EOS 3Dor 5DIII rumor update at Northern Light Images?

[pedro]

As one can read over at Northern Light Images: "We're told that a 3D is on its way early next year. No mention of MP, but 'low light' was a key feature. This is meant to be 'Pro level'. Details in the comments lead me to think that this is not the same as mentioned at CR - however I've been getting mails like this since 2005, and most reliable ones have been precursors of what was the 5D and 5D mk2"
What do you think? Is it something in relation to a 5DIII or the Hybrid mentioned over here?

 

[that1guy]

Well, I'm kind of a pessimist when it comes to the 3D. I think it is a pipe dream for many of us (myself included ) and I've heard it mentioned off and on so many times that I am now in a "I'll believe it when I see it" kind of mood. That being said, maybe there is something to what they were saying about it being the next 5D...especially since similar things happened before each of the other 5Ds were announced.

Aren't most people guessing that the 5D replacement will be early next year sometime? When did the 5D II get released? To me, the timing sounds right for a 5D...but I'm no expert

 

[pedro]

You are right. I would warmly welcome a 5DIII instead of a mythical 3D as it kinda remains within my saving up schedule (even though it could be priced slightly higher due to enhanced features); while I am heading FF currently using an excellent 30D.

 

[that1guy]

I'm still sitting on my 20D and waiting I've just been putting money into lenses because honestly, that is where you really see the difference in your photos. Plus, if I do get a nice FF, I will need some good glass for it.

Whether it is a 3D or 5D, the next cheap FF is what I will be watching for very intently.

 

[gkreis]

I'm still sitting on my 20D and waiting I've just been putting money into lenses because honestly, that is where you really see the difference in your photos. Plus, if I do get a nice FF, I will need some good glass for it.

Whether it is a 3D or 5D, the next cheap FF is what I will be watching for very intently.

Smart... the 20D was an amazing camera when it came out and it continues to do well years later from what I hear folks say.

 

[that1guy]

^yep, it's worked well for me. I try to not upgrade unless the thing I am upgrading to solves a problem that I need solved (that goes for camera bodies as well as lenses). Honestly I haven't found a compelling FF solution yet that solves the things that I need (the 7D would have been my solution if I were looking for an aps-c sensor). I nearly got the 5DII, but found out about the AF on it and so I bought a 70-200 2.8 IS instead. Best decision I ever made (photographically of course).

 

[pedro]

good argument. as mentioned above: I am about to go FF but 5DII's AF was a point. Cannot afford a 7k+ body to have that resolved, so there's some hope in the next 5D. yepp, good glass makes the difference. we're on the same track then.

 

[gkreis]

good argument. as mentioned above: I am about to go FF but 5DII's AF was a point. Cannot afford a 7k+ body to have that resolved, so there's some hope in the next 5D. yepp, good glass makes the difference. we're on the same track then.

I have found that even mediocre glass does a lot better on focus if tuned to your camera at Canon. My 40D doesn't have the microfocus feature and my 17-85mm was very soft (back focusing). I had Canon adjust it and WOW. It was amazing. I had them do the same for my 10-22 and my 70-300 (my least favorite lens). I plan to get my first L lens this year to experience the better color and contrast that I've heard others go on about, but I found that tuning the lens and body together can make a world of difference for sharpness. It was like getting a new camera rig...

 

[Chindog]

I am with you on the 20D, i have been sitting on my 30D for a few years. No compelling reason to upgrade as yet, likewise been putting my money into glass. 70-200 F2.8 IS is the best thing i have ever spent money on and the 24-70 F2.8 a close second, i take a couple of hundred photos during a shoot and it makes it hard to chose the keepers as they all come out great.

Even if i do upgrade at some stage the 30D will always be sitting there, has been a great camera and never faulted (even when dropped by my wife, my Sigma 24-70 did not fair so well when dropped though).

 

[Jan]

Same for me and my 400D.
Nevertheless I'm curious about a 3D or 5dMkIII or let's say: every new camera...

 

[dthomasla]

With the announcement of the 60D is there any possibility that the 5Dlll could still be announced at Photokina in September?

I want a FF and can onlly afford the 5Dll, but I don't want to purchase it if there are only a few months left in its product cycle.

On the other hand I've been using a 40D for 3 years and I think that my photography could improve substantially if I used any 5D however, I definitely don't want to wait 6-8 months for the 5Dlll.

 

[NormanBates]

One of the big problems with the crop cameras is that your lens choice for wide angle (less than 16mm so that after crop it is under 24mm) are very limited and there are no high quality (L) lenses available in this segment.

well, the tokina 11-16 is quite good, not expensive at all, and can even work in a full frame camera (as a 14-16 or so)

 

[that1guy]

I'm still sitting on my 20D and waiting I've just been putting money into lenses because honestly, that is where you really see the difference in your photos. Plus, if I do get a nice FF, I will need some good glass for it.

Whether it is a 3D or 5D, the next cheap FF is what I will be watching for very intently.

One of the big problems with the crop cameras is that your lens choice for wide angle (less than 16mm so that after crop it is under 24mm) are very limited and there are no high quality (L) lenses available in this segment.

Yup, that's true. One of the bummers for crop cameras. I personally don't shoot very much (at all) wide angle stuff. My widest lens is a 24mm which converts to a 38mm...not very wide. I mostly shoot portraits so I get by. I figure when I get my FF finally, that 24mm will look real wide I might also consider the 16-50 that is rumored (if they actually make it) as that would give me a lot wider view than I am currently used to, and still work on a FF later. Of course, that is just a rumor, and I do need to keep saving since I don't currently have enough for a FF yet.

Honestly, even more than the wide angles, I am looking forward to being able to use my 70-200 2.8 in more confined spaces. I love that lens, but sometimes it is just a bit too long on my 20D.

 

[Peerke]

Guys, never heard of the Sigma 8-16? It has an amazing angle of 118 (the widest FF is the Sigma 12-24 with an angle of 122) and this 8-16 is sharp according the reviews.

So no need for a FF if you want to go wide. If you want the better IQ, ok go for FF, but if you just want to go wide, buy the ..... You get my point.

 

[that1guy]

That's true ^ but I've never personally had good luck w/ or been impressed w/ Sigma lenses. I'm sure it depends on the copy you get, the quality level you buy, etc etc (and to be fair, I have not used their pro lenses, but I've tried midrange zooms and their 100 ish macro)...but it's just a personal thing. I'm sure others have had awesome luck/results with them. Personally, I have always had better luck w/ Tamron or Canon.

Either way, I'm not much of a wide angle guy anyway, like I said. Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that (or even w/ the 16-35 or the 17-40).

 

[unexposure]

Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that.

If you are fine with (pretty little) ca in the (very) wide end, go for a tokina 16-50 f2.8. From 18mm on, IQ is very nice and from my point of view the nearest competitor to the ef-s 17-55 f2.8 - and the price difference is about 500$...

 

[that1guy]

Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that.

If you are fine with (pretty little) ca in the (very) wide end, go for a tokina 16-50 f2.8. From 18mm on, IQ is very nice and from my point of view the nearest competitor to the ef-s 17-55 f2.8 - and the price difference is about 500$...

Sounds interesting. Will it work on a FF camera?

 

[unexposure]

Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that.

If you are fine with (pretty little) ca in the (very) wide end, go for a tokina 16-50 f2.8. From 18mm on, IQ is very nice and from my point of view the nearest competitor to the ef-s 17-55 f2.8 - and the price difference is about 500$...

Sounds interesting. Will it work on a FF camera?

Nope. EF-S-Mount (same as the canon).

 

[bradj]

I nearly got the 5DII, but found out about the AF on it and so I bought a 70-200 2.8 IS instead.

What AF issue on the 5dII are you alluding to please?
thanks,
Brad.

 

[Edwin Herdman]

I nearly got the 5DII, but found out about the AF on it and so I bought a 70-200 2.8 IS instead.

What AF issue on the 5dII are you alluding to please?
thanks,
Brad.

I happened to come across this on Vincent LaForet's new "My Gear" section - the cameras article found here. Quote:

Lastly - the autofocus system (for still photographers) is the same system that was found in the original 5D - therefore it is close to 5 years old relative to newer systems.

Now, that's not an explicit criticism, however, implicitly you can read that compared to newer designs it's a bit outclassed. The 5D Mark II has "9 AF points, one cross type, with six AF assist points" (according to Canon's website). Compare this to the 1D Mark IV, which has 45 points; the 5D's spec is similar to the T1i / T2i which both have 9 AF points with one being cross type. 60D also has 9 points with the middle being an "extra sensitive" cross type in the middle.

So how does that translate into missed shots? Your guess is as good as mine...I'm sure one can find anecdotes either way. But I hope that at least gives context for why people will be claiming that on paper the camera is no good...heh.