show aliasing. It is practically non-existent on the 5d3. While the d800 is out resolving the 5d3, the aliasing does not look promising. Though maybe the samples have in-camera sharpening applied.

Aliasing (and moire when it exists) is the final thing affecting the filmic look of DSLR footage.  You can shoot 24fps with almost the correct shutter speed of 48, and you can apply a beautiful filmic color correction in post, but nothing will make your footage look like true film if jagged digital edges are present.

You can definitely argue that resolution is another thing holding back a real film look, but I don't think the d800 is the answer there... Maybe once a third-party anti-aliasing filter is tested. Personally, because of my Canon glass, I'd probably rent a C300 for a higher budget shoot.  For something with the sub 10k budget of my last film, I'm sticking with my 5d3.

Take everything I say with a grain of salt though, as I am a photographer first and the 5d3 is my perfect camera for photography. I do believe though that that is something that can set you apart. I approach cinema no different than my regular photography and it can make for something more unique than the traditional master, closeup, closeup of normal shoots. We filmed about 1/4 of our movie The Battery in static single shots with no coverage, but it fit the lonely feeling we were going for.  I know I can't compete with the big boys in cinematography, so I want to do something different.

[stabmasterasron]

I think the only people complaining are video people.  I think the stills crowd got most of what they wanted.  Everything the 5dmkii lacked for stills, the 5dmkiii has, with the possible exception of a few people wanting much higher sensor resolution.

The biggest complaint about 5dmkii for stills was AF performance.  It seems like Canon responded to that complaint with much force.  Then they made the camera even more rugged and waterproof.  For stills, I think it was a nice upgrade from the 5dmkii.

well the landscape stills crowd are not happy, the new cam does not one thing for them, doesn't have more MP and doesn't have the tiniest little increase in dynamic range while Nikon's non-exmor sensors went up by over a stop for dynamic range and their exmor stuff is just nuts with like nearing 3 stops better dynamic range than the 5D3

the AF and increased speed are very nice for all the stuff that uses that though

I think if they had even just increased dynamic range 1.3 stops and gotten true 1920x1080 people would be raving and if they had gone 30MP, on top (all other specs the same), then wow. But same ISO100-400 performance, still 1280x720p detail for video without zebra stripes or zoom in while recording for focus, same MP and $800 more got some complaining going.

they surely should have had the 5D3 also do a crop mode 2x2 blocking like the C300 delivering trye 1920x1080 along with the soft 3x3 blocked FF 1280-720p-ish looking video.

foolish to protect the C300 so much

Yes, I know the landscapers are not happy, that is why I mentioned the MP issue.  The only thing that can help landscapers is MP and dynamic range - which the 5diii did not do much about.  But for wedding photogs, event photogs, pj's, I think this camera was what they had been wanting.  Killer AF (except f8), ruggedness, speed, weatherproofing.  Yes, it does seem that Canon sacrificed MP for speed, but many will find that a good tradeoff.

[Christian_Stella]

Yes, I know the landscapers are not happy, that is why I mentioned the MP issue.  The only thing that can help landscapers is MP and dynamic range - which the 5diii did not do much about.  But for wedding photogs, event photogs, pj's, I think this camera was what they had been wanting.  Killer AF (except f8), ruggedness, speed, weatherproofing.  Yes, it does seem that Canon sacrificed MP for speed, but many will find that a good tradeoff.

Canon knows where their bread and butter is. Landscape photographers must be an almost nonexistent fraction of the paid professionals looking into this level of camera. I think as more and more video people start moving up to the new wave of dedicated video cams Canon is making sure they've focused on what has always been the core buyers of the 5d line... Wedding and event photographers. The 5d3 is a camera that can survive 3 1/2 more years of intense video competition because of wedding and event photographers. No matter what video functions they should have added, they would be out of date in months in this post 5d2 world of video cams.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

In response to examples of the d800's moire, Gizmodo's side by side tests of the d800 and 5d3 showed an incredible amount of moire in the daytime shot of a skyline.  The camera is panning to the right and as it gets to the right there is a building that is being absolutely devastated by moire. I found this a pretty telling thing because the building hardly even looked like something that should have caused moire in the first place. It certainly wasn't a brick wall of fine details is what I'm saying.

In all honesty though, aliasing is my biggest concern.  In the entire feature film I shot on the 5d2, only 2 shots display any moire (using only sharp Zeiss wide angles and a singh-ray variable ND)... But nearly all shots display some amount of aliasing.   This is what was great about Phillip Bloom's review of the 5d3, while the nature wasn't the best example for moire, it's a wonderful example to show aliasing. It is practically non-existent on the 5d3. While the d800 is out resolving the 5d3, the aliasing does not look promising. Though maybe the samples have in-camera sharpening applied.

Aliasing (and moire when it exists) is the final thing affecting the filmic look of DSLR footage.  You can shoot 24fps with almost the correct shutter speed of 48, and you can apply a beautiful filmic color correction in post, but nothing will make your footage look like true film if jagged digital edges are present.

You can definitely argue that resolution is another thing holding back a real film look, but I don't think the d800 is the answer there... Maybe once a third-party anti-aliasing filter is tested. Personally, because of my Canon glass, I'd probably rent a C300 for a higher budget shoot.  For something with the sub 10k budget of my last film, I'm sticking with my 5d3.

Take everything I say with a grain of salt though, as I am a photographer first and the 5d3 is my perfect camera for photography. I do believe though that that is something that can set you apart. I approach cinema no different than my regular photography and it can make for something more unique than the traditional master, closeup, closeup of normal shoots. We filmed about 1/4 of our movie The Battery in static single shots with no coverage, but it fit the lonely feeling we were going for.  I know I can't compete with the big boys in cinematography, so I want to do something different.

from what I see on samples all over:

yeah, sadly I don't think the D800 is the answer (after sharpening the 5D3 the D800 isn't even THAT much sharper unlike some of the others and the aliasing and all look a mess)

the GH2 gets you the proper resolution although it does seem a bit jaggy and digital looking to me so it's not a filmic 1920x1080, although it is a real 1920x1080, but yeah a bit of a harsh, digital look for sure, maybe the GH3 will be it

the C300 and some other big boys get the 1920x1080 plus filmic look

the 5D3 is filmic in terms of aliasing and moire and stair-steps but doesn't really quite have the resolution and the NR and compression can seem kind of digital-looking at times, even the GH2 can be tighter 'grained', but overall, I'd take it over the other APS-C through FF-sized DSLRs so far, not as nasty with aliasing and moire as the previous ones or the current D4/D800 options.