Announcement Date? [CR1]

[Meh]

Another mention of 22mp resolution came in, as well as a “pro level” autofocus system. That bit of info comes from a known source.

The 5DIII as relly an almost baby-1D X? I'll play devil's advocate to my own viewpoint, and ask why not? Canon has to have a flagship, a truly top of the line pro camera. But they merged the 1D and 1Ds (or eliminated the 1Ds and made the 1D a FF camera, if you prefer) - still having a flagship, but not two of them. I have no doubt that the 5DII made them more profit than the 1DsIII and 1D IV combined. So, why not combine the 1-series, which they did, and not expect to make a hefty profit from that line. Make the 5DIII a significant improvement over the 5DII by giving it an excellent AF system, forget about 'cannabalizing' 1D X sales, the 5DIII is the real profit engine, so make it as good as possible.

I can say this, though - if they release a 5DIII with 22 MP and a “pro level” AF system (e.g. recycle the 1DsIII AF), leaving the main differentator from the 1D X as the frame rate (still 4 fps, even), I'd be quite interested - perhaps enough to get the 5DIII instead of the 1D X. Don't worry, Canon : the money saved will go toward lenses....

Ok, I'll bite at that...

It's perfectly plausible that they accept a smaller market for the 1DX by having less of a gap above a 5D3. It could make sense if they believe they only need minimal performance advantages to sell enough 1DX bodies... maybe the dual CF slots, ethernet, extra processors for AF, etc. etc.

But... if they intentionally accept a smaller market for the 1DX then I'd think the one thing they'd want to make the same is the sensor because the R&D and set-up costs to manufacture a sensor is high. The difference between 18 and 22 (22 is still just speculation for now) isn't huge so the advantage in IQ and FPS that are affected by MP count wouldn't be big enough to be a significant differentiating feature. Makes sense?

 

[JR]

Another mention of 22mp resolution came in, as well as a “pro level” autofocus system. That bit of info comes from a known source.

The 5DIII as relly an almost baby-1D X? I'll play devil's advocate to my own viewpoint, and ask why not? Canon has to have a flagship, a truly top of the line pro camera. But they merged the 1D and 1Ds (or eliminated the 1Ds and made the 1D a FF camera, if you prefer) - still having a flagship, but not two of them. I have no doubt that the 5DII made them more profit than the 1DsIII and 1D IV combined. So, why not combine the 1-series, which they did, and not expect to make a hefty profit from that line. Make the 5DIII a significant improvement over the 5DII by giving it an excellent AF system, forget about 'cannabalizing' 1D X sales, the 5DIII is the real profit engine, so make it as good as possible.

I can say this, though - if they release a 5DIII with 22 MP and a “pro level” AF system (e.g. recycle the 1DsIII AF), leaving the main differentator from the 1D X as the frame rate (still 4 fps, even), I'd be quite interested - perhaps enough to get the 5DIII instead of the 1D X. Don't worry, Canon : the money saved will go toward lenses....

I really think makes a lot of sense but I think there is another factor at play as well. Having too many products in a segment can obviously become expensive for Canon. Now that Canon positionned itself wanting to come out with some "movie" DSLR, while we dont yet know what they will look like, for sure they will take good still pictures...

So....it make some sense to simplify your existing offering in order to make room for the new product they will come out, and make sure your simplified offering is very strong. This rumored of pro grade AF makes me dream of this small body camera now...hummm what should I get now!

 

[tt]

I, personally, think the price of new 5D Mk III will be 3000 USD for body only. Maybe even over it - depends on sensor, AF and other specs. But we have to wait until official info is released to get something to catch to

Possibly - the Amazon pricing charts were for amazon.co.uk and in GBP not USD.

5D Mk II only: Initially at £2250 or $2700
5D Mk II + 24-105mm: Initially at £2990 or $3500

So apart from not working out if it's a 5D MkII or a 7D hybrid, isn't there still the issue of video? Is Canon offloading that to the C300 or a dSLR in the future, releasing the 5D MkIII from heavy video duties so it will be focused more on stills?

 

[Loswr]

It's perfectly plausible that they accept a smaller market for the 1DX by having less of a gap above a 5D3. It could make sense if they believe they only need minimal performance advantages to sell enough 1DX bodies... maybe the dual CF slots, ethernet, extra processors for AF, etc. etc.

But... if they intentionally accept a smaller market for the 1DX then I'd think the one thing they'd want to make the same is the sensor because the R&D and set-up costs to manufacture a sensor is high. The difference between 18 and 22 (22 is still just speculation for now) isn't huge so the advantage in IQ and FPS that are affected by MP count wouldn't be big enough to be a significant differentiating feature. Makes sense?

Makes sense to me. I'd perhaps take it a step further and say they might essentially write off profit from the 1D X - they need a flagship, but if they cripple the 5DIII sufficiently they'll hurt sales of that. Given the relative numbers, it's worth considering that they might prefer to completely sacrifice 1D X sales to enhance 5DIII sales. Just one possibility of many.

The 200-400mm f/4 I guess :?

Probably the 500mm f/4L IS II, actually. That with a 1.4x III would give IQ and focal length on a FF camera that would exceed that of the 100-400mm on APS-C.

 

[Meh]

It's perfectly plausible that they accept a smaller market for the 1DX by having less of a gap above a 5D3. It could make sense if they believe they only need minimal performance advantages to sell enough 1DX bodies... maybe the dual CF slots, ethernet, extra processors for AF, etc. etc.

But... if they intentionally accept a smaller market for the 1DX then I'd think the one thing they'd want to make the same is the sensor because the R&D and set-up costs to manufacture a sensor is high. The difference between 18 and 22 (22 is still just speculation for now) isn't huge so the advantage in IQ and FPS that are affected by MP count wouldn't be big enough to be a significant differentiating feature. Makes sense?

Makes sense to me. I'd perhaps take it a step further and say they might essentially write off profit from the 1D X - they need a flagship, but if they cripple the 5DIII sufficiently they'll hurt sales of that. Given the relative numbers, it's worth considering that they might prefer to completely sacrifice 1D X sales to enhance 5DIII sales. Just one possibility of many.

My point was meant to be that if that was their intention or even if they were going to accept that (not worrying about sales/profit form the 1DX) they would have designed one sensor for the 1DX and 5D3 and not spent all the money on R&D and setting up the fab. This view of course is predicated on the rumours that the 5D3 will remain in the 21-22 MP range... if it ends up being higher then of course they might not have been able to get high enough fps from the 1DX.

 

[Craig Richardson]

2012 is shaping up to be the ultimate year of Gear Acquisition Syndrome. First Fuji, then Olympus, and now Canon and possibly Leica... All I can say is there has never been a better time to be a photographer, keep up the good work Canon Rumors!

 

[gmrza]

My point was meant to be that if that was their intention or even if they were going to accept that (not worrying about sales/profit form the 1DX) they would have designed one sensor for the 1DX and 5D3 and not spent all the money on R&D and setting up the fab. This view of course is predicated on the rumours that the 5D3 will remain in the 21-22 MP range... if it ends up being higher then of course they might not have been able to get high enough fps from the 1DX.

I agree - a 21 to 21MP sensor for the 5DIII doesn't really make sense economically, since it would have no real IQ advantages over the 18MP sensor in the 1DX.

I believe that with the 1DsIII and 5DII, Canon probably made a very profitable move by allowing the 5DII to cannibalise 1DsIII sales. They retained the 1DsIII as a flagship for the small niche market that really needed its features, while the 5DII has been selling like hotcakes. I don't think it would hurt Canon to make the 5DIII be very close in feature set to the 1DX - provided the price is right for it to sell in high volumes, but there is enough differentiation to ensure that high end users do not totally abandon the 1DX. Assuming that the sales volumes of 5D series cameras are possibly an order of magnitude or more higher than 1 series cameras, Canon stands to recoup development costs faster on a 5D series camera, even at a lower price. If a lot of components are shared, that even allows the 5D series to bear a lot of the development costs of the 1D series. - This would be a bit more like the auto manufacturing approach of building around a platform - where for instance the Audi TT and VW Golf share the same platform, but target very different markets and sell at very different prices. The TT, on its own, could not justify the platform development costs however.

... Just my speculation.

 

[Meh]

@gmrza good analogy from the auto sector... well put

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Another mention of 22mp resolution came in, as well as a “pro level” autofocus system. That bit of info comes from a known source.

The 5DIII as relly an almost baby-1D X? I'll play devil's advocate to my own viewpoint, and ask why not? Canon has to have a flagship, a truly top of the line pro camera. But they merged the 1D and 1Ds (or eliminated the 1Ds and made the 1D a FF camera, if you prefer) - still having a flagship, but not two of them. I have no doubt that the 5DII made them more profit than the 1DsIII and 1D IV combined. So, why not combine the 1-series, which they did, and not expect to make a hefty profit from that line. Make the 5DIII a significant improvement over the 5DII by giving it an excellent AF system, forget about 'cannabalizing' 1D X sales, the 5DIII is the real profit engine, so make it as good as possible.

I can say this, though - if they release a 5DIII with 22 MP and a “pro level” AF system (e.g. recycle the 1DsIII AF), leaving the main differentator from the 1D X as the frame rate (still 4 fps, even), I'd be quite interested - perhaps enough to get the 5DIII instead of the 1D X. Don't worry, Canon : the money saved will go toward lenses....

+1

I've kinda always expected that the next edition of the 5D would have the 7D like features. The features are very popular, and, like the 5D MK II, the 7D is said to have surpassed its sales estimates by a large margin.

I would expect a 5D X with 7D AF features to be extremely popular.

 

[Loswr]

Specs: Another mention of 22mp resolution came in...

What if they just use the same sensor as in the 5DII in a new 5DIII? No one seems to be complaining about the performance of that sensor - so why not leave it alone and improve other features? This rumor of a 22 MP sensor? Note that the 5DII already has a 22 MP sensor, with 21.1 MP effective pixels. Check the specs...

 

[mathino]

Specs: Another mention of 22mp resolution came in...

What if they just use the same sensor as in the 5DII in a new 5DIII? No one seems to be complaining about the performance of that sensor - so why not leave it alone and improve other features? This rumor of a 22 MP sensor? Note that the 5DII already has a 22 MP sensor, with 21.1 MP effective pixels. Check the specs...

Exaclty. Current 5D Mk II has 22 Mpx but effective are 21.1 Mpx so they actually can reuse it. And as for sensor performance I havent heard any complains either. Canon can just upgrade other features (processor/s, AF, someting new) and leave sensor as it is. And this also reduces R&D costs. Hope our questions will be answered in 2 weeks

 

[moreorless]

The 5DIII as relly an almost baby-1D X? I'll play devil's advocate to my own viewpoint, and ask why not? Canon has to have a flagship, a truly top of the line pro camera. But they merged the 1D and 1Ds (or eliminated the 1Ds and made the 1D a FF camera, if you prefer) - still having a flagship, but not two of them. I have no doubt that the 5DII made them more profit than the 1DsIII and 1D IV combined. So, why not combine the 1-series, which they did, and not expect to make a hefty profit from that line. Make the 5DIII a significant improvement over the 5DII by giving it an excellent AF system, forget about 'cannabalizing' 1D X sales, the 5DIII is the real profit engine, so make it as good as possible.

I can say this, though - if they release a 5DIII with 22 MP and a “pro level” AF system (e.g. recycle the 1DsIII AF), leaving the main differentator from the 1D X as the frame rate (still 4 fps, even), I'd be quite interested - perhaps enough to get the 5DIII instead of the 1D X. Don't worry, Canon : the money saved will go toward lenses....

A potential 1DX/5D mk3 combination strikes me as being as very different situation to the 1Ds mk3 and the 5D mk2 .

To me it seems like the merging of the 1D line was more a case of more clearly defining its role where as the 1Ds was short of playing too two markets, part AF/FPS shooters who were willing to trade a bit of the latter for higher resolution/FF and part studio/landscape shooters. The latter part obviously had much less need to buy the 1Ds mk3 when the 5D mk2 offered a near indentical sensor.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Specs: Another mention of 22mp resolution came in...

What if they just use the same sensor as in the 5DII in a new 5DIII? No one seems to be complaining about the performance of that sensor - so why not leave it alone and improve other features? This rumor of a 22 MP sensor? Note that the 5DII already has a 22 MP sensor, with 21.1 MP effective pixels. Check the specs...

I certainly have no complaints, its everything that was advertised and more when I pre-ordered almost 3-1/2 years ago.

However, I constantly find myself wanting to use higher ISO's for extreme low light images, and that is the feature that would cause me to upgrade more than a better autofocus, even though that is a very desirable feature. Thats why I'm interested in the 1Dx, and wonder at its actual usable ISO for raw output.

It does not seem to me to be very likely that I'd gain more than 1/2 stop in raw with a 5D MK III and 22 mp, sensor technology has not moved that much in three years, even though Digic V will definitely do 2 stops better with jpeg out. There is a lot of ability to crop with 21mp, and I make use that, because shooting with primes, I sometimes cannot get the exact right distance, and there are no f/1.4 or even f/2 zooms for my camera.

 

[kidnaper]

I can say this, though - if they release a 5DIII with 22 MP and a “pro level” AF system (e.g. recycle the 1DsIII AF), leaving the main differentator from the 1D X as the frame rate (still 4 fps, even), I'd be quite interested - perhaps enough to get the 5DIII instead of the 1D X. Don't worry, Canon : the money saved will go toward lenses....

Beginning to sound like a 1Ds4 in a small body .... 8) 8) 8)

In terms of specs... However one of the reasons the 1 series loses the mode dial for buttons is the weather sealing. With a mode dial instead of buttons it either won't be sealed as well, or they'll need some tricks up their sleeves. You better believe, though, that I am very interested.

 

[Meh]

It does not seem to me to be very likely that I'd gain more than 1/2 stop in raw with a 5D MK III and 22 mp, sensor technology has not moved that much in three years

Actually I think it has. The 1D4 sensor (with higher pixel density that 5D2) already has about 1/2 stop better ISO than 5D2. More recent sensors from Sony seem to have further reduced read noise at all ISO settings and also appear to have increased the fill factor (the % of each pixel that has the photo-diode, bigger photosites despite higher pixel density). The 1DX sensor claims seem to be in line with these improvements.

However, it is an interesting thought that Canon might stick with the 5D2 sensor and improve the other aspects of the body.

 

[thewallbanger]

Specs: Another mention of 22mp resolution came in...

What if they just use the same sensor as in the 5DII in a new 5DIII? No one seems to be complaining about the performance of that sensor - so why not leave it alone and improve other features? This rumor of a 22 MP sensor? Note that the 5DII already has a 22 MP sensor, with 21.1 MP effective pixels. Check the specs...

Well, Nikon tried this with the D300S. It resulted in lack-luster sales, and its performance was soon surpassed by younger, more affordable bodies such as the D70. I'm not so sure Canon would take that risk with their full-frame crown jewel, especially considering the Nikon D800 release is fast approaching.

 

[Meh]

Specs: Another mention of 22mp resolution came in...

What if they just use the same sensor as in the 5DII in a new 5DIII? No one seems to be complaining about the performance of that sensor - so why not leave it alone and improve other features? This rumor of a 22 MP sensor? Note that the 5DII already has a 22 MP sensor, with 21.1 MP effective pixels. Check the specs...

Well, Nikon tried this with the D300S. It resulted in lack-luster sales, and its performance was soon surpassed by younger, more affordable bodies such as the D70. I'm not so sure Canon would take that risk with their full-frame crown jewel, especially considering the Nikon D800 release is fast approaching.

Good point as well. "If it ain't broke don't fix it" doesn't hold much water in marketing a new product.

 

[Loswr]

I'm not so sure Canon would take that risk with their full-frame crown jewel, especially considering the Nikon D800 release is fast approaching.

Good point as well. "If it ain't broke don't fix it" doesn't hold much water in marketing a new product.

The 1D X is the 'full frame crown jewel' not the 5D-line.

Marketing would have no problem with it - that's the whole point of marketing. "This way to the great egress." Same sensor but with Digic5+ means:

Two full stops better ISO performance than the 5D Mark II

(The invisible asterisk that you don't see points to an equally-invisible reference to the fact that the 2 stop improvement applies only to JPG images)

 

[waving_odd]

I certainly have no complaints, its everything that was advertised and more when I pre-ordered almost 3-1/2 years ago.

However, I constantly find myself wanting to use higher ISO's for extreme low light images, and that is the feature that would cause me to upgrade more than a better autofocus, even though that is a very desirable feature. Thats why I'm interested in the 1Dx, and wonder at its actual usable ISO for raw output.

As a wedding photog, I have been stuck with the 5D II for 3 years with no better choice that can provide me a better balance between IQ, ISO, and AF. I don't like its AF, but I can't live with 7D's IQ. I like 1D4's ISO, but I can't live with its cropped sensor. I like 1Ds3's IQ and AF, but I can't live with its ISO.

So naturally, I have high hope on 1D X as they claim it's the best-of-all-time all-around flagship from Canon, with the understanding that 18MP is no big difference to 21MP. And like what Mt Spokane said, ISO is the BIG thing for wedding togs. 1D X sounds like the ultimate answer.

But as a landscape shooting lover, another side of me also wants the highest MP and DR possible, while that side of me can safely ignores ISO, AF, etc.

I think there is no one single silver bullet that kills all. At least not for me. I want both 1D X (if works as claimed) and 5D III (or the next FF with whatever name)!!!

 

[Meh]

@neuro touché, well played sir