Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]

[jrista]

Let me be more precise: i dont' consider canon to be greedier than other corporations. I perceive them to be more shortsighted with greed. All they only offer is what is absolutely required to not loose out to competitor's products immediately. Sometimes they undershoot that threshold. E.g. Eos-m.

And even when canon comes up with a new feature like switching from line-of-sight-triggering to radio-wireless that is hugely useful to many customers and leapfrogs the entire competion, they are held back by shortsighted greed. Only offering rt in one expensive top of the line speedlite and one commander that lacks in other features. And they design the system to deliver the goods in combination with the latest cameras only. Rather than really pushing the feature unto rheir huge installed base (of pre 2012 eos models and 580/430 speedlites) by offering a 450ex-rt and a cheap little transceiver for existing canon speedlites. Of course canon gets punished for this behaviour by amateurs like me who do not need to have the rt system to earn money.

So many amateurs like myself have held off totally from paying canon 1.5k for 3 600ex-rt and an st-e3. Any day now i will be able to pick up a yongnuo ste of rt-commander plus rt-flashes and transceivers offering more functionality for about 1/4 of the money. And it will work nicely even with our pre-2012 cameras - even across makes.

Now who is the winner here? Certainly not canon, who have invited 3rd party competitors in and have not leveraged their technological improvement to really create a full-sized USP against their direct competition. Nikon or sony have gained valuable time. Canon has no killer instinct. They may lead in sales at the moment, but they dont lead the market. They don't ever try to exceed their customers expectations the way nikon or sony do ... On occasion. Canon really is a follower company. They will not win the game long-term with the attitude they have been showing over the last 5 years. They are trying to nickel and dime their customers exactly in the same way gm and ford have tries to. Withholding even small and cheap pieces of technical progress like give me a break - wifi connectivity in a digital camera. The strategy will not work for much longer.

Due to canons decisions i have also held off buying a 5d 3. and the 24-70 ii that i would take to go with it. I am continueing with my 7 d for the time being, and will sell the 10k canon glass selection (ef, l, ef-s) as soon as i get a 5d 4 type camera as a solid state milc. By whomever.

And no, its not just me. Its many other "enthusiast/amateurs" too.

what i don't get about this whole argument here is this ---There IS and HAS been a thriving third party radio trigger business for quite some time now.

Think about it, what is the industry standard for triggering strobes (not just speedlights, but all forms of strobes) - its Pocket Wizard. That may be why canon isn't pulling out all the stops on this....

Also, come on guys, have some patience here. An RT receiver may very well be around the corner. Or, it may not be!!! The problem is this, and this is where i get the idea of testing the waters. As said above, the industry standard is pocket wizards. Canon not only knows this, but, they also know there's more than one way to trigger a flash. A lot of shooters pick and choose where they need the latest tech, and many do prefer the simplicity of manual flashes. Manual flashes are generally a lot cheaper and pretty reliable because it's not packed full of tech. Then there are others who choose the cheaper option because they can't afford the switch to more complex systems.

For like just shy of 2 years now i have been using the cheap triggers...cactus v5's. Basic, simple, BUT reliable!!! I had one that took such a bad fall it tore the top hotshoe off. that one still works!!! not as a receiver of course, but the bottom shoe is fine. when i got them i got a batch of 5...one of them has died, but, for $35 a pop I'm really surprised more of them haven't died....

And there are a ton of other pretty reliable cheap options, and you can scale it up even too to less cheap options until you get to the odins and PW Flex and radio poppers.

So, I think it is actually a VERY wise Business decision to do what they have done with the RT system.

If your buying into the RT system, it means you want more than basic manual functionality. And if you want that, you know your spending more $$$ to get it. It's just the nature of the beast. Canon knows this. So they introduce it in their flaghip flash. It's sensible. those that want what the new system can do will buy it. Canon does not need to make a work around because ---most of the people buying into this system already have a way of triggering flashes!!!!!!

I use myself as a test case...as I said, i have my 4 cactus v5's. They are old and i want to replace them, or maybe move to the phottix strattos ---- or, make the leap to the RT system. Flash history. I had 2 580's and a 430. But one of my 580's got stolen. Ended up replacing it with another 430. Then, the night before shooting a wedding my last 580 died. No time to find another 580 on ebay, or order anything cheaper, so i snagged a 600.

the sale has me tempted, but, I know I could replace my cactus's with strattos for less than it will cost me to buy 1 ST-E3. I have grown used to manual settings so I don't know if I really need ETTL. That, and, I kind of like being able to have an on cam flash as well as off cam (just for a little fill). So, the new system for canon may not be best suited for me.

There are tons of options out there, and canon knows this. They made something unique and those that have adopted the system like it enough to say great things about it. Hell, great enough to even temp folks like me who like me! Hell, I may even buy the strattos but still get the ST-E3!!! LOL

I think your starting to get it. If we continue on from where you've started...a market that is fairly saturated with both cheap wireless options (Cactus v5) as well as expensive wireless options (PW). Think about what Canon has to do in order to make a dent in that market, especially with the way people's loyalties work.

Their product offerings in that market have to be at least as reliable as the cheap Cactus v5, and they have to be at least as capable as PocketWizard. They really have to be more reliable, and more capable. They have to live up to the Canon brand, and the Canon brand is extremely powerful and garners a hell of a lot of loyalty. Canon can't miss a step...I mean, look at EOS-M. Personally I don't think that EOS-M was a missed step, but it was close enough to one, and Canon ended up pulling it out of the US and European markets for the foreseeable future. Canon can not miss a step! It's their reputation riding on it.

Now, what's worse for Canon? Rushing some kind of PW counterpart for the RT system that, due to the fact that it wasn't fully and properly designed and tested before hitting the market, somehow fails? Or, holding back, risking pissing off a very few people in niche groups who really WANT a Canon RT counterpart to PW, are dissatisfied that Canon didn't rush one out, but are probably still ok with waiting, because hell, what else are they going to do?

Canon is going to take the safer rout. Holding back and not releasing a product that may not be ready, or that may otherwise affect their ecosystem in ways we cannot know or understand, is the only logical course of action for Canon. They my piss a few people like AvTvM off along the way, but there isn't anything he can really do, and when they finally do release the product he's looking for, he'll clearly be all over it.

There could be a myriad of other issues that Canon has to deal with before they could release such a product as well. Who knows what kind of regulatory pressures and issues Canon might be having to deal with for such a product, not just in one locale, but in multiple locales around the world. Coordinating R&D with multiple local regulatory bodies is no small feat. And if you know anything about regulation, it can be the most boneheaded legislation any country ever creates...a 600-RT, because of it's "class" may apply under one set of regulations, where as a stand alone radio trigger could fall under an entirely different device class, and apply under an entirely different set of regulations. And that may be the case in multiple markets! Regulation can be as much a nightmare as working with the dreaded "third party".

Let's not forget that many markets are controlled by regulatory bodies that frown quite gravely on anti-competitive behavior. The EU in particular. The US is a tossup...sometimes they decide to prosecute vehemently for anti-competitive behavior, and other times they ignore it entirely...depends on the political blob's mood, it seems. Canon could, theoretically, entirely undermine an entire third-party market segment for radio flash triggers. I believe it is MORE than conceivable that these parties, particularly the likes of PocketWizard, are doing everything they can to protect the market they fundamentally rely upon for continued existence. If Canon released a particularly compelling radio trigger for RT with backwards compatibility and that same rich featureset, they could undermine a massive segment of PocketWizard's market, and disrupt their financial stability. There is no knowing for sure, but PocketWizard and many of their counterparts could very well be putting legal pressure on Canon not to release such a device, and their threats may be part of what has held Canon back.

As I've said many times before...nothing is ever simple. People have a tendency to radically simplify the insanely complex natures of human economies. (Well, people actually have a tendency to radically simplify pretty much everything...guess that's just human nature.) Anyway, there are so many unknowns when it comes to what Canon can or cannot do, will or will not do, and the reasons behind those decisions. It's a massively complex system. Only Canon's executives have a handle on it, and even then, Canon's executives delegate the bulk of that understanding to various underling groups and legal groups to deal with the specifics. We can't know why Canon hasn't done something. Trying to make up reasons why is just an exercise in futility. When you take it as far as AvTvM did, it just gets inane, fabricated stories based on assumption and maybe a little bit of overactive imagination, and you really begin to wonder what in the world is going on in their head.

Well, that exhausts my contribution to the debate.

Simplicity is a lie. Nothing is simple. See the complexity, and you will be sane! Later dudes. 8)

 

[Loswr]

It's also worth noting that Canon really hit a homerun with the RT system, even as it stands today. Yes, there are cheaper options out there, and there will always be people who are willing to sacrifice quality, functionality and/or reliability in favor of lower cost. There will also always be people out there who will whine and complain that the branded system is too expensive. But for a lot of people, having a system that is robust and reliable is 'priceless' – and Canon really delivered in this case.

Well, that exhausts my contribution to the debate.

Forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical about that...

 

[AvTvM]

It's also worth noting that Canon really hit a homerun with the RT system, even as it stands today.

depends what expectations you had. Compared to the age-old, limiting and not very reliable optical triggering: YES.

Compared to what I would expect from a brand-new, proprietary "flagship-priced" flash system by the market leading camera gear company (right? ) I#d rate it "so-so". Yes, it is less limiting, yes it seems to be working reliably within the stated range and yes, it finally gives group-mode in conjunction with post2012 EOS camera models (is that 3 or is it more? 5D3, 1Dx ... plus some digital rebel?). Plus some nice remote 2-way triggering effects.

But ... there are shortcomings ... as in the days past: still no 2nd curtain sync, still no no hypersync (rather the other way round with pre-2012 cameras) and no zoom-reflector control. Still no ability to include monolights in an RT-setup. Very basic backwards compatibility - even with still-current Canon speedlites [e.g. 430EX or ring-flashes].

So, in my book, they made it to first base and stopped right there. Although the ball is good and no outfielder erm competitor managed to catch it yet. Although 2nd and 3rd base are free. For whatever weird reason, Canon decided to stop right there, rather than going for a homerun and win the game. Just standing there, frozen at first base. Weird, ain't it? ;D

 

[privatebydesign]

depends what expectations you had. Compared to the age-old, limiting and not very reliable optical triggering: YES.

Compared to what I would expect from a brand-new, proprietary "flagship-priced" flash system by the market leading camera gear company (right? ) I#d rate it "so-so". Yes, it is less limiting, yes it seems to be working reliably within the stated range and yes, it finally gives group-mode in conjunction with post2012 EOS camera models (is that 3 or is it more? 5D3, 1Dx ... plus some digital rebel?). Plus some nice remote 2-way triggering effects.

But ... there are shortcomings ... as in the days past: still no 2nd curtain sync, still no no hypersync (rather the other way round with pre-2012 cameras) and no zoom-reflector control. Still no ability to include monolights in an RT-setup. Very basic backwards compatibility - even with still-current Canon speedlites [e.g. 430EX or ring-flashes].

So, in my book, they made it to first base and stopped right there. Although the ball is good and no outfielder erm competitor managed to catch it yet. Although 2nd and 3rd base are free. For whatever weird reason, Canon decided to stop right there, rather than going for a homerun and win the game. Just standing there, frozen at first base. Weird, ain't it? ;D

It is still flag shipped priced at over $100 less than the vastly less well specced Nikon flag ship.

As for your shortcomings, I always ask people who moan about lack of remote second curtain sync to provide a situation where not having it ruins their image, I have never had one image posted as an accurate illustration. HSS works for all cameras via the RT system. Remote zoom might have some limited use to some shooters, I wouldn't have minded if it was included but have lost no sleep, or real time on the ground, as it isn't. A studio strobe trigger, that is the magic iPod Touch to iPhone box, never going to happen from Canon, it is not in their interests, mind you there are various ways of integrating 600's into a mixed studio light environment, using the studio strobes optical triggers would be my first thought, but there are many other routes. Get off the limited backwards compatibility loop, the 600 is 100% backwards compatible with every EX ever made. The ST-E3-RT is an RT, it was only designed to work with the RT system, if you want an optical controller for your 600 and 430 or macro flash setup use an ST-E2, how hard is that?

Not weird at all, the RT system is the best flash system on the planet. That you are too small minded to see the good for concentrating on the incorrectly reported, or misguided, bad is your loss, not mine.

 

[Loswr]

It's also worth noting that Canon really hit a homerun with the RT system, even as it stands today.

depends what expectations you had. Compared to the age-old, limiting and not very reliable optical triggering: YES.

Compared to what I would expect from a brand-new, proprietary "flagship-priced" flash system by the market leading camera gear company (right? ) I#d rate it "so-so".

Well, I guess we all know about unrealistic expectations. Compared to what's out there on the market, I'd expect it to be far better - and it is.

PocketWizard? E-TTL, HSS, and monolight capability, sure...when you can get the damn things to work. Remote power control? Within a limited range, yes - and very easy to make those changes, a real plus. But, if you need to connect everything in a specific order, turn the power switches on in a specific order, stand on your left foot chanting a mantra and it needs to be a Tuesday with a full moon in the sky to get the setup to work, and oh god whatever you do don't turn a flash off to change the batteries or else you're back to square one, except you need to stand on your right foot that time…well, the PW system doesn't exactly set a high bar for reliability, does it?

Cactus/Vello/YN 'dumb' triggers? Well, at least they're cheap…and they're reliable. But they're 'dumb' for a reason - having to climb up a ladder to change the power setting on a hair light isn't that fun, to give one example.

Phottix Odin? Probably the best 3rd party alternative available right now, but not better than the Canon RT system, just cheaper - and it's pretty unsurprising that a 3rd party alternative would be cheaper. If you need >3 groups, the Odin is certainly not better. The only real advantage is if you want to change the head zoom remotely, I'm still not sure why you'd want to do that (well, yes, I can think of reasons to want to, but many people don't realize that a consequence of zooming the head tighter than 50mm is patterned light if you're using bare flash - a grid or snoot will serve you better for creative use). A given modifier will have an optimal zoom setting, and once you've determined that, you're not going to change it unless you're changing the modifier, and unless you have a robotic assistant, you're not doing that by remote control.

I need to modify my earlier statement - not only will there always be people who will whine and complain that the branded system is too expensive, there will also always be people who will whine and complain because a system isn't perfect for their personal needs, and claim it fails to meet their expectations as if the manufacturer should have designed it specifically for them.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

It's also worth noting that Canon really hit a homerun with the RT system, even as it stands today.

depends what expectations you had. Compared to the age-old, limiting and not very reliable optical triggering: YES.

Compared to what I would expect from a brand-new, proprietary "flagship-priced" flash system by the market leading camera gear company (right? ) I#d rate it "so-so". Yes, it is less limiting, yes it seems to be working reliably within the stated range and yes, it finally gives group-mode in conjunction with post2012 EOS camera models (is that 3 or is it more? 5D3, 1Dx ... plus some digital rebel?). Plus some nice remote 2-way triggering effects.

But ... there are shortcomings ... as in the days past: still no 2nd curtain sync, still no no hypersync (rather the other way round with pre-2012 cameras) and no zoom-reflector control. Still no ability to include monolights in an RT-setup. Very basic backwards compatibility - even with still-current Canon speedlites [e.g. 430EX or ring-flashes].

So, in my book, they made it to first base and stopped right there. Although the ball is good and no outfielder erm competitor managed to catch it yet. Although 2nd and 3rd base are free. For whatever weird reason, Canon decided to stop right there, rather than going for a homerun and win the game. Just standing there, frozen at first base. Weird, ain't it? ;D

WOW...so other than the Odin system, and I think radio poppers which are both a bit pricey (I think PW does a system that offers high speed sync and 2nd curtain, but that system is pricey too), there isn't much that does offer that!

Optical trigger, yeah, it does suck, no arguments there. But for about $60 (cactus v5) you can use triggers which are reliable! Of course your using manual settings with these triggers. But they work! As with all things in photography, you make compromises unless you have an unlimited budget.

One last thing regarding sync speed....

why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's???? I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low? And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera. shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?

 

[Loswr]

why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's???? I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low? And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera. shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?

The mirror is gone, but the mechanical shutter is still there…and it's the shutter that imposes the Xsync limitation (shortest duration where the sensor is completely exposed - above Xsync both curtains are traveling across the sensor in a 'rolling' slit).

 

[CarlTN]

The 5D 3 really is nothing more than a 5D 2 with - at long last - a decent af-system in it. Hardly any improvement in IQ and resolution.

The 5DII delivered excellent IQ and resolution, the only real lacking features were AF performance and perhaps frame rate. The 5DIII dramatically improved AF and also improved fps, weather sealing, etc.

The 5D 3 is really dated in every respect.

Sure, that's why it's selling so poorly, and all those 'modern' cameras in that class are outselling it. Except...they're not.

The 6D further improved on the 5D2, yet you don't give it any respect. You're biased, that's all.

 

[danimon]

it's 2014 already and yet we haven't seen any pro DSLR with built in SSD..

since it's been rumored that nikon 4s will have 4k video capability, all i want from canon is another line of DSLR that featuring:
- >256GB SSD storage
- 3,2 inch articulated screen
- 60fps uncompressed fullHD +120fps compressed FullHD (adding 30fps 4k video would be generous)
- high capacity battery

all the cinema goodness in a standard DSLR body

just pack it with 20-ish mp high sensitivity sensor, and sell it under $4k

 

[AvTvM]

why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's???? I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low? And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera. shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?

The mirror is gone, but the mechanical shutter is still there…and it's the shutter that imposes the Xsync limitation (shortest duration where the sensor is completely exposed - above Xsync both curtains are traveling across the sensor in a 'rolling' slit).

exactly.

Aside from the "generic problem" of a mechanical shutter, Sony's greedy and shortsighted (!) choice of A) whimpy battery and B) crappy mechanical shutter unit [noise, lots of vibration, bad X-sync] for the A7R seriously degrades what would otherwise have been a truely amazing camera. Unfortunately. Shutter situation in A7 is somewhat better since it has an electronic "first curtain" and 1/250s X-sync as opposed to only 1/160s for A7R.

Much shorter X-sync times are one of the reasons why I am clamoring for true "solid state" mirrorless cameras, with "no moving parts whatsoever" inside.

see also: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19224.msg364739#msg364739

 

[Loswr]

The 6D further improved on the 5D2, yet you don't give it any respect. You're biased, that's all.

Sure, it further improved the IQ a bit, which was already excellent on the 5DII. It improved the metering, too. It didn't significantly improve the AF or frame rate, which were the 5DII's biggest deficits. The 6D has a less robust shutter with a 1-stop lower max speed, slower Xsync, and a shorter rated lifespan. The 6D has a substantially longer shutter lag. So considering IQ only, the 6D improved on the 5DII, but overall it's a mixed bag. The 5DIII improved on the 5DII in pretty much every way. At least on Amazon (not that it means much) the 5DIII is outselling the 6D.

The 6D's biggest 'feature' is its lower cost.

Of course, AvTvM might say the 6D is not 'dated' because it has WiFi. Nice if you want to upload your JPGs to Facebook on the fly, I suppose. I thought it would be great for remote triggering, but someone pointed out that after a short time the connection drops, and you have to physically access the 6D to reactivate the link - that severely limits the utility, IMO (the WFT options for other bodies aren't limited in that way, but you pay a big premium for them).

 

[MLfan3]

why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's???? I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low? And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera. shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?

The mirror is gone, but the mechanical shutter is still there…and it's the shutter that imposes the Xsync limitation (shortest duration where the sensor is completely exposed - above Xsync both curtains are traveling across the sensor in a 'rolling' slit).

exactly.

Aside from the "generic problem" of a mechanical shutter, Sony's greedy and shortsighted (!) choice of A) whimpy battery and B) crappy mechanical shutter unit [noise, lots of vibration, bad X-sync] for the A7R seriously degrades what would otherwise have been a truely amazing camera. Unfortunately. Shutter situation in A7 is somewhat better since it has an electronic "first curtain" and 1/250s X-sync as opposed to only 1/160s for A7R.

Much shorter X-sync times are one of the reasons why I am clamoring for true "solid state" mirrorless cameras, with "no moving parts whatsoever" inside.

see also: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19224.msg364739#msg364739

Exactly, the shutter issue and the slow flash sync speed of the A7R really hurt what would otherwise have been a truly amazing pocket camera.
This thing shouldn't have been rushed , after all , not many of us want to be beta testers for Sony or Samsung or whatever.

 

[flowers]

it's 2014 already and yet we haven't seen any pro DSLR with built in SSD..

since it's been rumored that nikon 4s will have 4k video capability, all i want from canon is another line of DSLR that featuring:
- >256GB SSD storage
- 3,2 inch articulated screen
- 60fps uncompressed fullHD +120fps compressed FullHD (adding 30fps 4k video would be generous)
- high capacity battery

all the cinema goodness in a standard DSLR body

just pack it with 20-ish mp high sensitivity sensor, and sell it under $4k

Though 4K->2K video always looks better than native 2K, 2K editing and 2K final result are plenty. Did you know over 90% of movies today are filmed on film that is smaller than an FF sensor or recorded by a sensor that is smaller than an aps-c sensor, and in the case of film telecined at about 3K and edited in about 2.5K and then shown in the cinema at 2K? 4K is not necessary for making a movie, it's just the latest hype.

 

[AvTvM]

The 6D further improved on the 5D2, yet you don't give it any respect. You're biased, that's all.

Sure, it further improved the IQ a bit, which was already excellent on the 5DII. It improved the metering, too. It didn't significantly improve the AF or frame rate, which were the 5DII's biggest deficits. The 6D has a less robust shutter with a 1-stop lower max speed, slower Xsync, and a shorter rated lifespan. The 6D has a substantially longer shutter lag. So considering IQ only, the 6D improved on the 5DII, but overall it's a mixed bag. The 5DIII improved on the 5DII in pretty much every way. At least on Amazon (not that it means much) the 5DIII is outselling the 6D.

The 6D's biggest 'feature' is its lower cost.

Of course, AvTvM might say the 6D is not 'dated' because it has WiFi. Nice if you want to upload your JPGs to Facebook on the fly, I suppose. I thought it would be great for remote triggering, but someone pointed out that after a short time the connection drops, and you have to physically access the 6D to reactivate the link - that severely limits the utility, IMO (the WFT options for other bodies aren't limited in that way, but you pay a big premium for them).

I consider
* 5D III = 5D IIN
* 6D = 5D II v1.1


6D basically is a FF digital rebel to me. Marekting crippled product with a reasonable sensor and Wifi. About equally bad as Nikon D610, but better than D600, since it did not do splatter movies with its mirror.

 

[jrista]

The 6D further improved on the 5D2, yet you don't give it any respect. You're biased, that's all.

Sure, it further improved the IQ a bit, which was already excellent on the 5DII. It improved the metering, too. It didn't significantly improve the AF or frame rate, which were the 5DII's biggest deficits. The 6D has a less robust shutter with a 1-stop lower max speed, slower Xsync, and a shorter rated lifespan. The 6D has a substantially longer shutter lag. So considering IQ only, the 6D improved on the 5DII, but overall it's a mixed bag. The 5DIII improved on the 5DII in pretty much every way. At least on Amazon (not that it means much) the 5DIII is outselling the 6D.

The 6D's biggest 'feature' is its lower cost.

Of course, AvTvM might say the 6D is not 'dated' because it has WiFi. Nice if you want to upload your JPGs to Facebook on the fly, I suppose. I thought it would be great for remote triggering, but someone pointed out that after a short time the connection drops, and you have to physically access the 6D to reactivate the link - that severely limits the utility, IMO (the WFT options for other bodies aren't limited in that way, but you pay a big premium for them).

I consider
* 5D III = 5D IIN
* 6D = 5D II v1.1


6D basically is a FF digital rebel to me. Marekting crippled product with a reasonable sensor and Wifi. About equally bad as Nikon D610, but better than D600, since it did not do splatter movies with its mirror.

LOL. OMG this is such an unmitigated amount of bias against the 5D III. The 1D IIn was a MINOR update to the 1D II. The 1D IIn was mostly the same, with literally the same sensor, af system, same digic, etc. The ONLY changes with the n were firmware...picture styles...and a better LCD screen. You do realize that, right?

Trying to make it seem as though the 5D III is basically a 5D IIn is exceptionally naive and ignores a hell of a lot of facts. The 5D III was a massive upgrade compared to the 1D II -> 1D IIn update. It got an entirely NEW sensor that offered significant improvements in IQ (especially at high ISO), it got a new DIGIC chip, it got a radical update in AF system, it was the first non-1D body to get f/8 AF, it got a significant upgrade in metering sensor, it got the much-needed ergonomic and button placement upgrade, it got a weather sealing upgrade, it got a massive firmware update (akin to the 1D X firmware, which is WORLDS better than what the 5D II had), and a hell of a lot more!!!!

Saying the 5D III is like a 5D IIn is completely ignoring ALL of the facts. Man, you know, you indicated in a response to me on another thread not long ago that you wanted me to show you some more respect. I'm happy to do so...but AvTvM...you really gotta DESERVE it. Saying crap like the 5D III is just a 5D IIn doesn't help, at all, in the respect department. It isn't as bad as the spinhappy tiraid against Canon as a greedy, selfish, and dumb company that is missing all it's opportunities (as if you actually know anything about it), but it's still dishonest. It speaks to a considerable level of either naiveté (i.e. you really just DON'T know what your talking about), or you do know what your talking about and it speaks to someone who is trying to pull a fast one on unsuspecting readers. Neither are very respectable.

I can't respect the way you try to twist and convolute the facts. Sorry, but seriously...if you want to make a viable, cogent argument that other readers here on the forum will respect, don't go around making bullsh*t claims like "The 5D III is a minor upgrade, barely qualifies as a 5D IIn." That's a bold faced LIE! I KNOW you know that! And we aren't talking about a difference of opinion here...were talking about concrete facts. Verifiable, measurable differences in relative terms. The 5D III is not akin to a 5D IIn based on the actual, real-world, factual differences between a 1D IIn and the 1D II. The latter was a pitiful update, involving minor firmware and very minor hardware changes. The former was a very significant, measurably meaningful update involving massive changes in both firmware and hardware.

Facts, bud. I'll respect you if you stick to the facts. :-\

 

[Sporgon]

The 6D further improved on the 5D2, yet you don't give it any respect. You're biased, that's all.

Sure, it further improved the IQ a bit, which was already excellent on the 5DII. It improved the metering, too. It didn't significantly improve the AF or frame rate, which were the 5DII's biggest deficits. The 6D has a less robust shutter with a 1-stop lower max speed, slower Xsync, and a shorter rated lifespan. The 6D has a substantially longer shutter lag. So considering IQ only, the 6D improved on the 5DII, but overall it's a mixed bag. The 5DIII improved on the 5DII in pretty much every way. At least on Amazon (not that it means much) the 5DIII is outselling the 6D.

The 6D's biggest 'feature' is its lower cost.

Of course, AvTvM might say the 6D is not 'dated' because it has WiFi. Nice if you want to upload your JPGs to Facebook on the fly, I suppose. I thought it would be great for remote triggering, but someone pointed out that after a short time the connection drops, and you have to physically access the 6D to reactivate the link - that severely limits the utility, IMO (the WFT options for other bodies aren't limited in that way, but you pay a big premium for them).

I consider
* 5D III = 5D IIN
* 6D = 5D II v1.1


6D basically is a FF digital rebel to me. Marekting crippled product with a reasonable sensor and Wifi. About equally bad as Nikon D610, but better than D600, since it did not do splatter movies with its mirror.

You certainly have a talent; for losing credibility.

With the exception of the 5Dmkiii AF system, which you acknowledge, your premise for considering the camera to be a '5Dmkiin' is clearly based upon the fact that it has a dslr form and a sensor of about 20mp.

Canon answered all those users who wanted a fully 'professional grade' 5D mkii and didn't want the cost and bulk of a 1Ds mkiii. Quite apart from the AF, speed, dual cards, shutter durability, stainless steel bottom plate, transmissive lcd display, improved build and weather sealing, the sensor in the mkiii is a substantial improvement over the mkii at high high ISOs, but also has subtle improvements in total graduation and graduation to high and low lights, which give it ( and the other latest generation FF cameras) much more of a film like quality.

Looking at the sales success and feed back from users of the mkiii Canon has clearly produced the finest general purpose dslr of the current era.

However as it looks like a mkii, and the sensor is more or less the same mp, I suppose there will be those, like yourself, who think it's a mkiin, but then there are those who think the moon's made of cheese.

You've also contradicted yourself with the 6D. In one sentence you call it a '5D mkii v1.1', and in the next paragraph a FF rebel.

The 6D actually does not feel like a 5D at all; it has its own characteristics. It's a fine camera for the market that it is aimed at.

 

[Loswr]

6D basically is a FF digital rebel to me. Marekting crippled product with a reasonable sensor and Wifi.

Oh dear, that was a grave mistake. As soon as he reads this, mild-mannered CarlTN will head for the nearest phone booth or broom closet to turn himself into SuperCarl and take you down like General Zod.

...and rightfully so. While the sensor is only part of the camera, the 6D does offer the best sensor IQ Canon has today outside the ~$7K 1D X (and at ISO 100, the 6D has slightly more DR than the 1D X). I stated that the shutter is less robust, but I bet many 6D owners never will never exceed 100K shots, need faster Xsync or 1/8000 s for shooting fast primes wide open in daylight. Importantly, the 6D is substantially cheaper than the 5DII was, making that level of image quality much more affordable.

 

[Woody]

Wow, I'm enjoying the fireworks here! ;D

Anyway, back to the topic on hand. I have no doubt Canon will answer the D4s (which is actually a rather minor update based on the rumored specs). I am more curious if Canon has a high mp, high DR answer in a moderately sized body like the D800.

 

[jrista]

Wow, I'm enjoying the fireworks here! ;D

Anyway, back to the topic on hand. I have no doubt Canon will answer the D4s (which is actually a rather minor update based on the rumored specs). I am more curious if Canon has a high mp, high DR answer in a moderately sized body like the D800.

HOW will they answer the D4s, though? I mean, is the 1D X not already THE answer? I find it highly doubtful that Canon would design, build, test, and release a successor to the wildly successful 1D X, which is already a far superior tool, just because of the minor updates coming in the D4s.

That's almost like a car manufacturer building an entirely new car only a few months after they put it on the market because their rival put prettier rims on their model, when the first car manufacturer already had kick-ass rims and was already selling the car like hotcakes.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

6D basically is a FF digital rebel to me. Marekting crippled product with a reasonable sensor and Wifi.

Oh dear, that was a grave mistake. As soon as he reads this, mild-mannered CarlTN will head for the nearest phone booth or broom closet to turn himself into SuperCarl and take you down like General Zod.

...and rightfully so. While the sensor is only part of the camera, the 6D does offer the best sensor IQ Canon has today outside the ~$7K 1D X (and at ISO 100, the 6D has slightly more DR than the 1D X). I stated that the shutter is less robust, but I bet many 6D owners never will never exceed 100K shots, need faster Xsync or 1/8000 s for shooting fast primes wide open in daylight. Importantly, the 6D is substantially cheaper than the 5DII was, making that level of image quality much more affordable.

LOL at that pic...

In practice I have found the 6d to be a way more capable camera than the specs say and many reviews say. I use it side by side with a 5d3, and depending on what and where and I'm shooting it's rare that I absolutely need the 5d3 to get the shot the way i want it. Sometimes even, in challenging low light like at a reception, if i am not using a flash on cam the 6d has a better hit rate with focus using that center point than any point with the 5d3.

But, none of what I say in on the matter will make much difference - to those that are rational they've already heard me say exactly what I just said and many do have similar experiences with the 6d. For action, yeah, it's not the best option. But for most other things it's a great little body.

but in your eyes (AvTvM), both of these bodies are paper weights, because they have mirrors.

Lastly, I kind of feel like you may be one of those people that's never happy. I keep seeing you posting these demand lists, and the list keeps growing. Canon could produce a mirrorless 1dx right now priced at 5d3 prices and you'd still complain about it (ohhhh its too large, or, it where is the tilt screen...)