5D Mark III Information [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
J
jstn
Guest
I could care less about the amount of focus points. As long as the ones that are there actually work, and work well!
Imagine you are shooting a wedding, you find the face in a small crowd you want your focus plane on, set a focus point over it and look at it with your eye... Boom! Instant perfect focus, without fiddling with your dial.
Although this sounds more like something for an "EOS 3D." Current technology would allow for a much more robust eye tracking system, and 3D eye control would really justify the name.
Imagine you are shooting a wedding, you find the face in a small crowd you want your focus plane on, set a focus point over it and look at it with your eye... Boom! Instant perfect focus, without fiddling with your dial.
Although this sounds more like something for an "EOS 3D." Current technology would allow for a much more robust eye tracking system, and 3D eye control would really justify the name.
Upvote
0
W
willrobb
Guest
pp77 said:
I had it on a EOS 7 about 10 years ago, it was awesome. Recently I was thinking about it and wondering if it'd make a come back anytime, I would be very happy if it did. Even if it wasn't perfect, I'm pretty sure it'd be better thanthe current 5DmkII AF abilities
As for the other possible specs mentioned such as FPS, they would all seem to make sense. A bit of an upgrade from the current 5DmkII, not as good as the 1DX specs so it won't cut into the sales of it, but strong enough on it's own to persuade people to upgrade their current 5D bodies and persuade the 1DX owners that it'd be a decent camera to have as a back up when they don't need the the high FPS...if the rumoured eye focus is in and it works well I think a lot of people would want one.
Upvote
0
M
mrcrsr
Guest
For what a 5D MK III?
I have been waiting for a very long time for the new 5D MK III. Last year in January I bought the 5D MK II. (because I was tired of waiting and I needed a second body)
Since October when the 1D X was announced I decided for myself to buy the new 1D X...
I will not wait any time longer for a 5D MK III!
I have been waiting for a very long time for the new 5D MK III. Last year in January I bought the 5D MK II. (because I was tired of waiting and I needed a second body)
Since October when the 1D X was announced I decided for myself to buy the new 1D X...
I will not wait any time longer for a 5D MK III!
Upvote
0
wickidwombat said:
+1 if that works! Wow! At first when I saw the details of this latest mkIII info I was disappointed because not much here in terms of spec (MP count, ISO performance, etc)...only AF info...
I must say though that eye AF seem very interesting. For me the number of AF may not be the most important factor as well, but at least I would like the mk III model to be able to focus better then the mkII model in servo mode when subject are moving so I dont need to use F8 all the time to mask the current poor AF performance in those situation!...
Upvote
0
Eye control autofocus?? really? i never heard it before but sounds really nice but i wonder why this hasnt been used before in previous digital cameras.. i mean for some reason they dropped that feature out
Upvote
0
I would welcome GPS functionality but a crippled AF system would prevent me from buying such a camera. Regarding the eye controlled AF system of the EOS 3 and 7: does it work properly when the photographer wears glasses?
Upvote
0
W
Wahoowa
Guest
I still own Elan IIE and Elan 7E.
Although the eye control AF is a "very cool" feature to have. I find it just an "okay" feature to put in use.
Why?
Some of you who have used it may have a different experience than I do. When using the eye control AF, since it's not perfect, you're forced to look at the AF point carefully to make sure that the camera selects the correct focus point. This happens more for me with the 7E than the IIE because it has more focus points (7 vs 3). I find that takes concentration out of what I actually need to do--look for other details while I'm framing the shot.
Say, with 7D, my eye can just keep looking here and there while I use my right thumb to select the AF point at the same time.
Although the eye control AF is a "very cool" feature to have. I find it just an "okay" feature to put in use.
Why?
Some of you who have used it may have a different experience than I do. When using the eye control AF, since it's not perfect, you're forced to look at the AF point carefully to make sure that the camera selects the correct focus point. This happens more for me with the 7E than the IIE because it has more focus points (7 vs 3). I find that takes concentration out of what I actually need to do--look for other details while I'm framing the shot.
Say, with 7D, my eye can just keep looking here and there while I use my right thumb to select the AF point at the same time.
Upvote
0
A eye control autofocus was MY idea for a 3D. 
Following possibilities now:
- The source covered me and made a mistake (farsighted or such a thing).
- Canon cancelled the 3D program and will enhance the 5D.
- The source IS Canon and tries to confuse us. NO CHANCE.
8)
Best regards
Eisbaer
Following possibilities now:- The source covered me and made a mistake (farsighted or such a thing).
- Canon cancelled the 3D program and will enhance the 5D.
- The source IS Canon and tries to confuse us. NO CHANCE.
8)
Best regards
Eisbaer
Upvote
0
I kinda feel like a big yawn coming up.... GPS? for me, wouldn't use it, couldn't care less about it... I could see why some could use it, buttt...... As far as eye control... I used a camera in school , i think the 1v or something like that which had the eye control... It seemed kind of neat, but to play devils advocate, I got an open question/comment I would be interested in hearing responses on...
while I never owned the camera and have limited experience, it was alas on a film 35mm camera... most 35mm film prints on average were 8x10 and smaller... On occasion if you felt daring enough, professionals would print that film at 11x14 but that was the exception to the rule because of film grain and the prints, if shooting ISO 400 or larger, would be just too ugly to print bigger than that. Now we know with digital, when we print an 8x10 vs printing 16x20s, the 8x10 can hide lots of sins and imperfections of lenses and such... some minor AF inconsistencies may even be hidden on a 8x10 vs bigger depending on the severity. While people have fondness of the eye control, could it be that in practice, on a camera such as the 1d, 7d, 5d2, 5d3 whatever that the eye control was good but may not be 100% perfect in which it could be intensified on a camera that natively pumps out 11x14's-16x20's? While on smaller prints the imperfections of the systems may be easily overlooked but on a monitor, blown up at 100% or greater in this day and age of pixel peeping, having the eye control could be a liability?
while I never owned the camera and have limited experience, it was alas on a film 35mm camera... most 35mm film prints on average were 8x10 and smaller... On occasion if you felt daring enough, professionals would print that film at 11x14 but that was the exception to the rule because of film grain and the prints, if shooting ISO 400 or larger, would be just too ugly to print bigger than that. Now we know with digital, when we print an 8x10 vs printing 16x20s, the 8x10 can hide lots of sins and imperfections of lenses and such... some minor AF inconsistencies may even be hidden on a 8x10 vs bigger depending on the severity. While people have fondness of the eye control, could it be that in practice, on a camera such as the 1d, 7d, 5d2, 5d3 whatever that the eye control was good but may not be 100% perfect in which it could be intensified on a camera that natively pumps out 11x14's-16x20's? While on smaller prints the imperfections of the systems may be easily overlooked but on a monitor, blown up at 100% or greater in this day and age of pixel peeping, having the eye control could be a liability?
Upvote
0
M
mortadella
Guest
The specs coming out of this rumor may not be eye-popping or drool inspiring...but rest assured the mk3 will dazzle with it's low-light/high ISO performance. It's not going to be a body you grab to shoot sports, and Canon hasn't intended to be.
Unless you're going to spend $6k-$7k for a body like the 1D-X you aren't going to get a "do-it-all" body. If you have a sub $3500 budget, you need to buy a second body like a 7D to be able to track your moving subject and have the burst speed to not miss as many shots. And the 7D is going to have Rebel quality ISO performance.
I wouldn't be surprised if AF was kept the same, but that wouldn't stop me from wanting to pick one up. If it gets 2 stop improvement in ISO over the mk2, that means clean shots at 6400, and would most likely be enough for people to upgrade, however its reasonable to assume that we will also see improvements in metering/dynamic range, perhaps some other minor things. But you definitely won't see a great AF system on a 5d body, not now, not ever....so please don't expect that. Save up for a 1D-X
Unless you're going to spend $6k-$7k for a body like the 1D-X you aren't going to get a "do-it-all" body. If you have a sub $3500 budget, you need to buy a second body like a 7D to be able to track your moving subject and have the burst speed to not miss as many shots. And the 7D is going to have Rebel quality ISO performance.
I wouldn't be surprised if AF was kept the same, but that wouldn't stop me from wanting to pick one up. If it gets 2 stop improvement in ISO over the mk2, that means clean shots at 6400, and would most likely be enough for people to upgrade, however its reasonable to assume that we will also see improvements in metering/dynamic range, perhaps some other minor things. But you definitely won't see a great AF system on a 5d body, not now, not ever....so please don't expect that. Save up for a 1D-X
Upvote
0
mortadella said:The specs coming out of this rumor may not be eye-popping or drool inspiring...but rest assured the mk3 will dazzle with it's low-light/high ISO performance. It's not going to be a body you grab to shoot sports, and Canon hasn't intended to be.
Unless you're going to spend $6k-$7k for a body like the 1D-X you aren't going to get a "do-it-all" body. If you have a sub $3500 budget, you need to buy a second body like a 7D to be able to track your moving subject and have the burst speed to not miss as many shots. And the 7D is going to have Rebel quality ISO performance.
I wouldn't be surprised if AF was kept the same, but that wouldn't stop me from wanting to pick one up. If it gets 2 stop improvement in ISO over the mk2, that means clean shots at 6400, and would most likely be enough for people to upgrade, however its reasonable to assume that we will also see improvements in metering/dynamic range, perhaps some other minor things. But you definitely won't see a great AF system on a 5d body, not now, not ever....so please don't expect that. Save up for a 1D-X
Thanks for that, i just threw up a little in my mouth... I hope they do not keep the same AF... AT LEAST they better make all AF points cross type sensors. For this price point they can throw in some more invisible assist points... spread it out, make it more functionable... maybe even add some zone options similar to the 7d af but on the current system... They need to do something. I'm not too bothered about Low light ISO but if they get it even better, great... I want the built in levels like the 7d... Hell if the rebel has 1 axis level, they at least can do that, but they better have dual axis for a $3000 camera... While I dont care if they have a pop up flash or not for a flash commander, I would at least want an IR transmitter for a flash commander... It doesn't have to have blazing 8 or 6 or even 5 frames per second, i dont care. It doesn't have to have 19 AF points, just make what they have more functional and or programmable... Also 1 or 2 Mfn buttons like the 7d so I can assign my own function for what I need. This will be what will make me jump and buy the new camera.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
