5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

Started Mar 14, 2012 | Discussions
Skip M Veteran Member • Posts: 7,174
Re: Here's 15 advantages over the MarII for landscape and studio

Clint Dunn wrote:

David...I respectfully disagree. As an example...what do I care about higher ISO ratings as a landscape photographer? Hell, I shoot night-time landscapes at ISO400 and below, you just make longer exposures. No serious landscape shooter is going to do landscape shots at ISO25,600.

The only area where the 5D3 is better than the 5D2 for landscapes is the addition of the digital level and better ergonomics.

So, you don't find:

1) Better weatherproofing to be an advantage for landscape? You do shoot outdoors, don't you?

3) Weaker AA filter. It's lets the resolution actually shine through as detail. It's one reason the old 5D nipped at the heels of the 5D2, even though it gave away 9mp in resolution. Its weaker AA filter allowed the relatively liimited number of pixels give the appearance of more resolution than it actually had, even though at the cost of moire. Moire shouldn't be a problem for landscapers, should it? (Unless you get a pesky power line in the shot... )

4) Better noise characteristics and better pattern noise at low ISOs. Not an improvement for landscape? I've heard tales of better DR, but I've not really seen any evidence of that, but still, with better noise in the shadows, those shadows are better brought out in post.

8) Better bracketing options. That should be an improvement for landscape shooters, too.

I'll admit that these aren't compelling reasons to upgrade from a mkII, true. But the camera is hardly a "dud" for shooting landscapes, and is, I might point out, the second highest resolution full frame camera on the market today, and the third highest resolution DSLR on the market, now, too. It out-resolves every offering from Olympus, Pentax, Sigma and Samsung, other than the Pentax 645D, at nearly $10,000. Sure, it may drop a position on both those lists when/if Sony brings out their next full frame body, but as for now, it's right there.
--
Skip M
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
http://www.pbase.com/skipm
http://skipm.smugmug.com/
http://skipmiddletonglamourshooter.blogspot.com/
'Living in the heart of a dream, in the Promised Land!'
John Stewart

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

EvokeEmotion wrote:

So you're implying had the 5D3 turned out to be 40MP, shoots 4FPS, and retains the same 9pt AF, you and other Wedding photogs would not whine about it? Come on! If you can't stand the whining, get off the forums yourself!

jamesfrmphilly wrote:

i don't care if you like the 5D III or not. just get off the forums whining about it.
buy a MF! rent one. get a D800. i don't care. just stop the whining.

What would happen is... I would whine AND still buy a 5D3. That's what happened in 2008 when the D700 went up against the 5D2.

I whined about the crappy AF in the 5D2 but I still bought it. That's what happens when yer in business. Can't afford to switch systems.

Randplaty Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

At $500 more, and with 40% fewer pixels than its closest rival, D800, I believe that unlike the out of the park home run of the MKII, the MKIII will not only prove to be a DUD for landscape photographers like Hondo, but will be a MARKETING DUD !

My overall reaction to the 5DMKIII is, and I believe the market's will be:
UNDERWHELMED.

You can believe whatever you want. And you'll still be wrong.

Hosko Contributing Member • Posts: 812
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

How can you say that all current 5D owners have chosen more megapixels over everything else. The reason most video people have chosen the 5D is for FF and video. FF because of the tiny depth of field that would normally cost an arm and a leg to do with a traditional video camera.

I work in TV however I've always been into photography, I use to shoot converts freelance and had the original EOS 5. I own a 5D purely for FF, I don't need more megapixels.

The one major complaint I have and all my friends who own a 5D mk ii have is the AF is a complete joke. Its essentially a single point AF system. When you look at how much you pay and the 7D had a far superior AF system it was unacceptable.

There is a very limited amount of people that would benefit from more megapixels, however the vast majority have been waiting for better AF.

MoreorLess Veteran Member • Posts: 4,667
Re: Who knows

technic wrote:

the 5D3 is NOT an allrounder, they sacrificed the landscape, nature, travel photographers - exactly the types who will be very happy with the D800. I think Canon is in for a rough ride, and the pre-orders seem to confirm that.

Depends on your view of an "all rounder", it likely won't offer that big an improvement for landscape use but for "nature and travel" I can see advanatges over both the 5D mk2 and the D800 with higher FPS and likely better ISO.

Now maybe I'm wrong, and there are millions of Pro wedding/sports photographers who are all rushing out to buy a 5D3 as soon as it is available, and make sure 5D3 sells in far more volume than that 'amateur' camera from Nikon. But I doubt it ...

Personally I don't think that the net really provides us with an accurate view of the market. Amature landscapers are IMHO very over represented, as one myself I think the very techy nature of both the photography itself and the fact that its a labour of love rather than profit naturally draws more in. The pro wedding tog or the amature who just wants a nice all rounder rather than something that can make the best 30X20 landscape prints just dpesnt post as often.

David Franklin Senior Member • Posts: 1,161
Re: Here's 15 advantages over the MarII for landscape and studio

Clint Dunn wrote:

David...I respectfully disagree. As an example...what do I care about higher ISO ratings as a landscape photographer? Hell, I shoot night-time landscapes at ISO400 and below, you just make longer exposures. No serious landscape shooter is going to do landscape shots at ISO25,600.

Of course I wasn't suggesting that landscape photogs would do that. But, what about shooting at ISO 800, instead of 100, with similar results? Moving clouds, tree branches swaying in the breeze and running water are now more likely frozen by a shorter shutter speed; this is good in and of itself, not to mention less matching errors when trying to do serious HDR. Also, gains would sometimes be possible in depth of field, when that would be desireable, due to the ability to stop down further because of higher ISO.

The only area where the 5D3 is better than the 5D2 for landscapes is the addition of the digital level and better ergonomics.

Likewise I think you are giving too little consideration to the rest of the points I characterized as possible advantages for "landscapers" (and sometimes for studio work as well), as per many of the points made by Skip M in the post preceding this response.

Please give this a little more thought. I know that none of these things seem, at first, like a great big gob of new megapixels, but they're things that, over the long term, might be very important to many people's work flow and style. I think that the "Canon 1D/5D community" has somewhat lost their bearings, in some cases even lost their minds, due to the D800 being such a great effort on Nikon's part, and it has blinded many to the real positive qualities the 5D3 should bring to Canon shooters. Hey, I've yet to even try one, but just looking at the so-far preliminary samples, reading about the features and extrapolating the probable results as a consequence of its claimed capabilities, the 5DIII looks to be a truly wonderful picture taking machine. Let's just hope that everything that points in that direction turns out to be for real. We'll see soon. Good luck and good shooting.

Regards,
David

Clint
http://clintdunn.zenfolio.com

-- hide signature --

Keep learning; share knowledge; think seriously about outcomes; seek wisdom.

Randplaty Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: Who knows

MoreorLess wrote:

technic wrote:

the 5D3 is NOT an allrounder, they sacrificed the landscape, nature, travel photographers - exactly the types who will be very happy with the D800. I think Canon is in for a rough ride, and the pre-orders seem to confirm that.

Depends on your view of an "all rounder", it likely won't offer that big an improvement for landscape use but for "nature and travel" I can see advanatges over both the 5D mk2 and the D800 with higher FPS and likely better ISO.

By nature, he means vast natural views... ie, landscape. By travel he means, vast views of mountains, lakes, forests in other countries, ie... landscape.

MoreorLess Veteran Member • Posts: 4,667
Has the 5D line really been "landscape cameras" in the past?

Both previous 5D's were obviously very good landscape cameras but I'd argue that landscape use really wasnt what drove most of the sales.

Yes AF was very limated but I'd argue that was more a case of trying to sell more 1D's than it was building the ideal camera for its intended market. In terms of resolution Canon was also releasing crop sensors within the lifespan of both 5D's that offered near to the same resolution. I'd argue that the biggest selling point of both 5D's was ISO performance which obviously greatly outclassed anything being offered on ASPC.

With the 1D line shifting to FF I'd argue the 5D mk3 is also targetting users who cannot afford the 1DX. Ontop of that I'd guess Canon views it as a mcuh clearer upgrade path for 7D users, a model that was very sucessful at targetting the "all rounder" amature market. For both of those markets the 5D mk3 obviously does offer an increase in resolution aswell.

Adam Palmer Contributing Member • Posts: 535
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

If I had to guess I would say there are 50 people making a living off portraits/ weddings for every one making a living off selling landscapes. So Canon caters to the market. I do weddings and I sell some art 98% weddings 2% art.
--
JMHO Adam

http://www.adamapalmer.com

 Adam Palmer's gear list:Adam Palmer's gear list
Sony a7R II Sony a7R III Sony a7 III Tokina AT-X 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 DX Fish-eye Sigma 20mm F1.8 EX DG Aspherical RF +10 more
BadBeta Regular Member • Posts: 454
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

If I had to guess I would say there are 50 people making a living off portraits/ weddings for every one making a living off selling landscapes. So Canon caters to the market. I do weddings and I sell some art 98% weddings 2% art.

Landscape photographers are far from the only interested in high image quality. And wedding photographers are hardly the mainstream of Canon's 5D market. That would be the people attending the wedding - the non-professionals. Canon has already released the 1DX to cater to the professional market in the same segment.

Canon will release a higher MP camera at some point as they currently have a huge gap in their lineup, and if it comes in at 3-4 fps and 45 MP it will be a winner that might last a while. Canon 5DIII on the other hand will look positively aged in comparison to the competition in two years time - it is still a fine camera of course, but the resolution, lack of USB3.0 and wireless will not do it any timely favors.

I'm actually starting to think that the 5DIII release now might be a trial run on the ergonomics and workflow before the release of the real thing - a 5DX.

 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
technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

please wake up; companies like Canon make money by volume, not with niche products like cameras that are only sold to professionals (like most of all the Canon 1D series or similar Nikon models). Most of the people buying 5D/5D2 type camera's were NOT pro's, they are mostly consumers/prosumers with money, who are willing to pay for better image quality (resolution etc. is far more an issue for landscape and architecture than for weddings, the 'making money' part is irrelevant).

Maybe the 5D3 is going to be an exception, but I know for sure that most of the sales of 5D/5D2 in my area were NOT to 'pros' (and I'm pretty sure the wedding shooters were only a small minority of these buyers).

harrygilbert Senior Member • Posts: 2,799
The price is not out of line

Back in 2005, my first 5D (Classic) was a little over $3000. The price dropped, and my second body was $1800 just a few years later.

In light of the improvements in the 5D3, and inflation over 7 years, I don't view a $3500 introductory price as outrageous. It will drop.

Greg Lavaty wrote:

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.

 harrygilbert's gear list:harrygilbert's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye +17 more
carlk Forum Pro • Posts: 15,940
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

You are right. There are many more, and that’s a big understatement, enthusiasts than pro wedding photographers who buy dslr. These enthusiasts shoot more serious landscape than weddings. Canon can charge twice the price and still lose money if they only intend to sell 5DIII to pro wedding photographer, not to mention there is already the 1DX. The 22MP sensor and the price of the camera are just miscalculations if not because of technical limitation on Canon’s part.

technic wrote:

please wake up; companies like Canon make money by volume, not with niche products like cameras that are only sold to professionals (like most of all the Canon 1D series or similar Nikon models). Most of the people buying 5D/5D2 type camera's were NOT pro's, they are mostly consumers/prosumers with money, who are willing to pay for better image quality (resolution etc. is far more an issue for landscape and architecture than for weddings, the 'making money' part is irrelevant).

Maybe the 5D3 is going to be an exception, but I know for sure that most of the sales of 5D/5D2 in my area were NOT to 'pros' (and I'm pretty sure the wedding shooters were only a small minority of these buyers).

 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
Skip M Veteran Member • Posts: 7,174
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

carlk wrote:

You are right. There are many more, and that’s a big understatement, enthusiasts than pro wedding photographers who buy dslr. These enthusiasts shoot more serious landscape than weddings. Canon can charge twice the price and still lose money if they only intend to sell 5DIII to pro wedding photographer, not to mention there is already the 1DX. The 22MP sensor and the price of the camera are just miscalculations if not because of technical limitation on Canon’s part.

You both are right about one thing, that more "enthusiasts" buy cameras, including the 5 series, than do wedding pros. In fact, I'd bet enthusiasts outnumber all professional camera buyers in any but the 1 series. But those enthusiast buyers don't just shoot landscapes, they shoot portraits, glamour, sports, pets, you name it, sometimes all with the same camera. And they also shoot in tough lighting environments, sometimes without a complete understanding of how to work exposures. The features that the 5D3 has plays right to that market. Yeah, it gives up some pixels for sheer resolution to the D800, but that frame rate might come in mighty handy for their kids' soccer game when they're not out shooting hypothetical landscapes. And the high ISO? Really nice for the kid's birthday party, don't ya think? And it certainly has enough resolution to produce stunning landscapes in sizes most enthusiast/non-pro photographers print, in fact, somewhat beyond that point.

With many amateur/enthusiast photographers, pixel count becomes a case of "mine's bigger than yours is," which is where Canon may have made a mistake. They probably thought the pixel wars were over, much like the auto manufacturers in the late '70s. It's still all about pixel count, just like it's now all about maximum horsepower. No matter whether you'll ever use it, or ever can use it, everybody wants it.

technic wrote:

please wake up; companies like Canon make money by volume, not with niche products like cameras that are only sold to professionals (like most of all the Canon 1D series or similar Nikon models). Most of the people buying 5D/5D2 type camera's were NOT pro's, they are mostly consumers/prosumers with money, who are willing to pay for better image quality (resolution etc. is far more an issue for landscape and architecture than for weddings, the 'making money' part is irrelevant).

Maybe the 5D3 is going to be an exception, but I know for sure that most of the sales of 5D/5D2 in my area were NOT to 'pros' (and I'm pretty sure the wedding shooters were only a small minority of these buyers).

Jay S. Senior Member • Posts: 2,920
Re: Has HDR in camera ;-) nt

The fact of greater bracketing is a benefit, but I can do that on multiple cameras that Canon has with a Promote Controller for a whole lot less than upgrading to a 5DmkIII. Also, I (and I think most) folks shooting HDR will do their own combining of the images vs. taking what the in Camera conclusion is in the 5DmkIII. HDR is a very individual thing. Again the bracketing is nice, but I can do FAR better with the promote and be able to have it work on multiple bodies.

abracadabenhotmailfr wrote:

No text here

-- hide signature --

Jay S.
Fuji 7000 / Canon 20D / Canon 40D / Canon 7D
http://jaysott.smugmug.com

 Jay S.'s gear list:Jay S.'s gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM +7 more
7enderbender Contributing Member • Posts: 822
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

I'm not opposed to more MPs and I generally understand your argument from our perspective. Here is the problem: How big would you like to print in order to take advantage of more MPs? Aren't you way more limited by your printers than by your camera?

Unless you either want to go huge with your prints or the current limitations in printing technology change for the better, I see no real value in more MPs unfortunately. So for large and very large landscape photography you may still be better off with medium format film and a traditional process. Just my 2c.

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

yes but its still probably the only upgrade that could be useful for a landscaper... so in some way they thought about it... lol.

Cultured Vulture Veteran Member • Posts: 4,181
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

Better weatherproofing, better DR, better high ISO. (yes, even for landscape). Probably better metering. I don't see the big problem.
--
Regards,

JR

 Cultured Vulture's gear list:Cultured Vulture's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 7900 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D7200 Nikon D500 +11 more
yabokkie Regular Member • Posts: 483
Re: flash against the sun is a old idea/standard skill

exactly as you said. but I do think a cheap popup will add value.

expro Senior Member • Posts: 1,778
Re: 5dIII a DUD for landscape photographers

the d800 is a full blooded nikon offering - all stops pulled out..

the 5d3 is a Canon stopped down version of 1dx....

the d800 is a better camera in nearly every area, not just mp... and where not better appears to be equal...

Actually I, and I suspect many many people, don't care much about all this...

we just refuse to pay $4800 for one...

especially as d800 in UK is now being offered a cool $1500 cheaper... delivery march 26th...

 expro's gear list:expro's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS M5 Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads