This article is seriously making me question my 5DIII purchase....

[kkoster]

I got my 5D Mark III yesterday. After shooting with it yesterday afternoon and this morning I have to say you couldn't pry this thing from my cold dead hands. I freaking love it.

I went into a store and played with it yesterday. After shooting with it yesterday afternoon and going back into the shop for another go this morning I have to say you couldn't convince me to buy this thing. I was psyched up about it in the run up to the announcement. But when the rumors for the spec circulated I knew I was in trouble convincing myself I needed it.

I only shoot video and I too cannot afford the C300. I absolutely loved my 5D2, but the spec and quality of the 5D3 falls way below the mark for a company that's been 3 years in R&D for the 5D2's successor. Perhaps the extra £1500 over the 5D2 is justified for photographers, I'm not qualified to comment on that. But as a professional filmmaker, I'm passing on this to see what they come up with next.

Don't get me wrong, I love Canon and have invested heavily in lenses. I'm not about to desert. I just feel let down by the 5D3 offering. Flame me all you like, but I'm holding on to my 60D and 5D2 kit until I see Canon coming up with something a bit more imaginative in the video EOS department.

 

[Jedifarce]

I reallly don't see the point of making the Mark III with a compact flash and an SD card slot. That' so stupid. Now you're expected to carry two different types of cards, why didn't it have dual CF slots?

 

[peederj]

I reallly don't see the point of making the Mark III with a compact flash and an SD card slot. That' so stupid. Now you're expected to carry two different types of cards, why didn't it have dual CF slots?

I like it, a lot. The camera will take whichever you have. SD's are easier to locate in a pinch in stores when out in the field. You aren't expected to carry both, you can if you want to have extended shooting or redundant backups. The body size is minimized as a result, and if you don't care about that, spring for a 1 series. The SD cards are cheaper for just as much storage and speed, the CF's are a sturdier build.

Vive la difference.

 

[unkbob]

I reallly don't see the point of making the Mark III with a compact flash and an SD card slot. That' so stupid. Now you're expected to carry two different types of cards, why didn't it have dual CF slots?

At least it's not dual floppy drives.

 

[JR]

This is what I do: I wait until it is released, read several expert reviews and look at examples RAW. Then I rent the camera and make my own overview and only then I decide to buy or not to buy

Man I so wish I was as rational as you are man...would save me some serious money and head-aches sometime!

 

[darrellrhodesmiller]

a video and a review for you:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7311/canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-nikon-d800-for-video

Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800

 

[psolberg]

a video and a review for you:

*facepalm*

eventualy, everything turns into vidoe from that site.

 

[thepancakeman]

Sony is huge, and knows video.

Not as huge as Canon.

I am bored of all the wailing because there's more than one decent camera on the market. In some respect, the D800 is way ahead of the 5D3, in other respects, not so much. No, the 5D3 is not God's gift to the industry. Both the D800 and 5D3 make compromises, but both are more than up to the task of creating beautiful photos and video. There is more to life than charts and test scores. When I was a painter I didn't brag about the number of bristles on my brush.

. Sony is way bigger. They even own movie studios (remember Sony pictures?) and make cameras and lenses for ultra high broadcast and movies. They are the bread and butter of Hollywood. No to mention huge RD in all things. To the greater point, now canon has a top dog to match that is able to match it in RD budgets. This is good news for any canon shooter. It means canon will have to work hard to stay competitive and earn your cash. I wish they would buy Nikon and create a goliath of an imaging division.

Do we have to go through this again? Google it. Canon has more employees than Sony, is valued on the stock market at more than Nikon + Sony combined, and is more profitable than Sony (not hard, as Sony made a loss in their last results).

Sony has fingers in lots of pies but a lot of what they do loses money. What % of their R&D budget do you think they can afford to dedicate to developing pro photography technology, when they have gaming, TV, electronics, movies etc etc to budget for? They are not a giant corporation with infinite resources, they are a struggling ex-giant trying to find their next route to profitability. Canon has the luxury of profits and a more focused product line. They just brought out the 5D3. Sony just brought out the Vita.

You must have a different Google than me. My google says 2010 revenue for Sony was 7.2 trillion yen. Canon? About 3.7 billion. I think that makes Sony a wee bit bigger.

Sony annual report here: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/ar/8ido18000003dkyy-att/8ido18000003dl0u.pdf
Canon annual report here: http://www.canon.com/ir/annual/2010/report2010.pdf

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

a video and a review for you:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7311/canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-nikon-d800-for-video

Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800

hate to say it, but there is so much bad info in that video there, so much very wrong, very wrong

 

[JasonATL]

hate to say it, but there is so much bad info in that video there, so much very wrong, very wrong

Care to elaborate?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

hate to say it, but there is so much bad info in that video there, so much very wrong, very wrong

Care to elaborate?

I don't feel like wasting the time to go point by point but right from the very start he is something like the 5D3 is far superior at every single ISO due to it's lower MP count (really? it is many stops better at high ISO? it doesn't have 3 less stops dynamic range at ISO 100?).

I suspect the 5D3 will be better for video though. EOSHD keeps saying the D800 is world's sharper, but I thought it actually looked even softer than his 5D3 footage.

 

[CatfishSoupFTW]

Seriously...
Please switch to Nikon!
Sell all you Canon-gear.
Buy a D800 and then join nikonrumors.com... log on and complaint about how you might think Canon is better.

That way we don't have to hear the complaints about a camera you haven't even tried yet.

If you HAVE a 5D3 and it $ucks badly then, please! DO tell us because it might be something wrong with it.
If not. Many of us still haven't gotten our cameras.
Many of us have been waiting years for this one, not for the Nikon-replica.

someone sounds like a serious fanboy...and your justifications are completely invalid.

 

[unkbob]

Sony is huge, and knows video.

Not as huge as Canon.

I am bored of all the wailing because there's more than one decent camera on the market. In some respect, the D800 is way ahead of the 5D3, in other respects, not so much. No, the 5D3 is not God's gift to the industry. Both the D800 and 5D3 make compromises, but both are more than up to the task of creating beautiful photos and video. There is more to life than charts and test scores. When I was a painter I didn't brag about the number of bristles on my brush.

. Sony is way bigger. They even own movie studios (remember Sony pictures?) and make cameras and lenses for ultra high broadcast and movies. They are the bread and butter of Hollywood. No to mention huge RD in all things. To the greater point, now canon has a top dog to match that is able to match it in RD budgets. This is good news for any canon shooter. It means canon will have to work hard to stay competitive and earn your cash. I wish they would buy Nikon and create a goliath of an imaging division.

Do we have to go through this again? Google it. Canon has more employees than Sony, is valued on the stock market at more than Nikon + Sony combined, and is more profitable than Sony (not hard, as Sony made a loss in their last results).

Sony has fingers in lots of pies but a lot of what they do loses money. What % of their R&D budget do you think they can afford to dedicate to developing pro photography technology, when they have gaming, TV, electronics, movies etc etc to budget for? They are not a giant corporation with infinite resources, they are a struggling ex-giant trying to find their next route to profitability. Canon has the luxury of profits and a more focused product line. They just brought out the 5D3. Sony just brought out the Vita.

You must have a different Google than me. My google says 2010 revenue for Sony was 7.2 trillion yen. Canon? About 3.7 billion. I think that makes Sony a wee bit bigger.

Sony annual report here: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/ar/8ido18000003dkyy-att/8ido18000003dl0u.pdf
Canon annual report here: http://www.canon.com/ir/annual/2010/report2010.pdf

LOL you think revenue makes you "bigger"? You can't spend turnover dude. If you could, Game Group would be classed as a huge company, whereas they just went bust.

 

[psolberg]

Seriously...
Please switch to Nikon!
Sell all you Canon-gear.
Buy a D800 and then join nikonrumors.com... log on and complaint about how you might think Canon is better.

That way we don't have to hear the complaints about a camera you haven't even tried yet.

If you HAVE a 5D3 and it $ucks badly then, please! DO tell us because it might be something wrong with it.
If not. Many of us still haven't gotten our cameras.
Many of us have been waiting years for this one, not for the Nikon-replica.

someone sounds like a serious fanboy...and your justifications are completely invalid.

That video is for fanboys. Not worth even discussing seriously.

 

[psolberg]

Sony is huge, and knows video.

Not as huge as Canon.

I am bored of all the wailing because there's more than one decent camera on the market. In some respect, the D800 is way ahead of the 5D3, in other respects, not so much. No, the 5D3 is not God's gift to the industry. Both the D800 and 5D3 make compromises, but both are more than up to the task of creating beautiful photos and video. There is more to life than charts and test scores. When I was a painter I didn't brag about the number of bristles on my brush.

. Sony is way bigger. They even own movie studios (remember Sony pictures?) and make cameras and lenses for ultra high broadcast and movies. They are the bread and butter of Hollywood. No to mention huge RD in all things. To the greater point, now canon has a top dog to match that is able to match it in RD budgets. This is good news for any canon shooter. It means canon will have to work hard to stay competitive and earn your cash. I wish they would buy Nikon and create a goliath of an imaging division.

Do we have to go through this again? Google it. Canon has more employees than Sony, is valued on the stock market at more than Nikon + Sony combined, and is more profitable than Sony (not hard, as Sony made a loss in their last results).

Sony has fingers in lots of pies but a lot of what they do loses money. What % of their R&D budget do you think they can afford to dedicate to developing pro photography technology, when they have gaming, TV, electronics, movies etc etc to budget for? They are not a giant corporation with infinite resources, they are a struggling ex-giant trying to find their next route to profitability. Canon has the luxury of profits and a more focused product line. They just brought out the 5D3. Sony just brought out the Vita.

You must have a different Google than me. My google says 2010 revenue for Sony was 7.2 trillion yen. Canon? About 3.7 billion. I think that makes Sony a wee bit bigger.

Sony annual report here: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/ar/8ido18000003dkyy-att/8ido18000003dl0u.pdf
Canon annual report here: http://www.canon.com/ir/annual/2010/report2010.pdf

LOL you think revenue makes you "bigger"? You can't spend turnover dude. If you could, Game Group would be classed as a huge company, whereas they just went bust.

It does in this case. Sony is bigger, is much more diverse. There are many ways to measure a company, if you count employees, you're counting factory workers. In that case many chinese companies would be larger, but they make little money. If you count revenue or profit then you're subject to a particular's years financials and given copanies are always playing with the books, you can't use that as a good measure. Stock price is meaningless as it represents the value of a stock if it was to be aquired, not the actual size of a company. Compare apple to msft, apple is worth more, but it isn't larger by many metrics, including employee count. Sony is a huge empire in technology. Canon is not even close. Stop being stubborn. You have been proven wrong. It is time to move on. I didn't reply to you because this is a silly thing to keep on arguing. Start a new thread or something if you really want to go on.

 

[takoman46]

how can the D800 score better than Nikon's flagship bodies? This tells me that there is something wrong with the DxO review...

 

[psolberg]

how can the D800 score better than Nikon's flagship bodies? This tells me that there is something wrong with the DxO review...

uh, because it is newer.....

 

[RLPhoto]

To be honest, the 5D3 will not be better than the d800 for video. The d800 can shoot uncompressed video out thru HDMI. That alone make it better than any video out of the MK3. Nuff said and I feel canon dropped the momentum the MK2 had with its video offerings.

But your not buying a d800 because of that, right? I would like to believe yor decision on is weighted down by a complete system of lenses, flashes and accessories? If so, that little benefit of Uncompressed output won't matter in the big picture of sticking to canon. A 5d3 makes sense.

If your not tied down, your a free agent to purchase whatever system appeals to you. D800 or 5D3... Does it really matter? Is your photographic ability able to use 100% of either camera? Will either system hold your creative ability down? I seriously doubt it but if this bickering over A few MP is enough to ruin the art we produce and love, it's not worth it either.

Just go out an shoot, and Consider the costs of switching a system, which I'd imagine brought images you love and cherish.

 

[peederj]

To be honest, the 5D3 will not be better than the d800 for video. The d800 can shoot uncompressed video out thru HDMI. That alone make it better than any video out of the MK3. Nuff said and I feel canon dropped the momentum the MK2 had with its video offerings.

Not necessarily at all. The codec is just one part of a system, it's the part that the 5D3 is suffering from the worst, but it is only one part. The HDMI streaming out of the D800 may already have baked-in aliasing and moire and other problems that the best codec in the world (or recording uncompressed) is just going to preserve. We're not sure yet with that camera, the consensus has yet to emerge.

We also don't know whether the codec in the 5D3 can be hacked into higher res yet.

 

[RLPhoto]

None the less, canon hasn't offered an uncompressed format for output. Moire can be controlled by choosing careful subject to camera distance and attire. I've had to work with that on the 7D and it's not a huge problem.

But more importantly is, how does the d800 change canon? I don't know for sure, I'm not switching systems anytime soon, maybe they will release a firmware update for HDMI output, maybe they will release 4k later, maybe it's I'm just typing out loud.

Man, I'm just disappointed about the 5d3 video.