The new 5D Mark III ?!?! PICS!

[EYEONE]

Are we there yet?

Would the existing 7D users sell off your current 7D's after you buy the 5D3, if the AF of 5D3 can match the 7D?

No. Assuming Canon will not include a crop image format like Nikon does with their DX mode (which I'm pretty sure they've never done before) I would still like to have the extra reach the crop sensor affords. Now if they did include a "APS-C mode" with at least 10MP selling my 7D would be a very tempting option... also assuming that the 7ish fps rumour pans out too.

I don't quite understand why people say this. Now, I 100% agree that have a crop mode is preferable to cropping later. But regardless of the 5DIII having a crop mode you can always crop your images to whatever MP a 1.6x ends up being from a 22mp FF. It's seems odd for something like "crop mode" being the main reason someone would keep or sell their 7D.

 

[Loswr]

During the exposure, the reflex mirror (the 'R' in dSLR) is flipped up and completely blocks light entering the viewfinder from reaching the sensor. If your camera is leaking light during long exposures, you should send it to Canon Service, because light leakage sufficient to affect an image directly means a defective camera.

No, not quite. Normally the mirror blocks enough light from the viewfinder, so that it is not seen in the picture. But if you use a filter like ND 3.0 or IR 720, which lets only 1/1000 of the light pass, the light from behind can be clearly seen in the pic, even with a non-defect-cam (on an IR-image it looks blue).

I've not done IR photography with digital, but I have done a fair bit of shooting with ND 3.0 filters (I have them in 77mm and 82mm sizes for various lenses), and I've certainly never 'clearly seen' any effect of light through the VF (I don't use a cover, because I'm shooting manually with the 10-stop ND). When I shot IR-sensitive film back in the day, there was some light leakage - but the build quality of the cameras I could afford then was nowhere near today's standards for prosumer bodies.

Perhaps you could post an example of a shot taken with and without the eyepiece covered, during a long exposure with a 10-stop ND, to illustrate the point? I'll try that, myself, too.

The main reason for the cropped camera is the extra reach for most people and a DX mode would solve this problem.

While I agree the reach is an important aspect and a crop format would be very helpful, I don't think it's the main reason. I think most people buy a crop sensor camera because it's cheaper. If you can afford both and then you choose the crop camera, sure, but most people would buy FF if they could, IMO.

I do agree that the main reason most people buy APS-C is becuase the cameras are cheaper. But the question was for people who have a 7D and buy a 5DIII, would you sell the 7D - in that case, assuming the 7D isn't being sold only to cover the cost of the new body, the answer might be different. I have both a 5DII and a 7D, and I'll replace the 5DII with a 1D X or maybe a 5DIII (depending on the real AF spec, mostly), but either way, I'll be keeping the 7D - in situations where you're focal length limited, a crop sensor is the second best solution (the best being buy longer lenses, but over 400mm gets $$$$, and the crop sensor is better than cropping a FF image down). It all depends on the use case for the images, of course. I've done detailed comparisons of the 5DII cropped image vs. the 7D in focal length limited situations, and the IQ is basically a wash. But the 7D image is still 18 MP and can even be cropped further if necessary (which it often is), whereas the 5DII image cropped to the same AoV is only 8 MP, and while that might be sufficient, cropping further isn't such a good idea.

A 'DX mode' is only a solution if the FF sensor has sufficient resolution to support it - the 36 MP D800 yields a 15 MP DX image, whereas a 22 MP 5DIII would only yield an 8.5 MP image. Also, a crop more presents problems for framing the image - with the masking, the VF image becomes very small, since there's no way to magnify the cropped portion to fill the VF.

 

[DJL329]

1. What do you guys read into this mistake made by Canon Japan?

2. Why so many times do Canon and Nikon make this mistake on their very own website! I mean, does the web admin type in Canon EOS 5D Mark III then click upload/update and then only realize that it's live and therefore needs to put the page "down" asap?

The credibility is high here, we're talking about Canon Japan's website!

1. Humans make mistakes.

2. Web admins have to update the code, create new pages, etc. in order to get things ready. It's probably just a case of saving the new page in the wrong place (updating it prematurely).

Most web sites I've worked on have an approval process on publishing new/updated pages. I would have expected canon to have this so to me it is quite surprising that this kind of error happened as is should require multiple 'mistakes'

I work in IT myself and have dealt with "change control" procedures for the past decade. These safe guards still don't prevent human error. For example, in October of last year, the CPS page on Canon's USA site had accidentally listed an "EF 24mm f/2.8 USM" lens, which wasn't announced until this month.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,1964.msg37861.html#msg37861

 

[triggermike]

Once again, well put Neuro.

Wildlife photography is a perfect example of where crop sensors + super-tele's shine. It has been my experience shooting eagles, bears, coyotes, etc. that even a 400mm lens on a crop body is not enough. When you reach in your bag for that 1.4 or 2x converter, you're probably even further away and they won't be enough. Any advantage you can get to have the closest appearing image in your viewfinder usually yields the best result. And as Neuro noted, the MP's at the crop size are larger in the crop body.

 

[AprilForever]

Would the existing 7D users sell off your current 7D's after you buy the 5D3, if the AF of 5D3 can match the 7D?

NO. I use a 500 mm f/4L IS on my 7D. The 800mm (for a FF body) is too expensive and since it's an f/8 I could not add a 1.4x to it and still keep AF on the 5D3.

A lot of people think we shoot 7Ds because we cannot afford 5Ds. But there are a few of us that need a very good APS-C camera because we cannot afford a pair of 1D Mk IVs. And the additional cost and weight of a 600mm f/4L IS makes the 500 a better solution.

But I am thinking of a 5D2 for a landscape kit body.

This would be why I shoot a 7D. That, and a 1D mk IV is heaver, to get the same frame is even heavier still, and much much more expensive... The 7D just makes sense!

 

[rgrphoto]

During the exposure, the reflex mirror (the 'R' in dSLR) is flipped up and completely blocks light entering the viewfinder from reaching the sensor. If your camera is leaking light during long exposures, you should send it to Canon Service, because light leakage sufficient to affect an image directly means a defective camera.

No, not quite. Normally the mirror blocks enough light from the viewfinder, so that it is not seen in the picture. But if you use a filter like ND 3.0 or IR 720, which lets only 1/1000 of the light pass, the light from behind can be clearly seen in the pic, even with a non-defect-cam (on an IR-image it looks blue).

I've not done IR photography with digital, but I have done a fair bit of shooting with ND 3.0 filters (I have them in 77mm and 82mm sizes for various lenses), and I've certainly never 'clearly seen' any effect of light through the VF (I don't use a cover, because I'm shooting manually with the 10-stop ND). When I shot IR-sensitive film back in the day, there was some light leakage - but the build quality of the cameras I could afford then was nowhere near today's standards for prosumer bodies.

Perhaps you could post an example of a shot taken with and without the eyepiece covered, during a long exposure with a 10-stop ND, to illustrate the point? I'll try that, myself, too.

The main reason for the cropped camera is the extra reach for most people and a DX mode would solve this problem.

While I agree the reach is an important aspect and a crop format would be very helpful, I don't think it's the main reason. I think most people buy a crop sensor camera because it's cheaper. If you can afford both and then you choose the crop camera, sure, but most people would buy FF if they could, IMO.

I do agree that the main reason most people buy APS-C is becuase the cameras are cheaper. But the question was for people who have a 7D and buy a 5DIII, would you sell the 7D - in that case, assuming the 7D isn't being sold only to cover the cost of the new body, the answer might be different. I have both a 5DII and a 7D, and I'll replace the 5DII with a 1D X or maybe a 5DIII (depending on the real AF spec, mostly), but either way, I'll be keeping the 7D - in situations where you're focal length limited, a crop sensor is the second best solution (the best being buy longer lenses, but over 400mm gets $$$$, and the crop sensor is better than cropping a FF image down). It all depends on the use case for the images, of course. I've done detailed comparisons of the 5DII cropped image vs. the 7D in focal length limited situations, and the IQ is basically a wash. But the 7D image is still 18 MP and can even be cropped further if necessary (which it often is), whereas the 5DII image cropped to the same AoV is only 8 MP, and while that might be sufficient, cropping further isn't such a good idea.

A 'DX mode' is only a solution if the FF sensor has sufficient resolution to support it - the 36 MP D800 yields a 15 MP DX image, whereas a 22 MP 5DIII would only yield an 8.5 MP image. Also, a crop more presents problems for framing the image - with the masking, the VF image becomes very small, since there's no way to magnify the cropped portion to fill the VF.

I agree with everything your saying which is pretty much always the case with you Neuro. I will definitely try to keep my 7D and the only reason I wouldn't would be to offset the cost of the 5DIII which for my type of photography I need more than a 7D. Or to get some glass. Still, a DX mode would make the choice/necessity to sell my 7D a little more bearable.

And I forgot about the masking of the VF image which would blow.

 

[westbild]

I've not done IR photography with digital, but I have done a fair bit of shooting with ND 3.0 filters (I have them in 77mm and 82mm sizes for various lenses), and I've certainly never 'clearly seen' any effect of light through the VF (I don't use a cover, because I'm shooting manually with the 10-stop ND). When I shot IR-sensitive film back in the day, there was some light leakage - but the build quality of the cameras I could afford then was nowhere near today's standards for prosumer bodies.

Perhaps you could post an example of a shot taken with and without the eyepiece covered, during a long exposure with a 10-stop ND, to illustrate the point? I'll try that, myself, too.

i did not get the pictures into my post here, so i uploaded them to my blog: http://fotoschule.westbild.de/2012/02/cr-effect-of-viewfinder-cover-in-ir-photography/

i found a *very* illustrative sample from a test i did and added a rather normal example.
best regards,

Christian

 

[Loswr]

i found a *very* illustrative sample from a test i did and added a rather normal example.

Interesting...thanks for sharing! I'll give my 5DII a test with a long exposure, probably just with a lens cap so the image should be black except for light entering from somewhere other than the lens, then with/without the eyepiece covered.

 

[hummingbird]

Ok everybody, let's take a deep breath and say
'I must stop refreshing my browser every 2 minutes,
I must stop refreshing my browser every 2 minutes,
I must stop refreshing by browser every 2 minutes,
because I will bring the server down again'

hehehe! I need the humor right now...things are so intense ;D ;D ;D

 

[Steb]

When I use my camera on a tripod, I simply look through the viewfinder whilst metering and then press the shutter release to lock up the mirror and the exposure (you are all using mirror lockup, right?). I can then take my picture after several seconds when all the vibrations have died down and when I judge it to be the decisive moment.

If you want to moan at Canon for excluding a feature that Nikon has, then try the lack of a direct mirror lockup button (OK, so it's a minor annoyance and there are ways around it).

I thought the direct mirror lockup button is called live view.

Never used the original mirror lockup method hidden in the custom functions menu. In live view I can even visually control vibrations. Am I missing something?

 

[Loswr]

I thought the direct mirror lockup button is called live view.

Never used the original mirror lockup method hidden in the custom functions menu. In live view I can even visually control vibrations. Am I missing something?

Nope - in fact, Live View is even better because it uses an electronic first curtain, and that reduces the vibration even further than MLU alone.

 

[gputah]

I was a bit bummed the site loaded so fast today It meant there wasn't any fresh news to report....

 

[Jamesy]

I was a bit bummed the site loaded so fast today It meant there wasn't any fresh news to report....

Or maybe it is now powered by dual Digic 5's

 

[gputah]

I was a bit bummed the site loaded so fast today It meant there wasn't any fresh news to report....

Or maybe it is now powered by dual Digic 5's

I thought that at first, but then didn't see anything new and assumed the speed to mean less traffic... But I could be wrong?

 

[gputah]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say the OP is either dead, in prison, or is being threaten with one or the other by the canon black-ops guys...

 

[AlicoatePhotography]

I would think that the power of a pending lawsuit is enough to quiet anyone up. I would be too scared to divulge open information like that. If I were his friend, I would be furious. I loved seeing the pics though. Thank you! I hope that your user id wasn't your real name, and that the discussion of your location was really just a cover up. It is interesting that the left side of the camera was never shown. Could it have something there that even you didn't want to give away? Also there were no mention of any specs. Just photos? Maybe this was an inside job? I hope so. Thanks for the info and good luck!

 

[Cinnamon]

This is really exciting news! As the owner of a 5D Mk II and a 7D, I'd be interested to see if Canon does in fact merge the two lines - but even if they don't, I'm still interested in the improvements.

I may have to hold off on a 5D3/5DX because of the price, but it is exciting to hear about what this week has in store for CanonRumors addicts

 

[Steb]

Live View is even better because it uses an electronic first curtain, and that reduces the vibration even further than MLU alone.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I was not aware of this benefit of the silent mode feature. I found some nice sample pics here that make the difference quite clear:

http://krebsmicro.com/Canon_EFSC/index.html

 

[2likru]

During the exposure, the reflex mirror (the 'R' in dSLR) is flipped up and completely blocks light entering the viewfinder from reaching the sensor. If your camera is leaking light during long exposures, you should send it to Canon Service, because light leakage sufficient to affect an image directly means a defective camera.

No, not quite. Normally the mirror blocks enough light from the viewfinder, so that it is not seen in the picture. But if you use a filter like ND 3.0 or IR 720, which lets only 1/1000 of the light pass, the light from behind can be clearly seen in the pic, even with a non-defect-cam (on an IR-image it looks blue).

I've not done IR photography with digital, but I have done a fair bit of shooting with ND 3.0 filters (I have them in 77mm and 82mm sizes for various lenses), and I've certainly never 'clearly seen' any effect of light through the VF (I don't use a cover, because I'm shooting manually with the 10-stop ND). When I shot IR-sensitive film back in the day, there was some light leakage - but the build quality of the cameras I could afford then was nowhere near today's standards for prosumer bodies.

Perhaps you could post an example of a shot taken with and without the eyepiece covered, during a long exposure with a 10-stop ND, to illustrate the point? I'll try that, myself, too.

The main reason for the cropped camera is the extra reach for most people and a DX mode would solve this problem.

While I agree the reach is an important aspect and a crop format would be very helpful, I don't think it's the main reason. I think most people buy a crop sensor camera because it's cheaper. If you can afford both and then you choose the crop camera, sure, but most people would buy FF if they could, IMO.

I do agree that the main reason most people buy APS-C is becuase the cameras are cheaper. But the question was for people who have a 7D and buy a 5DIII, would you sell the 7D - in that case, assuming the 7D isn't being sold only to cover the cost of the new body, the answer might be different. I have both a 5DII and a 7D, and I'll replace the 5DII with a 1D X or maybe a 5DIII (depending on the real AF spec, mostly), but either way, I'll be keeping the 7D - in situations where you're focal length limited, a crop sensor is the second best solution (the best being buy longer lenses, but over 400mm gets $$$$, and the crop sensor is better than cropping a FF image down). It all depends on the use case for the images, of course. I've done detailed comparisons of the 5DII cropped image vs. the 7D in focal length limited situations, and the IQ is basically a wash. But the 7D image is still 18 MP and can even be cropped further if necessary (which it often is), whereas the 5DII image cropped to the same AoV is only 8 MP, and while that might be sufficient, cropping further isn't such a good idea.

A 'DX mode' is only a solution if the FF sensor has sufficient resolution to support it - the 36 MP D800 yields a 15 MP DX image, whereas a 22 MP 5DIII would only yield an 8.5 MP image. Also, a crop more presents problems for framing the image - with the masking, the VF image becomes very small, since there's no way to magnify the cropped portion to fill the VF.

I would definable sell my 7d for 5d3. I may even let it go for a 5d2 if its an even trade. The only reason I bought the 7d was because of price, wanting to control speedlites in camera, ergos, and (to a lesser extent) auto focus. If the 5d2 was offered at the same price point as the 7d at the time I pulled the trigger, I would be using a 5d currently. I honestly think that crop sensor cameras only exist because of the price of full frame cameras and if the price of full frames ever came down below the $1500 mark, aps-c would disappear from the market. The ideal of crops offering more reach is an illusion. Even 8.5mp crops from a 22mp full frame image is plenty for me and how many wildlife shooters make huge prints from their crops? I'm sure there are some but are their really that many people doing that honestly? If Canon ever does make a full frame camera with equal pixel density to the 7d at the mid range price point, it will be interesting to see if people still buy aps-c cameras under the pretense of "reach".

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Are we there yet?

Would the existing 7D users sell off your current 7D's after you buy the 5D3, if the AF of 5D3 can match the 7D?

Still unsure as to what my exact upgrade path will be (what will the price of the mkii be in a week vs when will the mkiii become available?) Either way, I'd be more likely to pick up a mkii use it till end of fall then sell it and grab a mkiii (or better, get the mkiii then sell the mkii).

I'm not a wildlife shooter, but I can think of many reasons to keep the 7d. As an emerging photog, I am working lots of events that don't exactly pay very well. The 7D would be what i use for those (at one event, I had half a beer get spilled on my 7d, I almost decked the guy, but instead rushed to the bartender to get a rag). Of course , the better solution would be to only work bigger better gigs. But for now, it is what it is. So the 7D would be a good backup cam to use in situations i'm not comfortable pulling the more expensive rig out. I do also shoot a lot of live musid, and the extra reach of the crop sensor is great for catching the crisp closeup of a singer or the drummer way off at the back of the stage.

I am really hoping that canon will preserve the 7d line and give it a super upgrade (imagine a pro level 7D, with 25+ MP priced at a cool $1900 for the body...)