EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]

[Khufu]

Thinking that for some, this conversation has gone .....*imagine above image here*. Shot with Canon 5DX and 50mm f 0.6 used Toyota headlight.

Coooooooool!

...and 3C? People might expect it to be part of the Cinema line then! But... maybe it will also be an 8.8K video camera!

 

[martti]

Call it 5Boob and it will be immediate cybersuccess.

 

[J.R.]

Given that you have failed to articulate any other functionality losses, I'm going to therefore draw the conclusion that the "massively compromised with severe loss of functionality" is in fact limited to one feature and one feature only: autofocus and only when using a 3rd party adapter for 3rd party lenses.

Terrible battery life, Sony's weak UI, shutter-induced vibration, lossy RAW compression...but you go ahead and draw what ever conclusions you want – facts have never affected them before, no reason to let them start now. :

Sony's UI is improving and far more customisable than Canon's and speaking of UI's how easy is to access MLU on a Canon DSLR? In short, whether a UI is good or bad is not objective as it depends on what you're used to.

On the one hand there is mirror vibration that Canon has made no effort to make easy to eliminate due to MLU being hard to access and on the other there is shutter vibration which I'm pretty sure Sony will seek to fix (as they have other issues.)

So if you want to compare _systems_, then using the issues you've raised, on the one hand you have a system that is constantly evolving and improving (Sony) and on the other hand you've got a system that has gone nowhere (Canon.) But really the "going nowhere" sort of fits Canon quite well. Oh, unless you count improvements to autofocus as that seems to be all that Canon cares about now but which I'm sure Sony will also improve.

Have you started to shoot using Sony systems yet?

 

[MacPaul]

We’re told that the next EOS 5D will come in three different versions.
No matter which versions we will see, if Canon not dramatically improves their sensor IQ (see 7D Mk. II review on DP), they don't have to make these in the first place.

[quote author=dilbert]
Why do you say so? Canon has been more successful than Nikon or Sony despite their better low-ISO IQ. Why do you believe The Market has changed?
[/quote]
Cause it is so! I'm not interested in "the market" (attention, here comes the holy cow, the always so present "market"!), but results.

 

[J.R.]

I'm not interested in "the market" (attention, here comes the holy cow, the always so present "market"!), but results.

The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent

 

[Loswr]

Given that you have failed to articulate any other functionality losses, I'm going to therefore draw the conclusion that the "massively compromised with severe loss of functionality" is in fact limited to one feature and one feature only: autofocus and only when using a 3rd party adapter for 3rd party lenses.

Terrible battery life, Sony's weak UI, shutter-induced vibration, lossy RAW compression...but you go ahead and draw what ever conclusions you want – facts have never affected them before, no reason to let them start now. :

Sony's UI is improving and far more customisable than Canon's and speaking of UI's how easy is to access MLU on a Canon DSLR? In short, whether a UI is good or bad is not objective as it depends on what you're used to.

On the one hand there is mirror vibration that Canon has made no effort to make easy to eliminate due to MLU being hard to access and on the other there is shutter vibration which I'm pretty sure Sony will seek to fix (as they have other issues.)

So if you want to compare _systems_, then using the issues you've raised, on the one hand you have a system that is constantly evolving and improving (Sony) and on the other hand you've got a system that has gone nowhere (Canon.) But really the "going nowhere" sort of fits Canon quite well. Oh, unless you count improvements to autofocus as that seems to be all that Canon cares about now but which I'm sure Sony will also improve.

That's a sad, pathetic little argument – even for you.

Canon has and continues to tweak their UI with minor improvements. It doesn't need many, it's already quite effectively designed. Sony's UI is poor, and in some cases the evolutions aren't improvements...and it rather badly needs them. As was asked – have you used the system of which you seem enamored?

As for MLU, put it in My Menu. Or register it to a C# setting. Or, given that MLU is usually used on a tripod when you're not in a hurry, just press the button on the back for Live View, which locks up the mirror. Three different ways – all simple – to eliminate mirror vibration. Tell me...what setting on the Sony a7R turns off the mechanical design flaw that results in shutter vibration?

As for the Canon system 'going nowhere', what an asinine comment. Which other system has integrated RF flash control, for example?

 

[Loswr]

Except for ...

As for MLU, put it in My Menu. Or register it to a C# setting. Or, given that MLU is usually used on a tripod when you're not in a hurry, just press the button on the back for Live View, which locks up the mirror. Three different ways – all simple – to eliminate mirror vibration.

No, no point in being able to reassign the Print button function to being MLU or something else. The level of customisation with Canon gear is very low however the role of AE/AF button can be changed. Do you see a theme here? What is the big thing that you all talk about being better from the 5D2 to 5D3? AF. That's Canon's game. AF.

AF, frame rate, weather sealing, dual slots, lots of improvements from 5DII to 5DIII.

The theme I see is you thinking a non-programmable button is a terrible oversight but a mechanical flaw in the shutter design that introduces vibration and thus blur into the image is no big deal. Your priorities need some work.

As for the Canon system 'going nowhere', what an asinine comment. Which other system has integrated RF flash control, for example?

Meh, 3rd party solutions were available for that before Canon got in on the act there.

Solutions that mean one more thing to futz with, more batteries to carry, few with E-TTL, no guarantee of compatibility, etc. if that's your logic, why should Sony make lenses, after all everyone else's lenses work via a 3rd party adapter.

 

[crashpc]

Khufu: I wouldn´t be really angry to see 70D sensor in entry level DSLR. But I would immediately jump the ship by just seeing they put that 18Mpx sensor in another camera. It is the end for me, even If I´m not in/for entry level DSLR marked. It would be more than pwnage, "reckless" milking, acting as people was really dumb, and so on. They seriously need to put better sensors in there... Gosh! I bought two Canon lenses today!

 

[martti]

The Sony a6000 is a very nicely constructed high-tech picture-taking machine.
BUT.
Imagine that your budget depended on getting low-light photos where people are moving around properly timed and at least so abouts in focus. You cannot get the camera to focus an ambient light shot with an f/4 16-70mm Zeiss lens. The focusing light is blocked by the bulky lens!
One of the girls asked quite bluntly: "Why did you not bring your real camera with the Pomelo lens?"
She was referring to the 85m f/1.2 L which is the size and the shape of the citrus named above.
"For a really good time, make it Pomelo Time"...(ref. 'Lost in Translation')
Whatever she says, I'll do...

 

[sdsr]

Not to mention compatibility. Not all EF lenses will auto focus. Pure manual lens with out the focus conformation chips will not work on the Metabones so you will need a separate dumb converter if you have those. All lens will be reported as Sony Lenses. If you want the correct lens corrections applied in Lightroom you will have to manual select them and or change the lens meta data. I could go on. But I think you get the idea.

Plus, when you do use EF lenses in MF mode (which is often quicker than AF via Metabones), the manual focusing experience isn't as pleasing as it is with lenses designed to be MF exclusively (that that's true on Canon bodies as well, of course). I'm puzzled, though, by your third sentence - in what way(s) won't they work (or did you mean to omit "out"?)?

As for Dilbert's suggestion (or insistence or whatever it is) that the only thing you lose when adapting lenses is AF, even if that were true, for most people it's not much different from saying of a car that the only thing it lacks is wheels.

(I have come to prefer MF, love using old manual lenses and, like others with such preferences, think that the Sony A7 series are, for now, the best/easiest way to using them. But it's hard to imagine that we're anything but tiny minority - albeit not too tiny to prevent companies from making adapters or, unfortunately, to keep down the prices of old lenses to the levels they were a few years ago.)

 

[J.R.]

@ Dilbert - I guess you are intentionally not answering my question as to whether you have shifted to a Sony system. I hope you don't because once you do, you'll move your cribbing to the SonyAlpha forums and we'll miss out on your comic relief act here.

 

[Loswr]

The shutter vibration issue is fixed in the A7II.

...I see you're relying on FUD here ("no guarantee of compatibility"). I mean seriously, is that the best you can do to bolster your argument?

Seriously? You're basing your argument that Sony is a better system than Canon on the fact that Canon has a button on their cameras that you find useless (despite the fact that it's purposely there for integration with other parts of their system).

But...a known issue with the 36 MP a7R that causes blurry images, and you're relying on the "it's fixed in the 24MP a7II and that implies that it'll be fixed in an a7RII that may or may not come" argument? So if there's a known problem (which is very different than an inconvenience) with a Sony camera, the 'fix' is not a recall and repair, but rather to wait an indeterminate time then buy the next model?? Yeah, that'll cause some FUD... BTW, did the a7II fix Sony's lossy RAW compression?

Oh, and it's not just future incompatibility. You're conveniently forgetting (or is your memory really so poor?) that all the bona fide issues that I listed were in response to your specific request for issues other than the known, current, and very real problem with the mount adapters that renders AF with non-native lenses unreliable and therefore effectively repudiates your statement that the ability to use Canon lenses on a Sony MILC makes those lenses part of Sony's 'extended system'.

We're still waiting for you to admit that you haven't used the Sony system and that your praise of it arises from information on the Internet, and amounts to you talking out of an orifice other than your mouth.

 

[jeffa4444]

The Photography Show 2015 in Birmingham, England on between March 21 - 24th is the second year of the Exhibition and much larger than its first year.
All the major camera manufacturers are attending (not all were there last year) and Canon have a large stand. The UK is a major Photographic country it actually has more photographic publications than the US and judging by the content Landscape is the biggest group of photographers. If Canon are going to annouce a new 5d I would wager that Birmingham could well be where its first shown in public as the Canon 5d MKIII had its first public showing in Birmingham at the former show held there also held in March. High MP cameras appeal to Landscape Photographers wanting as much sharp as possible from foreground to background it would make sense and timing splits it between CP+ and NAB just a thought.

 

[martti]

the Metabones adapter arrived and I have been playing around enough to understand that I do not want the Metabones version of autofocus with my Canon lenses. It is totally useless. It takes a long time and then it focuses into another dimension where you are not at. Then you try to change focusing modes and the camera tells you that it #just #so #cannot.

Then you flip the lense to manual focus and get the focus indicator on.
I bet this is the way to really get the point where you want to make it, to the millimetre.
The image you are looking at comes from the same sensor that will take the photo so the two either are in focus or then they are not. This has to be the winning setup since you have removed all the possible sources of error.

Sony seems to be holding a winning formula in its hands. Certainly, they are perfecting the details and doing their best to make it as user friendly as possible.
I have to say, the EF 100mm f/2.0 shines on the Sony...what will the girls say is another thing.
What will the result look on hig magnification on the screen. That I will talk about later.

This looks like a whole new ball game here.
5DIII and the Pomelo for the girls, OK but this Sony is starting to impress me.
Nothing like it has ever been in the market before.

 

[Bob Howland]

I don't expect them to take place until the competition makes significant and consistent market gains against Canon. It's a mistake to think of the DSLR business as anything other than a business.

I'll agree with the second sentence but not the first. After all, isn't it better to make the changes before losing market share rather than after? Mismanaging major technological transitions drove Kodak into bankruptcy.

The managements of Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, Fuji and Samsung all decided, more or less simultaneously, that the case for MILCs over DSLRs was compelling enough to make major investments to overcome serious barriers to entry, the biggest of which seems to be getting stores to carry not-Canon/not-Nikon cameras so that consumers can look at them and buy them. It very much remains to be seen whether Canon and Nikon can leverage their installed base and very extensive DSLR lens lineups in the transition to MILCs.

The biggest of which seem to be getting people to actually buy MILCs instead of DSLRs...

If there was sufficient market demand, stores would stock them.

How does the market demand products if many/most of the people in that market may not even know they exist? Furthermore, stores stocking more not-Canon/Not-Nikon cameras means (1) they have to reduce the stocking levels of Canon and/or Nikon and/or (2) they have to stop stocking something completely unrelated (i.e., expand the sizes of their photographic departments) and/or (3) they have to expand the size of their stores.

B&H are now carrying Yongnuo products. How many people know about or have heard of Yongnuo. Yet B&H are stocking them. Why? Because they think they can sell them. Why aren't they stocking more MILCs? Answer please...

First, B&H already carries just about every MILC made. Second, most photographic non-gearheads outside of New York City (at least the ones that I know) have never heard of B&H. However, I do know of two people who bought their Rebels at Sam's Club. Another acquaintance bought his at Best Buy. We're not talking about highly educated consumers here, but their money is just as good as yours or mine.

 

[lintoni]

I don't expect them to take place until the competition makes significant and consistent market gains against Canon. It's a mistake to think of the DSLR business as anything other than a business.

I'll agree with the second sentence but not the first. After all, isn't it better to make the changes before losing market share rather than after? Mismanaging major technological transitions drove Kodak into bankruptcy.

The managements of Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, Fuji and Samsung all decided, more or less simultaneously, that the case for MILCs over DSLRs was compelling enough to make major investments to overcome serious barriers to entry, the biggest of which seems to be getting stores to carry not-Canon/not-Nikon cameras so that consumers can look at them and buy them. It very much remains to be seen whether Canon and Nikon can leverage their installed base and very extensive DSLR lens lineups in the transition to MILCs.

The biggest of which seem to be getting people to actually buy MILCs instead of DSLRs...

If there was sufficient market demand, stores would stock them.

How does the market demand products if many/most of the people in that market may not even know they exist? Furthermore, stores stocking more not-Canon/Not-Nikon cameras means (1) they have to reduce the stocking levels of Canon and/or Nikon and/or (2) they have to stop stocking something completely unrelated (i.e., expand the sizes of their photographic departments) and/or (3) they have to expand the size of their stores.

B&H are now carrying Yongnuo products. How many people know about or have heard of Yongnuo. Yet B&H are stocking them. Why? Because they think they can sell them. Why aren't they stocking more MILCs? Answer please...

First, B&H already carries just about every MILC made. Second, most photographic non-gearheads outside of New York City (at least the ones that I know) have never heard of B&H. However, I do know of two people who bought their Rebels at Sam's Club. Another acquaintance bought his at Best Buy. We're not talking about highly educated consumers here, but their money is just as good as yours or mine.

Their money is indeed as good as yours or mine, and when stores think that they can get people to part with that money in exchange for a MILC, then stores will stock MILCs. Why would you think stores would stock something that there isn't sufficient demand for? Because you believe that people are ignorant and they would all buy a MILC if only they knew that they existed?

 

[martti]

am I alone, am I strange, dazzled and confused in thinking that people want pictures rather than cameras
they want them easy, they want them sharp enough with warm saturated colors and just about good enough that they'd upload in two minutes over 3G

we are the weirdos, the market is right

 

[solomonshv]

lots of sony vs canon bashing going on here. personally, i sold my 5DM3 after using an A7R with a metabones converter for 2 months. if you don't do sport photography i don't think there is a reason to own a 5DM3 at this point.

even with the compression issues the images that come out of Sony ff alpha cameras absolutely s#!t on anything you'll get out of any Canon camera. that goes double for the a7s in low light situations. as for the battery issue with sony, the batteries are smaller and lighter, as is the camera itself. just buy more damn batteries and stop crying like little girls. the sony UI is junk, i agree, but you get use to it eventually.

some of you guys forget the most important thing, THE IMAGE QUALITY! and sony is winning in that department

my favorite thing about the sony a7r is being able to use sony/zeiss 55mm 1.8 lens. that lens is just incredible. it's like a mini otus with autofocus.

i still have my L glass, and while it's all working great with the metabones adapter, i hope that canon makes a proper 5D successor. as much as i DON'T miss my toaster sized 5DM3, i would like a proper focusing system and CF slots on my camera. if they can match or surpass sony's high ISO and DR performance, i'll gladly shell out the money for it.

 

[Loswr]

my favorite thing about the sony a7r...

if they can match or surpass sony's high ISO and DR performance,

If Canon merely matches the high ISO performance of your a7R, it will be because Canon made a sensor with worse performance than it's predecessor. Current Canon FF sensors have better high ISO performance than your a7R.

 

[martti]

People do get emotional when the adequacy of their decision making is being questioned.
This is a Canon forum and people who carry alien brands in their bags are considered apostates and they should be flamed. Not really, while it is funny how some people identify with the equipment they are using up to the point that they feel that their destiny is somehow connected to the success Canon is having in the mondial marketplace.
Canon is doing just fine, by the way. With its 8.5% growth in 2014 it beats the market. I could not care less.

I am now experimenting with the Sony a6000 and only yesterday managed to configure its controls exactly as I want them. It is really pretty cool as it is now. My experience with the Metabones adapter is mixed. Some EF lenses just do not work with it and the L series looks like...you might not believe this but they actually look like they'd belong to another series of cameras, intimidating the adolescent mirrorless slim body with their mere presence. True, the picture quality from the a6000 with L lenses is very good.

Of the Sony lenses I only have the 16-70mm Zeiss which in the APS-c world corresponds to the Canon FF kit zoom.
It is an OK lens, I could not with my casual shooting really tell the difference between the non-L Canon lenses and the Zeiss. The handling, of course, is totally from another world with ultra fast AF.

Now, looking at the Sony lenses available for the a6000, probably the 20mm pancake will be a part of my cycling outfit. Also, at 300 dollars, the Rokinon 12mm could make sense.
But could I justify the 55mm f/1.8 for an APS-c sensor at the crazy price they sell it? Not likely. Or the Poiuyt product line...my money just buys so much more value in for example the EF L 16-35 f/4 or the 70-200 mm f/4 zooms. Admittedly, the a6000 is a very well thought out piece of engineering. Will I keep it, time will tell.