5D Mark III Brief Specs? [CR1]

[sjprg]

As a landscape photographer. if Canon dosen't get off their arrogant position and give us some info on the
1DS-IV, I for one am off to the Nikon D800 (36MP). I'll keep my 1DS-III as a backup. I don't need another PJ camera, but I would like a 40MP+ camera.

 

[Orangutan]

I love how people state assumptions as facts. I have this old cheat sheet of phrase translations for scientific writing; a couple of those phrases apply here:

• "It's well undersood..." = "I think..."
• "It's widely believed..." = "A couple other people think so, too..." (It's an old sheet - today, "I read it on the Internet..." is probably more apt.)

Dude, you've really been getting a snarky edge lately. No, I don't have any proof, which is why I explicitly said that it's been "widely reported." Calm down a bit. If you have better evidence, great, please present it. Not all of us have jobs that let us spend our days searching for Canon sales figures. My point still holds: it's not about per-unit profit margin, it's about overall profit. If Canon believes a certain strategy will lead to a higher overall profit, they will follow that strategy.

P.S. Neuro makes an excellent point about science writing, and I would never have used such sloppy language in a serious forum. It really is important to use precise, meaningful / non-weasel language in "real" science writing. Neuro, you are right to point this out, but relax with the snark.

 

[Loswr]

@ Orangutan - sorry, I do realize that came off as directed at you, didn't mean it that way. I've read the same thing many places (those were the 'people', didn't mean to shoot the messenger!), and looking at the numbers, 5 years ago it was true - it's just not the case any more, and Canon obviously knows that.

 

[parsek]

A mere 22MP output would be incredibly disappointing for me, despite how great the rest of it will turn out. It would make me drop my plans of upgrading to the 5D Mark III entirely. Unless of course it has 18+ f-stops of dynamic range.

I see this a bit differently. Having a 22MP sensor is probably the best chance we have to see some tangible ISO improvement in the 5D mkIII with a new processor, as opposed to getting a super high MP sensor like 36MP and having ISO performance remains the same or even beeing less then today.

Of course all this are compromise, but we have to assume Canon will pick the compromise that suit the most people so as to generate the most sales...

Jacques

Well I completely agree on your assessment. I just happen to be one of those photographers, who for most of my landscapes do not care for improvements in ISO, since I almost exclusively shoot at ISO 100. If I have problems with movement I never go beyond ISO 500, and find the quality acceptable for smaller prints. I would be absolutely fine with ISO handling remaining at the current level of MkII, if I could get twice the MP count and higher dynamic range to go with it. But then again, I dont do concert photography any more. I understand that low light high ISO perfection is a holy grail to many. Just like processing power is. I am just looking for a different kind of camera.

 

[bigblue1ca]

I would like a 40MP+ camera.

May I suggest a Hasselblad?

 

[bigblue1ca]

On a side note, if you look at those numbers - more than a 100% increase in dSLR share of camera sales and revenue over the past 5 years - and also consider the overall dSLR market share, which went from a near tie to Canon dominating, it's easy to see how Canon could (and arguably should) feel that they have had a winning strategy for the past several years, and thus easy to see how they can justify sticking to that same strategy. I'm not saying they should do that, but that's definitely the easy road, especially for a conservative company.

I would think that anecdotal evidence supports the DSLR portion of Canon's overall camera revenue is growing as well, and I assume Nikon for that matter too. All you have to do is look around and you'll see that traditional P&S cameras are slowly disappearing from the general public. I know I used to go to any number of events: grads, concerts, parties, bars, parks, beaches, etc. and you'd see lots of people with their P&S cameras.

Now, I seldom see my non-photographer friends with P&S cameras, the reason is obvious, why carry a P&S when you have a iPhone, Andriod, or Blackberry. So now they use their phones to take their snap shots and those who don't use their phones have DSLR kits (Rebel). In fairness I still see some P&S cameras, but it certainly seems that the middle ground between phones and DSLRs is disappearing.

Having said that I recently bought a waterproof/shockproof P&S camera for a vacation in Mexico, but all I used it for was snorkelling. I'll take it skiing with me at Spring Break, next winter on my next trip to the Caribbean, and in the summer I'll use canoeing at the lake with my kids (it's not unheard of for us to dump occasionally ). In the mean time, my kids use it, it's actually good for them, it's shockproof to 6'6"/2m.

 

[simonxu11]

As a landscape photographer. if Canon dosen't get off their arrogant position and give us some info on the
1DS-IV, I for one am off to the Nikon D800 (36MP). I'll keep my 1DS-III as a backup. I don't need another PJ camera, but I would like a 40MP+ camera.

Well, I think it's too early to get any info of 1ds iv,at most you will hear some rumors from other sources, but they won't be solid!
From Canon?? Their new flagship is not on the market yet and you want some info of the next flagship model??
Like other said there are some brands do offer 40mp+ cameras, if money isn't the problem!
Or just go for Nikon!

 

[Bengt Nyman]

Can someone explain why Canon would provide any information to a waterproof housing manufacturer in advance of the release of a new camera, other than detailed engineering drawings and specifications for the external dimensions and button placements on that camera?

Because there are no such drawings. Products are designed on 3D CAD. You either send out the complete 3D CAD assembly model, and only a complete idiot would do that, or you send out a prototype 5DIII. There are many 5DIII out there right now, in different configurations, for test and evaluation.

 

[Loswr]

Can someone explain why Canon would provide any information to a waterproof housing manufacturer in advance of the release of a new camera, other than detailed engineering drawings and specifications for the external dimensions and button placements on that camera?

Because there are no such drawings. Products are designed on 3D CAD. You either send out the complete 3D CAD assembly model, and only a complete idiot would do that, or you send out a prototype 5DIII. There are many 5DIII out there right now, in different configurations, for test and evaluation.

Makes sense. But CAD programs I've worked with in the past have all had the capability to output files with the information specified. For example, Canon publishes graphics like this:

Which appear to have come from 3D CAD programs.

In the past, I've designed custom items to meet certain needs, and the engineering firms I worked with preferred the CAD output rather than a physical template, although the latter was desired at the prototype testing stage.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

All Canon has to do with the 5DIII is slightly improve the DR and ISO, while substantially improving the AF, and it will have a winner on its hands.

It is painful for us still photographers to learn that we hardly count any more. 90% of the efforts going on at Canon to develop the 5DIII has to do with pimping the 5D to become a sexier, cheap 5D video camera. I don't want no cheap video camera, less than half of which is designed to do high IQ still photography. Unfortunately Canon is doing the same with the 1DX. Yes, and Nikon is doing the same. Leica is no solution with the industries worst dynamic range and heavy handed, exaggerated contrast and saturation. I am beginning to think that if the camera has built in video, don't even consider it. Why? Because half the money you pay for the camera goes to subsidize the guy who buys if for video. I want the very best still camera. You want video? That's your problem.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

Can someone explain why Canon would provide any information to a waterproof housing manufacturer in advance of the release of a new camera, other than detailed engineering drawings and specifications for the external dimensions and button placements on that camera?

Because there are no such drawings. Products are designed on 3D CAD. You either send out the complete 3D CAD assembly model, and only a complete idiot would do that, or you send out a prototype 5DIII. There are many 5DIII out there right now, in different configurations, for test and evaluation.

Makes sense.

Of course the underwater people would rather have the 3D CAD data as well as a prototype. Canon would be fools to give CAD data outside a need to know basis. That's why they got a camera, and still abused the nondisclosure agreement.

 

[awinphoto]

All Canon has to do with the 5DIII is slightly improve the DR and ISO, while substantially improving the AF, and it will have a winner on its hands.

It is painful for us still photographers to learn that we hardly count any more. 90% of the efforts going on at Canon to develop the 5DIII has to do with pimping the 5D to become a sexier, cheap 5D video camera. I don't want no cheap video camera, less than half of which is designed to do high IQ still photography. Unfortunately Canon is doing the same with the 1DX. Yes, and Nikon is doing the same. Leica is no solution with the industries worst dynamic range and heavy handed, exaggerated contrast and saturation. I am beginning to think that if the camera has built in video, don't even consider it. Why? Because half the money you pay for the camera goes to subsidize the guy who buys if for video. I want the very best still camera. You want video? That's your problem.

It's not that the majority of the client base wants or needs video, the simple fact that the majority of it's client base for the 5d and 1d cameras are professionals and like it or not, the professional industry is becoming more multimedia driven. Not many professional photographers have grandeous visions of buying it and pumping out feature films, but for many photographers, it's proven invaluable sales tool... Wedding photographers, photojournalists (2 main target audience of the 5d), commercial photography (what client would turn down a 2-3 minute video they can shove on their website for a shoot you're doing ANYWAYS for a few hundred dollars/thousand dollars? They cant even hire a videographer for as cheap)

What extra bells and whistles do you really want out of stills camera? High ISO... that's debatable and except for extreme situations, Noise is typically more than acceptable, especially coming from the film days where shooting over ISO 1000 was almost taboo. More DR.. ok... every camera always seems to have some improvement in those two arenas... What else? Built in pocket wizards? 61 pt AF? auto white optimizer and D-min optimizer? Most other stuff is labeled "gimmicks and fluff"... so what would you "as a stills only" photographer want/need that you dont have right now? I think we should be grateful that we continually get new features and upgrade in quality... In the film era... you couldn't get upgrades in slide film past ISO 25-50 on average... You'd buy a brick of film, test the first few rolls just to get the perimeters on how to shoot the rest of the brick... I'm not saying we have to embrace video... it's there, if you dont need it, dont use it, no harm no foul... But to harp over it's existence seems futile and a waste of energy.

 

[wellfedCanuck]

It's well-understood (or at least widely reported) that P&S sales account for vastly more sales and profits than DSLR's, even with much lower profit margin

I love how people state assumptions as facts. I have this old cheat sheet of phrase translations for scientific writing; a couple of those phrases apply here:

Blah, blah, blah. There you go with your fancy facts and logic again. This is the INTERNET, man, get with it! You're supposed to win an argument by talking over the other fellow- completely ignoring his more salient points while demanding that he respond to each and every one of yours. Then you escalate. With each round- raise your voice, use CAPS and lots of exclamation points until you're shouting him down and questioning his intellect/parentage/genetic fitness. From there you transition into obscure and absurd threats. Tell him that you've traced his IP and that you intend to track him down and kick his scrawny ass!!

Geez, do I really have to spell EVERYTHING out to you?!!!

 

[Daniel Flather]

It's well-understood (or at least widely reported) that P&S sales account for vastly more sales and profits than DSLR's, even with much lower profit margin

I love how people state assumptions as facts. I have this old cheat sheet of phrase translations for scientific writing; a couple of those phrases apply here:

• "It's well undersood..." = "I think..."
• "It's widely believed..." = "A couple other people think so, too..." (It's an old sheet - today, "I read it on the Internet..." is probably more apt.)

So, P&S sales account for more profit than dSLR sales? Do you have evidence to support this claim? I'm going to guess no...and I'm saying that because Canon has presented that the true situation is the opposite of what you state - and getting more opposite by the quarter. The screenshot below is a slide from Canon's 3Q11 financial presentation (that's the most recent one posted, you can find them all here), and I've highlighted the relevant part with a red oval.

According to Canon, in 3Q11, dSLR sales accounted for 29% of units sold, but 72% of revenue from camera sales. If you look back historically (presentation materials at the link above), you can see that over the past several years, both the dSLR percentage of units sold and the percentage of camera revenue from dSLR sales has increased substantially (for example, 5 years previous to to 3Q11, dSLRs accounted for 12% of units and 34% of revenue).

On a side note, if you look at those numbers - more than a 100% increase in dSLR share of camera sales and revenue over the past 5 years - and also consider the overall dSLR market share, which went from a near tie to Canon dominating, it's easy to see how Canon could (and arguably should) feel that they have had a winning strategy for the past several years, and thus easy to see how they can justify sticking to that same strategy. I'm not saying they should do that, but that's definitely the easy road, especially for a conservative company.

I have zero proof, or any official stats to back this up, but I'll comment anyways, I think many PS sales are being eaten by phones.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

That's a confound - the limitation probably isn't the Digic processor(s), it's the mirror. Even on the 1D X, the Digic5+'s aren't the whole story, else why is 12 fps the max for RAW and 14 fps is only JPG? That speaks to a buffer/card speed limitation.

Regardless, I doubt we'll see two Digic processors in a 5-series camera, and I really doubt we'll see 7.5 fps. But...I'd like to be proven wrong!

If you look at all the past bodies pairings it always been seen dual digic givin 50% not 100% and it's been remarkably consistent. I don't think it's possible for them to get double processing speed by using two and something about how they have to be tied together always seems to hold it back 50%.

Anyway that said, I do doubt 7.5fps as well. THAT is one single spec that could pressure the 1DX a lot unless they tossed rubbish AF into the 5D3 of a level they probably don't dare. Plus a 7.5fps mirror box/shutter assembly would cost a bit more to make than a 6.3fps one. I don't think using dual-digic would necessarily be a shock, the only reason it might be is because it's modern day Canon, but even with the 7D they showed they would be willing to not be entirely ridiculous about things. That said I believe my numbers hold for the speed of the chips and that they can drive 6.3fps at around 30MP and won't even need dual digic 5+.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I've tried to do all the calculations based upon previous Digic generations, but I've found that it's very difficult to come up with precise figures for processing power. Take the Digic 4 generation:

1D Mk4 = 16MP x 10fps = 160/2 = 80MP/s
7D = 18MP x 8fps = 144/2 = 72MP/s
60D = 18MP x 5fps = 90MP/s

So there's a range from 72 - 90MP/s that they Digic 4 seems to be capable of processing; so are the 1D X's Digic 5+s at the higher end or lower end of their capability range? There is also the complicating factor that the 1D X has a separate Digic 4 processor dedicated to AF and metering. It could be entirely possible that a camera using dual Digic 5 for both image processing and AF & metering, might only be capable of 7.5fps. Alternatively, this could be all that marketing would allow for a sub-1D series full frame camera. Of course, it is far more likely that this rumour is total BS!

also D4: 50D 15.1MP * 6.3fps = 95MP/s from single
compared to 1D4 ahout 1.68x ratio

or digic 3:
1D3 10*10=100 from dual
1Ds3 21.1*5 = 105 from dual
40D 10*6.3 = 63 from single
about 1.66x ratio

anyway it is all a bit more variable actually, true
and a bit hard to judge actual factor, but it might well be better than 1.5, true too, although maybe not likely better than 1.75?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Personally I'd make it something like 30MP, 6.3fps, give it 1D4 AF or something better than 7D and worse than 1DX, video without moire.

 

[thepancakeman]

People trying to sort out major hints given on one forum where one member has seen and held the new camera, one possible guess for specs is apparently:

roughly 30MP, 6fps, AF better than 7D and worse than 1DX, video without moire

If so, those would be some nice specs (assuming everything works) and, on paper at least, make the D800 seem worse.

Now that is a camera I'd buy! (It's only $899, right? : )

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

People trying to sort out major hints given on one forum where one member has seen and held the new camera, one possible guess for specs is apparently:

roughly 30MP, 6fps, AF better than 7D and worse than 1DX, video without moire

If so, those would be some nice specs (assuming everything works) and, on paper at least, make the D800 seem worse.

Now that is a camera I'd buy! (It's only $899, right? : )

More like $699 max.

OK let us say $2700-$3700. (less than the 1DX because a 6fps FF shutter/mirror cost a lot less to make than 12fps version and sports guys want 8fps min these days and this won't hit the magic number and it won't have the same weather sealing, 100% VF, voice notes, etc.)

Although, someone pointed out that the hint giver also said that some might still prefer 1Ds3 over the new body, not just 1D2,1D3,1DX so it can't just be about the speed then since the 1Ds3 is slow and since the specs above sure seem way better to me than the 1Ds3, sadly, maybe they are just a dream (at least in Canon land).

Maybe it is 18MP, 3.9fps and crippled 7D AF heh.

 

[briansquibb]

People trying to sort out major hints given on one forum where one member has seen and held the new camera, one possible guess for specs is apparently:

roughly 30MP, 6fps, AF better than 7D and worse than 1DX, video without moire

If so, those would be some nice specs (assuming everything works) and, on paper at least, make the D800 seem worse.

Now that is a camera I'd buy! (It's only $899, right? : )

More like $699 max.

OK let us say $2700-$3700. (less than the 1DX because a 6fps FF shutter/mirror cost a lot less to make than 12fps version and sports guys want 8fps min these days and this won't hit the magic number and it won't have the same weather sealing, 100% VF, voice notes, etc.)

Although, someone pointed out that the hint giver also said that some might still prefer 1Ds3 over the new body, not just 1D2,1D3,1DX so it can't just be about the speed then since the 1Ds3 is slow and since the specs above sure seem way better to me than the 1Ds3, sadly, maybe they are just a dream (at least in Canon land).

Maybe it is 18MP, 3.9fps and crippled 7D AF heh.

I bought a 1ds3 for the IQ instead of going for a new 1DX - I dont need a 1DX as I also have a 1d4 and a 5DII.

FWIW I did a comparison between the 1ds3 and the 5dII and the 1ds3 still is king at skin tones.
FYI The 1Ds3 AF beats the 7D AF - and that is what was being suggested by Neuro as an option
FYI The 1Ds3 is faster than the 5DII at 5fps

I can only assume you haven't used a 1Ds3 from your comments