5D Mark III [CR1]

[Justin]

I welcome this rumor of a prototype becoming not a rumor and becoming an actual product. All these delays are doing is giving me more time to research and collect resources for other gear. I've tried the Pentax 645. Really a neat system. Beautiful output. Very big investment; I'd have to sell my Canon system. I've tried the GH2. Neat little camera. I don't know that I'd be satisfied with it being my primary system, but am seriously considering it as a contender for a trip at the end of the summer. There are rumors of new Olympus and Panasonic products forthcoming, including fast lenses and new bodies with new sensors. They are rumored to be released in June. I can't wait to see what June holds.

Meanwhile, Canon is stuck. They can't even release all the products announced 9 months ago (8-15, 300, 400). Let alone those announced in February (500, 600, 200-400). The 1Ds series missed its target release date last year. The 1D is a compromise many don't want to make. 5D2 is fun and still the best thing on Canon's plate, but old, compromised tech. The 7D is second best, but aps-c. The 600D is nicely spec'd, but nothing new.

The longer it takes Canon to get it together, the more opportunities I have to decide to augment my tools, or abandon my current tools altogether.

Fine by me.

 

[lee_hom]

It was stressed that below is one prototype, and two others exist.

Translation: "I made this up and emailed it to CR, and I'm covering my butt in case my wild-ass guess is completely off base."

very true 8)

 

[hlphoto]

Only because of the high-ISO settings it already sounds like a bunch of crap to me.
Why would Canon create a new sensor that wouldn't go past a native 3200 ISO after having one that does a very nice ISO 6400 (5D Mk2)?

I would bet a few dollars on the 5D Mk3 having 19-point autofocus and native ISO 12800 (with at least H2 for 51200 ISO).

I'm hoping we'll get RAW video and maybe even 2K or 3K, but do realise most dreams won't come true

Uh, I'm pretty sure the way its written is showing its native ISO range. It then states there is the typical "expanded" ISO range. L1 = ISO 50 H1 = ISO 51200 H2 = 102,400 H3 = 204,800

Of course this could still be a random rumor made up by a fan, but I don't think he was implying the camera would only go natively to ISO3200

Does make more sense to me, didn't read it that way. 204800 ISO is a little bit over the top if you ask me, but well ok

As for the story about photon shot noise: Not sure if I agree, but don't have enough knowledge to argue either. Waiting for deeper explanation!

 

[dash2k8]

I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

 

[Picsfor]

The 204k H3 iso setting is how I read it.

I'm mainly interested in better focusing & better low light IQ.
32mp - not my first option for an upgrade but I'll live with it.

Otherwise, not too fussed - as always, I'll believe it when I see it...

 

[unruled]

I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

pushing 32MP is a lot of data, so burst rates that high would be pretty tough.

 

[fotoray]

I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

pushing 32MP is a lot of data, so burst rates that high would be pretty tough.

A higher burst rate could be accomplishing using dual Digic V processors like the 7D uses dual Digic IV. This is how the 8 fps burst rate is achieved in the 7D. Even so, the 5D is primarily a landscape camera so burst rate is a much lower priority, whereas the 7D is a sports/widlife camera where burst rate is much more important.

 

[Blaze]

I don't understand why the burst rate is so low. 7 or 8fps would be glorious.

pushing 32MP is a lot of data, so burst rates that high would be pretty tough.

A higher burst rate could be accomplishing using dual Digic V processors like the 7D uses dual Digic IV. This is how the 8 fps burst rate is achieved in the 7D. Even so, the 5D is primarily a landscape camera so burst rate is a much lower priority, whereas the 7D is a sports/widlife camera where burst rate is much more important.

At 32 MP they could implement an 8 MP 2x2 pixel binning mode. Even if shooting in full resolution is only 4 fps, with pixel binning they could easily push it to 8 fps. That size and rate would be perfect for me when shooting sports.

 

[nex-s]

I just don't see the point of 32Mp. Why spoiling the burst rate because of this? Such an MP count would just momentarily fill up memory cards and your PC. And as someone mentioned before, shooting with sRAW does not work with some software. With such specs it actually seems dissapointing, because of only increased MP, ISO and AF. One of the previous topics clearly showed that between ISO, FPS, autofocus points and raw video, increased MP was the last thing people wanted. 24MP would still be ok and would give a much better FPS performance.

And if these were the only improvements Canon makes to the camera, which I doubt it will be, then I thing most of us will be very dissapointed.

 

[gmrza]

I read an interesting article on medium format sensors the other day. In it was a discussion on how many mp would be needed before the sensor outperformed the lens. Apparently Canon are said to be working on lenses for 36x24 "full frame" that will work happily up to 60mp, while on the Pentax 645 sensors would need to exceed 110mp before it becomes an issue. Basically, I believe that manufacturers will simply offer better lenses as the MP count creeps ever higher.

That same article was saying that in prints of A3 or bigger, the large MP sensors on good quality medium format systems produced a very obvious quality improvement over the 36 x 24mm "full frame" size sensors. Basically, bigger is still always better.

An interesting question about that will be what lenses like that will cost. Clearly over time, they will become cheaper, but I expect that we will initially see such lenses being quite expensive (relative to other 35mm system lenses).
On the other hand, that still gives Canon the ability to go hunting in traditional medium format territory, as such lenses might still be cheaper than medium format lenses. I suspect that Canon (and aso Nikon) will want to hunt as many photographers from the medium format camp as they can. - Ultimately, if your clients do not need resolution of more than 60MP, why buy a 110MP medium format system is a 60MP DSLR will do? Many photographers who previously shot medium format film have already taken that path and migrated to DSLRs.

I am not saying that there is no need for a 110MP MF camera. I am just postulating that Canon (and Nikon and Sony) would want to encroach as much as possible into the traditional territory of MF systems, relegating MF to being a more and more specialised niche. (That is a pity in a way, as that stands to risk MF cameras becoming even more expensive, due to smaller market scale and less competition.)

As for 32MP on a 5DmkIII - anyone who currently makes 20"x30" prints off a 5DmkII would welcome that!

 

[YoukY63]

I just don't see the point of 32Mp. Why spoiling the burst rate because of this? Such an MP count would just momentarily fill up memory cards and your PC. And as someone mentioned before, shooting with sRAW does not work with some software. With such specs it actually seems dissapointing, because of only increased MP, ISO and AF. One of the previous topics clearly showed that between ISO, FPS, autofocus points and raw video, increased MP was the last thing people wanted. 24MP would still be ok and would give a much better FPS performance.

And if these were the only improvements Canon makes to the camera, which I doubt it will be, then I thing most of us will be very dissapointed.

Then you are not a landscape photographer. If you want burst speed, don't buy a 5D serie Camera, there are not designed for that. What you want is a 1D serie camera: lower MP and higher burst rate, + better AF.
For me, 32MP sounds very logical. I was expecting 30 to 40MP. With an increase of 2 stops of sensitivity, that camera (if informations are true) will make me happy until 5DmIV! ;D
I shoot mostly landscape and portraits, daytime and also complete dark time. As a landscaper, I never have enough pixels to record all the smaller details from these wonderful Japanese scenery (which explain the success of medium format camera with 80+ MP in landscape community).
The increase of sensitivity will also be very welcome since I mostly use fixed focal lenses for my night pictures, but as they lack stabilisation I sometime fall short with the actual 5DmII sensitivity (even with f/1.4 lenses).

PS: also do not forgot that Sony will be presenting a 24MP APS-C sensor in a few weeks, and is expected to release a 40+ MP FF sensor around fall. Canon made a big part of its success during the past few years on high resolution DSLR, they cannot let Sony's sensors (Sony but also Nikon and Pentax cameras) win this war.

 

[te4o]

Let us all be just optimistic (it improves the mood) and say, the 5D3 will have at least 32 MP, will be very adaptable and let anyone choose how many of these to use for stills and video, at a perfect ISO & DR, will give you 10.6 FPS at lower MP counts, will serve us all for another 4 years etc etc , and will BE ANNOUNCED in JUNE 201ouch!

 

[abarraga]

Sort of related to this posting:

I went to Fry's Electronics (to shop around) and there was a fully functioning demo version of the 5DMKII with the 24-105mm f/4L IS. It was no surprise they did not have the body in stock, but I was offered 5% off the demo kit.

Knowing that the MK III will inevitably come (and my desire to upgrade to a full frame), should I have taken this offer?

 

[Gcon]

This is a very believable spec sheet.

32mp. Given that 600D, 60D and 7D are 18mp, the same pixel density on full frame is approx 46mp. Thus a move to 32mp is reasonable.

ISO to 25600. I don't expect it to go that high. I have no need for it in any case.

Digic V - to be expected. Hopefully it comes with an overhauled menu system and can do advanced things like electronic leveling.

4.2 shots/sec. A small increase from 3.9 of the 5DII. No threat to the 1DIV.

19 point AF. Taken straight from 7D.

CF card - to keep people with large investments in this card happy. Also it is appropriate for large RAW file transfer speeds.

All the video stuff I don't care for, but would imagine this is a good platform for video, as it's shot horizontal so don't need the vertical grip of the 1D series.

==========
Rant - I was hoping that Canon would bring the 5D line closer to the 1D line with a more rugged body and weather sealing, and using buttons instead of mode dial, and having an integrated viewfinder cover.

It doesn't look they will go that bold, but will keep the status quo and just bump up the features a bit to have a "full frame 7D" but without the same level of weather sealing.

This is a shame really, as Canon users need something akin to the Nikon D700, and it's imminent successor.

 

[simonfilm]

But 32mp add more problem for video processing in order to avoid line skipping Moire.

I would like a 5D3 with no heat problem, that you can have it recording video hours without heating.

 

[danski0224]

5% off

Sort of related to this posting:

I went to Fry's Electronics (to shop around) and there was a fully functioning demo version of the 5DMKII with the 24-105mm f/4L IS. It was no surprise they did not have the body in stock, but I was offered 5% off the demo kit.

Knowing that the MK III will inevitably come (and my desire to upgrade to a full frame), should I have taken this offer?

5% off isn't really much of a deal.

I would take it from a new in box item... if I was in the market. I don't think it is enough of a discount on an open item.

 

[epsiloneri]

32MP? Where am I gonna put all these images into? I just went to Rome for 6 days and I've taken over 64 GB of images! I guess I will need two new 3TB hard disks along with this 5DIII (one for original and one for backup).

32MP for a 5D3 is not that much more than the 21MP of the current 5D2, given that 3 years has passed since the latter's introduction. Hard drives have increased in size much more than those 50%, and storage price has reached 5 cents per GB. You can store all your Roman holiday pictures for $6, including backup. With 32MP it would have been $9. If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP. Storing the pictures is becoming easier and cheaper with time despite the MP increases.

 

[epsiloneri]

When you start having more than one value in the raw file per electron in the sensel, it does not make much sense to increase the amplification further, you can just scale in software. Unity gain (1 raw value = 1 electron) happens quite early, say around ISO 1600 or so. Why some cameras still do "native" amplification past unity gain I don't really know, perhaps there are some read noise advantages or something.

Unity gain depends both on the QE and the pixel pitch. I doubt a new 5D3 sensors would improve on the QE much, but with smaller pixels the unity gain would actually decrease, so you're right in that it wouldn't be much technical point in extending the ISO range even further (there can still be selling points in doing so however). Over-resolving the electron count can give a slight advantage for quantization reasons, since the A/D converters are basically analogue devices that do not register electrons 100% efficiently.

Read more about this at Clarkvision.

 

[motorhead]

I for one have never seen burst rates as anything important, to me it's another toy to play with when I'm bored. So I much prefer a bigger MP and would happily live with the consequences.

I speak as a died in the wool motorsports photographer as well as a landscapist. I much prefer to shoot in one-shot mode and use my understanding of the particular sport to guide me in my taking a shot. I'm firmly of the opinion that no matter how fast the bust-rate is, its always going to miss that "peak action" moment. I've read books and articles written by well respected motorsport 'togs and in ever case they have taken a similar view.

 

[DavidD]

All these specs sound reasonable.

At 32mp I'd easily upgrade from the 5d2.
At only 28mp - probably not.

I'm hoping Canon will get rid of the anti-aliasing filter
so we get sharper images. (Software can now handle
moire much better than that silly filter.)

And if the rumored "revolutionary" improvements in
noise reduction and back lit sensors arrive in the 5d3,
we'll all be celebrating.