Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

[Canon-F1]

So you're happy to accept that the 5Dm3 is better for people who shoot video
...and for those who shoot weddings
...and those who shoot events
...and those who shoot sports
...and of course anyone who does any of the above and studio or landscape work

he wrote: and you have to understand the different needs.

i mean it´s pretty clear that he accepts that, or not?

And if you can't wait for it then buy a D800 or go MF both will do what you do better than a 5Dm3.

i think many here have put a lot of money in a CANON SYSTEM.
so we ask canon to deliver.... not nikon.

and i think it is only human that we want the best, not only good enough.
competition is in our DNA.. olympics 2012?

The 5dm3 isn't any worse, and it adds a lot in other areas. If those other areas don't interest you then fine, just accept that it isn't the right tool for you and get on with your life.

but we are individuals here, with individual needs

looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion. :

 

[Marine03]

I to am excited in some ways by this camera.

1st. upgrading to FF from my 450D I dream over the possibilities of low light photography and stunning images.
2. I have done several events like weddings this year with the 450D as a second shooter, about $400 worth so far for the year and $3500 is never going to be in my budget with a new family. $2000 kit or less with just body however would be a possibility.
3. 19PT AF would be great for the occasional sports shots, I'm a center point type of guy most the time.
4. I'm not afraid of plastic bodies, 4 years of 450D use and I haven't broken it yet. Maybe every 5D owner uses it to drive nails?
5. FPS, 4? ehhhhh I guess that's is tolerable, I normally don't need more than my 3.2 I currently have but wish I had 6FPS some days, which I doubt would happen with the 5D3 being 6, but how about 5?
6. Built in flash can be handy especially if its a trigger.

ooo and please don't totally cripple it with like a 5 shot buffer.

 

[DJL329]

Will a plastic body mean they could add GPS? (If I remember correctly, the magnesium body is the reason that Canon states the 5D II and III can't have in-camera GPS.)

As for a new, non-L kit lens, could it be the long-awaited 50mm f/1.4 USM II -or- a 50mm f/1.4 STM?

 

[7enderbender]

How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?

If you don't think there is a noticable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor then maybe you could tell me if you notice a difference between these photos:

[...]

That's a back to back comparison with the 5D3 resized to 5D2 size. The 5D3 sensor has a significantly better AA filter that is more efficient in terms of preventing lost detail for a given level of moire reduction and so produces sharper images.

Furthermore many of the people saying that the 5D3 isn't that much better in ISO are not comparing the cameras correctly in likely two ways. Camera manufactuers generally make up their cameras ISO ratings out of thin air. There are a few acceptable ways of rating ISO but most manufacturers chose fringe methods which aren't widely respected so the can make up their ISO numbers as they see fit and when the 5D2 was released the ISO ratings were very optimistic to say the least with ISO 12800 being actually around what is commonly accepted as ISO 7000. With the 5D3 Canon has been less optimistic so ISO 12800 is actually a "true" ISO of 10000. The point is that people are comparing cameras using their RATED ISO which are on different scales not ISO measured on the same scale. It's like comparing a car going 0-60 kph vs a car that's going 0-60 mph, which doesn't make sense. The other issue is that after speaking to several Canon Techs and Reps, it seems that Canon specially designed the 5D3 to produce very low noise JPG's for photographers that have to shoot in JPG. Part of the innovation that they introduced was software but they also engineered the hardware to help in the process to make the noise coming from the sensor have far less speckle noise and have a very gausian distribution. This makes computer programs able to distinguish from the noise easier so when you apply noise reduction there is a slight advantage to the 5D3 of around a quarter of a stop more than the RAW data would suggest.


In any case here's a comparison between the 5D3 and the 5D2 rendered at the same resolution with the same ACR settings applied at a true ISO of 10084 for both cameras, this is a combination of a series of exposures using a method developed in consultation with the Cambridge Signal Processing Lab. I do consulting for a few camera review websites to develop testing methods and put this together for a project, with permission from all collaborators.

In any case feel free to spot the difference between the 5D2 and 5D3.

[...]

Look, that's all fine and maybe I should have said "noticeable difference for all practical purposes" or something to that extent. Clearly the 5DIII is a positive development on many levels. I wouldn't mind having one. And I can see that there are applications and user types who need exactly those improvements.

All I'm saying is that to me personally I see no reason to sell my MarkII and shell out a significant amount of money to upgrade. Hi ISO stuff, AF, and all the other improvements are not important enough for me and I have yet to see a real life photo where any one would say, wow, this was shot with camera A, B or C. They are all very very good, no doubt. None is "perfect".

So everyone needs to balance features, little quirks and cost of course. I personally would want a smaller, more plasticky camera for the minuscule improvement in the sensor functions that at least for my real-life applications wouldn't make any difference. Honestly, the 5DII is small and plasticky enough as it is. I actually added the battery grip to add some weight for balancing things according to what I'm used to and prefer.

And as I said, the biggest selling point for a 5DIII or 1DX would be its compatibility with the new flash system. But that adds even a LOT more money.

Considerations for people with other priorities or people new to a system may look entirely different and I'm not saying that's not valid. I'm just struggling with the above rumored features for that kind of money. 2k is hardly "entry level".

 

[Dylan777]

I'm very excited by the news, happy that it's CR2 and not just a wild rumor.

- I'm excited about a plastic body. I'm a traveler and hiker, and every gram counts.
- Same price as 5D2, but it'll have vastly better AF, a newer sensor, and it'll have digic5.
- If the price starts at $2k at launch, it'll only go downward from there on

I wonder if the new lens will be 28-135/3.5-5.6 mk2 STM?

This might just be the camera that'll have me switch from crop to FF. But then I'll have to buy new UWA and fisheye lenses :-\

Another enthusiastic target buyer. Perhaps Canon have got it right.

I agreed.

FF sensor + 19points AF = enough for enthusiastic shooter to jump from crop to FF.

 

[thepancakeman]

Oh, and as for terminating posts and posters, a word to the you know who. There's a strong Judeo-Christian bias in that neighborhood; something as innocuous as the "F" word will get you terminated here in the gentleman's club.

Seriously? You're going to make it a religious issue to act cordially and try to use an above 7th grade vocabulary? Maybe we should try to stick to discussing cameras and photography.

 

[D_Rochat]

looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion. :

No. Having an opinion and excessive complaining about the same thing are two different things. I also seem to recall him getting nasty with Brian for voicing HIS opinion. : :

 

[daniemare]

The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.

if canon would be the only camera maker it sure looks like a good deal.
compared to the rumored D600... well... no.

and you have to understand the different needs.

for me the 5D MK3 sensor has no real advantage.
i shot below ISO 1600 99% of the time.

i shoot landscape, macro and home studio studio stuff.
85% of the time i use the center AF point.

i shot no video.

so why should people like me update to a 5D MK3 or this new FF camera?

from a company point of view it sure makes sense.
but we are individuals here, with individual needs.

Ever thought that it might not be for people like you but people like me with Rebels and 60D's to upgrade to.
And I can just assume - there is a lot of us

 

[D_Rochat]

Will a plastic body mean they could add GPS? (If I remember correctly, the magnesium body is the reason that Canon states the 5D II and III can't have in-camera GPS.)

I don't know about the magnesium body, but having a built in GPS could backfire for some working Pros who shoot in sensitive areas where GPS is prohibited. For that reason, I doubt we'll ever see built in GPS in DSLRs. That and the GPS accessory is a money maker.

 

[ishdakuteb]

Umm.... I would be really suprised when one would choose Canon New Entry Level over Nikon D600 (as if reported specs of both cameras are correct) even if at the same price. There is one exception is that that person has too many Canon lens (ooopsss).

if a newbie wants to buy into the DSLR world and asks me what to buy .. and the specs are true.. my unbiased advice.. -> buy the D600.

sorry canon... but on paper the D600 looks better.

@Canon F1: Kudo to your suggestion Canon F1! You are absolutely correct. I would suggest the same thing as if they would like to go with Canon. However, as if Canon don't pay really close to voices from their customers, I bet that they would lose theirs... There are many lessons out there to take a look at (Sony TV vs. Samsung, Nokia vs. Samsung and Apple, etc). Didn't those company lose number of customers with same kinda reasons?

I guess that Canon needs to keep in mind that there is no such a DSLR newbie knowing why they are needing a full frame camera (For example, how many newbie knows how to shoot a picture in low light situation or dynamic range situation i.e. in a under shade of tress and sun? like cherry farm at high noon with a windy day

 

[awinphoto]

I'm very excited by the news, happy that it's CR2 and not just a wild rumor.

- I'm excited about a plastic body. I'm a traveler and hiker, and every gram counts.
- Same price as 5D2, but it'll have vastly better AF, a newer sensor, and it'll have digic5.
- If the price starts at $2k at launch, it'll only go downward from there on

I wonder if the new lens will be 28-135/3.5-5.6 mk2 STM?

This might just be the camera that'll have me switch from crop to FF. But then I'll have to buy new UWA and fisheye lenses :-\

Another enthusiastic target buyer. Perhaps Canon have got it right.

I agreed.

FF sensor + 19points AF = enough for enthusiastic shooter to jump from crop to FF.

awww hell, the 5d2 AF was so terrible I would have gotten the 5d3 even if it only had the 19 pt 7d AF system... the 61pt system now is just gravy to me. Horses for courses, a 5d2 shooter not wanting to shell out $3500 for the 5d3, and get improved AF again, more high ISO, better sensor and technology... all for under $2000 (supposedly)... to me that's a no-brainer, but what do I know.

 

[daniemare]

I'm very excited by the news, happy that it's CR2 and not just a wild rumor.

- I'm excited about a plastic body. I'm a traveler and hiker, and every gram counts.
- Same price as 5D2, but it'll have vastly better AF, a newer sensor, and it'll have digic5.
- If the price starts at $2k at launch, it'll only go downward from there on

I wonder if the new lens will be 28-135/3.5-5.6 mk2 STM?

This might just be the camera that'll have me switch from crop to FF. But then I'll have to buy new UWA and fisheye lenses :-\

Another enthusiastic target buyer. Perhaps Canon have got it right.

I agreed.

FF sensor + 19points AF = enough for enthusiastic shooter to jump from crop to FF.

awww hell, the 5d2 AF was so terrible I would have gotten the 5d3 even if it only had the 19 pt 7d AF system... the 61pt system now is just gravy to me. Horses for courses, a 5d2 shooter not wanting to shell out $3500 for the 5d3, and get improved AF again, more high ISO, better sensor and technology... all for under $2000 (supposedly)... to me that's a no-brainer, but what do I know.

I am also one of those target buyers very excited about this.

I was just wondering, back in Feb 2012 when I wrote a post about the cost of FF and suggested that there is space on the market for a 70D like body (60D + Digic 5), 7D AF and a FF sensor, many commented that you couldn't just drop that 7D AF in over a FF sensor. It seems that this is exactly what will happen. So do they need to change anything or not?

 

[ishdakuteb]

i really like the idea of a smaller lighter full frame, i dont need 9 fps.. or 60 focusing points. what i do need is the low light performance and the high ISO performance of the 5d mk III.

i know this wont be a perfect camera, but i'm really looking forward to seeing what really comes out and the performance of it. Nikon is really pushing Canon in good new ways. competition is a good thing.

D

From what you are saying, I am not sure why you need a full frame? Just currious... Want a real focal range?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It does sound like a repackaged 5d2. The probability of inheriting 7D's AF sounds promising and the package might come awfully close to mark3 for 1.5k less; perhaps some features chopping is due.

on another note, i seriously wonder about Canon's product planners abilities. 5years ago they were alone in the game and now they're being dragged around. Suddenly Canon who was in the frontier of FF finds itself stalling with cameras between 18 & 22mp and the competition ( that 5 yrs ago didnt even had FF) has models spanning from 12 to 36mp

That's why I (and a few others) started to raise havoc on the forums 3-4 years ago. It was all easy enough to see. But most said we were trolls spouting nonsense and that Canon would always easily be far ahead of Nikon....

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I can't believe how this is actually being taken as a serious option FOR ANYBODY. Over $2000 with taxes . . if you are a serious photographer, then get a mkIII and mean it. The laod of crap they saturate tyhe market witrh these days is amazing . . . thanks to the sheep out there. And thank god for plastic, and $2000 FF cameras too . . . profit grab, nothing else. So, I guess the 5DmkII will be around $1000 now.

$1500 extra is still a lot to many people

the main problem is not so much this camera but the rumored D600 which might have a much better sensor and an important extra fps and perhaps better AF for perhaps same price

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Basically the only difference between the 5d2 and 5d3 is the AF and thats worth $1500 in that case. but this AF UPGRADE isn't worth the same price? Im lost. and this is coming from a 5d3 owner.

no moire and 1.5-2 stops better SNR for video and a critical 2 extra fps and faster shutter response and no banding at very high iso are pretty big items too though, in addition to the AF (not a fan of the new VF though, easy replaceable screens would've meant more to me) oh and it's not super huge but it seems to do a solid 1/2+ better SNR

(granted it was sad they STILL crippled autoiso and they crippled video by not giving it crop modes, zebra stripes and focus peaking, ridiculous petty games by canon marketing and the dynamic range at lower ISO to actually become a trace worse when Nikon gets like 3+ stops better.....)

(and other nice ones, not that they really cost anything (other than perhaps the build): C1-C3 can now auto-update (really nice), dedicated video toggle switch, instant jump to exact 100% percent review, quick in field rating, audio meters, outline around histogram, nicer screen, less flimsy build, dual MFA for zooms (next they need to add near, mid and far distance settings perhaps), mostly they don't really add anything to Canon's cost and some could even be put on the 5D2 with a new firmware, but whatever, they do all make it more usable in the field absolutely for sure)

 

[RC]

The more I think about this rumor, this could could work out very nicely for me assuming the specs are within my needs. This might just be the perfect camera for those in my shoes or on a limited budget. (Obviously if funds were unlimited I would already have a 5D3.)

Since I have a 7D and plan to keep it and get a FF in addition, I will have the reach and FPS with the 7D when I need it.

A FF (I'll call it a 6D) will be my landscape, portrait, and low light body. Assuming the specs are at least these:
- same (or better) sensor than the 5DII
- 7D or better AF
- AFMA
- form factor no smaller than the 7D
- 100% view finder
- prefer metal body (may compromise)
- weather sealing (at least that of 7D)
- swivel screen--don't want
- pop up flash--don't want unless its a radio trigger

All my lens are EF Ls so everything is line.

If this doesn't work out then I'm back to looking at a 5D2 or 5D3--but a 5D3 has to come down or I'll have to go used.

Sorry, I know, this is an extension off a previous post, just optimistic that this might be my solution.

 

[Canon-F1]

looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion. :

No. Having an opinion and excessive complaining about the same thing are two different things. I also seem to recall him getting nasty with Brian for voicing HIS opinion. : :

well his opinion is that everyone should stop posting about nikon here.

I have no problem with people moving to Nikon. However I do think that the constant putting down of Canon to justify moving to Nikon with so called 'facts' to justify their move is not appropriate on a Canon Rumours forum. I dont logon to this forum to join in with speculation/rumours about Nikon kit.

This site is for users interested in Canon equipment, not for people to spread the word about how good Nikon a camera in comparison to Canon's camera - especially one that is only rumoured.

I think in this case the best option would have been to post this thread on a more general photographic forum

If I want to read about Nikon I go to Nikon Rumours. I dont come to Canon Rumours to listen to the Nikon Fanboys tell me what a poor job Canon are doing.

Well there are two trolls who have come out of the closet. Go back to NR lads

and so on.. lots more posted in the third party forum that is exactly made for such discussions. :

you were talking about "excessive complaining" ?

 

[RGomezPhotos]

Is that $1,999 for the camera AND the kit lens? Or just the body?

Cause if it's for the camera AND the kit lens....I am soooooo buying one. $1,499 would be sweet for a entry level full frame.

I doubt they would include a $500 lens with this camera. More like $200....

 

[crasher8]

Oh I see…..I'm not a 'serious' photographer unless I go into 'serious' debt!

The 2k price point is perfect and not one being used by Canon at the moment. You have a big jump from the 7D to a 5D mk2 and let's not get into the size of the jump from a 7D to a mk3. Once again, some of us have budgets. I for one am liking the specs. Not loving but liking.