Totally not relevant, but when I saw the name of your forum topic, I had no idea what I was going to read when I clicked on the link

jrista said:

Marsu42 said:

Pitbullo said:

The 5D3 does not have an articulated screen. 60D does.

Click to expand...

That's correct, I've got a 60d (see my equipment list).

What I tried to convey was that because even the video-king 5d3 hasn't got a swivel screen Canon didn't want to add it on the 60d-like 6d - because the 6d is obviously designed to have lower specs in any area save the center af light sensitivity as the "joker" against the Nikon 600d.

Click to expand...

Articulating screens are the bane of weather sealing. The 5D line, being Canon's second-highest professional-grade line of cameras, is expected to have some of the best weather sealing that can be found in a camera. The addition of an articulating screen would make that nearly impossible to achieve to the degree it needs to be, difficult to achieve by any means.

If you look at the 1D line, it doesn't even use a rotating knob for the primary mode control...it uses buttons. It uses buttons because they are much easier to weather seal, and the seals are more effective than the seal for something that turns or rotates.

When it comes to professional grade cameras, even those that support video, an articulating screen is probably the last thing on any serious professional's mind.

Click to expand...

Interesting. The Panasonic GH3 (a micro 4/3 camra) can be considered a pro or semi-pro camera. It has an articulated screen and is fully weather sealed (dust and splash proof).

You understand Canon often lies about things like this. Don't trust everything they tell you . Just like how Canon said that clean hdmi out is not possible on the 5D mark iii but now, somehow by magic, its possible and coming in April? Canon is full of crap.

Hill Benson said:

I wonder if a digital medium format camera has been considered by this photographer?

Click to expand...

They probably wanted to leak the dslr spec the president was shot with and make him a man of the people (you can also afford a 85L!) rather than a leader whose picture is taken with a medium format camera worth the price of a porsche racecar - the man is a democrat after all

thanks for your reaction.So should I sell the Samyang and use the 15 mm fisheye instead(lens corrected)?
It's much smaller and lighter.As far as I can see the quality is quite good,and the only disadvantage is you have to guess how much will loose of the frame after software correction.

By the way,what I would like most is Canon making a small fixed 16 mm/f4 lens...

All,
The wild card in these discussions is what appears to be some variability in the 5Dmk3 copies'AF abilities. I feel I got a flawed body and it seems slower than it "should". Unscientific, absolutely, and I should work up a test here that Canon Service can replicate. These discussions are helpful for establishing what the limits should be. My comparison is my 5Dmk2. For any of the tests described the next level is bringing a lot of 5Dmk3 bodies into the same setup and looking for variations in "lock" time. I bought my body in May last year.

I didn't figure this out in time to exchange it. My bad! Canon has already looked at this body once.

I need to find an acquaintance with a 5Dmk3 and time to compare. That would be interesting.

Aaaaarg. <anger>

jonathan7007

Jim Saunders said:

Thanks for posting this, it looks like a good companion to the manual.

Jim

Click to expand...

Thanks. I thought it would be a a good compliment to that great review Mark Webb did.

http://markwebbphoto.com/blog/2012/6/canon-600ex-rt-review

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7431.0

J.R. said:

distant.star said:

RLPhoto said:

I don't use in camera NR but I do keep long expo NR on standard.

Click to expand...

My "solution" also.

Click to expand...

I have this disabled as I believe that NR was best taken care of in PP.

What are the benefits of this?

Click to expand...

It takes a dark frame at the same exposure settings, which ends up being a frame of noise. It then subtracts that noise from the original exposure. I believe that the biggest non-random noise is thermal noise from the amplifier. I was looking for an old comparison of thermal noise among cameras of the 20D-era, but can't find it offhand.

*UPDATE* Here are the articles: http://ghonis2.ho8.com/DSLRcomparison.html
Specifically, look at the bottom of this one: http://ghonis2.ho8.com/rebelmod500d/rebelmod500dcompare.html
These are now "ancient" cameras, so likely this type of thermal noise has been fixed in newer cameras.

Dave

Marsu42 said:

neuroanatomist said:

I would not expect them to change their minds any time soon.

Click to expand...

I would guess that the st-e4 arrives once rt flash master mode is available in the camera bodies, i.e. 5d4 or maybe 7d2 - imho this would have been a real valuable addition to the 6d: They can add 2.4ghz wifi, but not rt?!

If the st-e3 is obsoleted then Canon needs a new reason for customers to buy additional equipment, i.e. the version with af beam and maybe e-ttl3 with remote 2nd curtain sync for the upcoming 660rt flash

Click to expand...

+1 ... that is exactly how I see it. But unfortunately for Canon I will now play that way!

AprilForever said:

Efka76 said:

IMHO Canon should follow similar strategy as Apple (created by S. Jobs) - to get rid of many models in DSLR area and produce only few and apply the top technology.

Also, i think that application of APS-C sensors can not be justified in 2013 as they initially were created due to significant costs of FF sensors. During few years sensor production technology had to become much cheaper. Also, Canon is not making any efforts in distinguishing themselves in the current market. Many consumers are not able to change firm as they already invested in expensive lenses. However, if the same trend will happen for few more years many people might switch to other manufacturers. Now it seems that Canon is sleeping and tries to follow Nikon.

I can not understand why Canon is not mowing to Medium Format cameras? Also, it is very obvious that in mirrorless camera area they are off-competition. It seems that they strategy guys are too old and not able even to follow market trends (from Canon I would expect to be market maker). Currently they are trying to squeeze all possible money from loyal customers and thinking how NOT to produce good camera in order to protect big line of camers. If they put FF sensor, they cripple autofocus, produce good camera 1Dx C however as for it too significant premium compared to almost the same camera 1Dx.

oh, i forgot that strange P&S camera, which they recently introduced. It seems that they do not understand words "customer expectations" (where is Canon 7D Mark II and etc.). Few more years and people will talk about Sony, Tamron, Sigma.... when Canon guys will try to catch up.

Click to expand...

Medium format would require an entirely new array of lenses. Also, worse still, an entirely new array of techniques.

APS-C has piles of applications. APS-C and FF are two different tools for two different purposes. APS-C is very valid.

Click to expand...

I can see the need for APS-C SLR's diminishing in the future. The crop sensor line up is starting to get eaten into at both ends - cheaper FF SLR's are being introduced, and we'll no doubt see even cheaper FF bodies introduced in the future - and the cheaper end of crop SLR's has mirrorless cameras to compete with, including Canon's own EOS M.

For the first two years of the 7D's life, there were no FF cameras in Canon's line up that could really be seen as an alternative for sports or wildlife - the 1Ds III was much more expensive and was only 5fps, the 5D II had under 4fps with much worse AF, leaving just the 1.3x crop 1D IV. Now we have the 1D X and 5D III - the 1D X is better in every single way except cost, and the 5D III is cheaper, has a faster frame rate and has better AF than the 1Ds III, so it is a viable upgrade for 7D users.

When FF bodies can be made for comparable prices to today's rebels (not impossible - when the sensor becomes as cheap to make as today's APS-C sensors, just package it in a plastic body with a pentamirror), the only need anyone would have for a crop body SLR and not a crop body mirrorless is to get a small camera with a real OVF. That can be covered with just two models - a high end crop camera for birders who only want to carry around a 500/4 instead of an 800/5.6, and something for people that don't want to lug around a big DSLR, but they still want an optical viewfinder.

Having said that, birders can get very good results cropping with FF, or simply throw on a 1.4x TC (or use a 2x instead of a 1.4x). And for the people that want a small normal zoom camera with an OVF, the body could be made very light with plastic construction and a pentamirror, and there's no reason why they couldn't release a lens much like the old 28-90 lens - it weighed in at just 190g - 10g less than the EF-S 18-55.

So, why carry on with crop SLR's at all if full frame sensors drop in price sufficiently? The only real place where it makes sense is mirrorless cameras, and there's still an argument for FF there.

Calumet is the obvious one that springs to mind, but it looks like they don't open Sundays.

http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/eng/storeLocator/redirect.cfm?sectionID=b2c/storeLocator/storeDetails.cfm&storeId=31&locationId=9154&var=d&ckey=UK

Interesting, and thanks for sharing that. At least one of the problems with the RX1 has been solved. Charging in camera is just a ridiculous idea for those on full day assignments.

Personally, I would shoot in one-shot AF mode instead of Ai Servo with 5D III. With the AF speed of 70-200 II, one-shot mode is plenty fast for situations like this, and Ai Servo may end up giving you unpredictable results IME.

Re: Canon 1dx Portrait orientation exposure problem

Well i feel like a dope- it appears that this is exactly what was happening- I changed it back to center and now it seems to be meterign fine- I tested by focusing on a light bulb, in both orientations- works liek it should- I wasn't even aware that spot meterign could be changed- I had posted htis in another forum too, but noone suggested what you two folks did- This indeed fixed the issue- will try again tomorrow on direct sun on snow- see if everythign is fine- it should be fine- the light tests work liek htey should

Many thanks- Not used to my camera yet- lots to learn I guess-

Mikael Risedal said:

yes , if you want that the ears looks bigger on a child than they are, you shall continue with 200mm lens instead of a shorter lens as 135mm , 85mm or 50mm

Click to expand...

A head/shoulder shot of a young child using a full frame and 50mm lens needs about a 3 foot subject to camera distance to fill the frame. For me, it's much more probable to photogragh a kid substantially further away. At 12 feet, a particular perspective and subject proportions are observed by the human eye. If I shot it with a 50mm lens, which is considered very close to what a human eye sees, I've captured these perspective and proportions observed at 12 feet distance. If I then crop the shot to end up with a head/shoulder shot, I have not changed anything I observed with the naked eye or what I photographed, and I end up with exactly the same perspective and proportions as if using the same 12 foot subject to camera distance and using a 200mm lens so it fills the frame with a head/shoulder shot. No? Isn't the magnification of a 200mm on a full frame 4X and 3 feet times 4 equals 12 feet?

Sure you can argue you don't like what it looks like with the 12 foot distance/perspective, or that a kids ears are too big in your opinion, or a girl is too fat in your judgement, and even argue that both could benefit asthetically from the skewed and inaccurate proportions that shorter pespectives and focal lengths afford in order to mask a reality, but it doesn't make sense to me to claim that longer focal lengths make for disproportion, when in fact the opposite is true.

Chris I ordered one last night from Park Cameras in the UK, £35 inc postage. To be honest it was on my mind to get in touch with Canon given that the camera came back less than perfect from them. It went in with a dirty sensor as described in the post link above and came back with something in the middle of the viewfinder which wasn't there when it went away to them. However I thought it would be easy to clean and I ended up making things worse. Because of that I don't know if the dirt that is now on my sensor, 5 or 6 distinct spots, was there before I mucked around with the blower, so I'm a bit hacked off. I've owned 4 DSLR's before I bought the 1Dx and never had a problem with dirt on the sensor, the total cost of those cameras was way less than that of the 1Dx so taking that into consideration its pretty damn poor on Canon's part that I had to send it away in the first place.

Welcome apop! You should find that this forum is a positive place with a smaller than usual amount of malarkey and a lot of solid advice and frequent posts. Enjoy the ride and have fun!

2400 euro for a 5D Mark III new or a 1 year old 1Ds Mark III, 1400 euro for a 5D Mark II... tough choice but I am gravitating towards the 1Ds III. I prefer the ergonomics and it will be meant for low ISO work, for the high ISO work miss 1DX performs just... purrfect.

I was absolutely going to sell my 24 f1.4 II for the 24-70, but after using the 24 more again for a period I just realized I could never ever part with it. Although I would also really like to have the 24-70, couldn't be further from each other, but it will take som saving, because, man..

Tried the 24-70 mk2 the other day and yes, it's seriously sharp, but I'm more impressed with the color and contrast compared to the mk1. BUT it isn't anywhere close to being as cool as the 24 f1.4 ;D

Anyway, glad to see DxO score it high since we've always agreed with DxO here on CR :

ok, so in theory you could make one that allows you to use EF lenses on your EF-S camera without losing FoV

but definitely not with this design: this adapter is actually shorter than a dumb glass-less one

I would think* there must be pretty big downsides to having an actually longer adapter (which is what you need for that EF to EF-S thing) while mantaining infinite focus, plus there's a mirror so you can't end up close to the sensor... I'd pretty much rule it out


* that guess is based on the fact that they had no restritions regarding size, and they ended up with a shorter-than-usual adapter: this must be what gives you the best IQ

SPL said:

Great images Ruddy!

Click to expand...

Hey thank you!

Mikael Risedal said:

Why the comparison between a APS sensor and a 24x36 sensor?
If there have been a DR comparison the 5dmk3 had been blowing of the street.Inside the Fuji are a Sony 16 mp with Fujis CFA
Regarding resolution and 16Mp against a 24 x36mm sensor there are now question about the real resolution=.a 2,3 larger sensor area in the Canon 5dmk3 .
so I ask , why comparing a APS sensor with a canon 24x 36mm sensor?

Click to expand...

Excellent question. Without knowing the photographer and if he gets compensation for promoting a particular camera, comparisons like that one leave me wondering.

You are Macro focusing, which is always slow. Some lenses do not work well with live view, particularly 3rd party lenses.
The 100mmL is among the fastest, but even it will be slow in liveview. If you have the 100L, set the range limiter to speed things up.
This has nothing to do with the camera, its the macro part that is slow.

I use SmugMug Pro Account and have been happy. Really need to get in there and reorganize and update - but thats my fault!!!! I'll being refining the whole thing in the near future . . .
www.mikefosslerphotography.com

ishdakuteb said:

M.ST said:

If Canon don´t put a real replacement for the 1Ds on the market, they lose a lot of pros.

Click to expand...

I thought:

1. 1D is crop series
2. 1Ds is full frame series
3. 1DX is end of 1D series with crop

Click to expand...

But the pattern was always the 1Ds is more of the Studio 1D, where as the 1D was the fast 1D.
But with the 1Dx, it sort of merged the 2 together to just get the full frame speedy camera.

A proper replacement for the 1Ds should come.

No, the ones I tested were $5 fotodiox ones, that's why I said cheap resin filters. I have not used hi-tech or lee.