Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

[fman]

To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR.  Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.

The viewfinder of the GH2 (sure it's electronic, which means it's also bright) is comparable in size with the VF of the 1Ds and bigger than any of the APS-Cs.
Just scroll down a bit.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page3.asp

From my personal experience AF is also very fast except in very dark scenarios (where also DLSR had trouble without AF assist light from flash centre AF point with f/2.8 or faster lens).
Also in case of micro 4/3 you're not limited with AF to middle point, which is the only possibility in case of 5DmkII due to it's crappy AF point arrangement and archaic AF system.

Sure there is some shutter lag. Never even bothered to look up the specs.

With the listed lens you cover less, and you have also only one fast prime.

Video compared:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.

[fman]

Why not take flash on vacation? -  There is plenty of room in the car

Oh I forgot to ask, do you always travel by car overseas? 
I really envy you then.

[briansquibb]

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.

I am sure you get great enjoyment from your 4/3 which is good.

However you have to understand and accept that your preference is not the same as others.

Perhaps I am am at the other extreme as I will carry around 2 x 1 series all day complete with fast lens and other equipment

Certainly for family pictures I go for the best photos I can - they are worth it and I wont take snaps of them.

Just because we dont agree with your choice doesn't make us wrong - just different.

I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.

[Rocky]

To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR.  Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.

The viewfinder of the GH2 (sure it's electronic, which means it's also bright) is comparable in size with the VF of the 1Ds and bigger than any of the APS-Cs.
Just scroll down a bit.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page3.asp

From my personal experience AF is also very fast except in very dark scenarios (where also DLSR had trouble without AF assist light from flash centre AF point with f/2.8 or faster lens).
Also in case of micro 4/3 you're not limited with AF to middle point, which is the only possibility in case of 5DmkII due to it's crappy AF point arrangement and archaic AF system.

Sure there is some shutter lag. Never even bothered to look up the specs.

With the listed lens you cover less, and you have also only one fast prime.

Video compared:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.

Try to pan you camera a few times conscecutively. The delay in EVF will give you head ache.   The OM-D is supposed to have the best EVF. It did gave me head ache. The lack of one fast prime can be make up with lower high ISO noise.

May I quote Brian Squibb ( I assume that is his name):
"I am sure you get great enjoyment from your 4/3 which is good."
"However you have to understand and accept that your preference is not the same as others."
"Just because we dont agree with your choice doesn't make us wrong - just different."

[tron]

I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.

You leave the tripod behind and take 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 ?
600??? That one 600 f/4L IS which let me think: is so small that I guess you carry it in your pocket... 

[briansquibb]

I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.

You leave the tripod behind and take 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 ?
600??? That one 600 f/4L IS which let me think: is so small that I guess you carry it on your pocket... 

The tripod doesn't fit in the back box on the bike - but the 600 does I use it resting on a short monopod

[wickidwombat]

I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car.

thats so not fair, i knew there haqd to be a + to being over there!
since I live in the most remote capital city in the world to go anywhere worth going its basically 10+ hours by plane and a couple of grand per person

[samirachiko]

What I'd like to see

swivel screen!
one CF slot
19 Af points

Without all that super professional features of the 5D MK3.

Price 1800 euro with a non L obb.

This could be PERFECT for me and a lot of people!

[crasher8]

I for one do not want the articulating screen. I want a stills camera. Now I know of course that it will shoot video and that the cost of video doesn't inherently increase the cost of the body yet a swivel screen does. I'm looking for IQ and simplicity.

[thejoyofsobe]

It's all shooting style. I use my swivel screen for stills far more than for video. A swivel screen let's over the head shots not be at the mercy of spray and pray and for low angle shots I don't have to get down in the dirt. plus you can be a little stealthier with candids when you don't have a big black camera pressed to your face.

[mathino]

I for one do not want the articulating screen. I want a stills camera. Now I know of course that it will shoot video and that the cost of video doesn't inherently increase the cost of the body yet a swivel screen does. I'm looking for IQ and simplicity.

Exactly as me  I want camera for stills. I dont want/need articulating screen for my style of shooting. For me, camera without articulating LCD feels more solid - I know I wont break it apart but it just feels more comfortable/solid to me.

[tron]

I for one do not want the articulating screen. I want a stills camera. Now I know of course that it will shoot video and that the cost of video doesn't inherently increase the cost of the body yet a swivel screen does. I'm looking for IQ and simplicity.

Exactly as me  I want camera for stills. I dont want/need articulating screen for my style of shooting. For me, camera without articulating LCD feels more solid - I know I wont break it apart but it just feels more comfortable/solid to me.

+1

[bdunbar79]

Apart from the new entry level FF camera, I would someday like to see Canon's true replacement for the 1Ds Mark III.  I don't think the 5D Mark III necessarily needs a replacement, since if you upgrade the metering, it's effectively a 1D-series in all likelihood.  How about a 3-series? 

[takoman46]

Apart from the new entry level FF camera, I would someday like to see Canon's true replacement for the 1Ds Mark III.  I don't think the 5D Mark III necessarily needs a replacement, since if you upgrade the metering, it's effectively a 1D-series in all likelihood.  How about a 3-series? 

Something tells me that the high megapixel FF body will fall in line as a direct 1DS3 replacement.  In theory it should deliver top image quality, but not necessarily the best ISO performance.  It seems that the 1DX is more of a replacement for the 1D4, but still might be a contender for top image quality at low ISO.

[neuroanatomist]

Apart from the new entry level FF camera, I would someday like to see Canon's true replacement for the 1Ds Mark III.  I don't think the 5D Mark III necessarily needs a replacement, since if you upgrade the metering, it's effectively a 1D-series in all likelihood.  How about a 3-series?

I think they'll stay with the 1D X as a unified 1-series body, and not split that line again.  I do expect we'll see a 3-series or whatever they call it - high MP sensor in a 5DIII-type body, 1D X/5DIII AF, but a slow frame rate due to the large MP count.