Donnie G: What we have here is some very clever engineering by Canon. They have managed to put some really powerful new tech into a form factor that is already familiar to anyone who has used a 1D series camera and kept that tech completely invisible, so as not to intimidate pro still shooters who might be willing to try their hand at high end movie capture for some projects. At the same time they have given the movie industry a new tool that is far better suited to run and gun and other scenarios than anything that has come before it. It's not suppose to be the perfect camera for all occasions. No camera is. Although for the well heeled still shooter it probably will come very close, and for cinema types it serves notice that along with the company's C300, C500, and their growing cinema lens line, Canon is in it for the long haul. Resistance is futile.
Darkshift, this camera wasn't made to please you, but there are several cameras that should. This is for people who want a semi-affordable 4K video camera. If you can't appreciate that, then move on and get a life. It's a great step forward for videographers who want a Hollywood look without the price tag. You may as well go complain in a Honda Automotive thread that nobody is going to use their cars to take 22MP shots with better than average DR... That's not really why Honda makes cars.
SonyA77: Canon have gone from 21mp to 22mp on FF in 4 years? Only 1MP increased? while Nikon had gone all the way to 36mp. I guess Canon is sticking to Sports and Wedding shoots while Nikon and Sony, Sports, Wedding and LANDSCAPE photography.
Come on, now all of a sudden 22mp isn't enough for landscape? Really? I'm done commenting for the year, this whole forum is hopeless... Reminds me why I rarely even read the comments.
SaltLakeGuy: Canon lost a LOT of the Photojournalist and Sports photography business when Nikon came out with their D3 and they haven't looked back. I think the 5DMkIII will appeal to mostly those that have had other versions of the 5D, but won't capture the new business for that genre like Nikon will. We'll see but that's my prediction based on what's been going on over the last few years with model changes and progress.
^ LOL, his gut feeling and a couple posters on here. Idunno they probably did though. The D3 was one of the big game changer cameras from any camp in recent years. Autofocus speed, shooting speed, high iso performance, pretty much went without competition upon release.
KlausP: Canon 5DIII a big disappointment for half the photo community and too expensive for everyone.
There are two photo camps that have somewhat divergent needs. They break roughly into the low light action shooters and the high resolution tripod shooters. Neither is right or wrong, just different needs for different types of photography. For low light, video, and action photogs, the improvements represent a desirable upgrade, at an undesirable price point. For high resolution, still work (and yes, there are plenty of pros that print big) the lack of resolution and perhaps dynamic range improvements are disappointing, to say the least. A previous poster said it right, the improvements amount to a 5D2.1 Most perplexing is the price point, particularly after Nikon released a much better speced camera for less. Unless Canon comes out soon with a high spec followup, they will have lost two sales here, one to the guy that buys my 5D2 and one to my new D800.
For those who got by "printing big" on the mkii, why is this considered a "lack of resolution"? Will they all lose their jobs now that Canon didn't let them have a 50MP camera? They will continue to get paid to do the job they've been doing just fine up until now. Don't worry about them. Why try to validate your complaints by bringing other photographer camps into the argument when you clearly do not even belong to these camps?
M Jesper: Take that, people who said they saw no reason to upgrade ;)
What if those people shoot studio with controlled lighting or outdoor landscape?... Just saying your own needs don't always match those of others. I welcome high ISO capability, but not everyone needs it, so not everyone may care to upgrade.
Peter S Carter: Hard to believe that there could be much improvement to the Mark II, but trusting Canon, I pre-ordered immediately. They have never yet failed to come thru.
@Francis Carver, Yeah, but for kids today who can't appreciate things like the tragedy of war, they are probably happy that Hitler gave them games like the Call of Duty series!
Francis Carver: On to the specs of this "new" EOS 5D wonder.....
"It can shoot 6 frames per second"Wow, only 6 fps? In the year 2012? That's nothing to write home about, is it now? Re. video, it can shoot 1080p at 24, 25, and 30 frames per second. But so could the previous Canon EOS 5D that came out 3.5 years ago, right? The new 5D cannot even do 1080p60 video -- another fatal mishap. Nor will the new 5D be able to put out uncompressed HDMI, like the Nikons will be able to do, wow!!! All you can do with the new EOS 5D is what you could with the old one -- record video only internally, not externally.
For external recording capabilities with a connected video field recorder at superior bitrates, you will need to go with the NIKON D800 or NIKON D4, correct? Giant advantage: NIKON.
Mono audio recording only -- yeah, right. I would have thought that SOMEONE at Canon must have heard of the word "stereo" by now, huh? But at least they give you a headphone jack, like the Nikons do.
I love retarded fanboys like lensberg up there. I myself shoot Nikon because when the time came, it simply had a better camera for my own needs with the d700 vs 5dmkii at the time. I still am interested in Canon which is why I read this stuff. It's ignorant to think that Canon owners are the only ones allowed to read and comment on Canon gear like they own the planet. Same for Nikon fanboys. Anyway, his rant about 5dmkii high iso being more useful than the d800's high MP marketing ploy is the exact same thing Nikon people were saying when the d700/mkii were released. Hypocrites, lol. Either way, neither camera is out so bragging on behalf of either brand for the unreleased camera's results is the epitome of "ignorant fanboy."
Also, whining that the MP is useless without "expensive" lenses means you must prefer cheap lenses. If you can afford it, Canon, Nikon or otherwise, they all cost the same for premium glass, loser.
Seeing the bird's face in the reflection only is pretty amazing. Great shot.
Unfortunately I think most of the people posting here fail to realize the potential for a camera like this. They see no further than the current product in front of them (basically a prototype.) Imagine in the future now, employing the concept behind this camera into larger SLR bodies, VIDEO, stereoscopic photo/video with unlimited depth of field, maybe an f1.8 shot with unlimited DOF, underwater stuff where light is limited, military equipment, etc. Even I can't fathom how this can change how we capture, so I wouldn't be so bold as to condemn the technology. Some people have absolutely no imagination, yet they take up a hobby or profession like photography... Then they post here on DPReview how they want technology to stop evolving just like they have.