Big Megapixel Camera in 2014

[Loswr]

If they do have some much better sensors coming out...

Except...that's a pretty decent-sized IF. More MP, yes, I'm sure that's coming...but I'd be surprised if that's what you mean by 'better'...

 

[Don Haines]

So Canon did all of this yet there are stories already about a quick replacement of the 5D3?

I am pretty sure that Canon was working on a replacement for the 5D3 before it was even released.... As to when, just remember that Canon has said that there will be no FF cameras anounced in 2013, so that means that the earliest announcement would be 2014... and who knows how much later the release date is.

The time is right to make the next leap ahead in technology... they are getting the lenses ready, they have introduced things like wifi remote control further and further up the chain... they have stated that a 7D2 will come out this year and will be revolutionary... my bet is the 7D will be the debut of new sensor and focusing technology and after lessons learned, the FF's get it.

Canon is a conservative company. The flagship models don't get features until they are well debuged and profesionals have had time to get used to them and comment on thier use. They try to keep those flagship models super reliable..... that's one of the reasons pro's buy them... they can rely on them to work with no surprises. For example, show me a canon "pro" camera with a touchscreen.... it's an advanced feature avaliable on 6D, rebels, point/shoots, and even the dreaded iPhone... but have they had sufficient feedback to put it in a pro camera yet..

 

[Hobby Shooter]

So Canon did all of this yet there are stories already about a quick replacement of the 5D3? Well, that tells you how important that list of "improvements" that you listed is, doesn't it?

It tells me nothing. There have been 'stories' of a new 100-400L for what...7-8 years? There have even been at least two patents. Where's the lens? Stories.

As for a 5DIII 'replacement', I'd say BS and wishful thinking. Many of the people clamoring for a high MP camera from Canon don't want to pay the price for a 1-series body, and from such dreams, rumors are born.

Let me put this another way. If I pick up and use a 5D Mark III, what am I going to notice as being significantly better aside from the AF? Nothing. What do I see as being better when I look at the images on my computer? Nothing.

So $800 or $900 more for improved AF.

Sorry, I completely disagree with that conclusion. With a few notable (and *cough* vociferous) minority exceptions, the consensus was that the sensor-based IQ of the 5DII was excellent - it wasn't broke, and Canon didn't fix it. Because of that excellent IQ, many people used the 5DII for tasks for which it's not ideal. There's a reason I and a whole bunch of other people had both a 5DII and a 7D. What Canon did with the 5DIII was, IMO, huge. They took a camera with already excellent IQ, and improved substantially on the overall performance.

For 5DII tripod-only, ISO 100 shooters, I can see the incremental nature of the upgrade. But if that's you, the answer is simple - keep your 5DII.

You state, "If I pick up and use a 5D Mark III...," which I take to mean you haven't.

After a couple years shooting a 7D and a 5DII, when I tried out a 5DIII what I immediately noticed was that it felt 'fast'. For example, the difference between the ~200 ms shutter lag of the 5DII and the ~100 ms lag of the 5DIII is very apparent. My overall impression of the 5DIII is that using it feels like using a 7D from a performance standpoint, and it delivers the IQ of the 5DII - that's a powerful combination, and whereas the 5DII was liked (almost exclusively) for its IQ, the 5DIII is, IMO, the best all-around dSLR on the market.

Now we're just waiting for a couple of other guys to step in and digging down in the DR discussion even deeper.

I have a 5D3, my previous body was a 60D so I can't compare it against the 5D2. Also, I am an amateur and I'm still learning new stuff every day so for me the 5D3 is much more camera than I actually 'need' today. BUT it's a brilliant piece of equipment thanks to it's all-around capabilities. A friend of my who is about on the same skill level as I bought a D800: He takes a lot of nice pictures, but many are our of focus, he complains to me that the camera feels slow. But when subjects are standing still and other conditions are perfect he can capture great images. I just seem to get the 5D3 out and it performs every time. Shadow details, yes I know he gets better performance there, but it doesn't really matter when the main subject is out of focus.

Both of us are helping each other, inspiring each other to learn more and try new things. It's a very fruitful but still a bit competitive friendship which is fun.

Some people could be more mature in discussing the differences between these two awesome brands, I think that would make for a more productive debate. I mean, who can really hate a 60D??? I've even read that the 5D3 is useless, that's a very bold statement.

 

[Ricku]

I've even read that the 5D3 is useless, that's a very bold statement.

Not bold at all, if it comes from a 5D2 owner who mainly shoots studio work, or tripod based landscapes (99% of photos below ISO 200).

For us, the 5D3 is a rather 'useless' camera in terms of upgrade. We don't need 61 pt AF, more speed, or gimmicks like rate button and in camera HDR. What we need is improvement in IQ, more resolution, more low ISO dynamic range, and a 100% fix for the horrible and well known pattern noise in shadow areas.

To the sports crowd, journalists or people upgrading from the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I am sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

 

[Loswr]

For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.

 

[Ricku]

For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.

Edited. :-X :'(

 

[Hobby Shooter]

I've even read that the 5D3 is useless, that's a very bold statement.

Not bold at all, if it comes from a 5D2 owner who mainly shoots studio work, or tripod based landscapes (99% of photos below ISO 200).

For us, the 5D3 is a rather 'useless' camera in terms of upgrade. We don't need 61 pt AF, more speed, or gimmicks like rate button and in camera HDR. What we need is improvement in IQ, more resolution, more low ISO dynamic range, and a 100% fix for the horrible and well known pattern noise in shadow areas.

To the sport crowd, journalists and photogs upgrading from the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I am sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

I understand what you mean, but then those should say, like you do now, as an upgrade it didn't live up to my expectations. That goes for a more mature and sensible debate. Canon might actually have made a mistake with the 5D3 as they listened to many of their 5D2 customers and designed the 5D3 against those demands. But for me it works well. And yes, I am actually very happy with the 61 pt AF, it gives me a lot of precision when composing a picture, I thought it was overkill when I moved from my 60D but now I almost couldn't live without it (bit of an exaggeration)

For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.

Yep ;D
I shoot alot of golf and although the subject is stationary there is still alot of movement in that. Then I do a lot of street photography, you do need fast AF in those environments.

 

[jrista]

So Canon did all of this yet there are stories already about a quick replacement of the 5D3? Well, that tells you how important that list of "improvements" that you listed is, doesn't it?

It tells me nothing. There have been 'stories' of a new 100-400L for what...7-8 years? There have even been at least two patents. Where's the lens? Stories.

As for a 5DIII 'replacement', I'd say BS and wishful thinking. Many of the people clamoring for a high MP camera from Canon don't want to pay the price for a 1-series body, and from such dreams, rumors are born.

Don't be so fixed on megapixels as being the only problem that needs attention.

What needs addressing is IQ. A combination of more megapixels and improvements in noise, DR, etc, is what is sought.

In essence, this is what the entire Canon community (apart from a few deniers such as yourself) seem to be saying - a new camera that costs $800-$900 more but my pictures are pretty much the same as before. WTF?

No, what the Canon community here on CR (and, I would argue, the photographic community at large given how many 5D III's have sold) is saying is that IQ is not solely the domain of the image sensor. There are other aspects of IQ as well. The AF system is indeed a very significant factor that assists photographers in maximizing IQ. The increase in frame rate is another significant factor in maximizing IQ. The best sensor in the world doesn't matter a wit if its AF system and frame rate are low enough such that you can't actually capture the one frame where everything is still and sharp...a soft frame is a soft frame, regardless of whether the sensor pumps out beautifully soft pixels or not.

Sure, read noise is an issue in the sense that it limits DR, however that is only an issue at the lowest few ISO settings. Compared to cameras two generations ago, which frequently topped out at 6-9 stops of DR, Canon cameras offering 11-12 stops is still quite good. Hell, even the top of the line medium format cameras still offer less than 12 stops of DR. Having 13-14 stops of DR is still rather new, and requires the absolute latest and greatest 180nm technology to achieve, and only matters at the very lowest ISO settings.

I'd offer that there are far more photographers who shoot high action in one form or another who use ISO settings 800 and above than photographers who shoot still scenes or low action and use ISO settings 400 and below. To the greater majority of photographers, the AF system and frame rate are critical factors to attaining the IQ they require. To that end, I'd say Canon did well by their customers, and clearly listened to what their customers were asking for...less megapixels, higher ISO, less noise at higher ISO (hell, even I asked for that!!! )

Let me put this another way. If I pick up and use a 5D Mark III, what am I going to notice as being significantly better aside from the AF? Nothing. What do I see as being better when I look at the images on my computer? Nothing.

So $800 or $900 more for improved AF.

Sorry, I completely disagree with that conclusion. With a few notable (and *cough* vociferous) minority exceptions, the consensus was that the sensor-based IQ of the 5DII was excellent - it wasn't broke, and Canon didn't fix it. Because of that excellent IQ, many people used the 5DII for tasks for which it's not ideal. There's a reason I and a whole bunch of other people had both a 5DII and a 7D. What Canon did with the 5DIII was, IMO, huge. They took a camera with already excellent IQ, and improved substantially on the overall performance.

For 5DII tripod-only, ISO 100 shooters, I can see the incremental nature of the upgrade. But if that's you, the answer is simple - keep your 5DII.

You state, "If I pick up and use a 5D Mark III...," which I take to mean you haven't.

After a couple years shooting a 7D and a 5DII, when I tried out a 5DIII what I immediately noticed was that it felt 'fast'. For example, the difference between the ~200 ms shutter lag of the 5DII and the ~100 ms lag of the 5DIII is very apparent.

From the ones I've picked up in stores, I've not noticed any difference. If I pick up a stop watch and time 1/10th of a second vs 1/20th of a second, it is almost impossible to do manually because the resolution of my finger pressing ability is not that fine.

Perhaps your finger-pressing ability is not that fine, however our minds can indeed sense minute differences. Our ability to measure time perceptually is not limited to 1-second increments, and even if we cannot send an impulse from our brains to our fingers in 1/20th of a second, that does not mean we cannot sense the difference between 1/10th and 1/20th of a second. Especially in the context of a camera shutter...looking through the viewfinder, it is very easy to recognize a TWO-FOLD difference in shutter performance, especially when holding the shutter button down and watching frame after frame race past at nearly double the speed. I'll say that again...a TWO FOLD, FACTOR OF TWO, 100% or DOUBLE the difference in shutter speed...relatively speaking, that is a huge difference!

My overall impression of the 5DIII is that using it feels like using a 7D from a performance standpoint, and it delivers the IQ of the 5DII - that's a powerful combination, and whereas the 5DII was liked (almost exclusively) for its IQ, the 5DIII is, IMO, the best all-around dSLR on the market.

Except that for the price the IQ is very very ordinary.

What exactly is "ordinary IQ"? I think your generalizing a bit too much...

 

[Loswr]

Don't be so fixed on megapixels as being the only problem that needs attention.

What needs addressing is IQ. A combination of more megapixels and improvements in noise, DR, etc, is what is sought.

In essence, this is what the entire Canon community (apart from a few deniers such as yourself) seem to be saying - a new camera that costs $800-$900 more but my pictures are pretty much the same as before. WTF?

First, what makes you think I'm 'fixed on megapixels'?? I'm quite happy with the 18 MP that I have. Also, in case it escaped your notice, this rumor thread is about a high MP Canon body...no guarantee of better IQ, and as I alluded to earlier, high MP doesn't mean 'better'.

Second, I do take issue with your statements that Canon's current sensors are somehow 'bad'. I'm not saying they're the best on the market, they're not...but implying they're sub-par is rather disingenuous.

Third, who the heck is 'the entire Canon community'? I can only assume you're referring to the tiny minority of people here bitching about Canon's 'terribly low DR' and 'horrible, shot-destroying pattern noise.' The 'Canon community' and in fact, the dSLR-buying community at large seems to be quite pleased with the 5DIII, and with Canon in general. Have a look at Amazon.com's Top Rated dSLRs (note - top rated by customer reviews, not top selling, although Canon owns the top of that list, too). The 5DIII tops the Top Rated list, and Canon holds the entire top 15. Then we see Sony...but where's Nikon? One Nikon camera in the top 20, a total of 5 in the top 40. And the D800? Based on customer feedback, it's not even in the Top 100 at all (the D4 and D700 are in the top 50, but only barely). So I'd have to say WTF to your claim that 'the entire Canon community' is dissatisfied with the 5DIII. A 'community' of about ten (excuse me, now about nine) naysayers here such as yourself, perhaps.

 

[moreorless]

Third, who the heck is 'the entire Canon community'? I can only assume you're referring to the tiny minority of people here bitching about Canon's 'terribly low DR' and 'horrible, shot-destroying pattern noise.' The 'Canon community' and in fact, the dSLR-buying community at large seems to be quite pleased with the 5DIII, and with Canon in general. Have a look at Amazon.com's Top Rated dSLRs (note - top rated by customer reviews, not top selling, although Canon owns the top of that list, too). The 5DIII tops the Top Rated list, and Canon holds the entire top 15. Then we see Sony...but where's Nikon? One Nikon camera in the top 20, a total of 5 in the top 40. And the D800? Based on customer feedback, it's not even in the Top 100 at all (the D4 and D700 are in the top 50, but only barely). So I'd have to say WTF to your claim that 'the entire Canon community' is dissatisfied with the 5DIII. A 'community' of about ten (excuse me, now about nine) naysayers here such as yourself, perhaps.

I'd say that the issue your dealing with is that the "Megapixel/DR" community tends to be the most vocal on the net. Partly I'd say because the serious landscape/macro market naturally tends to be a bit more "techy" and so involved in gear forums but mostly because these elements obviously count for more with the for the want of a better word "measurebators".

On this forum I'v no doubt most of those after more Megapixels/DR are in the first group but on the net as a whole I think the vast majority are in the latter. These are elements that can be tested to your hearts content shooting brick walls (or more likely looking at other peoples shots of brock walls for cameras you'll never own) where as the benefits of improved AF, FPS, weather sealing etc will be felt more when actually using a camera to take photos out in the world

Its not as if there isnt discontent on the Nikon side aswell though, head over to any Nikon forum and you'll find people bemoaning a lack of a true sucessor to the D700.

 

[anthony11]

Yep. The 50% faster frame rate

I see a lot of "up to" 6 fps, not just 6 fps, so I wonder what the weasel words are hiding. I also read that auto-AF-select is even slower and less useful than the 5D2's.

better sealing

I'm sure that both people shoot from inside waterfalls appreciate that.

better viewfinder

How is not being able to see what AF spot is selected "better"??

dual card slots

One CF slot.

shutter lag reduced by half

Welcome, but not along worth rebuying a body.

better metering

Pretty much everything has better metering than the 5D2. Having to routinely shoot with EC +1 is an embarrassment.

better ergonomics

Vaguebook much?

including a multicontroller on the grip

The pictures I find of the 5D3 show no such thing. It'd be really awkward to hold if it did.

it does seem like Canon ignored everything but the AF. Right.

The sensor is effectively identical to that in the 5D2, no high-ISO usability improvement, no improvement on low-ISO banding/shadow noise. Note that having more aggressive default NR when saving to JPEG files does not qualify as a high-ISO improvement.

 

[jrista]

Don't be so fixed on megapixels as being the only problem that needs attention.

What needs addressing is IQ. A combination of more megapixels and improvements in noise, DR, etc, is what is sought.

In essence, this is what the entire Canon community (apart from a few deniers such as yourself) seem to be saying - a new camera that costs $800-$900 more but my pictures are pretty much the same as before. WTF?

First, what makes you think I'm 'fixed on megapixels'?? I'm quite happy with the 18 MP that I have. Also, in case it escaped your notice, this rumor thread is about a high MP Canon body...no guarantee of better IQ, and as I alluded to earlier, high MP doesn't mean 'better'.

Second, I do take issue with your statements that Canon's current sensors are somehow 'bad'. I'm not saying they're the best on the market, they're not...but implying they're sub-par is rather disingenuous.

Third, who the heck is 'the entire Canon community'? I can only assume you're referring to the tiny minority of people here bitching about Canon's 'terribly low DR' and 'horrible, shot-destroying pattern noise.' The 'Canon community' and in fact, the dSLR-buying community at large seems to be quite pleased with the 5DIII, and with Canon in general. Have a look at Amazon.com's Top Rated dSLRs (note - top rated by customer reviews, not top selling, although Canon owns the top of that list, too). The 5DIII tops the Top Rated list, and Canon holds the entire top 15. Then we see Sony...but where's Nikon? One Nikon camera in the top 20, a total of 5 in the top 40. And the D800? Based on customer feedback, it's not even in the Top 100 at all (the D4 and D700 are in the top 50, but only barely). So I'd have to say WTF to your claim that 'the entire Canon community' is dissatisfied with the 5DIII. A 'community' of about ten (excuse me, now about nine) naysayers here such as yourself, perhaps.

Amen! +1

 

[bdunbar79]

Yep. The 50% faster frame rate

I see a lot of "up to" 6 fps, not just 6 fps, so I wonder what the weasel words are hiding. I also read that auto-AF-select is even slower and less useful than the 5D2's.

better sealing

I'm sure that both people shoot from inside waterfalls appreciate that.

better viewfinder

How is not being able to see what AF spot is selected "better"??

dual card slots

One CF slot.

shutter lag reduced by half

Welcome, but not along worth rebuying a body.

better metering

Pretty much everything has better metering than the 5D2. Having to routinely shoot with EC +1 is an embarrassment.

better ergonomics

Vaguebook much?

including a multicontroller on the grip

The pictures I find of the 5D3 show no such thing. It'd be really awkward to hold if it did.

it does seem like Canon ignored everything but the AF. Right.

The sensor is effectively identical to that in the 5D2, no high-ISO usability improvement, no improvement on low-ISO banding/shadow noise. Note that having more aggressive default NR when saving to JPEG files does not qualify as a high-ISO improvement.

You're under the utterly and completely clueless assumption that if you are a 5D2 owner, that the 5D3 is the next logical thing to buy. Imagine being a 7D owner and then moving on to a 5D3. The 5D3 is a 5D2 and 7D combined, and then actually extra than that. But you're arguing that anybody claimed that the 5D3 had any IQ improvement over the 5D2. Who claimed that? Did anybody on this forum claim that or did I miss it? The 5D3 has no IQ improvement over the 5D2. Who cares??

 

[Loswr]

@ anthony11 - pick many nits?

It's 6 fps. All the Canon fps specs state 'max' or 'approx' so maybe they are all lies?

Maybe you don't shoot in the rain for fear of having to shout, "I'm melting...what a world."

Do you have trouble seeing the AF points on your 5DIII? Maybe you need to visit an ophthalmologist. They were perfectly visible to me.

Dual CF would be nice. But two is still better than one.

So it does have better metering, right? What's your point there?

"Vaguebook?" Make up words much? Try using one...

The second multicontroller is on the battery grip, also known as a vertical grip or portrait grip, officially the the BG-E11. It attaches to the bottom of the camera, providing controls for portrait orientation, and the second multicontroller makes AF point selection a lot easier when shooting vertically. The battery grip for the 5DIII is the first battery grip to offer that feature, also found on the integrated vertical controls on the 1D X. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

So, we agree that the 5DIII doesn't offer significantly better IQ than the 5DII, and based on the long list of your responses, there do seem to be many other changes besides just AF. Just because you don't find those changes beneficial doesn't mean others feel the same - as noted above, the 5DIII gets high marks from a majority.

 

[wickidwombat]

you must have got a dud 5Dmk3 because mine ar considerably better than my mk2's

you do have a 5Dmk3 dont you?

 

[sach100]

I am neither a "pro" nor an expert on many things photography. But i do have some real world experience using 5d3 and 5d2 to a much lesser extent.

I see a lot of "up to" 6 fps, not just 6 fps, so I wonder what the weasel words are hiding. I also read that auto-AF-select is even slower and less useful than the 5D2's.

Slower and less useful? seriously? there is some quirk in AF (in low light) when you half press the shutter but that's about the only "problem" i have. I've used my friend's 5d2 and i find the 5d3's AF select way more useful

I'm sure that both people shoot from inside waterfalls appreciate that.

In my part of the world i frequently visit "hill stations" where there is too much fog / dew. So it IS great to have better weather sealing

How is not being able to see what AF spot is selected "better"??

How is this related to having a better viewfinder? Last time i checked the view finder was something like 5d2's 98% Vs 100% in 5d3

One CF slot.

Well, i agree. Dual CF slot would have been a better option but probably it came down to limited real estate and size of the camera

Welcome, but not along worth rebuying a body.

Probably, if you base your decision on this parameter alone. But coming from 7d this is a much better experience to me compared to the 5d2.

The sensor is effectively identical to that in the 5D2, no high-ISO usability improvement, no improvement on low-ISO banding/shadow noise. Note that having more aggressive default NR when saving to JPEG files does not qualify as a high-ISO improvement.

I am not an expert on this. But technically sensor is not identical. To me at higher ISO (>3200ish) it's a clear 1/2 stop improvement over 5d2 and definitely better handling of banding/shadow noise over 5d2 overall.

Canon did blew it when it came to DR and banding/ shadow noise compared to you-know-which-model. But then if you are hinting that 5d3 is not up to the mark to you it doesn't in anyway mean it's not for others. I am totally happy with the results i get with my 5d3 (studio/Low-light & generic use).

 

[jrista]

Yep. The 50% faster frame rate

I see a lot of "up to" 6 fps, not just 6 fps, so I wonder what the weasel words are hiding. I also read that auto-AF-select is even slower and less useful than the 5D2's.

You can only achieve the maximum frame rate when the shutter speed is high enough. The shutter speed needs to be high enough to account for shutter lag and mirror blackout time as well, which are on the order of 125ms for the 5D III. If your shutter speed is too slow, you can't actually achieve exactly 6fps...thus the "up to 6fps".

including a multicontroller on the grip

The pictures I find of the 5D3 show no such thing. It'd be really awkward to hold if it did.

You aren't looking at the right pictures. The multicontroller was a big new thing with the 5D III battery grip. To put the issue to rest and eliminate any more "None of the pictures I've seen show it", take a look at TDP's review...the third photo shows the multicontroller on the grip quite clearly...and it doesn't get in the way:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-BG-E11-Battery-Grip-Review.aspx

it does seem like Canon ignored everything but the AF. Right.

The sensor is effectively identical to that in the 5D2, no high-ISO usability improvement, no improvement on low-ISO banding/shadow noise. Note that having more aggressive default NR when saving to JPEG files does not qualify as a high-ISO improvement.

The sensor has a 16% improvement in Q.E. as well as lower minimum read noise. Thanks to both of those, there is a visible two-fold improvement in high ISO usability, which falls around 12800 ISO without the need for NR (i.e. comparing direct 5D II RAW to 5D III RAW). (Besides, the whole notion of "usable" is sketchy at best...there are forms of photography that don't require artistically usable ISO, such as documentary and police photography, where ISO 25600 or even the boost ISO settings are "usable". Not to mention the fact that if you can't get the shot at all at a "low" ISO, you really have nothing to lose by using a higher one.) Complaining about "default" settings is just a copout. Don't like the "defaults"? Change em...they ARE configurable!

BTW, high ISO unusable? Try this...ISO 25,600, 1D X (which would be about how good the 5D III @ ISO 12800 is from a noise standpoint):

How "The City and the Storm" photo was taken"

Regarding whether all the improvements in the 5D III are worth the upgrade...well, there isn't a formula for that. That is something each photographer has to determine for himself. The same goes for a "big megapixel" camera...whether the Canon Big MP body will suit a photographer is up to the photographer to decide. If we assume the big mp sensor has the same read noise as the 5D III (which I find unlikely...I figure it would be closer to the 7D which is about 4x less than the 5D III), the higher pixel count will produce improved results when scaled down to 5D III size. If the sensor does have 7D-level read noise (which I figure would be the case given the fact that the sensor would have the same pixel size, and similar FWC), overall read noise would be considerably lower than the 5D III, and even better when scaled to the same size.

 

[anthony11]

You're under the utterly and completely clueless assumption that if you are a 5D2 owner, that the 5D3 is the next logical thing to buy.

... as opposed to what? There is no logical next thing in the product line right now, short of a used D700.

Imagine being a 7D owner and then moving on to a 5D3. The 5D3 is a 5D2 and 7D combined

Two wrongs don't make a right.

But you're arguing that anybody claimed that the 5D3 had any IQ improvement over the 5D2. Who claimed that?

The specs and tests speak for themselves.

Did anybody on this forum claim that

Gee, I dunno, let me go read every post ever made here.

or did I miss it? The 5D3 has no IQ improvement over the 5D2. Who cares??

Those of us who have to work for a living and yet want wacky stuff like usable pictures of our kids.

 

[dlleno]

For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.

You're telling me that using a 5DIII with the same shutter speed and aperture as a 5DII will result in better photos of "action"?? I'd like to know how you work that magic. Do things automatically go slower when they sense a 5DIII is taking a photo of them?

dern right the 5D3 will produce better photos of action. the magic is in the AF system: if the subject distance is changing, the 5D3 will produce more keepers that are in focus.

 

[Hobby Shooter]

For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade.

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.

You're telling me that using a 5DIII with the same shutter speed and aperture as a 5DII will result in better photos of "action"?? I'd like to know how you work that magic. Do things automatically go slower when they sense a 5DIII is taking a photo of them?

dern right the 5D3 will produce better photos of action. the magic is in the AF system: if the subject distance is changing, the 5D3 will produce more keepers that are in focus.

Simple as that. I think that is hard to deny even for the biggest 5D3 hater.