5D3 and Canon's Comeuppance

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Canon has historically been able to produce greater supply and keep supply moving, where as Nikon has regularly had supply problems (which is a small part of the reason I'm a Canon photographer today.)

With that kind of manufacturing advantage, you'd think that Canon could fill the back orders for the damn 70-300L tripod collar It's no biggie, as I've got a knockoff collar on the way. Philosophically speaking, can you really call the Hong Kong collars a knockoff when the real deal Canon stuff is nowhere to be found ;D? Understandably, I'm sure Canon has much bigger priorities right now.

I hope it fits. I heard that the new knock-offs fit. So I finally ordered one. It arrived.
Oh it will fit all right.... if I first bash my 70-300L with a sledge hammer....
Back it goes.
:'(

 

[V8Beast]

Yeah, I'd figure replacement parts are pretty low on Canon's list of priorities.

Who said anything about replacement parts? The 70-300L doesn't come with a freakin' tripod collar. I would have ordered one when I bought the lens, but it's been backordered for over a year. A now LTRLI tells me the knockoffs don't even fit Maybe it's a Canon conspiracy to try to get people to upgrade to the 70-200 f/2.8 II and a 1.4 teleconverter I heard Kodak doesn't have any supply issues so maybe I need to switch ;D

 

[briansquibb]

I hope it fits. I heard that the new knock-offs fit. So I finally ordered one. It arrived.
Oh it will fit all right.... if I first bash my 70-300L with a sledge hammer....
Back it goes.
:'(

Mine fits no problem

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

And as a wedding photog, I am very thankful.

Something people don't take into account when viewing things like DxO mark is that for something like weddings, its not ALL about maximum image quality. Workflow has a bigger impact on profits than image quality from a camera (when all the latest cameras are so great). Clients don't know what color banding is. 5d3 workflow is MUCH faster than d800 workflow, and I don't think even nikon fanboys can deny that. So from where im sitting, canon can make me a more profitable business than nikon can. And thats what its really all about folks. Money makes the world go round. If you don't care about money, go shoot your kids birthday party with a hasselblad.

Yay for logic!

This is VERY true. As someone who makes money from a camera, my needs are different to many. I think carefully about quality of images, but the "5%" difference between in visual quality between the various sensors is just irrelevant - and I'm really picky

For me it is (nearly) the perfect wedding photographer camera. Canon really did listen to wedding photographers needs. The silent shoot mode especially is unbelievable - really good for echoy UK churches

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

TrumpetPower! - are you saying Canon has better lenses than say, Nikon? Would not say that that. Both brands, including Sigma and Tamron have good lenses. Zeiss are the masters of all glass!

Would not say that Canon has the best IQ for their lenses. I have a Sigma 105 f2.8 which is MUCH sharper than say, Canon's 24-70 mm - yeah, comparing prime to zoom is not fair, but for IQ many brands have very, very good lenses!

for example: Sigma 30mm f/1.4 - a $500 lens at a fraction of the cost of what Canon wants to sell you - is a STRONGER and has an overall better IQ lens than Canon 28 f1.8, Canon 35 f1.4

Isn't the Sigma 105 also a macro lens? Macro lenses are in my experience amazingly sharp, so you are comparing apples with not even pears, but onions. If you want to compare anything with the 24 - 70L, compare Sigma's own 24 - 70 which is good but not better than the L. Or conpare the 105 to the 100 macros that canon produce. Your arguments falls to dust when you compare a dedicated macro lens to an all purpose high quality zoom.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

To illustrate my point, I have just come back from a weekend in Dubai, and at the Sheraton resort there was a dragonfly (or similar) enjoying the sun. I had left my 100L macro in my hotel room some 36km away, so only had the 24 - 70L with me on my 5D3. I would undoubtedly have got it sharper on the macro lens but 70mm and f/13 (ISO 250 1/640), I think it's pretty sharp


Dubai-critter-enjoying-the-sun by singingsnapper, on Flickr

 

[RLPhoto]

LoL! This is great! Canon is always going to serve its pocket book first but its ever more halarious to believe that somehow Nikon isn't! Take a look at the d800.

Nikon was like "crap... People are losing interest in the d700 and we need to make a new camera." Bam! Take the d700 and slap video and 36 megapixels. Easy money.

I remember the forums before the 5D3 was released and lots of people were like "add everything but more megapixels to the 5D3! We don't need more megapixels!" then the d800 is released and a riot broke out and now we all need more megapixels! It's obsurd.

Anyway, it's a clever marketing and the time old belief that more megapixels is better that's going to see more nikons that canons this generation around. It's brilliant!

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

I remember the forums before the 5D3 was released and lots of people were like "add everything but more megapixels to the 5D3! We don't need more megapixels!" then the d800 is released and a riot broke out and now we all need more megapixels! It's obsurd.

Anyway, it's a clever marketing and the time old belief that more megapixels is better that's going to see more nikons that canons this generation around. It's brilliant!

+1

 

[skitron]

Anyway, it's a clever marketing and the time old belief that more mega-pixels is better that's going to see more nikons that canons this generation around. It's brilliant!

LOL, and I suspect if Canon launched an effort to promote a new metric mega-ISO and how much more of *it* they have than Nikon, they'd probably kill them in the marketplace!

The marketing geek in me honestly believes the market is full of folks that have a knee jerk reaction to all things mega and automatically gravitate to whatever has the most mega...

 

[birtembuk]

I have been working long enough with one of the biggest MNC's to apprehend what might going on with Canon these days. When longer term strategies are set, it's like an aircraft carrier: no way you are going to change course whatever. And you can bet there's a lot of brainpower behind these strategies. My take is that, over the last couple years, Canon have become infatuated with video. So much so that their new mantra might as well be: Go Hollywood. I don't believe in complacency but in carefully planned design and release of their models. These guys are professionals. C500, C300, C100, 1Dc, soon 5Dc (bet it's not April fool), 7Dc sooner or later and finally the whole range under Dc. The 5D3 - with no compressed HDMI output - finally fits quite well within that scheme.

They could not care less that a few gear junkies whine here and there and threaten to jump ship. Collateral damage to a much bigger picture. They'll look at numbers, that's what matters. Obviously, they are convinced to be right and it's not our call. We're grown-ups living in a world of free choice. You like it, you think it meets your requirements ? Go get it. You're not satisfy with the offering ? Decide for yourself. Lots of choice. On their side, only time will tell whether their strategy pays off. On our side, let's go out and shoot. Que sera sera.

Having said that, I think 5D3 is a great camera that actually fits the bill for a number of users.

 

[caruser]

I remember the forums before the 5D3 was released and lots of people were like "add everything but more megapixels to the 5D3! We don't need more megapixels!" then the d800 is released and a riot broke out and now we all need more megapixels! It's obsurd.

It's partly absurd, and partly not about the megapixels, but about the dynamic range and/or the price, or rather the combination of the 5D3 being more expensive, having worse dynamic range (and not inheriting the flagship's exposure sensor; unlike the D800).

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

I remember the forums before the 5D3 was released and lots of people were like "add everything but more megapixels to the 5D3! We don't need more megapixels!" then the d800 is released and a riot broke out and now we all need more megapixels! It's obsurd.

I was against more megapixels before the 5Dmk3 & D800 were released, I'm still against more megapixels now that they've been released, and - surprise! - still waiting for wide primes to be updates & a new ultrawide lenses.

Next year I'll have a saving account opened, and I'm considering spending the money on a Nikon FX camera for the 14-24mm f/2.8, in face of the extra megapixels.

 

[daveswan]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

 

[Chewy734]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

Doesn't the Blackmagic have a much smaller sensor than the 5D3?

 

[jrista]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

Doesn't the Blackmagic have a much smaller sensor than the 5D3?

Yes...much smaller, and a different form factor to boot. The BlackMagic is not a replacement for the 5D III. Its an alternative with some very different characteristics.

From what I have actually seen, the 5D III video is a definite improvement over the 5D II, and its a hell of a lot better than what you get from the D800. I don't think the 5D III's video is "botched"...its definitely an improvement, I think its just not as much of an improvement as people wanted, and since the C-series HDSLR's are more expensive, what people want is also not within the price range they want it at. Same deal as always, same reason people want more from the 5D III at a better price point than they already DID get.

 

[unkbob]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

Doesn't the Blackmagic have a much smaller sensor than the 5D3?

Yes...much smaller, and a different form factor to boot. The BlackMagic is not a replacement for the 5D III. Its an alternative with some very different characteristics.

From what I have actually seen, the 5D III video is a definite improvement over the 5D II, and its a hell of a lot better than what you get from the D800. I don't think the 5D III's video is "botched"...its definitely an improvement, I think its just not as much of an improvement as people wanted, and since the C-series HDSLR's are more expensive, what people want is also not within the price range they want it at. Same deal as always, same reason people want more from the 5D III at a better price point than they already DID get.

I'm disappointed that they have barely (if at all) improved the video resolution of the 5D3, which is still a long way from actual 1080P. Full res 1080p was not an unrealistic expectation, was it? It's still the best camera for me, but that's my biggest gripe.

 

[jrista]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

Doesn't the Blackmagic have a much smaller sensor than the 5D3?

Yes...much smaller, and a different form factor to boot. The BlackMagic is not a replacement for the 5D III. Its an alternative with some very different characteristics.

From what I have actually seen, the 5D III video is a definite improvement over the 5D II, and its a hell of a lot better than what you get from the D800. I don't think the 5D III's video is "botched"...its definitely an improvement, I think its just not as much of an improvement as people wanted, and since the C-series HDSLR's are more expensive, what people want is also not within the price range they want it at. Same deal as always, same reason people want more from the 5D III at a better price point than they already DID get.

I'm disappointed that they have barely (if at all) improved the video resolution of the 5D3, which is still a long way from actual 1080P. Full res 1080p was not an unrealistic expectation, was it? It's still the best camera for me, but that's my biggest gripe.

I think you mean 4:2:2 encoding, which is simply a variant of quality for 1080p. It is still a "full res" 1080p camera, since 1080p simply means the number of lines of resolution. The 5D III may not be 4:2:2, but its still a hell of a lot better with full 3x3 binning. You would need a 7680x5120 sensor, or 39.3mp, for full 4x4 luminance binning and 2x2 chrominance binning for 4:2:2 encoding. Not even the SoNikon alliance was able to create a 40mp sensor yet, and 3x3 binning was the next best option. So technically speaking, the 5D III video is the best it could be for its price point and release date, and 4:2:2 WAS an unrealistic expectation. At least the 5D III doesn't use skip-line encoding like the D800, which may be razor sharp for what it does encode, but it has a ton of rather severe problems as a consequence.

 

[unkbob]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

Doesn't the Blackmagic have a much smaller sensor than the 5D3?

Yes...much smaller, and a different form factor to boot. The BlackMagic is not a replacement for the 5D III. Its an alternative with some very different characteristics.

From what I have actually seen, the 5D III video is a definite improvement over the 5D II, and its a hell of a lot better than what you get from the D800. I don't think the 5D III's video is "botched"...its definitely an improvement, I think its just not as much of an improvement as people wanted, and since the C-series HDSLR's are more expensive, what people want is also not within the price range they want it at. Same deal as always, same reason people want more from the 5D III at a better price point than they already DID get.

I'm disappointed that they have barely (if at all) improved the video resolution of the 5D3, which is still a long way from actual 1080P. Full res 1080p was not an unrealistic expectation, was it? It's still the best camera for me, but that's my biggest gripe.

I think you mean 4:2:2 encoding, which is simply a variant of quality for 1080p. It is still a "full res" 1080p camera, since 1080p simply means the number of lines of resolution. The 5D III may not be 4:2:2, but its still a hell of a lot better with full 3x3 binning. You would need a 7680x5120 sensor, or 39.3mp, for full 4x4 luminance binning and 2x2 chrominance binning for 4:2:2 encoding. Not even the SoNikon alliance was able to create a 40mp sensor yet, and 3x3 binning was the next best option. So technically speaking, the 5D III video is the best it could be for its price point and release date, and 4:2:2 WAS an unrealistic expectation. At least the 5D III doesn't use skip-line encoding like the D800, which may be razor sharp for what it does encode, but it has a ton of rather severe problems as a consequence.

I must admit I understand only a fraction of what you've just said. I thought 4:2:2 was about colour depth, but I'm not a video tech guy, I just know there are not 1080 lines of actual resolution in 5d3 video files. There are 1080 lines of something, sure, but those are not individually resolved lines of information - ie it is not sharp at the pixel level.

 

[AprilForever]

Sorry, but I still don't see how this is commuppance for Canon. The 5D mk II got used a ton by video people. The 5d mk III will get used even more. People are buying them like mad pigs. I really don't get the point... I would so get a 5d MK III if I were into cinema. I once worked on a small indie film, shooting it with my 7D's. What they shot looked pretty good. Looked wild compared to stuff of not many years ago. Now, I don't ever want to do video again, but did I, the 5d MK III would be my beast. I really don't get the comuppance bit, or how this is all so bad for Canon.

Now, too bad that the smitings are over, because I am sure this thread would be giving them out like free beatdowns in a riot party...

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

Was saving up for the 5DIII, then something happened. A little something called the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

Guess who'll get my money now.

Canon really bogged up the much touted video / cine on the 5DIII to the rage of cinephiles everywhere,

Doesn't the Blackmagic have a much smaller sensor than the 5D3?

Yes...much smaller, and a different form factor to boot. The BlackMagic is not a replacement for the 5D III. Its an alternative with some very different characteristics.

From what I have actually seen, the 5D III video is a definite improvement over the 5D II, and its a hell of a lot better than what you get from the D800. I don't think the 5D III's video is "botched"...its definitely an improvement, I think its just not as much of an improvement as people wanted, and since the C-series HDSLR's are more expensive, what people want is also not within the price range they want it at. Same deal as always, same reason people want more from the 5D III at a better price point than they already DID get.

I'm disappointed that they have barely (if at all) improved the video resolution of the 5D3, which is still a long way from actual 1080P. Full res 1080p was not an unrealistic expectation, was it? It's still the best camera for me, but that's my biggest gripe.

I think you mean 4:2:2 encoding, which is simply a variant of quality for 1080p. It is still a "full res" 1080p camera, since 1080p simply means the number of lines of resolution. The 5D III may not be 4:2:2, but its still a hell of a lot better with full 3x3 binning. You would need a 7680x5120 sensor, or 39.3mp, for full 4x4 luminance binning and 2x2 chrominance binning for 4:2:2 encoding. Not even the SoNikon alliance was able to create a 40mp sensor yet, and 3x3 binning was the next best option. So technically speaking, the 5D III video is the best it could be for its price point and release date, and 4:2:2 WAS an unrealistic expectation. At least the 5D III doesn't use skip-line encoding like the D800, which may be razor sharp for what it does encode, but it has a ton of rather severe problems as a consequence.

I must admit I understand only a fraction of what you've just said. I thought 4:2:2 was about colour depth, but I'm not a video tech guy, I just know there are not 1080 lines of actual resolution in 5d3 video files. There are 1080 lines of something, sure, but those are not individually resolved lines of information - ie it is not sharp at the pixel level.

Since when does any sane person view videos at pixel level? The problem with forums like this one is that people obsess over things at minute detail at a purely theoretical level. Perhaps at full theoretical 1080p, you could get it sharp at pixel level but at the cost of moire and aliasing. Moire and aliasing are visible at normal levels so I know which I'd target. Not the one you have to stick your head against the monitor for certainly.