We've had a chance to handle Canon's EOS 5D Mark III 22MP HD DSLR and have prepared a detailed preview and video. The specifications may initially look a little familiar but almost every component has been updated or improved. It gains most of its ergonomics from the EOS 7D but inherits the sophisticated 61-point AF system from the EOS-1D X. It also comes with a range of movie-focused features and promises of a 2-stop improvement in low-light performance. The camera will be available from the end of March 2012.
When all is said and done. As of today, the best-seller list on Amazon reads: - Nikon D800 - 1st Place - Canon 5D Mark III - 13th Place - Nikon D4 - 15th Place - The 1DX is not in the top 100
I guess, whatever we may think of the too many pixels and the 4FPS and so on does not make one bit of difference.
I can sort of understand there is a difference between the 5DIII and D800, but why is the 1DX not making the list. Any ideas?
Amazon has this on their site regarding the 5D MK III : "This item is in high demand and we have taken orders up to our initial allocations. We will continue to accept pre-orders and fill them as soon as additional inventory becomes available."
So sounds like they have sold their entire allocation already. Maybe people are going somewhere else to pre-order?
I like everything I see about the iii EXCEPT that it's still the same old 14-bit depth. And I'm glad to see Canon has not completely lost it's collective mind after those weird new wide angle lenses...
I don't see how 14-bit is a limitation. It offers only a slight advantage over 12-bit, and it's hard to imagine how 16-bit would make any difference. I do a lot of low-light event work and often apply substantial highlight & shadow recovery to my RAW files. Frankly, I haven't had any issues with banding, either from my ancient 12-bit 1DII or 1DsII or the 14-bit 40D bodies I had before. For my purposes, the added file size of 16-bit would just be a burden. An extra stop of sensitivity is worth far more to me.
Most of us has never held this 5DMkIII in our hands yet, I would like to see what the pictures that comes out of this will look like on my screen. How different the images I take will look with all these mega-points and mega-pixels and mega mega... Does the Lamborghini really make you a better driver?
I switched from a 5D2 to a 1Ds3 because the 5D2 had poor AF and the less than 100% Viewfinder bothered me. Otherwise, the images were excellent. Now the 5D3 addresses all my concerns and it feels more like an upgraded 1Ds3 than the 1Dx which feels more like an upgraded 1D4 with FF.
The reason why I picked Canon over Nikon was Nikon didn't have a FF camera at the time. One other reason why I like using a Canon is the ability to use Nikon glass which is to me the best of both worlds. The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 is amazing. Also, Canon develops and makes their own sensors while Nikon depends on others. This could be why Canon charges more because R&D is not cheap.
Canon always had better AF until 1D3 where they went faster but lost accuracy. This fiasco hurt Canon and gave Nikon an opportunity to capitalize. The 7D's AF changed all that and the improved version is found in the 1Dx and now the 5D3.
I hope a lot of people dislike the new 5D3 so that I am in a shorter queue to get one.
hmm when the 7d came out, a lot of nikon users were dissing it because it apparently had too many mpixels compared to nikons 12mp apsc sensors. now the d800 comes out with its 36mp sensor and (shock horror) the same ppl are dissing the 1dx/5dmk3 for having too few mpixels.
You are so right, many people could not believe why a DSLR should have more that 12 megapixels. Lots of people complained about the large file sizes of Canon, so is the Nikon files any smaller?
The issue here is everyone wants to feel like their camera is the best. They don't want to think that maybe they picked the wrong brand or that they could be using something better. So they make up reason why their camera is still better the the new one. The megapixels are the most obvious differnce most of the time so that is the part they focus on.
How is the D800 better than this? The 5DmkIII has better high ISO performance, and faster shooting rate. What the D800 has going for it is the higher pixel count, but it has to be seen whether this translate in any higher effective resolution as measured in lp/mm. With such tiny photo sites only the sharpest primes will likely be able to achieve decent pixel level sharpness in the center of the image (see Canon's 7D which has the same pixel density, for comparison), and the borders will be soft no matter what. The D800 can be a good cheap studio camera (but for true 36 Mpixel you'll have to go medium format anyway), but the 5DmkIII seems more versatile and better all-rounder.
I doubt anyone who buys d800 will attach cheap zoom to it. Take a look at the first D800E sample from nikon website , does not look very soft in the corners.. It is also not true that 7D has the same pixel density - 22.3 X 14.9mm sensor hosting 18 mega pixels, sensor is 332.27mm squared, pixel Pitch is 4.3 microns, D800 - 24 X 35.9mm sensor hosting 36.3 mega pixels, sensor is 861.6mm squared, pixel Pitch is 4.88 microns. Everyone chooses products for their needs and likings, there is no same better and worse for all people. Enjoy 5dmkIII!
as a nikon user i totally agree.. i think the only thing the D800 has going for it is the D800E model w/ out the AA filter.. but we'll all have to see how its used in the real world of shooting.. the only gripe i have about the 5D mark III is that its $500 buckos more than the D800. >_< $3500 man! lol. Im going to get the Oly OM-D E-M5 to use for a lot of work in the nightclub/nightlife world in the meantime, looks really promising. :)
Nikon has rather fast face detection autofocus in video mode. That what I need. 36Mpx is also great! Nikon D800 is the first Nikon camera which I want much more then Canon. Thou this new Canon has some advantages, certanly. But I need fine autofocus in video.
I was hoping for so much more... I have a MkII and this does not seem that revolutionary. This is an evolution at best. The MkII should have had a more advanced AF system to begin with and things like more programmable bracketing shots should be offered as a firmware update to MkII users. I am happy to see that the megapixel count was not raised as I prefer low noise over pixels. What I can't figure out is why Canon in it's infinite wisdom can't put a swivel LCD on there and for a camera that supposedly is being marketed for video. You can put it on a 60D but not on a MkIII. Boo....
Not so long ago, there was a big outcry from some people who could not think why a DSLR should have a video function, let alone a swivel LCD on it. Canon's 60 D certainly prompted Nikon to use it on more of its DLSR's
You confuse me Trevor....on one hand you complain that the 5D3 is an 'evolution at best', but that you are happy with the 22mp count. This camera is light-years ahead of the 5D2....pro AF in a small body...what all of us have been asking for....and they kept the sensor to 22mp like you wanted, so what exactly is the problem??? A swivel screen...that's all you have to complain about??
then you should totally stick with your 5D mark II.. I think people are so surrounded on hype that they feel they HAVE to upgrade when something new comes out.. it is an evolution brotha, especially with technology nowadays.. look at how far its advanced, its not as night and day as it once was. 5D mark II is a great camera, id stick with it a few more years, maybe another 2 or until it breaks, then get the mark III. just a little thought. :)
I agree - for me, the articulated LCD is a must-have, for still-shots from awkward angles (in crowds or unfriendly lighting situations). I have not yet used my 60D for serious video but it is nice to know it is available.
Looking at the Showcases > Images Portfolio on the CPN website (http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii.do) is a powerful lure to a 5D Mk III body as a FF, second camera. I especially like the in-camera HDR and multiple-exposure capability. But I wish it had a "swivel LCD", especially for the asking price.
I am a great believer in in Canon. After all remember the company that gave us fast autofocus and the 5D MKII. Nikon has been trying to play catchup for a long time. Although I think the 5DIII is a damp squib, I am more than convinced that Canon has something awesome up its sleeve. Remember that they had the tsunami to deal with.
Anyone remember Grumpy? A famous Nikon shooter, he finally started looking at scans with his glasses on. His online rants against Nikon's slow and inaccurate AF were both hilarious and infamous. Too bad he had to take them down.
I don't think it has any relation to the tsunami/quake. Cameras and lenses are small pocket money for Canon. Their big business are corporate printers, photo copying machines, big tv cameras.
True. And even with all that other stuff--(January 30): Canon Inc. (7751) said its president will step down after the world’s largest camera maker forecast profit will increase by less than 1 percent for a second straight year. President and Chief Operating Officer Tsuneji Uchida, 70, will leave both posts effective March 29 and be replaced by Chairman Fujio Mitarai, 76, the Tokyo-based company said in a statement.
A tsunami has nothing to do with this exaggerated price. The philosophy of Canon is a stupid philosophy. The technicians do not matter. The managers of Canon do not understand ANYTHING, make huge mistakes. The managers of Canon killing the technology of Canon. The strategy of Canon is stupid. Canon's engineers build good Cameras, but manager of Canon kill that technology in the name of Money. Managers of the Canon makes two mistakes: 1: they destroy the technology of Canon. 2: they taking pictures and put them online as Canon sample images!
Prices are set by marketing departments, based on what they project persons will be willing and able to pay. All successful companies maximize earnings for their shareholders in this way. They set prices high at the start of a new product release to capture those buyers who can afford to and will pay. They gradually reduce as necessary to attract incremental buyers at the lower price point. They continue to do this until if they lowered the price any further they would begin to lose money on each item sold.
Does anyone know if the relative price increase is due parts shortages or factory issues from the recent disasters? It seems unusual that the initial MSRP is significantly higher than the previous models' launch price.
canon didnt make enough money last quarter so they had to raise prices. thats not that hard to figure out. pros will pay and amateurs wont. thats good for me. uncle bob does not need a 5diii. once they make some money they will come back down. cameras are expensive to make. sometimes nikons cost more sometimes canons do.
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?
LOL, I am coming over to Canon from Nikon specifically because of the huge disappointment with the D800 :) Download the technical guide to the D800 and it quickly becomes that it is a studio/tripod camera, with a high risk of blurring if shooting hand held. I mean to say, they even recommend taking pictures while in Live View to stop mirror slap and the resultant blur.
Add to this the horrible 4FPS and dismal low-light ability and you have a camera that is anything but general purpose. This left me the decision of either spending $6K on a D4 or moving over to Canon after years with Nikon if the 5D MK3 specs were more encouraging.
You say there are two camps, but I think there are 3. 1) Specialist low light, high frame rate (1D X, D4) 2) Specialist high MP (D800, D800E) 3) Generalist that give a bit of both. I see the 5D MK3 filling this role.
The 5D MK3 is an excellent choice for the vast majority of existing D700 users that are unimpressed with the D800.
@EvilTed: The D800 will have no more magical powers to ruin shots that employ poor technique than the 5DmkIII, or even the D700 for that matter. If you wouldn't see effects of poor technique at 22mp or 12mp, you won't see them on the D800 when down-sampling images to those resolutions. Also, the D800 is clearly NOT intended as the D700 replacement.
Dismal low-light ability? The better-than-D700 low-light capability is dismal? That doesn't make any sense.
Canon has faltered in some key ways with this camera, and they've trumped up the specs (as usual). The high-ISO specs are a hoax, and that is partially evidenced by the fact that you can't shoot at the higher ISOs during video recording. Why not? Also, wherefore hast the detail gone in the high-ISO shots?
The D700 replacement will come, but if you feel you must have the 5DmkIII for whatever reason in the meantime, go ahead. Personally, I think you sound like a Canon fanboi in disguise, but forgive me if I'm misled by my gut.
Also, why aren't you shooting lossless compressed RAW files with the Nikon? It's a phenomenally useful feature, and will nicely package up those huge, detail-laden 36mp files to roughly the same file size as the 5DmkIII images.
What's the benefit again then to the 30mb files from Canon that are probably on-par (if that) with the D800 in low-light capabilities, and lower resolution to boot?
EvilTed: you made a good point. Nikon's D800 has about the pixel density of an EOS 7D that I use e.g. for wildlife/tele shooting. After two years shooting thousands of photos with my 7D I can say that this camera is quite prone to blurring with its small pixels. Using a 500 mm tele or so I end with substantially shorter shutter speeds than before get as sharp pics as 7 D's sensor can deliver.
Birding is, of course, not everyone's cup of tea (and I shoot portrait, street etc., too). But I got the feeling that Canon's decision to stick with 22 mp and improve other features was wise in terms of making a very good generalist FF DSLR. But let's see what tests reveal.
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.
I still see more white lenses at sport events, so there must still be professional sport photographers who think Canon is worth it. I have a 70-200 F4L I. I am happy to keep any Canon DSLR body just to be able to use this lens.
I had one of the first 5D's in Canada Oct 2005 and then after a shutter replacement, I got the 5D2. Full frame is nice but for a wedding photographer on a sub-contract, $3400 is a lot of weddings before I start earning for myself! A $3400 camera without a swivel screen (for video)? Sorry, not for me. I switched to Sony last November and the phase-detect autofocus in video plus the articulating screen was the selling point for me.
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.
I will prob only ever want to use 22 mp when shooting portraits else its just too large a file size for little to no benefit unless you like to crop which i do in camera when i shoot. Most people have been saying for years give me more low light over more mp. actually light gatheres in little pixel sites. it has always been know that large sensors like the first full frame cameras were the best at light gathering because the photo sites gathering light were larger. If the payoff is better low light most shooters will take it but then you went ot sony and got what you needed so i am not sure why you would bother reading let alone posting something irrelevent to the masses. Also, to have a swivel on a camera means things to break off the camera and now if the lcd doesnt work because you beat up the swivel too much you are dead in the water to a degree. In addition you suffer from water proofing issues or at least another place for water to get in.
3300 euros for this bad camera? This is the 5D mark-II dressed as a 5D mark-III. Lots of money for 1 autofocus. And what about the 22MP sensor? 22MP are NOTHING, today! The 5D mark-3 is the past, not the FUTURE! 22MP are NOTHING on a FF sensor! Sony and Nikon show us what is technology. No one can stop technology. Canon has failed on the full sensor. Canon has put 18MP on aps-c sensor and only 22 MP on FF sensor. This can only mean two things: 1: Canon has made a mistake with eos 7D! 2: Canon has made a mistake with 5D mark-3! Which is the error? The error is in the camera 5D mark-3: the 22 MP SENSOR! No one can stop technology. Not even Canon has this power. Sony and Nikon show us you what is technology.
The 5D III is everything the 5D II should have been. The high ISO pictures are great. The faster AF is a really important improvement Very impressive - for 2008. However, it is now 2012.
Canon must be planning something better than this. There are so many contradictions with this camera. It goes to crazy ISO levels, but doesn't have a low-light autofocus. It does 22mp - which is not much better than 21mp. The price, you have got to be kidding. Are they pretending to be Leica?
Come on Canon we know you can do better than this.
You're right-on........I switched from Nikon to Canon when the EOS mount was first introduced. I could care less about the video aspect of the these cameras but if I wanted to use it, the auto focus would need to be much much better to be practical for spot news and action stuff. the 3 is definitely not worth the money. I am seriously considering the Nikon D800....
I have the 5d and avoided the 5d2 because of speed and the same focus system now this camera has all that and much more dynamic range as well as low light capabitlity for shooting receptions and creative shots. You guys are wack if you think you need more mp this day and age over low light. Go to nikon and suffer low light situation with the d800.
What a bitter disappointment this camera is. We waited three years for a sensor that has 22 instead of 21 MP? I can't believe the way people are swooning over this. Unless Canon comes out with a high resolution pretty quickly, they are going to lose a big market share to Nikon.
Funny how Nikon owners are angry about the D800 having packing too many pixels (presumably at the expense of noise and low-light performance), while Canon owners are upset the 5DMkIII doesn't have enough.
Wait and see if the sale of this camera are not dismal. I agree that many or most professionals probably do not want higher resolution. Yes, the file sizes are already large. But I doubt if most sales are to professionals. Amateurs don't take as many photos as pros, so the large file size is not as much of a problem. On those photos we do take, we want as much resolution as possible!
@Caleido: Actually I only had the 36 MP in mind. So you can consider the additional "s" as a typo. Still, I think that 12 MP is enough for most cases, but Nikon had to come up with 16 MP. The market dictates it.
@ Michael_13...Have you ever worked with medium format? I've worked with 30, 60 and 80 megapixel medium format cameras and have long dreamed of the day I could afford to own one. The D800e steps into the range so one could afford to buy the camera and a bag full of lenses for the price of a medium format body alone.
What you're really saying is that you don't need more magapixels and for many photographers thats true.
Canon has already announced a couple of new hgh end cameras, each filling it's own special niche. I think they have more up their sleeves and will eventually fill that the high megapixel niche as well.
@Micheal_13. Really? I find it so extraordinary that people still hold on to older specs 'because it is enough'. For them. Imagine that companies would listen to those instead of the market (=majority of users). We would still have noisy 6MP sensors. "Because 6MP is enough".
Instead of saying that the D800 has too many megapixels, you should state that people who don't need those megapixels, should look elsewhere - but of course they won't. Makes more sense too me, than criticising the D800 directly.
Cellphones have IQ very close to compact digicams, bridge camera's have the IQ that DSLR had 5 years ago. DSLR's are stepping into MF territory.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. You probably would buy a point & shot with 20 Mpixel, because more megapixel = better, right? Canon a while ago demonstrated a 50 Mpixel DSLR sensor... And if you'd think for a moment, Canon's 7D sensor is 18 Mpixel, at HALF the area of a full frame sensor. So making a 36 Mpixel full frame sensor would have been a no-brainer.
Instead they decided to give the same resolution of the 5DmkII with better ISO, frame rate and auto focus. How is that bad?
I don't believe the improvement was in the number of megapixels, but then, I didn't spend three years waiting for the next camera as I've been busy using this one.
Personally, I don't know many workaday photographers aching for more than 22mp. So I think many of us are pleased that the 5D MKIII stops at 22mp. 36mp may sound great on paper, but once you start shooting with it and its massive 75mb file sizes, multiplied by thousands of shots...suddenly 36mp doesn't sound so great. I think most of us would rather have the higher frame rate and high ISO performance.
This looks to be the perfect camera for me. The D800 is a one-trick pony. If that's what you'll use it for. Great. The 5DMK3 is much more a generalist camera and useful to more people.
Is the Mk3 worth $1000 more than a Mk2? I think so. You're getting really close to a 1DX at half the price. The Mk3 is on my list..
I am a Nikon user. I switched over when the D3s came out. Amazing camera. Now that both companies are introducing their boys, in my opinion. Canon won in the 1DX vs. D4 dogfight. Even as a Nikon user, the 1Dx really seems like a AWESOME camera. But Nikon seems to have won the D800 vs. 5D3 fight. Honestly, Even with that and being a Nikon user, And I love my Nikon, We really need to wait and see the REAL WORLD REVIEWS that were not done by Nikon or Canon sponsored photographers. I want to see the negative feedback on both cameras, or all 4 I should say. Though I must say not in canons favor, on their site the only high Iso pics are of a night sky, it really looked like they were using a pic to hide the noise. and why would the other high iso pics say coming soon, Do they need time to doctor them up first? I would not have wrote that. The d800 high iso pics at 36mp used real world scenes and looked pretty darn good. Tho, I am jealous of the new Canon flash!!
The 5D mk3 price will probably drop, once the 5D mk2 inventory has been sold. This may be a good time to buy one of the last mk2 models, for anyone wanting to enter the FF arena for a reasonable price.
It'll certainly be interesting to see which people choose - I suspect many people will find the 5D III's low compression video much easier to work with.
detachable screen would be nice for handheld video and photography. i hoped this camera would had that feature.
Canon 5D mark II was beyond future when it first came out, that's why it sold a lot. I thought canon would learn from that and the price was more than fair!
Canon 5D mark III is just another mark II with some improvements borrowed from here and there, at a higher price.
I'm curious to see if canon 5d3 has improved the dynamic range, higher iso performance, banding issues.
If so, i'd say it worth the extra cash even at the almost same resolution size. like Nikon D3s from D3 which was a monster upgrade in IMAGE QUALITY.
if not, i see no actual reason why should i pay canon a great deal of money for.. i'd go for D800E
Ii curse the day when video came up to DSLRs.. companies drop all their weight there which is very convenient for them providing a new revolution capability to the world, leaving image quality far behind.
The 5D MK III is going to be a very capable camera which got nearer to a 1D series camera in build, feel and function compared to its predecessors. So a higher price is adequate.
Unfortunately that means I can hardly afford it which is not so good news. To me a more affordable, lower spec camera with a better AF than MK I & II would have done the trick. But that is life!
The appearance and price of the D800 might help to get the 5D MK III into more pleasant financial regions...
Great specs, but like the 1dx it's priced too high for its competition. At $2,700 it would own its market slot. But at $3,500 does Canon really think they're going to compete with the Nikon D800 that's $500 less and has 50% more megapixels?
I'm not ready to upgrade to FF =(, but please put all this technology in an APS sensor camera ASAP (if you want to call it 8D) and package the very first one to my office! I can't wait!
There is ... it's called 7D. If that's not good enough, a successor (7D mk2?) is probably on its way, because the 7D has been around for about 3 years now.
"APS-C equivelant to the 5D mk III will most likely be called the 7Ds mk II."
Glad to hear that. I just love reading stuff about non-existing cameras. So much more fun than reading about the ones that have already been announced/released.
Yeah, not too far. Only $2400. That'll only buy you a 5D MKII. So you can basically buy yourself a 5D MKIII *and* a 5D MKII for the price of a 1DX alone. Or instead of a 5D MKII, you could get yourself three 600EX-RT speedlites and one ST-E3-RT transmitter.
Apart from perhaps ISO performance, I think the greatest improvement is the shutter sound (=the sound produced when taking a photo). 5D and 5D Mark II sounds so bad with the high frequency ending (just like XXXD cameras). I think Nikon has always conquered Canon when it comes to shutter sound, but with Nikon D3100 and its high-frequency sound, and Canon 60D with a very smooth shutter sound, and now the 5D Mark III's shutter sound it seems like Canon is about to go past Nikon.
I paid £1800 or thereabouts for the mark II. 4 years later and a 35% ish mark up? Canon must think the mark II was underpriced. This is making up for that.
@Nick49 - your £ or $ are probably worth 35% less against the Japanese Yen than they were 4 years ago. In the UK VAT has gone up too. Effectively there is no real price difference.
Sure you can buy the D800 for a bit less - but top grade Nikon lenses often cost more than their Canon equivalents so there may be no real savings.
1 Look at what was your GBP worth then and compae it with what it is worth now.
2. Much of value of the camera is in the value of the sensor. And much of value of the sensor is ( besides obvious megapixels) in its noise rating, sensitivity and colour depth ( bit resolution). Considerably imroved sensor can easily "lift" camera value.
Let's wait for the real tests.
For now, mkIII seems to be everything I expected - modernised mkII with improved sensor.
All Japanese products are overpriced by a good 10-25 percent since the earthquake there. The mfrs there are trying to make up for business interruption caused lost production this way.
@ RAWman: There is no need to look up anything on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, really. I know it full well already after reading up on the camera's features and specs that this baby does not worth US$3,500. Let alone the crazy prices Canon's resident bean-counters are hoping for that our friends in the U.K. and Europe will pay for it.
This is just old school design with very little new. Only the price tag is higher. But go right ahead, knock yourself out and buy three.
Just think of everything you can buy with it. Flashes, soft boxes, battery grips, lenses, radio triggers,CF Cards, batteries, Software, a few months worth of gas depending on how much you drive, a good chunk of your rent/utilities, computer upgrades,phones, a pretty decent new T.V., furniture, ect, ect, ect.
Looking at some of the example files from this camera, now appearing in the Canon forum taken from the Canon.Jp site, I am now getting a bit worried.
Some of them are pretty bad. Maybe they are just bad photos, I don't know. But they do not make the camera look good, lets put it that way.
Early days though. Canon are the market leader in size and resources, I am sure they would not release a lemon to the market. Once we see some proper results and the DPR test, I expect it will be fine.
Canon and Nikon loosing the market share due to mirrorless. Nikon has a good answer to that. Canon doesn't.
I remember the amount of the Canon 60D advertisement on the DPR when it was released and then 60D got the better score than d7000 and some pretty stupid "cons" to d7000, despite obvious immence advantage in the sensor technology. As far as I remember, the indignation on the DPR Forums made them change the score. This makes me sceptical about "proper test" from DPR. They've become too big and famous to be independent. ;-)
What I want to know is if it supports other, more matte focusing screens. The 7D does not (officially) support other focusing screens - if 5DmkIII does not have a more matte focusing screen, it is a no-go for me - I'm quite addicted to the Eg-S on my 5DmkII.
At last, a proper AF in 5d series! :) That alone looks like a good reason to upgrade from my 5d. I gave up mark II after 3 months of using it and went back to the old camera, as I didn't find any real reason to upgrade for the price difference at that time - not in terms of image quality (up to 1600ISO) or in terms of functionality (not using video). Can't wait for tests of mark III, I'll probably will get one before summer.
I have the 5d mark II and I use it mainly for videography. I'm really disappointed in the lack of upgrades from a video aspect. Especially with magic lantern adding features to the 5dmark II. I just can't seem to justify the upgrade. I honestly wanted the 5d mark III with all this hype of the launch date and surprises but I just don't see enough from a video aspect. I'm staying 5d mark II and If I see enough good reviews I will jump to the D800. My loyalty is going with the best product for it's worth. What do you video guys think?
''Of course both cameras have a host of features that can be compared. Nobody yet knows how the video form the two cameras will look. The 5D MkIII reads out every pixel from the sensor and from examples shown by Canon that factor, in conjunction with processing algorithms, has greatly reduced the intensity of Moire patterns which appear in the video images as a result of the required downsizing process (from the full sensor resolution to the 1920 × 1080 resolution of 1080HD video). I don’t know if the D800 reads out all 36.3MP for every video frame, but I suspect it doesn’t and that it samples pixels by a technique such as line skipping. Reports I’ve read seem to suggest that it does in fact skip lines, though I don’t know for sure. If so that could result in lower quality video (increased Moire patterning). However again, only actual side by side testing will tell the real story and that hasn’t yet been done by anyone.'' Bob Atkins
Ram is sooo cheap..you can get 16GB ram for around $100 (depending on type) a 4x3 print isn't very large. there are lots of spaces in my small home that I could put a print like that..
To Westkip, concerning Canon lenses : The wide angles are nothing spectacular, although the teles are good. All serious architecture shooters go with other adapted lenses offering better corner sharpness.
You have obviously never tried the new Canon TS-E 24mm mkII and 17mm lenses, they are fabulous. Hartblei has even made special equipment to adapt them to medium format backs, that should tell you something. But you were right up until the arrival of those lenses - Canon wideangles used to suck.
For many of my clients, 4x3 foot would be on the small side. And the way the prints are displayed, people like to get up close and examine the details.
22 mpx is more than enough for many photographers, but there are some clients who expect more and are willing to pay more. I can't afford to buy medium format system but when I need to I can rent one.
It would be nice to have a more affordable 35mm DSLR and right now that's the Nikon D800e.
I suspect that the rumored monster megapixel Canon is yet to be revealed , but with the 5DmkIII already at a price point higher than the D800e, a pixel count equal to the Nikon for a significantly higher price won't do. But if the monster megapixel camera is in the rumored 45 mpx range and priced in the 1Ds range, then it would fill the empty spece between the D800e and the low end medium format cameras.
To "rrr_hhh" -- Actually, architecture shooters do go with Canon lenses specifically for theirTS-E 24mm and 17mm lenses. Nikon's offerings have nothing that comes close for this specific application, and architects would welcome some competition here. I am an architect and have done a lot of architectural photography over the last 30 years.
I'm excited for this camera. I would liked to see higher MP but never mind less noise at high ISO is more important for me, Im sure this camera will handle noise better than the D800 because of the resolution. I hope you can turn off the autogain for audio recording. I agree its overpriced but I am sure it will go down within 6-12 months after release.
I agree: for stills photographer the most exciting feature will be the - hopefully - extremely low noise level. The new AF system is the next good message. Look forward to seeing first tests, in particular in comparison with Nikon's D800(E).
The most exciting news is that Canon, finally, quit the pixel race completely. I think this was now a good point to do that. Funny: Canon and Nikon now swapped their roles as pixel king versus (hopefully) noise king, at least with this new generation of FF bodies.
Thinking about video, times will get tougher for Canon because of the strong competition now. I think the 5D III will not again have this dominating impact as the 5D II, but that's quite what had to be expeted - competitors do not sleep.
Personally I'll wait for the first tests to come out. Then I'll decide whether I drain my account a bit for a 5D III.
The Canon 5D Mk III looks like a good upgrade from the 7D but it seems a bit short for a 5D Mk II upgrade. Whilst it looks like a nice enough camera the price is a concern. I'm also interested in where Canon will pitch the 7D Mk II.
I think I will have to find some more pennies for the 1DX. Perhaps that was Canon's intention.....
Lensrentals most-rented gear of 2017 contains a few interesting surprises. Among them: Sony has out-rented Nikon for the first time ever, and a Sony battery somehow took the #6 spot overall.
No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.
As a stills camera the Fujifilm X-T3 is a pleasant update to one of our favorite APS-C cameras, significantly improving the autofocus. If you're interested in stills and video, though, it's knockout.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
The Canon EOS R is the first full frame mirrorless camera to use the new RF mount. We're well underway putting it through our range of standard tests – take a look at how it compares to the competition and our thoughts on using it so far.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.
Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.
DxO announces the latest update to Nik Collection (version 1.1) that brings better compatibility, fewer bugs to the plugin suite it acquired from Google a year ago
Nikon USA has announced that its Z6 full-frame mirrorless camera will be shipping Friday, November 16th at a price of $1999 body-only and $2599 with the Nikkor Z 24-70 F4 S lens.
The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.
ON1 Photo RAW 2019 brings an updated interface, more powerful Lightroom migration, better camera/lens support, and more to ON1's flagship editing program.
Experiencing life through the lens of a camera might mean you miss out on special moments, warns Casey Cavanaugh as he shoots a short film through the viewfinder of his Hasselblad 500CM
The New York Times has teamed up with Google to start the process of digitizing more than five million photos stored in a vault nicknamed "the morgue."
Ambitious goals, new challenges and looking ahead to 100 years of the Z mount – we spoke with senior executives and engineers at Nikon about what lies ahead.
After years focused primarily on landscapes, Erez Marom leapt on an opportunity to return to his roots in wildlife photography. A trip to the mountains of Uganda photographing endangered mountain gorillas yielded some stunning photos – and an experience of a lifetime.
Digital cameras have made it incredibly easy to do time-lapse photography, thanks to the ability to take hundreds—or even thousands—of photos without interruption. This week, Chris and Jordan walk us through the process of planning and shooting compelling time-lapse videos.
The Nikon Z6 is the lower-resolution, faster sibling to the Z7, and has already shown impressive results in our preliminary testing. Take a look at how it performs outside of the studio.
Photopea is a free Photoshop alternative that works directly in the browser and offers advanced features including spot removal, clone tool, layers, filters, and masks.
Since publishing our full review, we've continued shooting with the Fujifilm X-T3 here and there – sometimes on assignment, and sometimes because we just like it so darn much. Our sample gallery has been updated with fresh images.
Comments