Insight from experts, please

Much of the commentary on the 1DMK III, especially on the Nikon D2x forum, refers to cameras which in final production form turn out not be as good as their press releases and white papers indicated they might be. Allowing for biased commentary, especially from Nikon users, I question that white-paper-to-full-production-unit disappointments are that common, at least for these two brands. (Yes, I recall the disappointment over the Sony DSCF828, but that is not Canon or Nikon.) What are examples of recent Canon or Nikon DSLR models which have proved to be so disappointing?

--try the 30D, D70S, D2Xs. We're spoiled you know.

joer56

Whats your point? Are you considering purchasing the camera and want to make up your mind based on the questionable opinions expressed here?

Joer56,

I'm sorry for what appears to be a misunderstanding from my original post. I know that many Canon users wanted more from a successor to the 20D than the 30D turned out to offer, but my reading leads me to believe that, within its specification and feature limits, the 30D is a very highly regarded camera.

Likewise, aren't the D70s and the D2h examples of cameras which may disappoint many people in their design, but which do meet what one should expect from reading their specification sheets?

Thanks for the observations.

Lovingtheview

OK......I will bite. I won't claim to be an expert, I do however make a full time living from my photography & have been in the same main street studio for the last 7 years. My comment is this............threads like this one are a joke, & I know it may sound harsh but this is not meant to be a personal attack. It is more an observation of the moronic mentality that seems to be so pervasive here. Furtrermore, there seems to be an abundance of them.

This camera is groundbreaking. I started out in digital about 5 years ago with a D30 (current 1DSMKll) & have been through various Canon cameras since. How anyone could be disappointed is beyond me. From the perspective of a pro (me) I would say that you work with the technology available.....applaud the innovations, use the fabulous features & try to ignore the almost insignificant negative issues. They will be improved next time around.

http://www.studio58.com.au

For the most part people aver expect what is coming. The 1D Mk II wowed everyone and pretty much lived up to it. The Mk III is also wowing most people that understand it and many are looking for a 400D price difference. You know. MY 400D has 10MP and costs lots less.

The Mk III will cater very well to the market it is targeted for. In fact, those people are mostly going HOLY $H1T!!!. IT IS GREAT.

Most of the people that are complaining on the images don't have a single image they have EVER taken that matches any of the Canon Samples. Personally, I would have been proud to have taken any of those images.

This is true with the D2X, D2H, 1Ds, 1Ds Mk II, K10D....

These cameras DO live up to the hype in most aspects and far outstrip the abilities of the people you see complaining on these boards.

Steven

--
---
2006 White Sands and Bisti Workshop
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/white_sands_and_bisti

Winter 2007:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_winter_2007

But there is no print button......
Cmon just kidding.

short of FF and huge MP numbers the 1D3 appears to be a major upgrade.

Many little things add up to a great product...
--
Yiannis
'Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.'

Dennis

Funny.

I already ordered a MKIII today.

Fiveoguy,

Asking my questions, rephrased here for you, "Given what one can predict from the specifications and feature set of a new dslr camera model, how commonly are users of the production model disappointed, and what Canon or Nikon models are examples of cameras that disappoint," seems to me to be a topic just as significant, or moreso, that the majority of threads in this forum.

Does your remark, "What's the point?" really ask why anyone would want to know about this topic, or, are you irritated by something else?

Probably fewer than 10% of the new posts on these forums come from people who need help to buy a new DSLR. No, that is not why I asked the question.

Thanks,

Lovingtheview

Paul wrote, "threads like this one are a joke, & I know it may sound harsh but this is not meant to be a personal attack. It is more an observation of the moronic mentality that seems to be so pervasive here. Furtrermore, there seems to be an abundance of them."

Paul,

I don't see that the original post is any sort of a joke, if that is what you mean. My original post is not an "observation," but is a question. If the thread is made moronic by replies from brand-loyalists, then I do not disagree with you, although the breadth of the English vocabulary allows us to use less condescending adjectives than moronic. Just what percent of the participants in this thread have "the moronic mentality that seems to be so pervasive here"?

If from my original post, you read any bias against the 1DMk III, you have interpreted my words completely.

I'm sincere in asking you directly. In what sense is this thread a joke? If you make such a charge, I'm presuming that you can articulate a justification.

Thanks,

Lovingtheview

lovingtheview said:

Much of the commentary on the 1DMK III, especially on the Nikon D2x
forum, refers to cameras which in final production form turn out
not be as good as their press releases and white papers indicated
they might be.

Click to expand...

Wow. I think the Nikon people seem to be really reaching here. If this is all they have to say, well, I think that says it all. This must be a great camera. Nothing like it out there.

lovingtheview said:

Allowing for biased commentary, especially from
Nikon users, I question that white-paper-to-full-production-unit
disappointments are that common, at least for these two brands.

Click to expand...

OK, now you have answered your question. By looking at the white paper, especially since we have many model upgrades and specification red flags to consider now, unless Canon has some kind of production meltdown, disappointment will be strictly on a personal feature basis. I don't think they are trying to violate any laws of physics here.

lovingtheview said:

(Yes, I recall the disappointment over the Sony DSCF828, but that
is not Canon or Nikon.)

Click to expand...

True, and a telling point. It wasn't a DSLR either. I was disappointed by the 828 because i owned an F707 (my first digital camera and one that I liked a lot. I found a good home for it and they still love it) at the time and was interested in upgrading. (I went to DSLR instead.) The 828 was the harbinger of the problems of stuffing pixels on a small sensor- a problem that has not gone away. Some people like the 828 if they don't run themselves up against the problems that it has.

lovingtheview said:

What are examples of recent Canon or Nikon
DSLR models which have proved to be so disappointing?

Click to expand...

Others have mentioned the 20D to 30D. The thng is that you have to read the specs carefully and with the knowledge gained over the last few years. The 30D did have improvements over the 20D, but most people wanted a more extreme upgrade. The 20D is a classic Canon camera. So I don't think that really counts.

So what does count? Disappointment is in the eye of the beholder (and the peeper). There are some poor souls out there who still think the 5D is a disapointment. I think the Nikon crowd might be a better place to ask your question since they seem to be putting a lot of thought into it. Plus, they have more reason to be disappointed about recent products when it comes to noise at high ISOs- or so we say. They have nothing to match the 1DIII, yet. Ask them to back up their argument. That should be interesting. : )

A lot of model changes are made by marketing decisions and need to be accepted as such. There is no real answer to your question because it is too vague to have any real meaning. No big deal, though.

It is interesting that we have the usual complaining over the supplied sample pictures. When has that NOT been a disappointment? : )
Sincerely,
--
Wendell
http://www.wendellworld.com

'Not everything that counts can be counted, not everything that can be counted counts.'
Albert Einstein

P.S. The owners of my old F707 had a problem with it recently (the camera is now over 3 years old). They contacted Sony about it and even though the camera was way off the quarantee, Sony fixed it for free because there had been a recall on it at some point in time. They even paid the shipping. Score one for Sony.

I passed on the 10D and stayed with digicams, until the 20D was announced.

Nothing that Canon said about the 20D proved to be an overstatement. I cannot compare it to the 10D, as I never owned one. The 20D performed as advertised. I might not say the same thing for the kit lens, but I avoided it and bought mostly L glass for what I had hoped would eventually be a lightweight 1.3 FOV. (Guess the 1DMKIII is as light as it is going to get.)

A little over a year later, along comes the 5D. Now the FF lenses can show their stuff, and the body performs as advertised. 3 fps is only 3 fps...the metering and AF are not hugely better than the 20D, but improved...and it was overpriced at $3200. But it performed as advertised.

Would I like to have seen improvements...absolutely. Most of what everybody wanted is in the 1DMKIII, i.e., MLU, better fps, ISO in vwf, more brightness in LCD, dump print button, etc., etc.

Bet some of those will be in the 5DII next year, but that's how the game is played.

All the white papers I've read on these models have proved to be accurate statements...not marketing's wishful thinking.

Can you trust the white papers...I did.

Can you get a dud, yeah...several of the out of box 5Ds had dust problems both on the sensor and in the vwf. Not enough seals. Not promised and not delivered, but exchanges were made. The early 20D battery grips were not adequately reinforced for use with big lenses on tripods in certain positions...a fix or exchange was allowed. Bad design...but fixed. Never heard a complaint on the 5D grip.

None of that was in the white papers, which are basically specs, features and performance data...and I haven't found fault with any to date.

I've been a Canon SLR owner since the FT days in the early '70s, and a former camera store owner and have not found them to be other than true to their word.

FWIW
--
Joe Sesto

yes interesting observation. Given that you mention your experience going back to the 70's I am sure you would appreciate my observation which is .........Back in the 60's, 70's you were seeing Pentax (Spotmatic) Minolta (SRT) Olympus (OM series) Nikon of course Canon (F1 etc)

• Funny thing is, any one of them could have been king & been in the market leader position now. They all had the resources & position. Nikon had it for a long time........Canon have it & have done so since EOS. Personally, I don't see Canon taking a backward step.

Cheers,

Paul
http://www.studio58.com.au

That would be the Nikon D2H (not the later D2Hs). It was released following a white paper on the expected superior noise performance of the LBCAST sensor. It disappointed in that category immediately.

Others from each brand have had glitches - banding or firmware, etc, but that's the one case I recall of "not what the white paper promised".
--
equipment inventory in profile

Paul Bestwick said:

Back in the 60's, 70's you were
seeing Pentax (Spotmatic) Minolta (SRT) Olympus (OM series) Nikon
of course Canon (F1 etc)

Click to expand...

In that era we sold all, except Nikon. In a small town there was no need for both Nikon and Canon. The Canon AE-1, A-1, new F-1 and later the T series were more directed to the consumers and hobbyists. Nikon was then king of the PJ and sports shooters. Maxxum made a huge leap forward for Minolta. I still have a Max 9000. It did things with a pair of 400 series flashes that let them act like mini-field studios.

Pbestwk said:

Personally, I don't see Canon taking a backward step.

Click to expand...

I agree, but there are niches where they will need to be playing catch up, i.e., 30D...and I hope the 40D moves the target forward, not just meeting the competition. There are also a number of lenses that are in need of updating, i.e., lenses like the 50/1.4 that they show on the 1DMKIII but it still has no distance measuring interface with ETTL. Not to mention a series of 5 - 28~XXX zooms that are as obsolete as flash bulbs.

Takes time and money, but good things are happening. I was surprised that they came out with the 16~35/L II, but several of their sample shots were made with the 17~40.

--
Joe Sesto

I'm an engineer (electrical and computer science) so don't make a living with a camera but buy equipment as if I do.

I don't think the personal bias can be discounted in your question. I rarely see flagrant errors in specs and the mfgs know folks like those on this forum would skewer them for significant false claims. So when they give a spec for conditions under which you can acheive 10 fps (as just one example) I assume they are right. But for all the great innovations in the new 1D3, there will be those who complain that they wanted even less noise at 6400, or that the Liveview isn't smooth enough, or that the lens focus micro-adjustment is too granular, blah, blah.

I think the comment about the thread being a joke is the incessant posts either ripping or negatively speculating on actually using or the images from the 1D3...it was funny at first but it's an epidemic at this point. I guess I'm contributing...but I haven't posted her in years!

To further my pathetic contribution to the never ending discussion of new equipment, I'm surprised by the working pro's who rip on amateurs like me who buy new lenses and bodies constantly...gear heads I guess we are called. Is there really enough working pros in the world who can buy $4k to $8k DSLR bodies to support a mfg developing and building them? The number of people with more money than sense who like to own the best toys surely is an order of magnitude more than working pros. I like to think people like me help fund the innovation folks like Canon build!

Just my 2 cents.

I nearly fainted upon reading something - that by goodness- made perfect and complete sense.

Paul Bestwick said:

OK......I will bite. I won't claim to be an expert, I do however
make a full time living from my photography & have been in the same
main street studio for the last 7 years. My comment is
this............threads like this one are a joke, & I know it may
sound harsh but this is not meant to be a personal attack. It is
more an observation of the moronic mentality that seems to be so
pervasive here. Furtrermore, there seems to be an abundance of
them.
This camera is groundbreaking. I started out in digital about 5
years ago with a D30 (current 1DSMKll) & have been through various
Canon cameras since. How anyone could be disappointed is beyond
me. From the perspective of a pro (me) I would say that you work
with the technology available.....applaud the innovations, use the
fabulous features & try to ignore the almost insignificant negative
issues. They will be improved next time around.

http://www.studio58.com.au

Click to expand...

Good observations.

Unless I'm missing something, the original poster's question was: Is the data reflected in the Canon Whitepaper on the 1D MkIII accurate or can we expect the reality, once delivered to be less?

Having started with the D60 and upgraded through the process to the 1D MkII, my experience at least has been that the White Papers, once published, have been dead on with respect to the specs given.

Whether those specs, even when fully lived up to, meet some of this audience's lofty expectations is a different question.
--
jsd