I'm Sad but I'm going to hang in there...

[aanative]

I started out using Nikon back in the days of the D100. Eventually I moved to the D300 and then made the jump to Canon when the 5DII came out. My interest in video has grown each year but I use my cameras heavily for stills too.

I am sad about the 5DIII. Such an opportunity missed for Canon. I have read the reviews since the camera was released and still will receive my new 5DIII tomorrow.

I have to say that I was tempted to switch. I already sold off some of my lenses in anticipation of the new 24-70II (sold my 24L and 35L). But when I looked hard at the d800 and the nikkor lenses I had a flashback to my nikon days and felt that I would miss my lenses too much (14LII, 50L, 85L, 100L, 70-200II, and 70-300L). I am not interested in 36 mp files. I am upset that the video resolution of the d800 is much superior (according to EOSHD). I shoot weddings and video is now the number one request - as well as a very profitable upcharge. I have worked video into my workflow enough that most brides feel comfortable not hiring a separate videographer.

I am looking forward to getting my new camera because I loved my 5DII dearly. I bought it the day it came out. The AF and improved ISO will be great. I am sad to see such little progress on the video side of things. Ultimately my anticipation for this camera was that it would be with me for years and years like my 5DII was but I believe that Canon will be forced to step up their game so the refresh cycle for this MkIII will be much shorter than that last one.

 

[TexPhoto]

I have to agree with a lot of what you are saying. I switched from a D300 to a 5DII because it was just a stunning leap in technology and image quality that Nikon could not match. Well not for less than $8000. And I'd been a Nikon shooter for 10 years. Minolta for 15 years before that.

Now my 5DIII is in the mail, and I see the report on DXO that the D800 is the new #1 sensor. And I read the lackluster reports on the 5DIII. Hmmm. I have $20K in Canon lenses sitting on the shelf behind me, and shot 160K photos with my 5DII. And I am wondering if I am going the right way.

 

[Axilrod]

Yeah I feel exactly the same, and we have almost the same gear aside from the zooms : ). I downloaded the video file they showed in that article and I really wasn't that impressed. The moire in the opening scene was pretty bad and it didn't wow me like I thought it would based on the description in that EOSHD article. He made it sound like it was a godsend.

Hmm... I just had a thought. I wonder if I'm more impressed with the 5DIII video than others because I used the Cinestyle profile and graded it afterwards.....It did look pretty damn good and responded to grading very very very well.

Honestly, I think the Cinema DSLR is going to crush ALL of these. I've been saying for months that the 5DIII would only have somewhat improved video so it wouldn't eat into the cinema dslr sales. And you have to remember that the 5DII was a still camera originally, video was just an afterthought. They made the best of it and did end up marketing it's video abilities somewhat, but it was still referred to as "the still camera that shoots great video." It's clear they are trying to keep the two separate, that's why they didn't put much effort into the 5DIII, why make it a top-of-the-line video camera when a large portion of the users will NEVER use the feature? I think that's why Canon previewed the CDSLR at the C300 announcement, I mean what other reason is there to show it that far ahead of an announcement? It was Canon's way of telling the indie shooters that they didn't forget about them. So I think that may be the video camera you're looking for.

And people will try and tell you the cinema DSLR is going to be crazy expensive, but this is solely based on the fact that the C300 is "expensive" (even though it isn't at all in the Cinema world). Or that because the C300 is downsampled 4k to 1080p and the cinema dslr is "4k' that it has to be more, based solely on that spec. I think it'll be priced to compete with the FS100, $4-$6k, Canon knows there is a lot of money to be made in that area.

Anyways, I'm getting the CDSLR, no questions and I'm sure it will crush all of this stuff video-wise.

PS. I was expecting to be disappointed with the 5DIII, I waited an hour to go pick it up after they called me (which is very unusual for me, the shop is only 5 min away). But now that i've played with it I really do think it's an awesome camera, once you crank up the ISO to 12800 or 25600 and see how great it looks it's hard not to be happy with it.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

Personally I wouldn't judge it from the reviews. What is on paper is often very different to what goes on canvas or glossy or my favourite media for landscapes, lustre. I am running two lines of lenses: Pentax medium format and Canon. I made a decision when I bought the 645D in Japan (40% cheaper than UK price) that I would hold on to my Canon estate just in case. I have expanded my pentax 645 lenses from the 2 I bought with the camera to a range from 33mm - 400mm including a 120 macro (27 - 326mm 35mm equivalent). I also have a Pentax 645N film camera that makes these lenses even wider.

I had an incident with the camera in the hills of the lake district (whatever you do don't buy sunsniper camera straps: they aren't secure mine has come off in my hands several times as I happened to be holding it - latest time I wasn't and it fell on the ground causing a few bumps and scrapes and now a few buttons, namely WB, and drive buttons don't work and it doesn't acknowledge the cable release which means it's no longer useable for long exposures as I can't change the drive to timer or to remote release). My 645D now needs to go back to Japan for what will probably be quite an expensive repair job. I'm not bothered about the cosmetic damage as I doubt I'll sell the Pentax any time soon.

So how do my images compare?

Well the angle of view is different, and there is always something special about medium format, something you can't quite put your finger on (don't let Nikon make you think that it's about MP because it isn't, not by a long chalk) I am very happy with the images I am getting from the mk III. I'm amazed by the low light performance, although you should of course expose correctly and this will make noise even more irrelevant. Auto focus works very well much better than the mkII or my 645D (with its 11 points). I usually use a single point for all my photography and one thing I'm happy to have back which I actually didn't use much before: live view. Really helps to nail the focus, plant it a third through the scene and you more or less have hyperfocus done without the arithmatic.

In conclusion, the mk III is a very impressive camera, although I am still getting my head around it. It's not medium format, but then neither is the D800 and genuine MF shooters will not abandon MF for the D800, though some might pick one up as a back up, 35mm will never replace MF. It's not all about resolution.

 

[aanative]

I will probably look at the new 4k EOS HDSLR whenever they announce it. I am a photographer first and videographer second. Although I usually have a second shooter with me I have done plenty of work solo and will say that the only the 5D will allow me to do this. Unless the cinema DSLR shoots extremely high quality stills it won't be as useful for events where you need to take picutres and video as a solo shooter. If this 4k SLR can't take high quality stills AND video then it would be useful only as a "B" camera.

In reality 95% of clients won't notice a difference but I want to keep up with the videographers as this can be quite a lucrative way to go for a photographer.

We'll just have to see what happens. Overall it will be nice to have the MKIII but I'll always wonder...what if...?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I am upset that the video resolution of the d800 is much superior (according to EOSHD). I shoot weddings and video is now the number one request - as well as a very profitable upcharge. I have worked video into my workflow enough that most brides feel comfortable not hiring a separate videographer.

To be fair I'm wondering what is with the EOS HD guy's eyesight. Ho won earth can he claim those D800 video samples are noticeably softer than his 5D3 samples?? Heck, they look even softer to me than the 5D3. I don't get it. Something seems to be off.

I think many here know I speak my mind and am not afraid to say when Canon loses, but wow, I sure don't see what he is talking about with his claims that the D800 video res is much superior, honestly it looks worse in every single respect to me, if anything, even softer than the 5D3 and yet with still some moire and aliasing.

It'll be interesting to see what Phillip Bloom says. He seems to be an unbiased, straight-shooter.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I don't know the EOSHD guy is going on about, took another look and the D800 footage looked like crap compared to his 5D3 footage. Why does he say the D800 is noticeably sharper? It's even blurrier! Something odd going on there.

 

[psolberg]

I am upset that the video resolution of the d800 is much superior (according to EOSHD). I shoot weddings and video is now the number one request - as well as a very profitable upcharge. I have worked video into my workflow enough that most brides feel comfortable not hiring a separate videographer.

To be fair I'm wondering what is with the EOS HD guy's eyesight. Ho won earth can he claim those D800 video samples are noticeably softer than his 5D3 samples?? Heck, they look even softer to me than the 5D3. I don't get it. Something seems to be off.

I think many here know I speak my mind and am not afraid to say when Canon loses, but wow, I sure don't see what he is talking about with his claims that the D800 video res is much superior, honestly it looks worse in every single respect to me, if anything, even softer than the 5D3 and yet with still some moire and aliasing.

It'll be interesting to see what Phillip Bloom says. He seems to be an unbiased, straight-shooter.

Disappointment at mushy video.
http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I am upset that the video resolution of the d800 is much superior (according to EOSHD). I shoot weddings and video is now the number one request - as well as a very profitable upcharge. I have worked video into my workflow enough that most brides feel comfortable not hiring a separate videographer.

To be fair I'm wondering what is with the EOS HD guy's eyesight. Ho won earth can he claim those D800 video samples are noticeably softer than his 5D3 samples?? Heck, they look even softer to me than the 5D3. I don't get it. Something seems to be off.

I think many here know I speak my mind and am not afraid to say when Canon loses, but wow, I sure don't see what he is talking about with his claims that the D800 video res is much superior, honestly it looks worse in every single respect to me, if anything, even softer than the 5D3 and yet with still some moire and aliasing.

It'll be interesting to see what Phillip Bloom says. He seems to be an unbiased, straight-shooter.

Disappointment at mushy video.
http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/

yeah I saw that, he didn't officially measure it yet or side by side it so i'm hoping it'll look closer when he does that, probably not though

that said, it's one thing to call out the 5D3 for being soft, but another to call out the 5D3 for being even softer than the D800.... by posting footage from the D800 that looks a lot softer to me than even the soft 5D3 as EOSHD is doing

so eoshd is, sadly, probably correct about the 5D3 compared to a true 1920x1080p videocam but i have serious doubts about his comparison between the the 5D3 and D800, his D800 samples look even more soft to me (plus with more artifacts on top)

 

[Bosman]

Ive had it for 2 days i want another one! I dont know what you are moping about at all. I have a 1DM3 and an original 5d plus my new 5dm3. The 1D is top of the line yet you ask why would you sell that pro camera and get another 5d3? Because it is friggen awesome!

 

[birtembuk]

Understand the frustration here. Felt the same around the launch as I though 5D3 would cater more for video than photo. Now it seems clearer and clearer that the 5D3 brilliantly continues with the idea of the 5D2, that is a still camera that can do video. Hence the naming 3 instead of X I guess. Happiness of one is the misfortune of others. Well, sort of as I am probably not the only one around happy with a much improved still-camera-that-can-do-video. I'll grab one as soon as available in my country. Our videographers friends will probably have to wait a little bit longer for the gear of their dream. Should not take long anyway.