5DIII same ISO performance as 5DII

[prestonpalmer]

You'd still need a taller body to fit that sensor in though... so a similar to 1 series body would still be used?

Nope, no change to the body is required to accommodate a 1x1 sensor.  We can have the 1D camera in a smaller, lighter package.  No need to flip the camera back and forth.  Crop lines would exist in the viewfinder.  I am totally for it!

[prestonpalmer]

I like the bigger bodies.

I always carry 2 bodies, so I am a huge fan of the 5D size and weight.  Carrying 2x 1D's is heavy and cumbersome. 

[DavidRiesenberg]

The problem with a square sensor is that it won't be 36mm x 36mm as some people assume. If my calculations are correct, Ef lenses cover a circle with a diameter of ±43mm which means the biggest square sensor that could be made without vignetting is ±30.5mm x 30.5mm. That means it will roughly have a bit better than APS-H maximal FOV.

[Orangutan]

without vignetting is ±30.5mm x 30.5mm.

Why do we care about vignetting at capture?  Why not have a 43mm square sensor, and just accept major vignetting at capture, but you've got the entire image circle.  You can then decide how to crop in post.  You'd never need to rotate your camera, and so no need for vertical grip.  Yes, it would be a bit of a waste of silicon, but so what?  There could also be camera settings to pre-select format: 3:2, 2:3, 1:1, 4:3, 16:9, etc.  If Canon (or Nikon, or whoever) want to stretch their lens lineup for pros, that's how to do it.

** Note: I've made this suggestion several times; some have noted that there might be problems with mirror clearance.  I accept that as a legitimate question, but still consider it worth consideration, especially when (not if) we get to the point of mirrorless pro-level bodies.

[unkbob]

Not that sure what the advantages of a square sensor are. You don't have to turn your camera 90 degrees, but you then have to choose orientation in post? Sounds like a PITA to me. I like the fact that the camera knows which way it's tilted, so when I shoot portrait, I get portrait. One less step to deal with, it's a supremely intuitive system already.

Am I missing something?

[briansquibb]

Not that sure what the advantages of a square sensor are. You don't have to turn your camera 90 degrees, but you then have to choose orientation in post? Sounds like a PITA to me. I like the fact that the camera knows which way it's tilted, so when I shoot portrait, I get portrait. One less step to deal with, it's a supremely intuitive system already.

Am I missing something?

One less opportunity to get it wrong when shooting in the heat of the action, one less image missed

[unkbob]

Not that sure what the advantages of a square sensor are. You don't have to turn your camera 90 degrees, but you then have to choose orientation in post? Sounds like a PITA to me. I like the fact that the camera knows which way it's tilted, so when I shoot portrait, I get portrait. One less step to deal with, it's a supremely intuitive system already.

Am I missing something?

One less opportunity to get it wrong when shooting in the heat of the action, one less image missed

I'm not convinced. If I screw up in the heat of the moment, it's not going to be because I chose the wrong aspect ratio. I know what I'm trying to shoot before I lift my camera. I might have the wrong lens, might have camera shake, might screw up the ISO or exposure, might forget to put the flash on HSS, I can screw up magnificently in any number of ways, but not knowing if a shot should be wide or tall just isn't in my list of worries. Maybe that's just me. If this was really a concern I would just shoot wider all the time and crop into every frame, but it's not so I don't.

[briansquibb]

Not that sure what the advantages of a square sensor are. You don't have to turn your camera 90 degrees, but you then have to choose orientation in post? Sounds like a PITA to me. I like the fact that the camera knows which way it's tilted, so when I shoot portrait, I get portrait. One less step to deal with, it's a supremely intuitive system already.

Am I missing something?

The flash on the hotshoe would always be on the top - you wouldn't need a flash bracket and spin it round - a real pain in a wedding scenario

One less opportunity to get it wrong when shooting in the heat of the action, one less image missed

I'm not convinced. If I screw up in the heat of the moment, it's not going to be because I chose the wrong aspect ratio. I know what I'm trying to shoot before I lift my camera. I might have the wrong lens, might have camera shake, might screw up the ISO or exposure, might forget to put the flash on HSS, I can screw up magnificently in any number of ways, but not knowing if a shot should be wide or tall just isn't in my list of worries. Maybe that's just me. If this was really a concern I would just shoot wider all the time and crop into every frame, but it's not so I don't.

[unkbob]

Haha, the quote format is bonkers at this point, I was quite confused by who was quoting who

Yes, I can see that as one advantage, having the flash fixed. I use a bracket and it's cumbersome.

[briansquibb]

Haha, the quote format is bonkers at this point, I was quite confused by who was quoting who

Yes, I can see that as one advantage, having the flash fixed. I use a bracket and it's cumbersome.

Sorry - too early in the morning 

[bycostello]

people i know who have the 5d3 say it is a stop better.... 

[swrightgfx]

Not really the place for it (other than the fact it would result in greatly improved ISO performance), but I think 36² would be lovely. That said, I would much prefer 6x6 or 6x7 medium format, but neither will probably spawn from the Canon stable.

It would be nice to use all my Noritar lenses on digital though, even just to see how they'd perform - would require a customised breech-lock adapter though.....

[DavidRiesenberg]

Why not have a 43mm square sensor, and just accept major vignetting at capture, but you've got the entire image circle.  You can then decide how to crop in post.  You'd never need to rotate your camera, and so no need for vertical grip.  Yes, it would be a bit of a waste of silicon, but so what?

You dismiss the silicon waste too easily. A 43mm square sensor will have an area slightly larger than a P45+ digital back and be considerably more expensive to produce compared to a FF sensor.

[rhommel]

in terms of high ISO performance, I can definitely say that 5D3 outperforms 5D2!



Natural Light
Canon EOS 5D MK III + 70-200 F2.8 L II IS
ISO 12,800
1/800
F2.8

there's no way my 5D2 could've taken that shot with less noise

[sandymandy]

without vignetting is ±30.5mm x 30.5mm.

Why do we care about vignetting at capture?  Why not have a 43mm square sensor, and just accept major vignetting at capture, but you've got the entire image circle. 

If the viewfinder doesnt become square too it can get really annoying to "fix" ur composition of every photo by cropping. Plus i personally dont wanna crop every photo post.