Have most now forsaken the 5dMk3 and jumped on to the Mk4?

[AvTvM]

...
So I think the 5D4 was one key feature away from being a blockbuster. Either give it the processing bandwidth of a 5DS and give it 9 fps or so, or give it a tilty-flippy screen. Both of those unlock some sexy 'new' into the brand in a way that (I think) would have a lot more people getting in on day one rather than waiting for what the 6D2 might bring.
...

For me it would have been "Eye Control Autofocus v2.0". A massive USP feature no other manufacturer ever matched or could quickly match. No idea, why Canon does not pull it out of its bag. STUPID!


PS: fully articulated LCD - not only flip-flop - should have been included without even thinking about it. It's a glaring omission. Now the CDL will likely respond that it is "prone to break off" and much more importantly that "it might hurt Canon's profits" in some way or other ... and we customers should never let that happen ... yada yada yada ;D

 

[ahsanford]

PS: fully articulated LCD - not only flip-flop - should have been included without even thinking about it. It's a glaring omission. Now the CDL will likely respond that it is "prone to break off" and much more importantly that "it might hurt Canon's profits" in some way or other ... and we customers should never let that happen ... yada yada yada ;D

Even card carrying members of the CDL like me would readily admit that not offering either an articulating screen was a miss. They should have offered it or offered a full blown second SKU variant of the 5D4 -- one with a rigid screen, one with articulating -- so people could choose. If you can get a 2nd camera body built and marketed for things like...

• Standard sensor vs. astro sensor
• AA filter / no AA filter
• Memory card A vs. Memory card B

...then you can offer a camera body with both options for the LCD. It's 2016 -- they can find a way to give the field a better answer than: (a) try Nikon or Sony, (b) try a much lower price point product that has a tilty screen or (c) cross your fingers again in 4 years when we refresh this line.

- A

 

[tron]

The only things that I find missing is just a notch better IQ in shadows and even better high iso performance as well as a bigger buffer. Nothing else! Well in 5 years... ;D

 

[scyrene]

PS: fully articulated LCD - not only flip-flop - should have been included without even thinking about it. It's a glaring omission. Now the CDL will likely respond that it is "prone to break off" and much more importantly that "it might hurt Canon's profits" in some way or other ... and we customers should never let that happen ... yada yada yada ;D

Even card carrying members of the CDL like me would readily admit that not offering either an articulating screen was a miss. They should have offered it or offered a full blown second SKU variant of the 5D4 -- one with a rigid screen, one with articulating -- so people could choose. If you can get a 2nd camera body built and marketed for things like...

I'm gonna be picky and suggest that, only if enough people wanted it that the extra cost (whatever that may be, it's surely more than a fixed screen) was exceeded by the extra sales it generated, would it be a no-brainer (two lines or one).

And if that makes me a member of the CDL, then entry rules are pretty relaxed.

 

[AvTvM]

of course you are one of the key CDL members, scyrene. I know all of you.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The 5D3 is probably better value for money

Understatement of the century.

Cameras can only make (generally) small advancements over time with current tech at this point, i.e. the days of 'it's 2 full stops better at high ISO' are clearly over. So the value proposition of a new rig is 'what glaring deficiencies in the last model have been corrected' or 'what new features were added that are gamechangers'.

From the 5D2 to 5D3, you got a world class AF upgrade (#1 reason to choose the 5D3 over the 5D2), two card slots, some fluffy in-camera HDR / dual exposure modes, some thoughtful video stuff (headphone jack) and a slightly better sensor (high ISO was better, but not dramatically so). +1 fps, larger buffer, etc. as well. But by any measure other than sensor quality, it was a comprehensive upgrade.

But the reason people jumped out of their seats for it was you could get a near 1D level AF experience at a 5D price point. It was, to many forms of photography, a flagship camera south of $7000. That was its biggest selling point, and it sold well.

Now from the 5D3 to 5D4, the problem lies in the fact that the 5D3 had only one clear 'weakness' (I giggle that people can't get good results with that sensor, but yes, it is outperformed by competitors in testing). So the 5D4 has less problems to fix than with the glaring AF deficiencies of the 5D2. So the 5D4 improvement/gamechanger is the sensor this time (and, for some, 4K) -- more resolution and on-chip ADC for more latitude with your files. If you shoot through the viewfinder, DPAF doesn't do anything for you. So the rest of the value proposition comes in predictable though important upgrades (VF layout, Wifi, GPS, anti-flicker mode, touch screen) or clever but lesser things (touch screen AF point selection, DP RAW).

Also consider that the FF lineup is much more crowded now, so it's harder for the 5D4 to justify its existence in the light of quality of the 6D brand (which has many folks waiting-and-seeing for what the 6D2 brings to the table before buying a 5D4) and great resolving power of the 5DS rigs.

So I think the 5D4 was one key feature away from being a blockbuster. Either give it the processing bandwidth of a 5DS and give it 9 fps or so, or give it a tilty-flippy screen. Both of those unlock some sexy 'new' into the brand in a way that (I think) would have a lot more people getting in on day one rather than waiting for what the 6D2 might bring.

- A

I think the 6DII's biggest rival will be a S/H 5DIII. So Canon need to raid the sales of the S/H 5DIII market by launching a similar product but lighter and cheaper to nuke the 5DIII's S/H sales. So my prediction, the 6DII will have very similar specs to the 5DIII with maybe one added feature (like a flippy screen) and a 6D price point.

 

[tron]

The 5D3 is probably better value for money

Understatement of the century.

Cameras can only make (generally) small advancements over time with current tech at this point, i.e. the days of 'it's 2 full stops better at high ISO' are clearly over. So the value proposition of a new rig is 'what glaring deficiencies in the last model have been corrected' or 'what new features were added that are gamechangers'.

From the 5D2 to 5D3, you got a world class AF upgrade (#1 reason to choose the 5D3 over the 5D2), two card slots, some fluffy in-camera HDR / dual exposure modes, some thoughtful video stuff (headphone jack) and a slightly better sensor (high ISO was better, but not dramatically so). +1 fps, larger buffer, etc. as well. But by any measure other than sensor quality, it was a comprehensive upgrade.

But the reason people jumped out of their seats for it was you could get a near 1D level AF experience at a 5D price point. It was, to many forms of photography, a flagship camera south of $7000. That was its biggest selling point, and it sold well.

Now from the 5D3 to 5D4, the problem lies in the fact that the 5D3 had only one clear 'weakness' (I giggle that people can't get good results with that sensor, but yes, it is outperformed by competitors in testing). So the 5D4 has less problems to fix than with the glaring AF deficiencies of the 5D2. So the 5D4 improvement/gamechanger is the sensor this time (and, for some, 4K) -- more resolution and on-chip ADC for more latitude with your files. If you shoot through the viewfinder, DPAF doesn't do anything for you. So the rest of the value proposition comes in predictable though important upgrades (VF layout, Wifi, GPS, anti-flicker mode, touch screen) or clever but lesser things (touch screen AF point selection, DP RAW).

Also consider that the FF lineup is much more crowded now, so it's harder for the 5D4 to justify its existence in the light of quality of the 6D brand (which has many folks waiting-and-seeing for what the 6D2 brings to the table before buying a 5D4) and great resolving power of the 5DS rigs.

So I think the 5D4 was one key feature away from being a blockbuster. Either give it the processing bandwidth of a 5DS and give it 9 fps or so, or give it a tilty-flippy screen. Both of those unlock some sexy 'new' into the brand in a way that (I think) would have a lot more people getting in on day one rather than waiting for what the 6D2 might bring.

- A

I think the 6DII's biggest rival will be a S/H 5DIII. So Canon need to raid the sales of the S/H 5DIII market by launching a similar product but lighter and cheaper to nuke the 5DIII's S/H sales. So my prediction, the 6DII will have very similar specs to the 5DIII with maybe one added feature (like a flippy screen) and a 6D price point.

6DII will have a much better sensor than 5DIII. Even the 6D has a better sensor than 5DIII...

 

[jolyonralph]

6DII will have a much better sensor than 5DIII. Even the 6D has a better sensor than 5DIII...

Maybe (although resolution is lower). But the key winning factor of the 5DIII over the 6D is the focusing. We can hope that the 6D II will match the 5D III in this regard.

 

[ahsanford]

I think the 6DII's biggest rival will be a S/H 5DIII. So Canon need to raid the sales of the S/H 5DIII market by launching a similar product but lighter and cheaper to nuke the 5DIII's S/H sales. So my prediction, the 6DII will have very similar specs to the 5DIII with maybe one added feature (like a flippy screen) and a 6D price point.

My guess:

Where I agree with you: (Roughly) the same resolution and fps, both probably getting a 1/8000 max shutter and similar sync speed.

Where the 6D2 will outperform the 5D3: Better sensor DR-wise (on chip ADC), Tilty-flippy, DPAF, anti-flicker, WiFi, GPS

Where the 5D3 will outperform the 6D2: AF for sure, build quality, and they may not give the 6D2 dual cards.

But I fully expect the 'newness' and punchy feature-set to see the 6D2 steamroll the 5D3 for even second-hand sales. The 6D2 advantages list above is in sexy areas people care about.

- A

 

[Maiaibing]

The 5D3 is probably better value for money

Now from the 5D3 to 5D4, the problem lies in the fact that the 5D3 had only one clear 'weakness' (I giggle that people can't get good results with that sensor, but yes, it is outperformed by competitors in testing). So the 5D4 has less problems to fix than with the glaring AF deficiencies of the 5D2. So the 5D4 improvement/gamechanger is the sensor this time (and, for some, 4K) -- more resolution and on-chip ADC for more latitude with your files.
- A

No. According to Canon, 5DIII users had three key complaints regarding the 5DIII: lack of MPIX, DR and the need for better AF. All three were therefore (successfully) targeted for improvement in the 5DIV development.

 

[Maiaibing]

I think the 6DII's biggest rival will be a S/H 5DIII. So Canon need to raid the sales of the S/H 5DIII market by launching a similar product but lighter and cheaper to nuke the 5DIII's S/H sales. So my prediction, the 6DII will have very similar specs to the 5DIII with maybe one added feature (like a flippy screen) and a 6D price point.

6D sensor is better than the 5DIII sensor. 6DII will hopefully also be better than the 5DIV sensor - and if so presumably blow the 5DIII sensor out of the water.

Even today I'd have to have a specific need to pick up a 5DIII before going with (just) a 6D.

 

[ahsanford]

No. According to Canon, 5DIII users had three key complaints regarding the 5DIII: lack of MPIX, DR and the need for better AF. All three were therefore (successfully) targeted for improvement in the 5DIV development.

Better LiveView AF, certainly, but I'm sorry, anyone bashing the 5D3 main AF setup...

(a) Has forgotten what an interstellar jump the 5D2 --> 5D3 was on that front.

(b) Apparently thought the 1DX AF setup on every sports sideline also had problems. The two AF setups are nearly identical.

The 5D3 had nearly the best AF on the planet until the 1DX2 arrived, so I welcome the +5% better AF hit-rate study that shows the 5D4 made great strides here. (Ain't happening.)

I think the 5D4 main AF setup addressed more niche needs like broader teleconverter support for wildlifers and better 'events in dark rooms' AF locking (-3 EV, -4 EV). Those are wonderful adds, don't get me wrong, but the idea that the 5D3 AF was regularly swinging and missing in general use is farcical.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

6D sensor is better than the 5DIII sensor. 6DII will hopefully also be better than the 5DIV sensor - and if so presumably blow the 5DIII sensor out of the water.

Even today I'd have to have a specific need to pick up a 5DIII before going with (just) a 6D.

Regarding your first point: see screenshot below. Sensors don't get dramatically better anymore. Forget aggregate scores and look at what these metrics mean -- the ass-kicking 5D4 sensor only gathers high ISO a fraction of a stop better than a 5D3, and the DR improvement (which is nice, sure) isn't going let you leave your ND grads or tripod at home for high contrast scenes. These are small improvements only, but if they matter to you, the camera industry thanks you for your frequent capital expenditures.

Regarding your second point: That 'specific need' just might include shooting at 1/8000s, shooting at 33% faster burst, hitting a moving target, AF points in places other than where a Rebel can cover, a second card slot, much tougher build quality, video without moire, etc.

The notion that the 6D eeks out a slightly better sensor score means leaving a far far far better camera at home is insanity to me. Unless you need WiFi/GPS or are shooting in a dark room (for the 6D's -3 EV center point), I'm taking the 5D3 every single time.

- A

 

[Maiaibing]

6D sensor is better than the 5DIII sensor. 6DII will hopefully also be better than the 5DIV sensor - and if so presumably blow the 5DIII sensor out of the water.

Even today I'd have to have a specific need to pick up a 5DIII before going with (just) a 6D.

Regarding your second[/color] point: That 'specific need' just might include shooting at 1/8000s, shooting at 33% faster burst,
- indeed

hitting a moving target, -
no, because 6D centre point is faster, more accurate and can shoot in lower light than any 5DIII point.

AF points in places other than where a Rebel can cover, -????

a second card slot, much tougher build quality, video without moire, etc. -
Never had any use for any of these myself, so nothing to me, and btw 5DIII speed sufferes terribly if you used both slots...

The notion that the 6D eeks out a slightly better sensor score means leaving a far far far better camera at home is insanity to me.
???? - I was specific on that 6D has a better sensor. That's very important to me. What you write above in a seemingly fit of insanity, has nothing to do with my claim or choice.

Unless you need WiFi/GPS or are shooting in a dark room (for the 6D's -3 EV center point), I'm taking the 5D3 every single time.
- Good luck with your choice, I prefer to go for the better quality pictures.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

6D sensor is better than the 5DIII sensor. 6DII will hopefully also be better than the 5DIV sensor - and if so presumably blow the 5DIII sensor out of the water.

Even today I'd have to have a specific need to pick up a 5DIII before going with (just) a 6D.

Regarding your second[/color] point: That 'specific need' just might include shooting at 1/8000s, shooting at 33% faster burst,
- indeed

hitting a moving target, -
no, because 6D centre point is faster, more accurate and can shoot in lower light than any 5DIII point.

AF points in places other than where a Rebel can cover, -????

a second card slot, much tougher build quality, video without moire, etc. -
Never had any use for any of these myself, so nothing to me, and btw 5DIII speed sufferes terribly if you used both slots...

The notion that the 6D eeks out a slightly better sensor score means leaving a far far far better camera at home is insanity to me.
???? - I was specific on that 6D has a better sensor. That's very important to me. What you write above in a seemingly fit of insanity, has nothing to do with my claim or choice.

Unless you need WiFi/GPS or are shooting in a dark room (for the 6D's -3 EV center point), I'm taking the 5D3 every single time.
- Good luck with your choice, I prefer to go for the better quality pictures.

No one would choose a 6D over a 5DIII for the slight iso noise improvement over the slightly reduced MP count on the 6D....or the slightly better in very low light single AF point or the slightly better shadow DR. The only reason some one chooses a 6D (and it's a great camera) is because it's cheaper than a 5DIII and it's in their price bracket.
The center AF point is only better in very low light. The 5DIII's vertical center array of AF sensors are equal the the single center AF point on the 6D in every other measurable metric. The 6D is certainly not faster or more accurate in it's AF.

 

[Hector1970]

The 5D3 is probably better value for money

A brand new camera is worse value for money than one that's been out over four years? Who would ever have thought!

Any person thinking of upgrading from an APS-C camera or a 6D might be balancing between a 5DIII and a 5DIV.
When the 5DIII came out it was worth the premium price over the 5DII as it corrected a number of issues.
The 5DIV is just an incremental improvement that is no great leap forward in terms of getting better photographs out of a camera. I was just trying to be helpful to people who might be in that position.
I would think that its a smart enough decision to go with a 5DIII as its still a good camera and good value for money.
Unfortunately there are people like you on this site who's only contribution is sarcasm which is the lowest form of wit.

 

[ahsanford]

No one would choose a 6D over a 5DIII for the slight iso noise improvement over the slightly reduced MP count on the 6D....or the slightly better in very low light single AF point or the slightly better shadow DR. The only reason some one chooses a 6D (and it's a great camera) is because it's cheaper than a 5DIII and it's in their price bracket.
The center AF point is only better in very low light. The 5DIII's vertical center array of AF sensors are equal the the single center AF point on the 6D in every other measurable metric. The 6D is certainly not faster or more accurate in it's AF.

Agree. You'd think sanity would prevail, but Maiaibing's not alone in owning both cameras and preferring the 6D -- there are others on the forum who have said the same (principally lower-AF-intensive needs like landscapers and astro folks from what I recall).

It shocks me that someone would own both and prefer the 6D, but some folks buy a lot of gear and have nutty priorities. To each their own, of course.

- A

 

[Eldar]

The 5D3 is probably better value for money

A brand new camera is worse value for money than one that's been out over four years? Who would ever have thought!

Any person thinking of upgrading from an APS-C camera or a 6D might be balancing between a 5DIII and a 5DIV.
When the 5DIII came out it was worth the premium price over the 5DII as it corrected a number of issues.
The 5DIV is just an incremental improvement that is no great leap forward in terms of getting better photographs out of a camera. I was just trying to be helpful to people who might be in that position.
I would think that its a smart enough decision to go with a 5DIII as its still a good camera and good value for money.
Unfortunately there are people like you on this site who's only contribution is sarcasm which is the lowest form of wit.

Here in Norway you can get a new 5DIII about $1.500 cheaper than the (now reduced) price for a 5DIV. For the average photographer, I would agree with Hector, that a 5DIII is better value for money. If you are willing to get a mint condition second hand 5DIII, you will be below half price of a 5DIV.

 

[Eldar]

No one would choose a 6D over a 5DIII for the slight iso noise improvement over the slightly reduced MP count on the 6D....or the slightly better in very low light single AF point or the slightly better shadow DR. The only reason some one chooses a 6D (and it's a great camera) is because it's cheaper than a 5DIII and it's in their price bracket.
The center AF point is only better in very low light. The 5DIII's vertical center array of AF sensors are equal the the single center AF point on the 6D in every other measurable metric. The 6D is certainly not faster or more accurate in it's AF.

Agree. You'd think sanity would prevail, but Maiaibing's not alone in owning both cameras and preferring the 6D -- there are others on the forum who have said the same (principally lower-AF-intensive needs like landscapers and astro folks from what I recall).

It shocks me that someone would own both and prefer the 6D, but some folks buy a lot of gear and have nutty priorities. To each their own, of course.

- A

The 6D supports interchangeable focusing screens. Big plus for Zeissoholics!

 

[AlanF]

The 5D3 is probably better value for money

A brand new camera is worse value for money than one that's been out over four years? Who would ever have thought!

Any person thinking of upgrading from an APS-C camera or a 6D might be balancing between a 5DIII and a 5DIV.
When the 5DIII came out it was worth the premium price over the 5DII as it corrected a number of issues.
The 5DIV is just an incremental improvement that is no great leap forward in terms of getting better photographs out of a camera. I was just trying to be helpful to people who might be in that position.
I would think that its a smart enough decision to go with a 5DIII as its still a good camera and good value for money.
Unfortunately there are people like you on this site who's only contribution is sarcasm which is the lowest form of wit.

Here in Norway you can get a new 5DIII about $1.500 cheaper than the (now reduced) price for a 5DIV. For the average photographer, I would agree with Hector, that a 5DIII is better value for money. If you are willing to get a mint condition second hand 5DIII, you will be below half price of a 5DIV.

"Better value" depends on for what you use it. The old Mk III is still a very good camera and for many people it still makes an excellent buy. But, for me, the ability to focus with all points at f/8 and the better focus in general has transformed my keeper rate for BIF with my f/8 lenses and so the Mk IV is much better value.