A couple of months ago people were OK with an almost 7D / 7D AF system. Now it's not good enough because it might be slightly worse than the 1DX. Fun times. ;D
Upvote
0
dedrick427 said:I don't know, but this site has it for pre-order for $4,200 F-ING DOLLARS for the BODY ONLY!!! Not sure if that's AU or US $$ though...
http://www.teds.com.au/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii
Tuggen said:No its not possible.
The 5D2 is about 1/2 stop better than 5D.
The D3s is about 2/3 stop better than D700.
The 5D3 is not expected to have 1 stop advantage over 5D2. That would require a QE of ~66%. I don't say it's impossible but it would be a very big (and nice) surprice.
Canihaspicture said:There seems to be a lot of fanboys in this thread... hardware wise how much better really do you feel this is than the 5D mark II besides the DIGIC 5 (which handles the high iso and framerate) and the small increase in MP by the sensor? If you pretend that this camera wasn't from Canon would you still feel the same way?
shuttersound said:If the photo is real, i was right abt the dial mode, it was not the lock type from the previous leaked pics and im glad it wasnt !!!
fotoray said:Where is the DOF preview button?
djejmz said:Hey guys,
Never followed the release of a camera, so forgive me if it's a dumb question.
From past releases, how long do you think it'll be afterMarch 2nd until we can actually get our hands on a 5dMIII? Please god let it be by July/August!
I really hope the same LP-E6 batteries as the 7D & 5D II,..that will be very nice!!jrista said:Well, HAPPY HAPPY ;D ;D about 61/41 AF!! Seems the 5D line is finally getting an appropriate and competitive AF system. I was extremely skeptical it would, glad to be proven wrong on that one!
A bit dismayed about the metering though. :-\ iFCL 63-zone....rather than the 1D X 100k RGB pixel metering and AF assist system. Guess thats entirely logical...even if we get the full 61pt AF of the 1D X, no way its going to perform as well without the linked in metering and slower FPS. Still, HAPPY it will have a better AF system!!
Also VERY HAPPYthat it is still using LP-E6 batteries! I bought a bunch of those for my 7D, and totally expected to have to buy a bunch of a different kind when the 5D III came out. Looks like I can share my batteries amongst both bodies! WOOT!!
Eagle Eye said:People might get annoyed or offended, but I think this needs to be said (don't smite me, please). If you are or wish to be a full-frame shooter and really, truly, heartfully can look at the spec list for this new camera and say with a straight face, "wow, Canon REALLY missed the mark on this one. The D800 is going to crush this!" then I feel confident encouraging you to go buy Nikon equipment, because constantly switching is going to be the only way for you to find happiness in this world. You could try getting a pet, too. Like a gerbil.
I made a post a week ago that I now would like to retract, claiming that the 5D III was in trouble if the price point was really $3,500 compared the D800's $3,000. Given the spec list here and the sheer refined look of this camera, I think it easily justifies the extra $200 or $300 in actual market price over the D800. EASILY.
For the individual claiming that this is just not enough resolution and you need 38 for your wedding photography, you're not going to find a lot of friends over at Nikon, given that they only had 12 megapixel sensors for, like, a millennia, and did just fine. I'd like to take a moment to remind you that in the 1990s, wedding photographers shot with a medium called "film" with 45 autofocus points. If you can honestly look me in the eye and tell me with a straight face that your photographs look bad or in any way insufficient at 21 or 22 megapixels, I will do you the courtesy of looking you back in the eye and telling you bluntly that it's not your camera that sucks, it's you. I will than buy your 5D Mark II from you and give you a pat on the back. It's going to be okay.
I had no plans to upgrade from my 5D Mark II, but this camera is making me rethink that given that it didn't just upgrade one or two things, but everything, including the body lines (still waiting on dimensions and weight). This tells me that Canon has generated a golden seller. If this thing weighs less and is smaller than the Mark II, I'm advising the wife the credit card bill is going bulge this coming August. Autumn landscapes, here we come... Again, no smiting, please. This is to be a day of joy and happiness.
Tuggen said:No its not possible.
The 5D2 is about 1/2 stop better than 5D.
The D3s is about 2/3 stop better than D700.
The 5D3 is not expected to have 1 stop advantage over 5D2. That would require a QE of ~66%. I don't say it's impossible but it would be a very big (and nice) surprice.
awinphoto said:Blaze said:Ivar said:Currently I fail to see any magic in this camera, just as usual Canon's crippled update, whereas the price seems to indicate premium qualities.
In that sense Nikon has clear and understandable distinction - full package in all FF cameras targeting different auditoriums, against Canon's very expensive and crippled expensive option.
What exactly do you think is crippled about this? These specs look much more appealing to me than the Nikon D800.
Exactly... granted it can still change up until it's release, but other than MP, what does the D800 have that the 5d3 (rumored) doesn't have that has been confirmed? ISO even wins (theoretically until tested) which is a first for canon.
Eagle Eye said:People might get annoyed or offended, but I think this needs to be said (don't smite me, please). If you are or wish to be a full-frame shooter and really, truly, heartfully can look at the spec list for this new camera and say with a straight face, "wow, Canon REALLY missed the mark on this one. The D800 is going to crush this!" then I feel confident encouraging you to go buy Nikon equipment, because constantly switching is going to be the only way for you to find happiness in this world. You could try getting a pet, too. Like a gerbil.
I made a post a week ago that I now would like to retract, claiming that the 5D III was in trouble if the price point was really $3,500 compared the D800's $3,000. Given the spec list here and the sheer refined look of this camera, I think it easily justifies the extra $200 or $300 in actual market price over the D800. EASILY.
For the individual claiming that this is just not enough resolution and you need 38 for your wedding photography, you're not going to find a lot of friends over at Nikon, given that they only had 12 megapixel sensors for, like, a millennia, and did just fine. I'd like to take a moment to remind you that in the 1990s, wedding photographers shot with a medium called "film" with 45 autofocus points. If you can honestly look me in the eye and tell me with a straight face that your photographs look bad or in any way insufficient at 21 or 22 megapixels, I will do you the courtesy of looking you back in the eye and telling you bluntly that it's not your camera that sucks, it's you. I will than buy your 5D Mark II from you and give you a pat on the back. It's going to be okay.
I had no plans to upgrade from my 5D Mark II, but this camera is making me rethink that given that it didn't just upgrade one or two things, but everything, including the body lines (still waiting on dimensions and weight). This tells me that Canon has generated a golden seller. If this thing weighs less and is smaller than the Mark II, I'm advising the wife the credit card bill is going bulge this coming August. Autumn landscapes, here we come... Again, no smiting, please. This is to be a day of joy and happiness.
HurtinMinorKey said:All I can say is, thank God they moved the on/off switch.
Diko said:6/ And yes I would love to have a full frame with no Video, but better ISO and AF with a price that would not bring me to huge troubles about what-if I loose or break my camera-body.
I still hope for 5DMx could be it. ;-)
D.Sim said:skoobey said:How much bigger than 100% do you wanna get?BIG VIEWFINDER
+1 Awesomeness!
Sorry, you won't get this. Other than a mic input, onboard mic, and maybe one button, there are no other hardware differences between adding video and not. All the features are mostly software based so it doesn't add alot to the price. Just think, the Canon t2i does video just as well as the 5D mark II (minus the full frame) and canon didn't add more than $50 to the cost of the t1i. My 60D has full manual audio control as well and that is a cheap camera. It really does not add much to the price.sphax said:Diko said:6/ And yes I would love to have a full frame with no Video, but better ISO and AF with a price that would not bring me to huge troubles about what-if I loose or break my camera-body.
I still hope for 5DMx could be it. ;-)
Yeah I guess a lot of us want that … but Canon won't hear it !!!![]()