Jay_S said:
So not knowing a whole lot more about DR, ISO, etc. I'm debating the 5DmkII (at significantly reduced cost) vs. the mkIII at $3500 for base body. I've already got a 7D some I've got plenty of speed for action and sports. Wanted full frame primarily for portraits, landscapes, so the 3.5 FPS on 5DmkII doesn't have a negative impact. Metering at focus point might, but again there are lots of ways around that with the 5DmkII..
Is anyone (with a 7D) thinking along the same lines (sorry I didn't read all 35 pages).. Anyone have an holes they can poke in the thought? I mean the extra $1500 - $1600 can buy and awfully nice full frame 1.4/1.2 lens..
Jay S.
People are speculating that $3500 is with kit lens. Users from other forums seem to have evidence.
Otherwise, we should all trust Canon - if they're pricing it at $3500, it's because they know it's good. Take a look at the 24-70 II. We were all confounded at the high price tag, but we've since learned that the IQ is god-tier from people who have used it. Simply put, Canon seems to know what they're doing. The things we don't know about the MK III could be good things.