Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]

[100]

No Wi-Fi, no GPS, no USB-3, no built in radio control for speed lights…
The 5D3 is so dated, if we transport it back in time to the stone age with the future Sony A9R (time travel capability will be the new Wi-Fi) even cavemen will think it’s a relic from the age of the dinosaurs.
The people who are still using 5D3’s today and manage to get great pictures out of them must be world-class photographers.

 

[bornshooter]

the d4s still wont compete with the 1dx.

 

[flowers]

No Wi-Fi, no GPS, no USB-3, no built in radio control for speed lights…
The 5D3 is so dated, if we transport it back in time to the stone age with the future Sony A9R (time travel capability will be the new Wi-Fi) even cavemen will think it’s a relic from the age of the dinosaurs.
The people who are still using 5D3’s today and manage to get great pictures out of them must be world-class photographers.

You can't get great pictures without all that? And I've managed without exposure metering and flash synching with manual exposure and manually fired flash during a 1/4 exposure that produced a correct exposure for the flash power I used without mixing in ambient light! I've also done it with ambient light mixed in, you can get any kind of results you like. I have radio transceivers for my flashes, but I also took off-camera flash pictures at a point when I didn't have the radio transceivers and that's how I did it! The quickest I've managed to manually sync to was 1/5s (0.2s). 2sec self-timer is almost as handy as remote controlled camera and flashes in a pinch!

Nobody will take the idea seriously that you can't take great pictures without all that extra stuff! It's great to have and it allows you to take some pictures that would otherwise be impossible but if you lose all your photographic ability when you don't have a camera that measures exposure for you and wi-fi this and radio that, I don't think you had that much to begin with! Back to basics.

 

[Loswr]

No Wi-Fi, no GPS, no USB-3, no built in radio control for speed lights…
The 5D3 is so dated, if we transport it back in time to the stone age with the future Sony A9R (time travel capability will be the new Wi-Fi) even cavemen will think it’s a relic from the age of the dinosaurs.
The people who are still using 5D3’s today and manage to get great pictures out of them must be world-class photographers.

You can't get great pictures without all that? And I've managed without exposure metering and flash synching with manual exposure and manually fired flash during a 1/4 exposure that produced a correct exposure for the flash power I used without mixing in ambient light! I've also done it with ambient light mixed in, you can get any kind of results you like. I have radio transceivers for my flashes, but I also took off-camera flash pictures at a point when I didn't have the radio transceivers and that's how I did it! The quickest I've managed to manually sync to was 1/5s (0.2s). 2sec self-timer is almost as handy as remote controlled camera and flashes in a pinch!

Nobody will take the idea seriously that you can't take great pictures without all that extra stuff! It's great to have and it allows you to take some pictures that would otherwise be impossible but if you lose all your photographic ability when you don't have a camera that measures exposure for you and wi-fi this and radio that, I don't think you had that much to begin with! Back to basics.

@ 100 - You're welcome to borrow my <sarcasm> tag. It comes in handy sometimes.

 

[flowers]

@ 100 - You're welcome to borrow my <sarcasm> tag. It comes in handy sometimes.

I missed 100's previous post... Sarcasm is not easy to read in a forum! Discussions are more polite without sarcasm and easier to read. I apologize for my mistake.

 

[bornshooter]

They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit... i say f**k it

 

[Orangutan]

@ 100 - You're welcome to borrow my <sarcasm> tag. It comes in handy sometimes.

I had assumed you bought them in bulk at Costco.

 

[Loswr]

@ 100 - You're welcome to borrow my <sarcasm> tag. It comes in handy sometimes.

I had assumed you bought them in bulk at Costco.

No, but now that you mention it, I really should pick up a value pack.

Might not help though, as I'd probably still forget to use them...

 

[100]

I hoped the time travel capability of the future Sony A9R would function as a sarcasm tag.

But I agree sarcasm is not always easy to read (or write, English is not my mother tongue, which makes it even harder).
Page after page of "discussion" over a largely irrelevant feature like built in Wi-Fi lures me into sarcasm and I’m too weak to resist.

Anyway, on a more serious note; I think the future is more about software than hardware.

 

[Orangutan]

But I agree sarcasm is not always easy to read (or write, English is not my mother tongue, which makes it even harder).

It's sometimes spelled sar-chasm for just that reason. ;D

 

[flowers]

I hoped the time travel capability of the future Sony A9R would function as a sarcasm tag.

But I agree sarcasm is not always easy to read (or write, English is not my mother tongue, which makes it even harder).
Page after page of "discussion" over a largely irrelevant feature like built in Wi-Fi lures me into sarcasm and I’m too weak to resist.

Anyway, on a more serious note; I think the future is more about software than hardware.

I think you are right but I don't know if it's a good thing. Earlier lenses like 300/2, 200/2, 200/1.8, 135/2, 135/1.8, 135/1.5 were being designed and made. Now many lenses are just mk II III IV with no changes to lens design but only to coatings. Fastest lenses made today over 100mm (and sometimes even under) are f/2.8. The idea is to use a high ISO. "Nobody needs fast lenses" is the mentality. I think if this trend continues, more things will be delegated to software instead of hardware. Maybe tomorrow's fast lenses are compact f/4. Who knows.

 

[dgatwood]

Anyway, on a more serious note; I think the future is more about software than hardware.

I think you are right but I don't know if it's a good thing. Earlier lenses like 300/2, 200/2, 200/1.8, 135/2, 135/1.8, 135/1.5 were being designed and made. Now many lenses are just mk II III IV with no changes to lens design but only to coatings. Fastest lenses made today over 100mm (and sometimes even under) are f/2.8. The idea is to use a high ISO. "Nobody needs fast lenses" is the mentality. I think if this trend continues, more things will be delegated to software instead of hardware. Maybe tomorrow's fast lenses are compact f/4. Who knows.

Software can only go so far. You can do massive DNR, but at the end of the day, you're losing a lot of detail, too. We're to the point where in most typical lighting conditions, you can get away with f/4 lenses and IS, but only if you aren't looking at the pixels. You can usually get away with f/2.8 lenses and no IS, but again, only if you aren't looking at the pixels.

As pixel density increases, the light gathering decreases proportionally. That's one big reason why FF cameras have such a low-light advantage over crops. The pixel density is so much lower that you can get away with slow lenses in crappy light. Unfortunately, cameras are rapidly approaching the limit of what you can do in terms of sensor quantum efficiency (at best, it can improve by no more than about a factor of two—only one more stop), so most of that extra light gathering isn't going to come from better sensors beyond this point. Therefore, any future improvements in pixel density will require faster lenses just to break even. When we finally see a high-pixel-density full-frame camera, those f/1.2 and even f/1.0 lenses are going to start looking mighty tempting again, because the FF cameras are going to have the same terrible low-light performance as crop bodies unless you downscale at the end of your processing.

Now that's not to say that we won't eventually see hardware with electronic shutters that take thousands of images per second and use bats**t crazy advanced image processing to smart-merge the images and individually stabilize each part, compensating for motion, etc., but I'd imagine the compute power to do that in-camera is at least a decade out, and the storage requirements might push it even further out. So at least in the near term, fast lenses are going to continue to be crucial, IMO. And even in a decade, when we have such software capabilities, a fast lens will still be useful for obtaining shallow depth-of-field for artistic effect. Short of taking advantage of parallax in combination with light-field sensor tech, I don't see that being readily emulated in software.

 

[flowers]

Anyway, on a more serious note; I think the future is more about software than hardware.

I think you are right but I don't know if it's a good thing. Earlier lenses like 300/2, 200/2, 200/1.8, 135/2, 135/1.8, 135/1.5 were being designed and made. Now many lenses are just mk II III IV with no changes to lens design but only to coatings. Fastest lenses made today over 100mm (and sometimes even under) are f/2.8. The idea is to use a high ISO. "Nobody needs fast lenses" is the mentality. I think if this trend continues, more things will be delegated to software instead of hardware. Maybe tomorrow's fast lenses are compact f/4. Who knows.

Software can only go so far. You can do massive DNR, but at the end of the day, you're losing a lot of detail, too. We're to the point where in most typical lighting conditions, you can get away with f/4 lenses and IS, but only if you aren't looking at the pixels. You can usually get away with f/2.8 lenses and no IS, but again, only if you aren't looking at the pixels.

As pixel density increases, the light gathering decreases proportionally. That's one big reason why FF cameras have such a low-light advantage over crops. The pixel density is so much lower that you can get away with slow lenses in crappy light. Unfortunately, cameras are rapidly approaching the limit of what you can do in terms of sensor quantum efficiency (at best, it can improve by no more than about a factor of two—only one more stop), so most of that extra light gathering isn't going to come from better sensors beyond this point. Therefore, any future improvements in pixel density will require faster lenses just to break even. When we finally see a high-pixel-density full-frame camera, those f/1.2 and even f/1.0 lenses are going to start looking mighty tempting again, because the FF cameras are going to have the same terrible low-light performance as crop bodies unless you downscale at the end of your processing.

Now that's not to say that we won't eventually see hardware with electronic shutters that take thousands of images per second and use bats**t crazy advanced image processing to smart-merge the images and individually stabilize each part, compensating for motion, etc., but I'd imagine the compute power to do that in-camera is at least a decade out, and the storage requirements might push it even further out. So at least in the near term, fast lenses are going to continue to be crucial, IMO. And even in a decade, when we have such software capabilities, a fast lens will still be useful for obtaining shallow depth-of-field for artistic effect. Short of taking advantage of parallax in combination with light-field sensor tech, I don't see that being readily emulated in software.

I hope you are right! I would really like to see more modern lenses faster than f/2. MF is fine when your subject isn't moving a lot but the old lenses would benefit a lot from AF and redesign with modern coatings and modern knowledge of optics! In the future it would also be easier to design fast TS lenses, as an example of lenses that don't exist today. I like lenses that are multi-purpose. Sharp and fast macro wide-angle tilt shift lens would be a super powerful lens! If only it existed.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Owner of a 6d and a 5d3 here. In regards to wifi ---when i got the 6d I thought the wifi was kind of neat. I used it here and there (via the remote app). It took taking selfies to a new level! that, and every once in a while, like on vacation or something I'd use the remote transfer app to upload something to facebook. LOL...other than that, I have barely used the wifi. It has stayed in the off mode for like 98% of the time I have had the body.

I used to think wifi on an SLR was a dumb gimmick, but I now wish I had it on my 5D3. Some of my editorial clients now want to art direct shoots in real time. Fortunately, this isn't for every shot, but just for the more important ones that may be used as cover images. Without wifi, my ghetto solution is taking a pic of my camera's LCD screen with my smartphone, then texting in to the client. Wifi would sure make this agonizing process less painful.

Being able to trigger the camera remotely and seeing the images on my phone would also save tons of time when I have to rig the tripod up someplace that's difficult to access (like the top of my van ) I'll probably just have to suck it up and get a Cam Ranger.

I actually had a lot higher hopes for it! I am mainly a wedding shooter, but i do shoot landscapes and other stuff for fun. Things I didn't like about it that have made me go from psyched on it to meh...

Part of me thought that for weddings I could set the 6d on a tripod and use the remote to snag shots from a second angle so i didn't have to do as much running around (on days i don't have a second shooter) - or, for venues that don't let you go into the sanctuary, they may allow a remote cam there. But, the wifi times out after a while and you need to accesss the camera and phone together to re-establish connection (even if you set your cam to never go to sleep, the phone itself cuts the connection and won't just reconnect without going to the camera!

So that plan = fail.

for fun i like to do stuff like time lapse...but the remote doesn't act like an intervelometer.

and -- long exposures. I thought this would be a good way to not have to use the intervelometer for long exposures. But, the phone settings need to be changed because once the screen goes to blank the camera says i'm done...so for a 30 second exposure your phone has to be active the whole time.

Add to it that it doesn't let you program in...longer expores...shooting at night...i want a 7 minutes exposure...these are things that remote needs to do!!!!

Another drawback...for some reason the live view with wifi remote disables the hotshoe...I think there is a way to use the live view to gain focus, then disable it then you can trigger off camera light...but...that kind of bites that live view via remote app cuts the hotshoe.... Ok, this is selfie...but...i would be out there trying a ton of different techniques with lighting that worked right. yes i would be the model...and it wouldn't ever be posted...but that would be great...i can try oput new ideas on me rather than having to go ask a friend...

so it's not that i didn't give the wifi a chance. If I was doing things that required instant upload more...then hell yeah. But, for most of what i was psyched on about it is a fail.

These are things that will most likely get sorted out...if not by canon then by 3rd party aps. Either way...it's not like there isn't a way top make a 5d (or 1d) series wifi capable if needed. What i hoped for would have been kick ass...but it isn't...so that's why the wifi sits unuesed on my 6d....hope that adds context.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

However, the 5DIII was designed before wifi made its entrance. It makes sense that Canon introducwd it in the 6D which is in the FF low and and also a new model to see how the market would react.

Sorry to disappoint you. Wifi in cameras was already invented in 2012. canon just believed they would get away forcing customers to buy their oem-wifi-grip-bricks for their mirrorslappers. As in the past. At 1000% gross margin.
They were right. A few of their customers don't mind.

Lack of onboard wifi does not make the 5d iii a bad camera. It just demonstrates that it is ... dated. A bit like a car without AC or a tube tv.

again...what was the 5d3 designed for???? I don't think its far off to say wedding photographers because wedding togs need to shoot product, portraits, art, action, people, event work....its a little bit o everything...hence why the 5d3 is a jack of all trades camera...good for about everything!!! To a wedding photog lack of wifi on a 5d3 is kind of more like - a car without a spoiler on the trunk, or a TV without a build in DVD player. It's really an un-needed add on that may come in handy at times ...but needed...nope

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

However, the 5DIII was designed before wifi made its entrance. It makes sense that Canon introducwd it in the 6D which is in the FF low and and also a new model to see how the market would react.

Wifi in cameras was already invented in 2012.

"Invented" is not the same thing as "robust." P&S cameras are, unfortunately, disposable items. People don't keep them long, and they buy cheaper, better replacements rather than get them repaired. A DSLR, on the other hand, must be designed to be used and repaired for up to 10 years. Even if the warranty is much shorter, you don't want to annoy your upscale customers with a flimsy product.

I would actually tend to disagree with this " A DSLR, on the other hand, must be designed to be used and repaired for up to 10 years." I say this only because the tech in bodies keeps progressing. Even the evolutionary upgrades are still handy. Lenses, yes, you buy them and they last. But bodies, I do kind of feel that the life cycle of bodies for pros currently matches the update cycle for pro bodies which is 3-4 years. 10 years misses a lot of updates...

 

[privatebydesign]

It seems like the WFT accessories are more robust than the 6D's built in WiFi, using HTTP mode it doesn't matter if the connection is lost, or even if you switch your phone off, when you switch it back on it will reconnect without goig near the camera. I picked up a WFT-E2 on Craigs List for $150 and really like it.

 

[100]

Anyway, on a more serious note; I think the future is more about software than hardware.

I think you are right but I don't know if it's a good thing. Earlier lenses like 300/2, 200/2, 200/1.8, 135/2, 135/1.8, 135/1.5 were being designed and made. Now many lenses are just mk II III IV with no changes to lens design but only to coatings. Fastest lenses made today over 100mm (and sometimes even under) are f/2.8. The idea is to use a high ISO. "Nobody needs fast lenses" is the mentality. I think if this trend continues, more things will be delegated to software instead of hardware. Maybe tomorrow's fast lenses are compact f/4. Who knows.

Software can only go so far. You can do massive DNR, but at the end of the day, you're losing a lot of detail, too. We're to the point where in most typical lighting conditions, you can get away with f/4 lenses and IS, but only if you aren't looking at the pixels. You can usually get away with f/2.8 lenses and no IS, but again, only if you aren't looking at the pixels.

As pixel density increases, the light gathering decreases proportionally. That's one big reason why FF cameras have such a low-light advantage over crops. The pixel density is so much lower that you can get away with slow lenses in crappy light. Unfortunately, cameras are rapidly approaching the limit of what you can do in terms of sensor quantum efficiency (at best, it can improve by no more than about a factor of two—only one more stop), so most of that extra light gathering isn't going to come from better sensors beyond this point. Therefore, any future improvements in pixel density will require faster lenses just to break even. When we finally see a high-pixel-density full-frame camera, those f/1.2 and even f/1.0 lenses are going to start looking mighty tempting again, because the FF cameras are going to have the same terrible low-light performance as crop bodies unless you downscale at the end of your processing.

Now that's not to say that we won't eventually see hardware with electronic shutters that take thousands of images per second and use bats**t crazy advanced image processing to smart-merge the images and individually stabilize each part, compensating for motion, etc., but I'd imagine the compute power to do that in-camera is at least a decade out, and the storage requirements might push it even further out. So at least in the near term, fast lenses are going to continue to be crucial, IMO. And even in a decade, when we have such software capabilities, a fast lens will still be useful for obtaining shallow depth-of-field for artistic effect. Short of taking advantage of parallax in combination with light-field sensor tech, I don't see that being readily emulated in software.

A Bayer sensor throws away 2/3 of the light due to the color filters (RGBG) so in theory you could gain another stop and a half on top of the QE improvement.

If there is a market for “fast” lenses, they will be made. At best the market for Full Frame lenses between f/0.8 and f/1.4 will be small which makes theme even more expensive. Most (professional) photographer don’t care all that much about pixel performance, they care about the overall result. Even a 4k screen is only about 8mp (the resolution of Rebels almost a decade ago).
If you want to print wallpaper size and view it from half a meter away, or if you use tiny crops, pixel performance might be of great importance but these are all exceptions, or should be.

On the software part, look at what Magic Lantern has been able to accomplish. With all the connectivity added to anything with software I think it’s just a matter of time before camera manufactures will allow apps to control their devices to some extent because apps will add value for free.

 

[AvTvM]

... With all the connectivity added to anything with software I think it’s just a matter of time before camera manufactures will allow apps to control their devices to some extent because apps will add value for free.

Exactly. canon will likely continue to hold back as much as they can in order to preserve their strictly proprietary ecosystem. Meanwhile other makers are offering cameras today already that allow their owners to configure and expand their functionality by using apps ... E.g. sony a7/R.

While many shooters will not need this, having the opportunity would still come in handy for many.

It's not so much technical challenges, but rather canon GREED that dictates, what their customers can possibly get. That's what i am calling them out for.

 

[Orangutan]

"Invented" is not the same thing as "robust." P&S cameras are, unfortunately, disposable items. People don't keep them long, and they buy cheaper, better replacements rather than get them repaired. A DSLR, on the other hand, must be designed to be used and repaired for up to 10 years. Even if the warranty is much shorter, you don't want to annoy your upscale customers with a flimsy product.

I would actually tend to disagree with this " A DSLR, on the other hand, must be designed to be used and repaired for up to 10 years." I say this only because the tech in bodies keeps progressing. Even the evolutionary upgrades are still handy. Lenses, yes, you buy them and they last. But bodies, I do kind of feel that the life cycle of bodies for pros currently matches the update cycle for pro bodies which is 3-4 years. 10 years misses a lot of updates...

I take your point, but there are still people shooting 1DsMkIIs out there (we have some on this site). That's getting very close to 10 years. Maybe 8 years would have been a better number, but the point remains: P&S are, essentially, disposable. DSLRs, especially pro-oriented models, are intended to be repairable for a number of years. That requirement affects the ability to add features as soon as they come out.