5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

Started Mar 14, 2012 | Discussions
Randplaty Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

No, just that even hobbyists shoot weddings and sports more than landscape.

technic wrote:

Randplaty wrote:

Really unscientific, but I looked at the number of threads in different categories on POTN:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=110

  1. 1 Weddings & Family Events (by far the most threads)

  2. 2 Sports

and you assume those are all Pro people, taking those family pictures and making loads of money with them?

carlk Forum Pro • Posts: 15,940
Re: apparently landscape photographers do nothing but whine

jamesfrmphilly wrote:

the wedding shooters buy enough cameras to subsidize the rest of us.

How does that work? They pay more for their cameras or they donate extra money to Canon?

Or do you think we buy enough cameras to subsidize the tools they need to make a living?

 carlk's gear list:carlk's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 7D Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +6 more
jayrandomer
jayrandomer Contributing Member • Posts: 888
Re: flash against the sun is a old idea/standard skill

yabokkie wrote:

that's why people missed lens shutter, and SLR got high speed sync.

Not quite sure what you meant by this, but my comment was simply about showing a uniformly darker outdoor scene to indicate the absence of a popup flash.

No popup flash could illuminate clouds kilometers away and even if it could it wouldn't do so as uniformly as some building mere meters away. Also, if you didn't have a popup flash with you underexposing the image and leaving it that way probably isn't the way forward--raise the ISO, open the aperture, or lower the shutter speed.

 jayrandomer's gear list:jayrandomer's gear list
Canon EOS 550D Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM +3 more
Teila Day
Teila Day Veteran Member • Posts: 4,865
I like to quantify things... let's take a closer look ;)

ScottieC wrote:

• Even the 5D Mark II “ approaches ” the IQ of a MF along with every generation of new bodies…

That would depend on your definition of "approaches"...the size you need, and how much you're going to crop. All that should be taken into consideration, and when all of that is taken into consideration, the smaller sensors have a ways to go yet. However practically speaking, you would be correct in the most general terms.

• You should be able to go well beyond 16x24 with a 5D Mark II, I do that a 1D Mark II…

I've a 5d2 and "well beyond" definitely depends on what type of crisp result you're wanting.

• You have a pinto in the driveway.. somehow I doubt you would upgrade if you have a 5D Mark II

Pinto... people still own those? ... didn't they sometimes explode when hit from the rear?

• If your “Willing” to sell your Canon gear to swap to Nikon, then you should be able to “Afford” to go MF….

Ok, here's where we get to the nitty-gritty. People routinely comment about MF as if MF costs are anywhere in the same ballpark as a Canon/Nikon which is really dirt cheap in comparison.

Replace a 5d2, 16-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, 85 1.2, and 300 f/4

Not that big of a deal for a person to make a switch to Nikon; not even worth doing the math since the "system" costs are similar.

MF? Not so similar:

Mamiya (22mp) = $11,000

300mm f/4 = $4,000 (with a shorter angle of view compared to Canon 5d2+300 f/4)
150mm f/2.8 = $3,500 (about the equiv. of 90mm AOV on a FF Canon)
28mm f/4.5 = $5,000 (about the equiv. of 17mm AOV on a FF Canon)
----------------------------------------

Total = $23,500 not even in the same ball park as switching between Canon and Nikon. In fact, switching and selling all your gear to switch back wouldn't cost this much. This is one glaring example of why many are looking for a Canon/Nikon substitution (not equivalent) to using Medium Format... because in many cases, a mere substitution as far as the CUSTOMER and end product is concerned, makes the most sense.

-- hide signature --
SPTtheRapper New Member • Posts: 13
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

I agree it is pretty silly to label the 5D3 as a DUD.

The 5D2 was/is regarded as an excellent landscape camera and the 5D3 matches or exceeds its capability in every way. However there are numerous threads much like this one and I don't know why.

Just because Nikon release a camera with 14 more MP doesn't somehow negate the 5D2 and 5D3's capabilities.

Lets face it, if you were a strict Landscape ONLY photographer, you would have a MF regardless of the cost.

The 5D3 serves its purpose as intended a great all-round camera. It will be great in all areas but not perfect in any. And if it did everything perfect it would be some sort of 80 MP, 100k ISO native, 12 fps monster and cost way more than a MF camera!

So to say that Canon doesn't care about Landscape photographers is false, they do care, just as much as they do with wedding/sport/family/fashion/etc... photographers, no more no less.

-SP

gdanmitchell wrote:

I have a 5D2. I shoot landscape. I don't think I'll upgrade from the 5D2 to the 5D3, since the advantages it provides, while real, are probably not critical enough for me to invest the additional money... though I can understand a counter argument in the right circumstances.

That said, I think it is pretty extreme and pretty silly to describe the 5D3 as a "dud" (or "DUD") for landscape photographers, unless you also felt that the 5D2 was an even bigger "dud" for them/us. In fact, the 5D2 has been a great landscape body for those using FF DSLRs to shoot in this genre of photography. The 5D3 will work at least as well, and arguably at least a bit better in some areas that might be useful to folks who shoot the way I do.

If I were purchasing a new body and I had the choice between the 21MP 5D2 at $2500 and the 22MP 5D3 at $3500, I would buy the newer body for my own uses. You are correct that it won't have greater sensor resolution, but the other features of the camera are worthy and, I think, of value.

Dan

 SPTtheRapper's gear list:SPTtheRapper's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM +2 more
jamesfrmphilly
jamesfrmphilly Senior Member • Posts: 1,603
Re: apparently landscape photographers do nothing but whine

i have one body. the wedding shooters that i see have 4 and 5 bodies. canon is not making money off me. the wedding shooters buy enough bodies to make it possible for canon to invest in the technology that we all benefit from.

 jamesfrmphilly's gear list:jamesfrmphilly's gear list
Canon G7 X II
BadBeta Regular Member • Posts: 454
Re: apparently landscape photographers do nothing but whine

Personally I think the hobby market far exceeds the professional one. Maybe even for the highest end bodies.

 BadBeta's gear list:BadBeta's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital II Ricoh GR Digital III Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM +7 more
huskerss1 Regular Member • Posts: 293
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

Agree..

My clients don't mind paying $750-$1000 for children photography. But I can't seem to move my landscape work priced from $400 - $600

I love my 5D2, and I have printed as large as 30x40, and they look great!

But I plan to get one 5D3 mainly for focus improvements.

Best!

abracadabenhotmailfr Contributing Member • Posts: 762
Has HDR in camera ;-) nt

No text here

DotCom Editor Veteran Member • Posts: 7,363
If 5D2 was great, how can 5D3 be a dud?

Maybe you got "dud" and "dude" mixed up.

So, dude, if my 5D2 is soooooooooooo good at landscapes, how can a 5D3 be a dud? I don't get it.

Now, I would like more pixels. A lot more. Like 40MP, perhaps. Alas, we didn't get that. But that doesn't make the 5D3 a dud.

 DotCom Editor's gear list:DotCom Editor's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Epson Stylus Pro 3880 +3 more
PHXAZCRAIG
PHXAZCRAIG Forum Pro • Posts: 15,621
D700 user here - pop up flash?

I've used D700 for over a year, and I never once used the pop-up flash for fill flash or any kind of on-camera flash. For one thing, the big zoom lenses I have on there cause an ugly shadow.

Same with the D300. Haven't used popup flash there for years.

BUT - I used the pop-up many times as a flash controller, setting power manually or via TTL to my SB900 and SB800 speedlites.

That is, until very recently, when I purchased a pair of pocket wizards and a mini TT1 and AC3 controller.

How much did that pop-up flash save me? Let's see the alternatives. (I assume Canon users have similar alternatives)

1. SU800 infrared controller, about $200. Of course I'd have to carry it with me and it's not that small on camera.

2. Another SB900 ($500) or SB800 (hard to find, $350-400). Seems like a total waste to stick an expensive flash on top of a camera just to trigger the remote flashes.

3. A set of radio remotes, like the PW's I finally bought, for about $500. Nice to have radio control and not have to worry about line of sight. Except for the very high price, that new Canon speedlite sounds pretty nice for Canon shooters. Too bad the controller isn't built into any Canon bodies.

If I need quick and dirty on-camera flash, I'm putting my SB900 on there, and trying to bounce it.

There is no drawback to me to have a pop-up flash built into my cameras. Trying to describe it as such is probably just a made-up argument trying to diss a Nikon, or total misunderstanding of how it is used and useful.

I did add one gizmo to make that flash more useable. A $15 SG-IR3, which is a little plastic filter that filters out most of the (very weak, but still visible) light while allowing the infrared signals to the remote flashes. (Gets rid of catchlights in the eyes and flash reflections in mirrors).

-- hide signature --
 PHXAZCRAIG's gear list:PHXAZCRAIG's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V1 +37 more
carlk Forum Pro • Posts: 15,940
Re: apparently landscape photographers do nothing but whine

C'mon you know how many wedding photographers are there and how many dslr Canon sells each year? Not even close.

 carlk's gear list:carlk's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 7D Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +6 more
Randplaty Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: apparently landscape photographers do nothing but whine

carlk wrote:

C'mon you know how many wedding photographers are there and how many dslr Canon sells each year? Not even close.

There are about a million (I don't even know if that's exaggerating) photographers who are wanna be wedding pros even if they don't actually make money themselves. They buy gear like the wedding pros do. They show up in droves to weddings. We call them "uncle bobs."

Randplaty Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: apparently landscape photographers do nothing but whine

jamesfrmphilly wrote:

i have one body. the wedding shooters that i see have 4 and 5 bodies. canon is not making money off me. the wedding shooters buy enough bodies to make it possible for canon to invest in the technology that we all benefit from.

This is true. I've posted this here before, but I've personally purchased 7 dSLRs. I have two or three emails a year from complete strangers asking me which dSLR I recommend. On top of that, I have actual friends who always ask me for camera buying advice. I would say I've at least steered 10 additional dSLR purchases towards Canon if not more.

BadBeta Regular Member • Posts: 454
Re: If 5D2 was great, how can 5D3 be a dud?

So, dude, if my 5D2 is soooooooooooo good at landscapes, how can a 5D3 be a dud? I don't get it.

It is not a dud as a camera. As an upgrade however it is pretty much a dud as far as low ISO image quality is concerned.

 BadBeta's gear list:BadBeta's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital II Ricoh GR Digital III Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM +7 more
Greg Lavaty Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

Well, sounds like you have your answer for the moment. Wait and see how much better the D800 does and decide if it looks like higher MP FF cams are what you really are looking for… Also, do you think Canon won’t eventually make a higher MP camera? Did the new 24-70 really need all that resolution for a 22MP body? Something tells me that a higher MP body from Canon might be coming sooner than 3.5 years from now.

If you don’t think the 5D3 is going to give you any added benefit the smart thing to do is to pass on it.

Greg

Greg Lavaty Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

I guess I totally missed it. I always thought the 5D line was about affordable FF. Of course bouncing the price back up to $3500 seemed like a step in the wrong direction.

Greg

Well, the 5D line has so far been about focus on high IQ and resolution at the expense of other specifications. And the 5D line has been a success doing that, even though Canon has had others cameras with both better AF and better FPS. It tells me that there are plenty of people who make the same prioritization again - and most of them actually owns a 5D already. So all this talk about there not be a market for a 5D with higher resolution and lower FPS: look at all the existing 5D customers.

Greg Lavaty Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

Well, I do get the impression that Canon does pay attention to the whining that goes on in places like this forum which is why the 5D3 got what looks like it will be an awesome AF system and more FPS. With all the whining that is going on right now my guess is that they will be addressing the MP’s next.

Greg

Greg Lavaty Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

I agree but then I don’t think my standards might be quite up to the level of some of the landscape folks here. I have don’t a couple of 20x30’s and was actually really happy with how they came out.

In my opinion Canon really did address the most serious limitations of this camera making the 5D3 a really great all around camera (at least on paper at this point). 21MP wasn’t really a shortcoming before but AF and FPS were according to users…

Greg

Greg Lavaty Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: Who knows

Yea, Canon sure looks stupid for putting out a camera that will appeal to a wider audience rather than one that will be quite specialized. Well of course that isn’t completely fair either, the D800 looks like it will be a great all arounder as well when you consider the crop modes.

Are we sure Canon won’t be releasing a higher MP FF camera any time soon???

Greg

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads