Will the suggested 5d III specs satisfy your photograpy needs?

[psolberg]

So, adding video to my still camera now adds a $1000 premium for something I don't need or want.

the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point. I would be surprise if the video specs on this camera aren't a carbon copy of the 1DX. These cameras are returning to focus on stills and the video guys will go their own way.

 

[Neeneko]

the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point. I would be surprise if the video specs on this camera aren't a carbon copy of the 1DX. These cameras are returning to focus on stills and the video guys will go their own way.

Sadly I suspect Canon marketing has not caught on to this yet. Right now they seem to have a 'video in everything' requirement, as does Nikon. The only companies that are not investing in video are the MF camera makers since their customers are not even vaguely interested, thus the increased R&D/manufacturing costs are not worth it.

I would not be surpised if, in another generation, Canon starts making still cameras again after the 'multimedia' thing looses steam and people go back to dedicated devices on the medium end.

 

[Actionpix]

Like with the previous 5D and 5D II I am absolutely not impressed. Looking at the years between the models I think the improvement is not very convincing. (Note! This is only my opinion and no more.) I, for myself, still very much would like a 45MP camera (FF) with ISO starting at 25 or eventually 50. For my action shots I very often just have to much light to really show the action. I also would like more detail in the name of driver or pilot on the fuselage, as this is what matters to them. Having lenses of $10.000 and no camera to let these lenses excel is frustrating. I do not care for video or high iso. Just give me more pixels and FF for shallower DoF.

 

[psolberg]

the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point. I would be surprise if the video specs on this camera aren't a carbon copy of the 1DX. These cameras are returning to focus on stills and the video guys will go their own way.

Sadly I suspect Canon marketing has not caught on to this yet. Right now they seem to have a 'video in everything' requirement, as does Nikon. The only companies that are not investing in video are the MF camera makers since their customers are not even vaguely interested, thus the increased R&D/manufacturing costs are not worth it.

I would not be surpised if, in another generation, Canon starts making still cameras again after the 'multimedia' thing looses steam and people go back to dedicated devices on the medium end.

I hope so. I'm sure video will remain built in forever but hopefuly they'll focus on making better still images. We're still shooting with sync speed limiting physical shutters, prisms, darn noisy slapping mirrors, and same old point based AF. And all I hear is 4K, 4K, 4K. Jez, I haven't even seen a freaking 4K tv in my life or a tv channel that has that. Meanwhile I have to put up with 250ms sync speed because nobody has cared to get rid of the noisy shutter. All the RD is video video.

 

[dtaylor]

Nope.

* Better AF and faster fps are welcome improvements, but it doesn't have the MP to make up for the loss of crop factor which is important for my action shots. So it can't help there.

* For landscapes it doesn't have any more resolution than the current 5D2. If I can't tell the difference in 24" landscape prints between the current 5D2 and my 7D, then why would I be able to tell with a 5D3? Upgrading my crop UWA glass to FF glass would be a substantial investment and would only be worth it if I can get significantly more resolution for larger, more detailed landscape prints.

I don't begin to understand Canon's reasoning here. It's like they positioned the 5D3 closer to the 1Dx and further away from the landscape / studio / wedding camera it's supposed to be. They're going to cannibalize their own 1Dx sales on one end, while Nikon eats into their sales on the other with the D800. And I have to wonder: how many 5D2 users will consider upgrading? 5D2 AF is a sore spot, but for many the center point works good enough to get the job done. Are they really going to drop $3k for an AF update?

I don't have money burning a whole in my pocket right now, so I'll sit tight with my 7D for the moment. But if Canon doesn't have an answer for the D800 this year, there's a good chance I will be adding Nikon to my lineup.

Canon's crop bodies all look good against the competition right now. But Canon seems to be falling behind in FF even though they were the first ones there.

 

[kenraw]

Before the D800 was announced everyone want no more than 18mp in the 5dIII as this was the " sweet spot "
Now all of a sudden 22mp isn't good enough????? What are you shooting and how big do you want to print?
If you people now need huge mp fot their work how were they managing with a measley 21mp?

I think it's simple. If all you are interested in is 36mp buy a Nikon D800 who cares its only as camera just get one.

For me 22mp is easlily enough. I currently use 7D's for weddings and most peole would be surprised how well the images print at 24" x 36" at iso 1600. Actually printing gives a totally differnent result than looking at your images at 100% on your monitor that cant display the true resolution.

The reason I will be upgrading immediately to the 5dmk3 is for better noise so I can shoot at 6400 or maybe above and to give me that extra shallow DOF. If it was 36mp I don't think I'd be too happy with 75mb raw files.
If you run the D800's sample images through plugins in CS5 there is a big difference in the time it takes to process them so god only knows what it will be like handling 2000 raw images from a wedding. My pc would go into meltdown and I've got a high spec machine.
I think canon are going to announce a high mp camera anyway aswell so if u need to stick with your glass just hold out a bit a longer, the 5d2 and 7d are still awesome cameras anyway.

The new one one in my opinion will be the 5dx and the high mp one could have a different model numer altogether.

And one last thing. Canon hasn't actually announced the spec's or price anyway so It could still shatter all our dreams :'(

 

[Radiating]

As others have said, it doesn't make sense to bring this highly anticipated camera to market without major improvments.

I think the most dramatic improvement we'll see is in noise. The 5D Mark II had some of the worst quantum efficiency (portion of photons collected) possible in a camera, it only collects 25% of the photons that strike the sensor. That number is so low that it is only equaled by medium format cameras, or some of the very very early DSLR's which only had 2-6 megapixels. Canon litelrally put one of the least advanced sensors they could make in the 5D and 5D II. It's stone age technology of the cheapest caliber. What is very possible and what I am hoping is that Canon bumps the camera to at least the "average" light gathering in it's range, if not making it the king of low noise.

At the least I'm speculating a 1 stop increase in light gathering, which is an epic difference, no more low iso noise and nikon quality dynamic range, pro grade AF and a major bump in continuous RAW shooting as well as major improvements in video. This would pretty much make it the go-to camera for practically anything. THE killer app - a 22 mp D3s in other words.


I'm also speculating that Canon will then release another 5D like camera with 30-50 megapixels which will have a 'soviet era' sensor design.

If you take a 5D III with the specs I outlined, a 5DX with extreme resolution but poor performance otherwise and the 1DX you have the best bodies out there in this segment.

If the 5D III is anything like I'm speculating it will be perfect for most photographer's needs including my own.

 

[ghstark]

As a Pro Wedding & Portrait Photographer i think 22mp is ok as long as it has twin card slots(for me this is the most important) and improved AF.Most of us want great low light quality and i can't see the d800 being as good as a 22mp 5d mk3 in low light.

 

[Quasimodo]

I am sure that whatever specs would leak or be announced, there will be many who are dissatisfied. Many of you and I are focusing on specs, and we get worked up about them. However, I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. I have the Canon Lens book, and looking at some of the classic old pictures taken there one is struck that these photographers were stuck with way worse equipment than we have at our disposal today. I believe that if these specs does not satisfy your needs, you should invest in a Leica or Hasselblad. On the other hand, few people are skilled enough as photographers to outgrow the current Canon high end cameras.

Just a humble thought...

 

[Loswr]

I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.

A simple rangefinder camera and a 50mm lens were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. Glass plates in a large, cumbersome view camera were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.

Having said that, I like tools that make what I do easier and more enjoyable.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point.

This argument would have sounded reasonable in 2007, not 2012. The 5DII already proved that top of the line IQ can be delivered for $3K back in '08. There is absolutely no technical reason that suggests that they aren't able to do so now as well.

Secondly, the idea that video is moving to the "big boys" is misleading. The one that are moving to the big (and expensive) boys are the ones that made a name for themselves in recent years, mostly with 5DIIs and now can afford the luxuries that dedicated video cameras offer. But as they once were starting out without the possibility to drop 10k-20k on a camera rig, there are new filmmakers that cannot do that now. If Canon will "abandon" them in favor of the more grossing Cinema line, there are other manufacturers that will take their place and that will hurt Canon in the long run. At this point it seems that Panasonic is but a year or two away from unleashing a killer product which could severely hurt the Canon if they are not paying attention.

 

[Quasimodo]

I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.

True, true... It's just that there will never be THE camera that satisfies everyones needs, and I think that what we already have even before the launch of the 1DX and 5D whatever, we are already at a good thing.

BTW: Neuro I have a question for you, if you have time, but this thread is not the right one.. It's about fluorite.

A simple rangefinder camera and a 50mm lens were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. Glass plates in a large, cumbersome view camera were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.

Having said that, I like tools that make what I do easier and more enjoyable.

 

[Neeneko]

I hope so. I'm sure video will remain built in forever but hopefuly they'll focus on making better still images. We're still shooting with sync speed limiting physical shutters, prisms, darn noisy slapping mirrors, and same old point based AF. And all I hear is 4K, 4K, 4K. Jez, I haven't even seen a freaking 4K tv in my life or a tv channel that has that. Meanwhile I have to put up with 250ms sync speed because nobody has cared to get rid of the noisy shutter. All the RD is video video.

Actually, I saw someone doing a DIY camera project that used a re-purposed LCD screen as a shutter. Their idea was to get exotic aperture shapes (kinda like lensbaby) but I could easily see a similar method being used to get really fast shutter speeds. It is a pity innovation in cameras really seems to have moved off-shore.

 

[smirkypants]

As a full-frame camera it's great and I'm actually thrilled with the specs and will likely buy one. One really gets accustomed to a great AF system and whenever I used a 5D2 I always became frustrated by how 20th century it seemed. I do some event photography but it just couldn't keep up with the way I learned to love framing and shooting.

Yes it will fill my FF desires but my money-maker is the crop. Still waiting for that one. If they could they just drop a 22MP APS-H in this one, I'd buy two and take them both home to meet mommy.

 

[dadgummit]

not likely but possible

1. I have a 7d now and don't really need all 19 of the AF points so 61 seems silly (My opinion only) unless you are trying to track a dragon fly in flight or something. I would be fine with 9 or 19 af points as long as they are more sensitive (less hunting in dark/ low contrast situations) and f8 would be nice but that is probably reserved for 1D bodies only. My opinion on this is we are paying for an expensive af system I would never use.

2. Stepping from 7d to full frame it would be nice to at least be able to do a 1.6X crop and still end up with 18mp which means the camera would need to be about 29mp. 22MP would be good If and only IF the high ISO noise and DR are FAR ahead of the already excellent 5d II. In my eyes to justify $3500 this camera would have to have the same noise at ISO 3200 or 6400 as the 7D has at ISO 100 or 200.

3. FPS, I have used the 7d's 8 FPS like twice and it was kind of cool (kid sliding down a slide) but if the new camera has 6.9, 6 or even 4 that would be fine too as long as the AF keeps up.

4. Dual card slots... Good for a wedding photog but useless otherwise. If I did want dual slots I would not be excited over a second SD slot though I would want a second CF.

5. 100% Full Frame Viewfinder is EXCELLENT!! a big plus in my eyes as long as the user can change out the focus screen if they want.

6. 3.2" LCD. Bigger is better but .2" is not much different.


So in my eyes the 100% viewfinder is a plus but my purchase decision COMPLETELY relies on the utter speculation that this camera will be many stops better in High ISO noise than the 5D2 for it to justify the huge price jump.

 

[jalbfb]

Answer: Yes

 

[Loswr]

BTW: Neuro I have a question for you, if you have time, but this thread is not the right one.. It's about fluorite.

I sent you a PM (Messages tab along the top).

 

[yunusoglu]

The CR3 confirmed specs are unfortunately not enough for me to upgrade from 5D Mark II...

I'm sure the new 5 series camera will be great and if I didn't own Mark IIs, I wouldn't hesitate on the purchase but, I ask myself; what will I get in return for the $3500?

+1MP? Not worth the trouble...
Super-duper ISO performance? Don't care under studio lighting...
7fps frame rate? Irrelevant...
+0.2" LCD? No use for me...
61 points AF? I'll still be using center AF point if it had 661 AF points.

That would be $3500 spent for everything I don't need so I definitely see no point in upgrading.

Do I even consider switching to Nikon for the D800? No, not at all. I've invested too much in Canon gear to switch now. Plus, today D800 appears to look like what I need but what happens tomorrow, you never know...

I don't know if it's wishful thinking but somehow I believe that Canon will also announce a camera aiming at studio/landscape photographers, weighing heavier on the megapixels rather than low light capability and speed.

 

[zim]

Need to see the full specs and raw comparisons but potentially absolutely yes. Happy to let the street price settle and see what if anything else is released this year though so no rush decision from me.

 

[iaind]

Need to see the full specs and raw comparisons but potentially absolutely yes. Happy to let the street price settle and see what if anything else is released this year though so no rush decision from me.

Probably wont be available until Photokina so a few more months to save up. By then hopefully the photojournalists will have found all the potential faults in the 1DX and the first of many firmware updates will have been released. Why pay for the privelidge to be a guinea pig.