5D Mark II Replacement

[bvukich]

From Canon's recent actions I think the 5D III will be down graded, just like the 60D. This leaves room for a 7D like full frame (lets call it a 3D ;D ) that will sell for more than the 5D II.

That does make a lot of sense. The current lineup is approximately this:

Consumer	Prosumer	Pro
xxxxD xxxD	xxD 7D	1D
	5D​	1Ds

A new FF would (obviously) need to be either above or below the 5D, like:

Consumer	Prosumer	Pro
xxxxD xxxD	xxD 7D	1D
	5D 3D​	1Ds

Or:

Consumer	Prosumer	Pro
xxxxD xxxD	xxD 7D	1D
	9D 5D​	1Ds

In my mind, either way, the build quality of the 5D series pretty much needs to change. But that being said, Canon will do whatever Canon decides to do. Everything here is pure speculation and wishfull thinking.

 

[Justin]

I agree. Unless Canon tries to resegment the 5D lower in the lineup and introduce a 4, 3, or 2D.

Otherwise I expect the 5D3 to be a killer 36x24mm sensor camera with the works: AF points and speed, high iso, big files with resolution to spare, new video features and optimizations.

The camera that follows in the 1 series will be a game changer and will not compare to the 5D3 so differentiation between the segments won't be an issue anymore. The 5D3 will be everything that we wanted the 5D2 to be and a little more. The 1Ds4 or probably new name will be a beast.

Sorry, but I think you're all being way too conservative...

The specifications that people are suggesting for the 5D Mk3 are typically Canon, so I can see your points... But, Canon have allowed themselves to get into a position where Nikon have regained large amounts of market share by being far too tight with their feature set.

9 AF points? A plastic body? Come on, what price point could this possibly sell at and not look pathetic compared to a furture D800? Canon have already made a massive error with the 60D and when the D7000 hits the stores, only Canon converts will buy it at anything like its current price.

Do you think that the D800 will come with Nikon's old 11pt multi-CAM 1000 focusing system and a plastic body? Canon seriously needs to up-spec their cameras or risk losing the mid end of the market, so how about these specifications:

45 AF points: 19 cross type
5 fps
100% viewfinder
dual memory card slots
improved weather sealing
HD video - I'm sure some care about the details, most don't or won't as soon as proper full-frame video cameras appear.

 

[L-Fletcher]

I think it's dangerous to try and predict the exact specifications of the 5D Mark III, particularly resolution. The 60D proved that (although logically, in retrospect, it does fit).

But from what we've seen from a constant update of megapixels right across the board, on all their bodies, is that Canon is bound to increase the MP count in the 5D MK III; by how much, it's probably going to be hard to predict.

I'd say, personally:

- Anywhere between 24-28 MP
- Improved AF (chance of matching the 7D's system, but possibly not, considering the 5D range target market) system
- Digic 5 processor
- 100% processor
- 4.5-5fps burst rate (depending on MP)
- SD/CF card slots
- Maybe improvements to build, but I doubt it will be as weather-sealed as the 7D, let alone the 1D MK IV
- 1080p 30/24fps HD video (but still with 5 min limit)

 

[Edwin Herdman]

Well, Canon sure didn't heed that advice with the 60D...they churned out a package worse than the old one (but with 3 more megapixels - woot!).

So what's worse about it?

It's missing microadjustment and it's missing a magnesium alloy frame. It still has a pentaprism, has a top LCD, has a new sensor that adds more than just 3MP resolution, and they added a swivel screen. All this in a package that's $200 less than the 50D launched for in 2008. Yes, you lose Compact Flash - I've not heard that the 60 MB/s transfer makes much difference for heat (like in video, which it doesn't have anyway), and CF is much more expensive for the capacity than the same size of SDHC cards anyway. The ergonomics of locking the mode dial and the wheel are controversial, but that's a design decision I think is separate from pricing.

I wrote the other day about people wanting not to pay less and get less than they want, but Canon has to set differences between models, else they would either have one camera too expensive for most to buy, or they would have a nearly infinite range of models with no differentiation. (Would make for some confusing logistics at the factory.)

Nikon only builds consumer cameras and pro cameras. There isn't much difference between their pro models for things like weather sealing, metering and auto focus. The top of line D3x - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible and the bottom of the pro line D300s - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible. Canon would never do this, they worry about cannibalizing sales. And this is why a 7D will never be as good as a D400.

I think the reality is more nuanced than you admit. I don't see Canon ever having the rather x0D-ish "prosumer" tag to the 7D. The USA website's page for the 7D marks it for "serious photographers and semi-professionals." They want to have an APS-C camera for professionals, not just because APS-C chips are cheaper, but because the format offers extra reach with lenses. Somebody with a 5D or 1D series body may carry a 7D around as a second body, and Canon doesn't want to punish them for their purchase. The x0D line has been repositioned from semiprofessional or "prosumer" to "advanced amateur," though I don't see tons of changes myself, aside from the addition of a lot of new features and less emphasis on the old points that were thought to constitute a "pro" camera but which weren't adding new functionality (i.e. the magnesium alloy body) or advertising bullet points.

Other than that, I don't see your autofocus comparison providing your argument much support. Number of AF points has seemed to be going in Nikon's direction for a while - compare the D7000 and the Canon 60D, for example; the number and types of AF points was seen as a point in the D7000's favor there.

For Nikon's part, their USA website shows five tiers of cameras, with the D3x00 couple at the bottom. Perhaps they do fit cameras with just two levels of finish, but they sure don't spec and price them in just two tiers. The differences between the lower-end models in particular are quite varied.

The camera that follows in the 1 series will be a game changer and will not compare to the 5D3 so differentiation between the segments won't be an issue anymore. The 5D3 will be everything that we wanted the 5D2 to be and a little more. The 1Ds4 or probably new name will be a beast.

I wouldn't be surprised if these new cameras you speak of just add some new features from the recent consumer releases, like the swivel screen from the 60D, in a body that otherwise has modernized specifications over their predecessors. The one obvious wild card is the idea of a 3D camera, which would be an obvious choice for a "3D" moniker, but I don't care about that and a lot of other folks don't, either. There's also the possibility of a mirrorless or semi-transparent (like the Sony Alpha A-55) camera but those strike me as again consumer-oriented cameras (at least at the beginning), even if they are EF compatible.

 

[Edwin Herdman]

I'd say, personally:

- Anywhere between 24-28 MP
- Improved AF (chance of matching the 7D's system, but possibly not, considering the 5D range target market) system
- Digic 5 processor
- 100% processor
- 4.5-5fps burst rate (depending on MP)
- SD/CF card slots
- Maybe improvements to build, but I doubt it will be as weather-sealed as the 7D, let alone the 1D MK IV
- 1080p 30/24fps HD video (but still with 5 min limit)

I'm looking for it to be in the 30MP+ range actually.

Otherwise that looks pretty solid. 8 FPS bursts would be good, but I feel this is stretching the as-yet-unseen-DIGIC V a bit much I share your concerns about the AF specification, though it feels safe to say it will at the very least match the 60D in autofocus - and the 60D is (per Osiris) said to be pretty good in that regard. AF sensor size differences aside, there doesn't seem to be a reason it should stick with the current underwhelming and outdated AF specification, nor why a camera $1000 more than the 7D should have inferior AF. After all, there's a lot of difference between the 1D / 1Ds cameras, with the 1D Mark IV having 45 autofocus points, and the 7D. Those are also 1.3x crop cameras, and they are better suited to telephoto and journalism applications - not to mention event photos, I'd think, so if Canon wants to differentiate, that's a reasonable place to start, rather than gutting the AF sensor of a 5D Mark III.

I am rather hoping 1080p is more than five minutes. They ought to have an improved codec, as well as a 60FPS mode. 24 and 30 FPS modes for 720p would be a good idea as well (why they've been cutting 30fps from their other cameras is beyond me - it's almost like they're sending a signal not to use the camera for video and to use a camcorder instead, but...but...) It may have an SDXC slot in addition to CF, which could bode well for video run times.

 

[L-Fletcher]

I'd like to see SD card slots in the 5D MK III (I use SD cards for my smaller bodies), but it's quite possible that Canon will ignore it, like it did with the 7D.

I have no doubt, actually, that the 5D MK III will have 28-32MP, but personally I'm looking for not much more than 24-28MP.

I made a mistake when I mentioned the 5 minute limit - it should be 12 minutes (29 min total cut off). And it won't change, probably, due to the CF limits being its reason.

My actual predictions (realistically speaking):
- 28 to 32 MP
- Digic V processor
- Improved AF with 9-point focusing system
- 100% viewfinder
- 1080p at 24/25/30fps HD video (with 12 min. limit for 1080p)
- Dual CF card slots
- 4.5fps burst rate
- same magnesium-alloy body, no additional build improvements/weather-sealing (as the 5D MK II is already equal to the 7D in terms of weather-sealing)

 

[c.d.embrey]

Nikon only builds consumer cameras and pro cameras. There isn't much difference between their pro models for things like weather sealing, metering and auto focus. The top of line D3x - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible and the bottom of the pro line D300s - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible. Canon would never do this, they worry about cannibalizing sales. And this is why a 7D will never be as good as a D400.

I think the reality is more nuanced than you admit. I don't see Canon ever having the rather x0D-ish "prosumer" tag to the 7D. The USA website's page for the 7D marks it for "serious photographers and semi-professionals." They want to have an APS-C camera for professionals, not just because APS-C chips are cheaper, but because the format offers extra reach with lenses. Somebody with a 5D or 1D series body may carry a 7D around as a second body, and Canon doesn't want to punish them for their purchase. The x0D line has been repositioned from semiprofessional or "prosumer" to "advanced amateur," though I don't see tons of changes myself, aside from the addition of a lot of new features and less emphasis on the old points that were thought to constitute a "pro" camera but which weren't adding new functionality (i.e. the magnesium alloy body) or advertising bullet points.

Other than that, I don't see your autofocus comparison providing your argument much support. Number of AF points has seemed to be going in Nikon's direction for a while - compare the D7000 and the Canon 60D, for example; the number and types of AF points was seen as a point in the D7000's favor there.

The comparison is very simple.

The APS-C Canon 7D "19-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 at center: Dual Cross Sensor)." The Canon 1D IV "All 45 AF points are horizontal-line sensitive at f/5.6 (vertical). Thirty-nine of the 45 AF points are vertical-line sensitive at f/2.8 for cross-type focusing."

The Canon 7D does not use the same focusing as the Canon 1D IV.

The 5D II "9 AF Points (1 Cross Type) + 6 AF Assist Points." The 1Ds III "45-point (19 high-precision cross-type AF points plus 26 Assist AF points)"

The Canon 5D II doesn't use the same focusing as the 1Ds III.

On the Nikon side the APS-C D300s, the full frame D700, full frame D3s and the $8000.00 full frame D3x all use the same 51 point focusing.

What's so hard to understand? Canon down grades the focusing for their lower cost cameras, Nikon doesn't. Simple as that!

The above may make little or no difference to you. Many 5D II shooters only use the center focus point.

 

[richy]

Canon make cameras around all the same price points as nikon, ergo the whole nikon don't make prosumer cameras thing is just marketing. The 300 \ 700 is in the same ballpark as the 7d \ 5d. Nikon just market differently.

Re the AF, yup but did nikon put the d3x sensor in the d700? They put their 'lower end pro(if that makes sense)' sensor in. So canon put a sensor from a body that costs 8k into the 5d2 yet nikon only put a sensor from a 4-5k body in their d700. That is why canon scuppered the AF. Also the AF motors in the d700 aren't as fast as the d3. Minor difference but it is there, else why would anyone buy a d3? For the d3\d3x and 1ds4 to sell for 2-3x the price as the d700&5d3 they have to be significantly better. Nikon chose not to put their best sensor in the d700, canon chose not to put their best AF in the 5d2. Want to shoot sports on a canon, prior to the 7d just get a 1d2 or 1d3 used. Want to shoot landscapes on a nikon, stitch. Both makers had to down spec their 'mid range \ pro sumer \ its pro honestly' cameras otherwise it would kill sales of their top lines.

I would love to see truly crazy specced cheap cameras, and specs do evolve, but pining for a $2500 camera thats an amalgam of all the best parts of $4000 and $8000 cameras seems a little optimistic I would love it, it would slash my capex, but really, put yourself in the position of trying to sell that to canons board. Yeah I want to completely destroy the sales of our two flagship cameras by drastically undercutting them in price whilst offering virtually all the same features.

A decent amount of money for canon comes from pro's, probably not as much as from rebels, but we still spend 10-40k a year probably each. They know we will make purchases mostly based on a business case. There would be virtually no business case for a 1ds4 if the 5d3 was that good. I truly wish it was, because it either means I get a great camera cheap, or the 1ds4 has to come with dancing girls and a lifetime supply of la grande annee. Either way its all good.

I just canon would grow a pair and release their roadmap for a rolling 12 months. It wouldn't be fast enough for nikon to react to as cameras can take 24-36 months to come to market, and it would allow pros to budget during and between financial years which is important.

Take care

PS- I wish they would sell a more expensive 7d and 5d2 with the 5 minute video thing removed. Crazies. I know its to protect their video line. But I don't want to carry extra stuff and having both in one makes sense even if it costs more.

 

[L-Fletcher]

PS- I wish they would sell a more expensive 7d and 5d2 with the 5 minute video thing removed. Crazies. I know its to protect their video line. But I don't want to carry extra stuff and having both in one makes sense even if it costs more.

As I corrected myself and mentioned above: there's no 5 minute limit. It's 12 minutes at 1080p and 24~ mins at 4:3 640x480.

5 minutes is the Nikon D90's limit.

 

[Etienne]

I don't have many wishes for the 5DIII:

Better auto-focus
Better high ISO: too much banding in 5DII, noise could be more grain-like
Improved video features: better AF, dedicated buttons, less moire/jello, how about rack auto-focussing (that would be awesome, and could be done with firmware in 5DII)

MP is fine,
build quality is ok

 

[Edwin Herdman]

The comparison is very simple.

Informative, but still nothing touching my major point. I was wrong to suggest that Nikon hasn't been consistent with specifications on its SLRs, like the AF point counts which have been remarkably stable regardless of the year or price (you'd think they could make it better as time goes on...but Canon has to catch up first, right?). On the Canon side my point is that AF module "downgrading" is only relative to other cameras in the contemporary lineup. By the time a 5D Mark III comes out, the 7D will be a year old. The 5D Mark II's autofocus sensor is similar enough to the original 5D's, and it's simply time for a change. The 5D line is apart from the "prosumer" or advanced amateur etc. lines, and it's separate from the 1D / 1Ds / 1.3x crop lines as well.

It certainly can use autofocus at least as good as the 7D, but in truth it needs to be considerably better than that. The 5D Mark III (or whatever occupies the line) really needs continuous autofocus in movie mode, for example, given the camera's use for filmmaking, which try as they might Canon can't sway users to the more expensive 1.3x crop cameras for. Unless Canon is hoping to aim people towards a new line entirely, or a different kind of product (like camcorders), they will simply lose a lot of friends if the AF system stays stagnant.

For what it's worth, the 7D's 19 cross-type sensors ought to beat (at least for photographs) the more impressive-sounding 51 point AF sensor-equipped cameras, when those like the D700 and D300S have 15 cross type. By the "Nikon only builds two tiers" theory, the D7000 is placed at the very top of the low end, with just 9 cross-type sensors, 39 overall. Not a bad argument given its price.

On the lower-tier cameras Nikon hasn't been shy about holding down costs - and cutting features: The Multi-CAM1000 AF sensor in the D3100, released almost at the same time as the D7000, has just 11 points, none of them cross-type. Even my poor old T1i has a cross-type sensor.

 

[Flake]

There's a lot more to autofocus than the number of cross points, I'm afraid there are plenty of people who believe that the 5D MkII & the original one have a better AF system than the xxD cameras.

There's no way Canon would cheapen the 5D brand by using a plastic body. Everything in there is packed pretty tight. and if you believe Canons excuse then there's not even enough room for a larger autofocus sensor. The probable reason the 5D MkII didn't get a better AF is because all its engineers were trying yo sort the 1D AF debacle.

Many Pros moved to Nikon for sports purely because of the 1D AF issues, not because of the sensor, and not because of superior image quality. As for magazine covers being shot on various cameras well if they're that good might as well junk the Hasselblad, the D3x and the 1Ds, because they're all pretty pointless. Why spend upwards of £25K on a system when you can do it for £500? But why stop there? Magazine covers have been shot on a G10 !


If the only people buying camera equipment were pro's then the camera companies would have gone out of business years ago. Of course the majority of cameras sold, and the majority of a camera companies income is from the entry models, and most are first time buyers who are hugely influenced by reviewers. Just to give an example What Digital Camera rated the Nikon 70 - 200mm f/2.8 VR II as a better lens than Canons IS MkII purely on the grounds of the cost of the two lenses at the time of the review the Nion's price was quoted at £1630 and the Canon which had been very recently released as £2200. The street price for the Nikon is now £1600 and the Canon at £1670. No explanation or caveat as to the Canon's seeming £500 extra cost was given and the whole review was predicated on this price. Proof that reviewers can be strongly biased to one brand over another.

Every other properly condicted objective review has the Canon as a slightly better performer than the Nikon, have a look at Dpreview.

 

[oalali]

My wish list

Here is my wish list:

a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.
dual digic IV (or V).
5-7 frames per second
Canon 1ds autofocus system . (to set it apart from the current 1d bodies)
same form factor and weather sealing as the current model.

8)

 

[Waleed Essam]

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

 

[Flake]

Re: My wish list

Here is my wish list:

a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.
dual digic IV (or V).
5-7 frames per second
Canon 1ds autofocus system . (to set it apart from the current 1d bodies)
same form factor and weather sealing as the current model.

8)

Why don't you just buy a 1Ds MkIII then?

 

[Mark D5 TEAM II]

And here's the winning and most-likely 5D3 spec, hats off to you sir 8):

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

 

[Flake]

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

It is much more difficult than you realise! The sensor is so significantly larger that the casre has to be completely redesigned to accommodate the shutter & mirror mechanism, then there's the pentaprism which is also significantly larger. Plus another issue which doesn't seem to get much discussion and that is the flatness & alignment of the FF sensor & the 5D MkII has had more than a few issues with miss aligned sensors. Because thes FF unit is so much larger it suffers dissproportionately from miss alignment in both the vertical & more in the horizontal axis, but it also suffers from warping & rippling, caused by the heating & cooling of the silicon wafers in the manufacturing process. One company has calimed that it can produce sensors which are perfectly aligned (can't remember who though!)

ISO 12800 is not a real Iso, it is a sofware one where the camera uses Iso 6400 increases the shitter speed and then drags the exposure back by software. High Iso performance is desireable in a digital camera, because dynamic range is the difference between clipping & the noise floor, hence there is a higher dynamic range on a High Iso performing camera.

So no chance of putting it into a 7D body, it's not much larger anyway!

 

[Jarveye]

anyone care to estimate a date when we will know the real spec? either by announcement or a likely time when canon wont be able to prevent a leak of info?

 

[traveller]

Canon is caught in a trap of its own making, as much as Nikon's.

They can't produce a D700-like camera because they have no fast pro-level full frame model and are (rightly) worried that a lot of pros would choose such a camera over the 1D Mk4. Similarly, the AF system in the 7D is of lower spec than the 1D series because they are afraid that an 8fps, 18MP APS-C model would be too good an alternative to a 16MP APS-H 1D Mk4 for many users considering purchasing the latter. Had the 1D Mk4 been planned to be full frame, I believe that the 7D would probably have shared its AF system and the 60D would have got some sort of 19pt system (maybe not all cross type).

So now, Canon have some tough choices for the next generation and what they decide for the high end models will impact upon the lower end cameras. Should they continue to push APS-H in the 1D line, or go full frame? This isn't an easy decision for them to make; many people seem to like the 1.3 crop as a good compramise that gives them more reach with lighter lenses. But the D3s has shown people what a lower-resolution full frame sensor is capable of and I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C). If the next 1D goes full frame, it will free up the cameras below it to be better, without stealing its market.

 

[unfocused]

I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).

Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor? If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.