traveller said:So this is what the rumour source meant by "simplified 61pt af". Without the 100,000 pixel metering sensor linked to the af system, the 5D MkIII will not have the performance of the 1D X when it comes to subject tracking. It could still outperform all previous 1-series cameras though. To be honest, I think that the price tag is looking a bit steep considering that this is the camera that the MkII should have been! The rest of the specifications need to be top notch, or people will start to ask why this is so much more expensive than the D800 (not that they won't ask that anyway -and be justified in doing so).
awinphoto said:jchong62 said:Axilrod said:jchong62 said:Seriously... has Canon introduced full-time AF (autofocus) during video shooting starting from 5D Mark III ? I have been longing for this feature for a couple years now.
I highly doubt it, there are too many situations that you would want manual control for that. I do suspect there are some video features that we don't know about just yet, as the spec list didn't talk much about that aspect of it.
OK. Having the feature and not using it is fine. But not offering the feature is a total different story. Just think how seldom you have been switching to manual. I guess most people stay on AF most of the time.
And the argument would be while all point-and-shoots, Micro 4/3s, and Nikon have it for a couple years, why is Canon not offering it?
hows this for food for thought... Lets say they get it in there... it's finicky, but it's there... Lets say you are filming your kids recital or even better, lets say you film your kids graduation outdoors... the kid is walking across the stage, all of a sudden a bird flys by, the AF freaks out, focuses on the new object, you lose focus that critical moment, then it's over... I've seen a lot of video cameras that do continuous AF do just this... The noise and grumblings about the feature would be so great it would be deafening... And secondly, the 60D, 7d, 5d2, etc... when you have IS lenses, you can hear the freaking IS buzzing in your shots... if you have regular lenses, you're going to hear whirling of the lens, even USM has some movement noise, all that's going to be picked up by the video feed... so unless you then have an external mic or get rid of all on board mic audio, it creates more havoc then good. In theory it sounds good, but this camera, in particular, is geared for pro's and semi pros and advanced amateurs... Even the weakest indi shooter wants their own control. If you want a dumbed down video camera, buy a $200 walmart special.
sublime LightWorks said:Couple of things......
1) Anyone notice the Digic 5+ in the specs?? <------ notice the "+" What's the "+" for compared to the two Digic 5's in the 1Dx?
2) No 1Dx AF and metering....said this about a dozen times in the past weeks that it would never happen. The processing power isn't here for that, 1Dx needs dedicated Digic 4 for the AF and metering. Lot of folks said it would be otherwise. Reality wins as usual.
4) On the subject on high ISO IQ performance.....the mk2 goes to 25,600 native...BUT...the 1Dx goes to 51,200 native ISO. If we are to take this as any indication of performance, I had also said the 5D3 would NOT outperform the 1Dx in IQ. This hints that is the case, as I seriously doubt a camera Canon touted as a merging of the 1D and 1Ds lines but with better performance than either would hand the IQ crown to a body costing less than half the price.
5) 6 fps....not the 6.9fps/7fps we saw in the earlier specs. That one item is a near deal breaker for me and why I'm strongly leaning towards the 1Dx. I have a 5Dmk2 and a 7D, I shoot work across the spectrum....kids...high school...weddings...studio...sports. I need the higher frame rate and 8fps does that for me. I'm not looking to have "a camera for X and a camera for Y and a camera for Z". I just want one and a backup body. The 5D3 does not go far enough for me to do that if I sell the 5D2 and replace it with the 5D3. It comes close, but I'd still be shooting the 7D for the frame rate.
I'd much rather spend $3500 on a 5D3 than $6800 on a 1Dx if I can get 90% of what I need and no deal breakers. My gut tells me the 5D3 will not do this, but I'll wait until it's out and in some folks hands before deciding. I have time, not like I need to buy a body today or in the next 3 months.
gecko 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.
ksieb said:as a videographer, it seems to not be very different of the actual mark2
What you think
KeithR said:Exactly - hardly "crippled", is it?Nikon said:It says:
"61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points)"
61 high density and 41 crosstype points, I am satisfied.
LetTheRightLensIn 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.
In what way? D800 has Nikon's best AF effort, more MP, same fps with grip, $500 less.
Hopefully some little things like fps will go up with the official announcement tonight, hopefully the AF is not as watered down as I fear, hopefully the HDR mode is some super-advanced dual read method and not just some software nonsense.
Specs are as are not bad, but they already seem like Canon could have delivered them a while back and the price increase of $800 is insanity if these specs are to the T.
Himanshu said:All right people. I really need an honest opinion here. I was shooting Nikon D5100 up till now and was hoping to upgrade to full frame by the end of this year.
To begin with, I had both the D800 and the 5D Mark 3 on my wish list. I mean I really don't have a huge investment in terms of the lenses, and I'll always get some return when I sell of my present gear (In case I decide to go with canon).
I need opinion on this because if I do go with canon on the mark 3, then i'll also get L lenses, and the investment then is going to be substantial. So its going to be a long term commitment. And the tech guide on the D800 kinda scared me a bit with all the chatter involving image blur with the slightest movement because of the "high resolution". And I'm also not sure about its iso performance in comparison to the D700.
Suggestions please guys..?? What would be a better camera for me. I mean we cant really say much until both the cameras are out and have been thoroughly reviewed. But going by the spec list...?? Which way should I go..??
jchong62 said:awinphoto said:jchong62 said:Axilrod said:jchong62 said:Seriously... has Canon introduced full-time AF (autofocus) during video shooting starting from 5D Mark III ? I have been longing for this feature for a couple years now.
I highly doubt it, there are too many situations that you would want manual control for that. I do suspect there are some video features that we don't know about just yet, as the spec list didn't talk much about that aspect of it.
OK. Having the feature and not using it is fine. But not offering the feature is a total different story. Just think how seldom you have been switching to manual. I guess most people stay on AF most of the time.
And the argument would be while all point-and-shoots, Micro 4/3s, and Nikon have it for a couple years, why is Canon not offering it?
hows this for food for thought... Lets say they get it in there... it's finicky, but it's there... Lets say you are filming your kids recital or even better, lets say you film your kids graduation outdoors... the kid is walking across the stage, all of a sudden a bird flys by, the AF freaks out, focuses on the new object, you lose focus that critical moment, then it's over... I've seen a lot of video cameras that do continuous AF do just this... The noise and grumblings about the feature would be so great it would be deafening... And secondly, the 60D, 7d, 5d2, etc... when you have IS lenses, you can hear the freaking IS buzzing in your shots... if you have regular lenses, you're going to hear whirling of the lens, even USM has some movement noise, all that's going to be picked up by the video feed... so unless you then have an external mic or get rid of all on board mic audio, it creates more havoc then good. In theory it sounds good, but this camera, in particular, is geared for pro's and semi pros and advanced amateurs... Even the weakest indi shooter wants their own control. If you want a dumbed down video camera, buy a $200 walmart special.
Again, you are thinking in a pro-Canon way.
I have been using a Canon T1i with MF video of my kid. You wouldn't understand how hard it has been.
Don't find birds flying through as an excuse because there are no birds in 99% of the time.
Agree with you here... AF on movie mode is just too... unpredictable for Canon to implement without knowing its foolproof...awinphoto said:Yes I am a pro shooter and "pro" canon, and I fully understand where you're getting at... I'm just explaining there are more liabilities and roadblocks that is to be hand, let alone the fact that it can go through more lenses AF motors even more quickly and depending on the lens, it could be more bad than good. Canon TYPICALLY dont half a$$ things and if there is something that could cause them any more bad press, they may be more inclined to not partake.
steveg said:gecko said:
I'm really hoping it does slow motion. My plan was to sell the 7D and replace it with the 5D mk III, but I use the slow motion all the time. Hmmm. Decisions....