5D Mark III Information [CR1]

[V8Beast]

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

The problem with this sort of rationalizing is that while a 5DIII with an antiquated AF system might make sense for product alignment within the Canon family, it will also be competing for market share with the Nikon D800. The D700 already crushed the 5DII in terms of AF (51 points vs. 9) and speed, but the 5DII's significant advantage in resolution was enough to win over many buyers. If Nikon comes out a D800 that maintains its AF advantage over the 5D, but then makes up for the D700's resolution shortcomings with its long rumored 36 megapixel D800, Canon runs the risk of losing market share to Nikon.

 

[Justin]

The Camera and Photo Imaging Show 2012 will be held from 9th to 12th Feb 2012. Expect Nikon D800 and Canon 5D3 to surface around that time. Just a hunch.

Yup. I would be incredibly surprised if Nikon releases their full frame high mpx small body flagship D800 without Canon countering with their full frame, high mpx, small body flagship. RIGHT Canon?

 

[Justin]

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

I just don't see how Canon will compete in a world where Nikon offers a huge megapixel and auto-focus advantage over a similalry priced Canon camera. Canon will bleed share. They already did during the last generation of DSLRs.

 

[Loswr]

I just don't see how Canon will compete in a world where Nikon offers a huge megapixel and auto-focus advantage over a similalry priced Canon camera. Canon will bleed share. They already did during the last generation of DSLRs.

They did? In 2008, Canon and Nikon were nearly neck and neck in dSLR market share at 38 and 37%, respectively, but by 2010, Canon rose to 44.5% while Nikon fell to under 30%. Who's bleeding share, here?

I'm not saying the trend will continue, but historically, your statement is just plain wrong. Canon can look at the above numbers and come away thinking they don't have to change a thing...

One other key point - we're talking about FF cameras costing in excess of US$2,000. That's not the real competitive battleground. Sure, it's interesting to us here on CR...but the overwhelming majority of dSLR purchases are entry-level bodies with kit lenses, and that arena is the real driver of the overall sales figures. Granted, there's a trickle-down effect, and when pros are seen using Canon or Nikon that impacts consumer decisions to some degree.

A 5DIII with weak AF stacked up against a D800 with more MP and better AF will not cut Canon as deeply as it might appear. People with a 5DII and a bunch of L-series lenses, people with a 60D and a couple of EF lenses, those folks are unlikely to sell it all and jump over to Nikon in droves. The number of first-time purchasers with no system buy-in and no brand loyalty who jump straight into a >$2K FF camera is vanishingly small, especially relative to the number of xxxD buyers.

 

[zim]

Looks to me like Canon are in the middle of re-aligning their dslr range. They cannot release an xD camera with lesser AF spec than a xxD (can they? :-\ ) but they can have it the same and have the FF high IQ one digic 5 differentiator and that sits well. I’d have called it the 6D though and that may be the surprise?

As for the eye thingy, if it works well isn't that better suited to a fast camera....... 7Dii....... mmmmm

This is a bit like Christmas eve – almost more fun than Christmas day! ;D

 

[traveller]

They did? In 2008, Canon and Nikon were nearly neck and neck in dSLR market share at 38 and 37%, respectively, but by 2010, Canon rose to 44.5% while Nikon fell to under 30%. Who's bleeding share, here?

I'm not saying the trend will continue, but historically, your statement is just plain wrong. Canon can look at the above numbers and come away thinking they don't have to change a thing...

One other key point - we're talking about FF cameras costing in excess of US$2,000. That's not the real competitive battleground. Sure, it's interesting to us here on CR...but the overwhelming majority of dSLR purchases are entry-level bodies with kit lenses, and that arena is the real driver of the overall sales figures. Granted, there's a trickle-down effect, and when pros are seen using Canon or Nikon that impacts consumer decisions to some degree.

Yeah, that's your favourite statistic, but Nikon have been on the move in the mid-ground for a while now and that is where there are high margins and volume, for both bodies and lenses. Granted, there's quite a bit of lag in the system because the "advanced amateur/pro-sumer" or whatever name you wish to give them, tends to own a good collection of lenses. With growth in the DSLR sector now basically static, Canon would be fools to ignore this segment. My view is that if Canon continues to signal that they intend to play second fiddle to Nikon, more and more people will consider the switch; I cannot be the only person that does the 'back of cigarette packet' calculations of trade-in costs every time I hear rumours like this...

A 5DIII with weak AF stacked up against a D800 with more MP and better AF will not cut Canon as deeply as it might appear. People with a 5DII and a bunch of L-series lenses, people with a 60D and a couple of EF lenses, those folks are unlikely to sell it all and jump over to Nikon in droves. The number of first-time purchasers with no system buy-in and no brand loyalty who jump straight into a >$2K FF camera is vanishingly small, especially relative to the number of xxxD buyers.

We're not all going to change systems every generation based upon who's got the 'best' specifications, but when you see your chosen manufacturer continue to underspecify versus the competition year upon year and when you know that they have access to the same sort of technology, you start to think that they're taking you for a fool.

This sounds like an anti-Canon tirade, which would be unfair based solely upon a rumour. Let me just state that I'm not buying any camera equipment until all the major players show their hands this year and then I will be making a long term decision on whether to stick or switch. I'm pretty sure that I won't be the only person in this position.

 

[Loswr]

My view is that if Canon continues to signal that they intend to play second fiddle to Nikon, more and more people will consider the switch.

We're not all going to change systems every generation based upon who's got the 'best' specifications, but when you see your chosen manufacturer continue to underspecify versus the competition year upon year and when you know that they have access to the same sort of technology, you start to think that they're taking you for a fool.

Depends on the market segment. At present, it seems that Canon is focusing on a polarized strategy - entry level bodies and pro bodies/lenses. The 1D X and the new supertele primes point to a focus on the latter. The 7D was aimed straight at the mid-market. We'll just have to wait and see what the 5DIII has to offer, and the D800 is still a rumor, too.

One could argue that 'your chosen manufacturer continue to underspecify versus the competition year upon year' could as easily apply to Nikon's low MP sensors. If the 36 MP D800 rumor is true, and if the IQ doesn't go down the toilet as a result, that would be a clear signal that Nikon rectified their 'underspecification' (and will likely involve just as much backpedaling and handwaving regarding strategy as Canon's releasing a flagship with fewer MP than it's predecessor).

 

[mortadella]

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

The problem with this sort of rationalizing is that while a 5DIII with an antiquated AF system might make sense for product alignment within the Canon family, it will also be competing for market share with the Nikon D800. The D700 already crushed the 5DII in terms of AF (51 points vs. 9) and speed, but the 5DII's significant advantage in resolution was enough to win over many buyers. If Nikon comes out a D800 that maintains its AF advantage over the 5D, but then makes up for the D700's resolution shortcomings with its long rumored 36 megapixel D800, Canon runs the risk of losing market share to Nikon.

The problem with Nikon is that while the D700 "crushed" the 5dmk2 in terms of AF specs, it also crushed their own D3, which is something Canon will not do, they aren't going to over spec a 5d body to kill sales of their 1 series bodies. And Canon seems to be doing fine when it comes to share. Forget sales figures, because there isnt a breakdown between models...Just for comparison I went to B&H and had a look a the number of reviews for the 5dmk2 compared to the D700 (not scientific but fairly balanced way to look at it) and when you combine the reviews for the body only, and kit you get about 2100 reviews for the 5dmk2 and for the d700 there are just over 1000. Sure its not sales figures but I would venture to guess the rate at which buyers leave reviews is not 1:1. I dont think the d700 "crushed" anything and therefore Canon would rather have their own house in order because what they're doing works for them...share-wise and otherwise.

 

[V8Beast]

This sounds like an anti-Canon tirade, which would be unfair based solely upon a rumour. Let me just state that I'm not buying any camera equipment until all the major players show their hands this year and then I will be making a long term decision on whether to stick or switch. I'm pretty sure that I won't be the only person in this position.

I'm with you 100%, and no, you're not alone. I've already researched how much of a hit I'd take on my bodies and glass, and if the 5DIII doesn't stack up well to the D800, I'm jumping ship. I currently shoot with a 1DsIII as my primary body, and a 5DC is a backup. Overall, I'm very happy with the 1Ds, but would just like some more resolution, DR, and high-ISO performance. A few more FPS would be nice, but 5 is enough for most situations and the AF works very well. I'm sure the 1Dx will address most of these issues, but at $6,800, I'd be paying for speed (12-14 FPS) that I don't really need, while still pining for more resolution. I have no doubt that the 1Dx will be have stunning low-light capability, but if that was my top priority I would switched to Nikon and bought a D3s a long time ago.

That's where the D800 comes in. If the rumored 36 mp sensor actually materializes, and it's DR and high-ISO abilities are merely on par with the D700, I see it as an upgrade over my 1DsIII. I don't care that I'd technically be "downgrading" from a pro to a prosumer body. I'm sure the times where I miss the 1D's tank-like build quality will be offset by the times where I appreciate the D800's lighter weight and smaller form factor. The D800 would simply better suit my needs than a 1DsIII or even a1Dx, and I'd save a bunch of money to boot.

The big wild card is the 5DIII. If it specs out as a high-resolution, compact body with a much-improved AF system, then I'll stick with Canon. If it specs out as a 1Dx Jr. with the same 18 mp sensor, but with a castrated AF system, then all my Canon gear is going up on ebay.

 

[motorhead]

What I would not pay for an Eye-Focus version of the 5D! I still love my Eos-3 for that, its wonderful.

But it needs a certain number of AF points to be successful. The Eos-3 offers a wall-to-wall "almost" seamless 45 points, well, not quite but it seems that way. And that's what the system needs top work well it strikes me.

So a message for Canon management: Yes Please.

 

[traveller]

Depends on the market segment. At present, it seems that Canon is focusing on a polarized strategy - entry level bodies and pro bodies/lenses. The 1D X and the new supertele primes point to a focus on the latter. The 7D was aimed straight at the mid-market. We'll just have to wait and see what the 5DIII has to offer, and the D800 is still a rumor, too.

The 1D X and 7D are proof that Canon can listen to what its customers want and deliver; I hope that they can do that for the 5D MkII as well, because the number one complaint is the AF system. [Personally, I think that the 7D should've had the 1D AF system, but even I can admit that an APS-C 7D and an APS-H 1D MkIV would have been too close; I hope that they rethink this for the 7D MkII].

One could argue that 'your chosen manufacturer continue to underspecify versus the competition year upon year' could as easily apply to Nikon's low MP sensors. If the 36 MP D800 rumor is true, and if the IQ doesn't go down the toilet as a result, that would be a clear signal that Nikon rectified their 'underspecification' (and will likely involve just as much backpedaling and handwaving regarding strategy as Canon's releasing a flagship with fewer MP than it's predecessor).

True, but if the rumours are correct then Nikon has listened to what its customers have asked for! If the 5D MkIII perpetuates a crippled AF system, Canon will not have.

 

[V8Beast]

The problem with Nikon is that while the D700 "crushed" the 5dmk2 in terms of AF specs, it also crushed their own D3, which is something Canon will not do, they aren't going to over spec a 5d body to kill sales of their 1 series bodies.

People have said the same thing about the 5DII vs. the 1DsIII. IMHO, the D3s had enough of an advantage in high-ISO performance to distinguish it from the D700. At any rate, Nikon seems to be aligning the D4 as the ultimate in low-light, AF, and FPS while positioning the D800 as a slower, high mp body to distinguish between the two models. Canon might do the same same thing with the 1Dx and 5DIII, but they may also put an 18 mp sensor in the 5D while intentionally castrating its AF system. Only time will tell what Canon has planned.

And Canon seems to be doing fine when it comes to share. Forget sales figures, because there isnt a breakdown between models...Just for comparison I went to B&H and had a look a the number of reviews for the 5dmk2 compared to the D700 (not scientific but fairly balanced way to look at it) and when you combine the reviews for the body only, and kit you get about 2100 reviews for the 5dmk2 and for the d700 there are just over 1000. Sure its not sales figures but I would venture to guess the rate at which buyers leave reviews is not 1:1. I dont think the d700 "crushed" anything and therefore Canon would rather have their own house in order because what they're doing works for them...share-wise and otherwise.

I'm not a fan boy, so sales figures don't concern me. Canon knows the market better than me, so if they decide that a low mp, low FPS body with an antiquated AF system is best for sales, so be it. It just so happens that such a body won't suit my shooting needs, so if Nikon offers a better product, I'm switching.

 

[traveller]

The problem with Nikon is that while the D700 "crushed" the 5dmk2 in terms of AF specs, it also crushed their own D3, which is something Canon will not do, they aren't going to over spec a 5d body to kill sales of their 1 series bodies.

This is why Nikon appear to be taking care to place the D800 in a different market position to the D4, as a slow but high resolution camera as opposed to a high-speed and low noise camera.

And Canon seems to be doing fine when it comes to share. Forget sales figures, because there isnt a breakdown between models...Just for comparison I went to B&H and had a look a the number of reviews for the 5dmk2 compared to the D700 (not scientific but fairly balanced way to look at it) and when you combine the reviews for the body only, and kit you get about 2100 reviews for the 5dmk2 and for the d700 there are just over 1000. Sure its not sales figures but I would venture to guess the rate at which buyers leave reviews is not 1:1. I dont think the d700 "crushed" anything and therefore Canon would rather have their own house in order because what they're doing works for them...share-wise and otherwise.

Forget looking at past sales figures, that's what Kodak did and it told them there was nothing to worry about!

 

[V8Beast]

True, but if the rumours are correct then Nikon has listened to what its customers have asked for! If the 5D MkIII perpetuates a crippled AF system, Canon will not have.

Exactly. Rumors are just rumors, but consider this. If the 5DIII gets the 1Dx's 18 mp sensor, or one similar to it, and the D800's 36 mp sensor actually reaches production, then Nikon and Canon will have both completely reversed strategies. A 18 mp sensor geared toward low-light performance is something I would have expected from the D700's successor, not the 5DIII. Likewise, a 36 mp sensor with an emphasis on resolution over noise is something I would have expected from the 5DII's successor, not the D800.

 

[Loswr]

The 1D X and 7D are proof that Canon can listen to what its customers want and deliver...

...if the rumours are correct then Nikon has listened to what its customers have asked for! If the 5D MkIII perpetuates a crippled AF system, Canon will not have.

If Canon had listened to prominent wildlife photographers using the 1D IV, they certainly would not have eliminated the f/8 AF capability from the 1D X (at the same time as reducing pixels on target by going from 1.3x to FF) - and no doubt even if Canon didn't actually ask, they had to know it would be an issue. That indicates they either eliminated f/8 AF for technical reasons (they could have come right out and said this, but they didn't, and if they had they'd look foolish after the D4 announcement!), or it was a marketing-driven decision, i.e. induce people to spend thousands of dollars to upgrade to longer/faster lenses. If the reason for eliminating the f/8 AF was the latter, that same logic could support a decision to cripple the AF system of the 5DIII to induce people toward the 1D X.

I hope that's not the case, but I do see it as a likely scenario.

Forget looking at past sales figures, that's what Kodak did and it told them there was nothing to worry about!

How many companies did that before Kodak...and did Kodak 'listen'? Just because something makes sense doesn't mean it will be followed. Keep in mind that many companies are short-sighted (and being publically traded and stock-market driven contributes to that mentality). Many decision-makers within companies are also short-sighted, and in many cases (and this I know from personal experience), the internal corporate compensation/bonus structures are often geared to reward short term successes at the expense of the long term.

 

[jaduffy007]

I just can't believe Canon will not significantly improve the AF performance for the mark III. That would be absolutely stupid imo. The D800 will eat its lunch. Hell, the NEX 7 would compete with it! :

 

[jaduffy007]

The big wild card is the 5DIII. If it specs out as a high-resolution, compact body with a much-improved AF system, then I'll stick with Canon. If it specs out as a 1Dx Jr. with the same 18 mp sensor, but with a castrated AF system, then all my Canon gear is going up on ebay.

I'm right behind you.

 

[EYEONE]

I just don't see how Canon will compete in a world where Nikon offers a huge megapixel and auto-focus advantage over a similalry priced Canon camera. Canon will bleed share. They already did during the last generation of DSLRs.

They did? In 2008, Canon and Nikon were nearly neck and neck in dSLR market share at 38 and 37%, respectively, but by 2010, Canon rose to 44.5% while Nikon fell to under 30%. Who's bleeding share, here?

I'm not saying the trend will continue, but historically, your statement is just plain wrong. Canon can look at the above numbers and come away thinking they don't have to change a thing...

One other key point - we're talking about FF cameras costing in excess of US$2,000. That's not the real competitive battleground. Sure, it's interesting to us here on CR...but the overwhelming majority of dSLR purchases are entry-level bodies with kit lenses, and that arena is the real driver of the overall sales figures. Granted, there's a trickle-down effect, and when pros are seen using Canon or Nikon that impacts consumer decisions to some degree.

A 5DIII with weak AF stacked up against a D800 with more MP and better AF will not cut Canon as deeply as it might appear. People with a 5DII and a bunch of L-series lenses, people with a 60D and a couple of EF lenses, those folks are unlikely to sell it all and jump over to Nikon in droves. The number of first-time purchasers with no system buy-in and no brand loyalty who jump straight into a >$2K FF camera is vanishingly small, especially relative to the number of xxxD buyers.

That's true. If Canon releases a 5D3 with the same AF as the 5D2 or even 60D I would probably just buy a cheaper 5D2. I'm certainly not on the fence for switching. Canon would not lose my business they would just lack a sell of one 5D3. I think they can deal with that.

That being said "because you can" is not a great reason to put a old AF system in a new camera. But all in all it will probably save me some money as I wouldn't get a 5D3.

I would expect Canon to put a 19 point system with fewer cross type points than the 7D in the 5D3. Maybe 11 or 15 and give it a wider spread. Nothing fancy needed. But they can't just transplant the 7D system in to the 5D3 because the coverage would be too small. Maybe they'll just spring for a totally new system.

 

[awinphoto]

The big wild card is the 5DIII. If it specs out as a high-resolution, compact body with a much-improved AF system, then I'll stick with Canon. If it specs out as a 1Dx Jr. with the same 18 mp sensor, but with a castrated AF system, then all my Canon gear is going up on ebay.

I'm right behind you.

Well if you guys do, feel free to shoot me a message with how much you guys want for your lenses =)

 

[keithfullermusic]

I feel like Canon will have to make the 5Diii sweet - how can they not? It is the camera that everyone loves. People are freaking out about the AF, but it seems to be the biggest complaint about the ii, so they will have to fix it I would think.

Can't wait until it is released and we can see who guessed right.