5DIII will come

[Isaac]

It looks like most people are pretty damn happy with their 5D2s... There are just some quibbles about the ancient AF system really. Otherwise, fps, ISO, mp... all up to par. Really, if the 5D2 was introduced last year, it would still make sense in the Canon lineup. If the 5D3 is just going to bump up the mp and ISO a bit and largely leave the AF alone, then I say I'd rather wait another year or so and get a 5D that will have a significantly upgraded AF instead of getting one in the next 6 months that upgrades everything just a bit but still leaves me wanting more. And out another $3k lol. What do you think? Is the 5D2 so terrible now that we need an minor upgrade on things we're mostly happy about right now?

I don't think Canon are going to just up the MP and ISO while jumping the price to $3k. I expect Canon are going to be putting in a lot of effort in making sure that the 5D3 is going to still be head and shoulders above any other camera in it's category eg. D800.

 

[AG]

Speaking with the local Canon rep today in the camera store while picking up 12 new bodies for work.

Asked him about the new 5D3 and said about buying a new 5D2 or should i wait.

His exact words were, the 5D3 is due in March 2012 but expect constraints on supply like when the 5D2 was released so don't expect to see one for about 6 months. Which he said will be around the time the 1D-C will be introduced.

Now going on that it seems that its a sure bet that we won't see the Mk3 until at least early next year and not be able to buy one until around July/August time.

If this was to be true it pretty much seals the deal for me buying a Mk2 NOW and not waiting anymore, i can buy the Mk3 later down the track, and as long as the batteries and grip etc all still fit it won't be a huge loss (having to re buy all new batteries etc).

He also made mention that the 5D3 will not be the video DSLR that everyone is wanting (pretty much the same as already in the Mk2), that will be what the 1D-C will be.

Now i don't know how much of this was just BS from him wanting to sell another body but he seemed pretty convinced.

Only time will tell..... now to damage the credit card for that 5D2 body

 

[alipaulphotography]

They aren't going to want to be hurting 1Dx sales though. They've suffered that before with the 5DII eating sales from the 1 series bodies. In order to make the 5DIII 'inferior' it will most certainly have less fps, probably (slightly) lower ISO capabilities, intermediate AF and no built in battery grip of course. I don't know what they'll do with the sensor and MP but I'd imagine it will be high mp to give it its own niche. I'd rather the 18mp 1dx sensor but in a slower cheaper body! Fingers crossed...

 

[willrobb]

I think the 5DII produces wonderful images, and I use it much more often than my 7D. But everytime I use the 7D, I'm struck by how much better the AF system is, and how much room for imprevement there is in the 5DII's AF. Sadly, I firmly believe they Canon will intentionally hobble it to increase separation from the 1D X. Frame rate and build won't be enough, especially if the 5DIII is a high MP camera.

+1 that. Even though many of us expect to see 7D's AF in the 5DIII, Canon is unlikely to offer that. An all 9 cross-type AF as in the 60D seems more likely to be used in the 5DIII, or maybe a completely new AF system, something between 60D's and 7D's AF.

+ 2 that. The image quality of the 5DmkII had me using it 90% to my 7D's 10%, but the AF and FPS ofthe 7D really was great.

Last weekend I sold my 7D and got a second 5DmkII body. Big price drops in Japan.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

The 1DX adds so many advances they surely wouldn't need to cripple things close ot this much.

The 1D X adds some nice advances relative to the current 1-series bodies - but note, there is some regression as well - the loss of center point AF with an f/8 lens.

yeah, too bad about that too, since it gives marketing all the excuse they need to not dare put 1D4 AF into 7D2 or 5D3

 

[K-amps]

It looks like most people are pretty damn happy with their 5D2s... There are just some quibbles about the ancient AF system really. Otherwise, fps, ISO, mp... all up to par. Really, if the 5D2 was introduced last year, it would still make sense in the Canon lineup. If the 5D3 is just going to bump up the mp and ISO a bit and largely leave the AF alone, then I say I'd rather wait another year or so and get a 5D that will have a significantly upgraded AF instead of getting one in the next 6 months that upgrades everything just a bit but still leaves me wanting more. And out another $3k lol. What do you think? Is the 5D2 so terrible now that we need an minor upgrade on things we're mostly happy about right now?

I don't think Canon are going to just up the MP and ISO while jumping the price to $3k. I expect Canon are going to be putting in a lot of effort in making sure that the 5D3 is going to still be head and shoulders above any other camera in it's category eg. D800.

The one thing going concerns do; is ensure sustainability.

One would think that if they made the 5D3 such a superior product, it would cannibalize other canon models, (higher margin offerings) secondly would be hard for them to show improvements in a 5d4 etc. As Neuro would put it, if one plotted the value propositions; it would be close to a second order polynomial , and a very high value 5d3 would be a distraction to the progressive market segmentation they have tried to create.

I suspect they will make it very close to the D800 in terms of a value proposition. Again thinking sustainibility.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It looks like most people are pretty damn happy with their 5D2s... There are just some quibbles about the ancient AF system really. Otherwise, fps, ISO, mp... all up to par. Really, if the 5D2 was introduced last year, it would still make sense in the Canon lineup. If the 5D3 is just going to bump up the mp and ISO a bit and largely leave the AF alone, then I say I'd rather wait another year or so and get a 5D that will have a significantly upgraded AF instead of getting one in the next 6 months that upgrades everything just a bit but still leaves me wanting more. And out another $3k lol. What do you think? Is the 5D2 so terrible now that we need an minor upgrade on things we're mostly happy about right now?

I don't think Canon are going to just up the MP and ISO while jumping the price to $3k. I expect Canon are going to be putting in a lot of effort in making sure that the 5D3 is going to still be head and shoulders above any other camera in it's category eg. D800.

The one thing going concerns do; is ensure sustainability.

One would think that if they made the 5D3 such a superior product, it would cannibalize other canon models, (higher margin offerings) secondly would be hard for them to show improvements in a 5d4 etc. As Neuro would put it, if one plotted the value propositions; it would be close to a second order polynomial , and a very high value 5d3 would be a distraction to the progressive market segmentation they have tried to create.

I suspect they will make it very close to the D800 in terms of a value proposition. Again thinking sustainibility.

OTOH the lower tiers have so much vastly larger volume. The 1Ds sold about zero copies compared to 5 series.
And all this little picking and pecking and barely improving this or that maybe it seems good, but imagine if they had gone full tilt a few years back when Nikon was floundering, Canon seriously could've grabbed a ton a ton of extra market share and had so many more people on board and buying lenses, etc. Sometimes I think the marketing attitude of recent Canon shoots themselves in the foot in the end.

 

[Loswr]

imagine if they had gone full tilt a few years back when Nikon was floundering, Canon seriously could've grabbed a ton a ton of extra market share and had so many more people on board and buying lenses, etc. Sometimes I think the marketing attitude of recent Canon shoots themselves in the foot in the end.

Really? The numbers over recent years contradict that statement. Consider - last year (2010, latest for which figures are available), Canon had ~45% of the dSLR market share, compared to Nikon's ~30%. Three years before that, in 2007, Nikon had 41% dSLR share to Canon's 40% share. So from 2007 through 2010, Canon grew their market share while Nikon lost it to Sony, Olympus, et al.

So, why change anything? They're winning! Yes, I know the arguments about resting on past laurels, etc., but the can obviously convince themselves that they're doing everything right, and it's hard to argue otherwise...

 

[whatta]

since you have been talking about AF, let me ask my question again:

is there ANY difference between the AF of 60d vs AF of the rebels from 400d (to 600d)
IF I ONLY use the manually selected central AF point?
(cross type f2/8)

thanks!

 

[Loswr]

let me ask my question again:

is there ANY difference between the AF of 60d vs AF of the rebels from 400d (to 600d)
IF I ONLY use the manually selected central AF point?
(cross type f2/8)

Missed the question before, but yes, there is a difference.

The Rebel center AF point is a single cross-type point that is vertical-line sensitive at f/2.8 and vertical- and horizontal-line sensitivite at f/5.6. Basically, the AF point is a '+' shape with a longer horizontal arm. So, with a lens slower than f/2.8, it's an f/5.6-sensitive cross, but with f/2.8 and faster lenses, it's a single orientation sensor with the higher accuracy you get from an f/2.8 baseline, but only for vertical lines.

The xxD (40D - 60D, actually 7D as well) center AF point is a dual cross-type point that is vertical- and horizontal-line sensitivite at f/5.6, with a diagonally-oriented f/2.8-sensitive cross-type sensor. Picture it as a bigger 'x' superimposed on a smaller '+'.

The diagonal cross means you get the more accurate f/2.8 baseline in multiple orientations, and thus you're more likely to get more accurate focus with the center AF point on the xxD/7D than on the Rebel/xxxD body.

 

[whatta]

The diagonal cross means you get the more accurate f/2.8 baseline in multiple orientations, and thus you're more likely to get more accurate focus with the center AF point on the xxD/7D than on the Rebel/xxxD body.

Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation!!

 

[pdirestajr]

I'm just waiting for the 5D3 to come out so I can but the 5DII at a discount!

 

[K-amps]

I'm just waiting for the 5D3 to come out so I can but the 5DII at a discount!

Realistically, what price do you expect for one in good condition after the 5d3 announcement?

 

[Loswr]

I'm just waiting for the 5D3 to come out so I can but the 5DII at a discount!

If the 5DIII is more expensive than the 5DII (and given the current street pricing of a new 5DII, how can it NOT be?) then the price of a 5DII might very well rise as new ones become scarce and retailers start charging full retail price (that's exactly what happened with the 70-200/2.8L IS II, used prices of the MkI went up by ~$300 once the new version came out).

 

[traveller]

All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this...

The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system. The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities. The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition. Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail. If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"? This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image.

Canon must risk their 1D X sales by upping the specs of the 5D MkIII AF system, many people won't actually need it most of the time but that's not the point. I live in the UK and my car (like most these days) has air conditioning, which is great for the few days a year I actually need it. Try selling people anything other than a base model without A/C.

Canon are competing in this market on a differentiation strategy, if their sensor isn't a lot better than the new Sony FF unit, what will Canon differentiate on? In my view, the 7D's AF system is the bare minimum for the 5D MkIII; let's not forget that the frame coverage of the AF points would be virtually the same as with the 5D MkII (just higher density). If Canon are unwilling to go the whole hog and fit the new 61pt AF system to the 5D MkIII (and 7D MkII), they should develop a new AF system for these cameras; how about a 39 pt "low density reticular array".

 

[Loswr]

What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.

Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%. Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF.

There's my organ grinding for the night...

 

[npherno]

All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this...

The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system. The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities. The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition. Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail. If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"? This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image.

Canon must risk their 1D X sales by upping the specs of the 5D MkIII AF system, many people won't actually need it most of the time but that's not the point. I live in the UK and my car (like most these days) has air conditioning, which is great for the few days a year I actually need it. Try selling people anything other than a base model without A/C.

Canon are competing in this market on a differentiation strategy, if their sensor isn't a lot better than the new Sony FF unit, what will Canon differentiate on? In my view, the 7D's AF system is the bare minimum for the 5D MkIII; let's not forget that the frame coverage of the AF points would be virtually the same as with the 5D MkII (just higher density). If Canon are unwilling to go the whole hog and fit the new 61pt AF system to the 5D MkIII (and 7D MkII), they should develop a new AF system for these cameras; how about a 39 pt "low density reticular array".

I agree, but maybe the 7D AF will be adequate enough? You KNOW Canon isn't going to do better than that. I also think that besides the actual, you know focusing (only kind of important..Low light be damned if you cant get a AF lock), the sensor better rock. Sony/Nikon make "better" looking random noise at high ISO, and Canon should as well. Ive learned to live with banding on my 50D, but on a $2.5K camera, thats BS.

I have to say (and I can hear the detractors now regarding NEX processing and sharpness levels) my NEX-5 is WAY better at low ISO with noise than my 50D, shooting in RAW. Im still not too invested in Canon, I'd def switch to Nikon if the D800 was compelling.

 

[traveller]

What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.

Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%. Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF.

There's my organ grinding for the night...

I disagree that Canon are not competing with Nikon and Sony at this level, if that was the case then why on earth did Nikon bother to make the specifications of the D700 so good? They could have made themselves a higher margin by installing the 11 pt AF and metering systems from the DXX series. Your right about inertia, owning many lenses and flashes for a system gives you a strong incentive to stay, but if your chosen brand keeps underperforming in key areas generation after generation then you will eventually consider switching (you're always saying how 'L' lenses hold their value). If this were not the case then Nikon would still be the market leader for professionals and 'serious enthusiasts'.

Nikon have been offering significantly more AF points on their 'below flagship' range for exactly one generation. I don't think that it's safe for a company to extrapolate from three years of past data and use that as the basis of future strategy, especially when what is being measured is as coarse as overall DSLR sales. Canon are really starting to look like they're no longer the best choice in the mid-market and now Nikon are starting to produce some very good entry level cameras (where I believe they have recently been weaker than Canon) and Sony are also fielding some interesting alternatives. Actually, I hope that Canon do lose some market share, it might just stimulate them to do better...

 

[JR]

What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.

Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%. Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF.

There's my organ grinding for the night...

I disagree that Canon are not competing with Nikon and Sony at this level, if that was the case then why on earth did Nikon bother to make the specifications of the D700 so good? They could have made themselves a higher margin by installing the 11 pt AF and metering systems from the DXX series. Your right about inertia, owning many lenses and flashes for a system gives you a strong incentive to stay, but if your chosen brand keeps underperforming in key areas generation after generation then you will eventually consider switching (you're always saying how 'L' lenses hold their value).

I don't think that it's safe for a company to extrapolate from three years of past data and use that as the basis of future strategy, especially when what is being measured is as coarse as overall DSLR sales.

+1 on your last comment there, but I am really torn on this one. I know John is a strong believer of the inertia to change brand once you are invested in it which does make sense, but the argument that we must also look at what competition is doing is also a very compelling argument.

Not sure if anyone in this furom actually has this info, but building on John (Neuro) thinking, I guess if we knew how much of the 5D sales for example were from new buyers versus a Canon upgrade, that would help. Then if we knew the demographic of people buying 5Ds with several L lens, it would also help assessing their stickyness. For example are they professional making a living from it or recreational passionate with a lot of disposable income?

If Canon beleive their market for a 5DIII will come from Canon owners wanting to upgrade and if they beleive these buyers are not likely to jump ship (from their marketing analysis) then maybe we will all be disappointed with the specs. If on the other end they want to stay the market leader and continue to steel customer from NIkon and Sony while at the same time making money from existing customer by making them upgrade, it will lead to a more exsiting set of specs!

One thing for sure, it must be fun to be a Canon exec these days and planing for this transitional period!

 

[Loswr]

Not sure if anyone in this furom actually has this info, but building on John (Neuro) thinking, I guess if we knew how much of the 5D sales for example were from new buyers versus a Canon upgrade, that would help. Then if we knew the demographic of people buying 5Ds with several L lens, it would also help assessing their stickyness. For example are they professional making a living from it or recreational passionate with a lot of disposable income?

If Canon beleive their market for a 5DIII will come from Canon owners wanting to upgrade and if they beleive these buyers are not likely to jump ship (from their marketing analysis) then maybe we will all be disappointed with the specs. If on the other end they want to stay the market leader and continue to steel customer from NIkon and Sony while at the same time making money from existing customer by making them upgrade, it will lead to a more exsiting set of specs!

I agree that no one here has those data. But Canon has those data. Whenever you register a new product purchase online, you're asked what other camera(s) you own, what lenses you own, what lenses you're planning to buy next year, your profession, your income, etc. I'd argue that some of their choices in the last few years (e.g. a 60D clearly aimed at xxxD upgraders, not 50D upgraders) are driven by just that sort of demographic data.

I'm sure Canon does look at what Nikon/Sony are doing, at all levels - they do need to compete for some philosophical 'best camera in class' even if they're not competing for that many real customers in the upper end of the range.