Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

[briansquibb]

2000/-??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Canon must be kidding.

Again it lost on
Nikon D600 24mp full frame under 1600usd.

How do you figure that the D600 will be better than the new Canon ff?

Neither have been announced nor tested - yet you are dissing Canon?

well look at the chronology of the canons price factor.
500$ less cheaper D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3.

so i guess D600 performs as well as price mentioned, but canon never did perform as their worth.

I guess that is why Nikon is #2 then

Does the "D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3" ? I would guess which angle you are coming from and is totally subjective.

 

[wickidwombat]

2000/-??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Canon must be kidding.

Again it lost on
Nikon D600 24mp full frame under 1600usd.

How do you figure that the D600 will be better than the new Canon ff?

Neither have been announced nor tested - yet you are dissing Canon?

well look at the chronology of the canons price factor.
500$ less cheaper D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3.

so i guess D600 performs as well as price mentioned, but canon never did perform as their worth.

I guess that is why Nikon is #2 then

Does the "D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3" ? I would guess which angle you are coming from and is totally subjective.

i'm still trying to decipher "chronology of the canons price factor"

 

[fman]

Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2? ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...

From flexibility/portability perspective a GH2 + a bunch of micro 4/3 lens (which still cost less, weighs less and takes less space in your bag) are way better than an 1Ds3 with 200 f/2.
So yes in 99.9999% of the cases yes micro 4/3 with a bunch of lens is better (for stills E-M5, for video GH2 or G5). For the remaining 0.0001% 1Ds3+ 200 f/2 wins big time (when you need extreme low light performance, background blurring etc.).

All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy and space taking way for non pro usage. In most of the cases it's also a costly way. Far too many people have the misconception that for vacations, daily snapshots they need a DSLR and couple of expensive lens. In fact most would be better served with something smaller, lighter and most of the time less expensive.
Real pro usage is different. However that's probably not the target for an entry level crop or FF DSLR with crippled ergonomics and functionality.

 

[maxxevv]

well look at the chronology of the canons price factor.
500$ less cheaper D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3.

so i guess D600 performs as well as price mentioned, but canon never did perform as their worth.

don't get what you mean in the first sentence.

But in my part of the world, the 5DMkIII is actually cheaper than the D800 in the stores. And availability is way, way better. The stores basically can get hold of replacement stocks within 5-6 working days right from the first batches ( which were like barely 2~3 weeks after launch). D800 was a rare commodity for a few months in fact. None of the shops could get hold of any for multiple weeks ( stretches into a month + ) after their first batch. And it was similarly so for replacement batches. Even now, the shops cannot confirm when their next shipment be should they finish their existing stock.

What good is a camera that you can barely get hold of versus one that you could have used to shoot for thousands of quality photos and captured plenty of priceless memories in the same elapsed time ?

 

[briansquibb]

Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2? ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...

From flexibility/portability perspective a GH2 + a bunch of micro 4/3 lens (which still cost less, weighs less and takes less space in your bag) are way better than an 1Ds3 with 200 f/2.
So yes in 99.9999% of the cases yes micro 4/3 with a bunch of lens is better (for stills E-M5, for video GH2 or G5). For the remaining 0.0001% 1Ds3+ 200 f/2 wins big time (when you need extreme low light performance, background blurring etc.).

All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy and space taking way for non pro usage. In most of the cases it's also a costly way. Far too many people have the misconception that for vacations, daily snapshots they need a DSLR and couple of expensive lens. In fact most would be better served with something smaller, lighter and most of the time less expensive.
Real pro usage is different. However that's probably not the target for an entry level crop or FF DSLR with crippled ergonomics and functionality.

If you are after something portable and cheap then clearly a P&S would be better than a 4/3 using your argument

However, weight and money are not everybody's priority. You might think that on vacation smaller, lighter and less expensive is 'better' but I dont want to come back with 'snaps'. I am going on vacation to France on Saturday and will be going round the chateaux and castles as well as some birding( my wife's hobby).

I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.

The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.

 

[trulandphoto]

I haven't read all the posts, but I'm going to predict the new kit lens will be an EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM.

 

[fman]

I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.

The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.

Although I have couple of Canon lens (2 of them are whites, but would prefer them in black)+DSLR body, my choice for vacation: Pana 7-14, 14-140 or 14-45 (14-150 would be for Oly) and 20 1.7 + Oly 45 1.8.
So altogether 4 lens (2 zooms, 2 primes).

I don't think that equipment would be holding back me in anything (ok. there is no TS in the set, but TS would be the last thing I'd take with me with for vacation; there is also no macro but I don't shoot macro so much to justify the Pana 45 2.8 ).

I know people who swapped 7D and couple of L lens for such a set. I won't swap DSLR (as it has also its place) but I really don't get excited hearing such rumors like in this post.

 

[briansquibb]

I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.

The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.

Although I have couple of Canon lens (2 of them are whites, but would prefer them in black)+DSLR body, my choice for vacation: Pana 7-14, 14-140 or 14-45 (14-150 would be for Oly) and 20 1.7 + Oly 45 1.8.
So altogether 4 lens (2 zooms, 2 primes).

I don't think that equipment would be holding back me in anything (ok. there is no TS in the set, but TS would be the last thing I'd take with me with for vacation; there is also no macro but I don't shoot macro so much to justify the Pana 45 2.8 ).

I know people who swapped 7D and couple of L lens for such a set. I won't swap DSLR (as it has also its place) but I really don't get excited hearing such rumors like in this post.

Visiting historical buildings and no TS - I just couldn't contemplate it

This thread is about full frame cameras - I have 3 and am waiting for the 4th to be delivered. My standard walkabout is the 1DS3 and 70-200 f/2.8L II hanging off a BR strap. Even simple family shots can be turned into works of art so far beyond the possibilities of a 4/3.

 

[fman]

I'm always surprised at people who have never tried micro 4/3 and yet they are convinced that they need a FF DSLR with ultra fast lens to make good family/vacation photos (or a portrait cannot be good enough if the background is not melted to nothing).
Lack of confidence? Addiction?
I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).

 

[Etienne]

You'll just have to experience it yourself I guess...and when you do, you'll be saying wow a lot!

The attached shot - ISO 20,000 - f4, 1/40th, taken at night no flash...4th of july...this was on my second day with the mk3, was shooting the fireworks, played it safe for most of that night and used flash, once I had fulfilled my requirements decided to play and snap some candids at crazy high ISO just to see how it would handle it. I'd say, not so bad... ;D

That shot looks great. I never go above 6,400 on the 5DII.
There are a lot of things I am going to love about the 5DIII.
Thanks for the shot. btw ... what lens?

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

You'll just have to experience it yourself I guess...and when you do, you'll be saying wow a lot!

The attached shot - ISO 20,000 - f4, 1/40th, taken at night no flash...4th of july...this was on my second day with the mk3, was shooting the fireworks, played it safe for most of that night and used flash, once I had fulfilled my requirements decided to play and snap some candids at crazy high ISO just to see how it would handle it. I'd say, not so bad... ;D

That shot looks great. I never go above 6,400 on the 5DII.
There are a lot of things I am going to love about the 5DIII.
Thanks for the shot. btw ... what lens?

24-70L...not the new one though, the old one. When you get yours, try it in the most extreme situations you can! You'll find that 6400 is like safe....which is awesome cause it totally opens things up. Here's a wedding shot - at ISO 6400, f6.3, 1/60th = on my 70-200 2.8 (the non-IS version at 200mm) 6400 is pretty clean. Yes there is noise in the RAW file, but it doesn't take too much to clean it up and you don't lose too much sharpness. I love that I was able to get this shot, no flash, and have some room to play with DOF. On my 7D, I would have had to go with ISO 4000, 2.8, and closer to 1/50 or lower, and thats just to get the shot at all, on a mk2 it would be a similar story.

 

[briansquibb]

I'm always surprised at people who have never tried micro 4/3 and yet they are convinced that they need a FF DSLR with ultra fast lens to make good family/vacation photos (or a portrait cannot be good enough if the background is not melted to nothing).
Lack of confidence? Addiction?
I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).

I have a G12 for the occasional picture where a DSLR is not advisable

We all have our own preferences. Why should I buy a 4/3 camera just to try it? I have experienced APS-C, APS-H and FF and the best pictures come from FF - so why go to a very small sensor?

I dont want to use a small camera - yes I am convinced I need a 1 series ff with a fast lens - that has come from many years of experience and I find it condescending to be told that I should be taking a 4/3 to get good family/vacation shots when I know that I get better from my full size - and that is due to 'lack of confidence' or 'addiction'.

You can take your 4/3 and I will take my ff and large whites.

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

 

[fman]

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.

 

[briansquibb]

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.

Well I take 2 flash and stands etc as default for simple pictures. Tomorrow I will be taking photos of my father and his new kitten - of course I will do flash

Why not take flash on vacation? - There is plenty of room in the car

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

 

[RLPhoto]

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.

Well I take 2 flash and stands etc as default for simple pictures. Tomorrow I will be taking photos of my father and his new kitten - of course I will do flash

Why not take flash on vacation? - There is plenty of room in the car

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

How about a scrim/reflector in your kit? :

 

[thepancakeman]

All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy

Maybe you just need to start working out--my 7D with 70-200 f/2.8 IS has never seemed heavy to me.

 

[briansquibb]

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.

Well I take 2 flash and stands etc as default for simple pictures. Tomorrow I will be taking photos of my father and his new kitten - of course I will do flash

Why not take flash on vacation? - There is plenty of room in the car

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

How about a scrim/reflector in your kit? :

Have a large reflector

 

[fman]

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

5DmkIII or 1Dx no, but it easily beats 5DmkII in JPG and comes very-very close in RAW at ISO3200:
JPG (pick the camera): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/20
RAW: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/21
A result unimaginable just a year ago...

In video Pana G (G5, GH2) cameras beat any DSLR from Canon including 5DmkIII.

So I don't really see the reason not to travel light.
A pro work is different.

 

[briansquibb]

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

5DmkIII or 1Dx no, but it easily beats 5DmkII in JPG and comes very-very close in RAW at ISO3200:
JPG (pick the camera): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/20
RAW: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/21
A result unimaginable just a year ago...

In video Pana G (G5, GH2) cameras beat any DSLR from Canon including 5DmkIII.

So I don't really see the reason not to travel light.
A pro work is different.

Shoot in jpeg

Looked at the pictures in the link - and even the tiny web pics show the significant extra noise for the Olympus and the GH2 - so no cigar for the 4/3

I only do stills

Pro work? You mean get paid for family pictures?

 

[tron]

Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2? ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...

From flexibility/portability perspective a GH2 + a bunch of micro 4/3 lens (which still cost less, weighs less and takes less space in your bag) are way better than an 1Ds3 with 200 f/2.
So yes in 99.9999% of the cases yes micro 4/3 with a bunch of lens is better (for stills E-M5, for video GH2 or G5). For the remaining 0.0001% 1Ds3+ 200 f/2 wins big time (when you need extreme low light performance, background blurring etc.).

All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy and space taking way for non pro usage. In most of the cases it's also a costly way. Far too many people have the misconception that for vacations, daily snapshots they need a DSLR and couple of expensive lens. In fact most would be better served with something smaller, lighter and most of the time less expensive.
Real pro usage is different. However that's probably not the target for an entry level crop or FF DSLR with crippled ergonomics and functionality.

If you are after something portable and cheap then clearly a P&S would be better than a 4/3 using your argument

However, weight and money are not everybody's priority. You might think that on vacation smaller, lighter and less expensive is 'better' but I dont want to come back with 'snaps'. I am going on vacation to France on Saturday and will be going round the chateaux and castles as well as some birding( my wife's hobby).

I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.

The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.

There is no point of arguing. I believe that both of you are right. It depends on what someone wants more.
FF with many lenses mean the best possible photos.
Micro 4/3rds mean traveling light, worrying less and ... having the camera always with you!

I, for example, am a 5DII owner. Also, I do have many lenses (except of the big whites lucky brian ). I wouldn't go on vacation without some of my equipment especially in places I know I will have plenty of opportunities to take pictures.

However I always get tired of carrying it! I guess it's the price to pay for my preferences. So I can understand that someone can have fun with a tiny 4/3rds camera.

I will not buy one though because I do not wish to invest on a second system and I always think that the money for a 4/3rds system could go to a new lens :