5D MkIII Is it what you wanted?

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by scott_ferris, Mar 1, 2012.

  1. Well now it is actually announced does the new MkIII deliver what you wanted? Is it a good answer to the D800? It looks like it could be a 1Ds MkIII killer to me. Really like the wider screens and the second joystick on the grip.
    Official release here.
  2. Me want new toy!
    How much new toy cost?
  3. "An estimated retail price of $3499 for the EOS 5D MkIII body, $4299 for the body + EF24-105/4L IS USM lens"

    Not cheap but better than my 1Ds MkIII by the looks of it.
  4. New toy cost $3500 MSRP. Me wonder how much cost on street?
    Supposedly ISO 3200 on the MkIII is equivalent to ISO 800 on the MkII, I presume because the photosites on the MkII are only 25% of the sensor, relative to the MkIII's gapless microlens coverage.
    Nice :)
  5. T'anks. I didn't find d'at.
  6. Supposedly ISO 3200 on the MkIII is equivalent to ISO 800 on the MkII, I presume because the photosites on the MkII are only 25% of the sensor, relative to the MkIII's gapless microlens coverage.
    No, coverage is much higher than that in both cases. Lower noise comes from a better gapless microlens array, improved photodiode structure, on-chip noise reduction and better noise reduction algorithms. The 2 stop gain is for in-camera produced JPEGs. RAW files don't show a 2 stop improvement (Canon didn't quantify how much better the RAW files are, they just said they were better).
  7. I found an actual "order" price from Amazon with the 24-105 of $3100 something, but this might just be a teaser. Couldn't find the body-only anywhere.
  8. It will certainly be interesting to see good comparison images, though I can imagine the fights there will be, even before anybody mentions the D800.
    On the face of the specs I'd be more interested in the Canon even if I didn't have any lenses. I have been very happy with 21MP, as a photographer I am more interested in DR and iso performance than direct video out. I like having an SD card slot, makes using the Eye-Fi card easy. I wonder if the price is going to ease this year to compete with the D800, I am sure the first batches available will sell at almost any price, but come Christmas there is a good difference between $2,995 and $3,499.95.
    It almost seems Nikon panicked and threw everything and the kitchen sink into the D800, megapixel overload, XQVC (or is that a shopping channel?) cards that almost nobody makes, USB 3, and price. Canon, meanwhile, have left room for a 5D MkIV, direct out video, USB 3, megapixels etc. They can maximise revenue off the early adopters too.
    I have posted many times I don't care if I never own camera better than my 1Ds MkIII, but if the 5D MkIII does have the DR, iso performance and AF ability it promises then maybe I just will.
  9. This is better than I had expected.
    Just based on what I've seen so far, I'll upgrade from the 5D mk I to the mk III.
    Probably a lot of people will be disappointed that the megapixels did not go up much. But I'm not. This is pretty much exactly what I wanted.
  10. Me want new toy!​
    Me want work to be able to buy new toy!
    Happy shooting,
  11. Improvements in AF and image quality (though for now just speculative) are very welcome. I don't care for more resolution and am not sure the higher frame rate will be helpful but it can't hurt. One thing on my (actually my wife's) wish list that is not mentioned anywhere is functional autofocus during video capture for us mere mortals who want sharp videos of their kids and can't afford to hire a trained focus puller for that :) Wife's Sony NEX 5N does a pretty good job autofocusing in video so we were hoping the Mark III could as well. Next on my list of unfulfilled wishes is lighter weight... the Mark III is apparently some 100 grams (4 oz) heavier than Mark II. Nevertheless, wife says we'll get one sooner rather than later, and who am I to disagree?
  12. And now the first images and movies.
  13. Like Alan said, this is better than I expected. I am definitely impressed with the spec. I shoot primarily JPEG... the 2-stop noise reduction makes my spine tingle ;-)
    Megapixel wars have go on for years, ad nauseum, so I'm glad that Canon has chosen to ermmmm.... focus on other things important to image-making.
  14. The archway and pipe organ in the background of image 10, shot at iso 3200, looks good to me, sure there is a lot of noise reduction and she is well illuminated, but it still looks good.
  15. WOW!
    I'm also curious about autofocus in video.
    Think i'll finaly shell out the $$$ and go full frame :)
  16. No autofocus in video.
  17. Any sign of f8 af capability?
  18. According to the official info, the AF system is essentially identical to the 1DX, and lacks f/8 capability.
    Still a huge improvement over the 5D mk I and mk II though. And AF down to EV -2. That I can use.
  19. Not impressed...it seems not much improvement in RAW image quality; no AF in video; (only) 3 exposure HDR capability (of jpegs - not Raw)...but at 0.5 stop intervals (good).
    Looks like Nikon's D800 image sensor is significantly ahead of what the 5D3 can do.
    I want to like the new 5D3 but it looks like I can focus on lenses for the next couple of years.
  20. Canon 5D Mk II launched at $2699. At that price, I would have really liked 5D Mk III. However at $3499, it is a no go. Used to be Canon was more economical and sensible choice; not any more. The only exciting news today has been the introduction of RF based speed lights.
  21. Price is high but not unexpected.
    Aug 2008 exchange rate was 1 Yen to 0.00929454 US dollar
    Current exchange rate is 1 Yen to 0.0123316 US dollar
    That's 1.327 times higher now. $2700 * 1.327 is $3,581. In terms of Yen, the mk III is being released at a slightly lower price than the mk II was. I realize that doesn't help a US buyer, but they're made in Japan and that's how the exchange rates play out.
  22. No f8 AF capability. Sorry!
    "....it seems not much improvement in RAW image quality..." You cannot conclude that frrm anything said up to now. It's probably less than 2 stops, but even 1 stop would be significant. Canon are showing ISO 3200 images (JPEG of course since you can't show RAW) with essentially no noise and which still look very sharp (i.e. show no obvious signs of heavy handed software noise reduction).
  23. No autofocus in video.​
    As an amateur this is very important for me. :-(
    Happy shooting,
  24. 5d3 seems to check all the boxes I have except for flash commander found in the 7d. I don't get it since the d800 does accommodate pop up flash for CLS. Is the D800 100% VF?
    I'll wait a year or two before getting one though. No need to rush.
  25. A big positive is the dof preview button repositioning, I have never got on with EOS standard placement for that.
  26. Aug 2008 exchange rate was 1 Yen to 0.00929454 US dollar
    Current exchange rate is 1 Yen to 0.0123316 US dollar
    That's 1.327 times higher now. $2700 * 1.327 is $3,581. In terms of Yen, the mk III is being released at a slightly lower price than the mk II was. I realize that doesn't help a US buyer,​
    It is basically all relative. Cars, TVs, and other cameras are also made in Japan or at least by Japanese companies. Their prices have not shot through the roof. Why only 5D? Even 1Dx is cheaper then 1Ds Mk III (they are both FF, so manufacturing costs are similar).
  27. As a purely-amateur, non-videographer user of Canon's products, the price of this is pushing me slowly but surely towards the 60D. Perhaps I'll wait a while to see what the next generation ('650D', '70D') will bring; but the 5DIII will not be on sale for any amount of money that I can justify to myself.
    So I'm not really 'disappointed'; I suspect that my dreams of the price-point that the 5DIII would appear at were never realistic. Good though it undoubtedly is, it isn't the camera for me. This is a useful reality-check.
  28. If this has the same autofocus as the 1DX, and decent weatherproofing, why buy the more expensive camera?
  29. That's pretty much the kind of camera I was looking for. But I own a 7D, I understand owners of a 5D Mk II will have less reasons to buy it.
  30. Will have to see if Canon has finally made the flash control as reliable and easy to work with as Nikon. Can't even begin to guess why Nikon has it down and Canon is still fumbling in the dark here.
    No eye control focus. Sure like it on my older EOS 3 film bodies.
    Will wait to see the image quality but it looks as if Canon is willingly giving up the lead in the pixel count to Sony and Nikon both.
    Sure hope the low light auto focus problems are finally fixed so it is reliable and repeatable.
    A quick look seems to say Nikon is building serious Photojournalism tools while Canon is still looking at the much greater amateur market. But, ultimate image quality is what I will look at before making a decision between the two - or possibly even Sony for the future.
  31. I know we say this every time but the UK vs US price is a bit rich: $3,499 (~£2,195) vs £2,999 (~$4,779).
  32. One thing the Nikon D800 has that might tip the scales that direction is full time AF with face detection for video.
    As stated, I'll wait to see what ultimate image quality is between the two before deciding what to do.
  33. I know we say this every time but the UK vs US price is a bit rich: $3,499 (~£2,195) vs £2,999 (~$4,779).​
    Our problem is that we can't avoid paying VAT, and therefore our quoted prices always include it. US customers can avoid paying Sales Tax, and quoted prices always exclude it. So that £2999 (let's call it £3000 - the figures are clearer) comes to £2500 + VAT of £500. £2500 isn't a world away from your £2,195.
  34. 5d3 seems to check all the boxes I have except for flash commander found in the 7d. I don't get it since the d800 does accommodate pop up flash for CLS.​
    The 5D and 5D MkII don't have a pop-up flash, and considering the weather sealing of the series, I doubt they even considered adding a pop up flash. I'd guess they figured that if a buyer can afford a $3500 body, they can drop $200 for an ST-E2 or some radio triggers and keep the sealing.
  35. Call me a noob, but the lack of a pop-up flash still bugs me.

    The price bugs me more.

    On the plus side: 6fps with top notch AF. Now, THAT is worth talking about!
  36. Unless the price drops significantly, I won't be getting one but may be on the look out for a clean, used 5D MkII.
  37. I wonder why no AF in video mode? Coupled with the SWM and IS lenses it would have been a good feature to add.
  38. The good news is the 5DII will be affordable to more people with its price decrease.
  39. Of course Canon is trying to produce the BBD (Bigger Better Deal) in a new consumer camera - their continued survival as a camera company depends upon it. The 5D models (v1 & 2) have been very successful for Canon, but I think they may be leveraging the past success too heavily with this new offering.
    I'm not a video shooter, I've not used the video feature at all on my 5D2 so that aspect of the 5D3 is lost on me. I believe there are many photographers who feel similarly about the video capabilities. Considering only still photography, I'm very happy with my 5D2 and am not interested in paying a $3500 price tag for 61 focus points instead of only 9 - which also requires the new $650 Canon flash to fully utilize, btw.
    I suspect that the 5D3 will not have the success that Canon experienced with previous 5D models and that a "scaled down" version without the video capabilities which is designed for the still photographer only will be necessary for Canon to offer. Things that I would like to see in that revised 5D3 would be a longer shutter life, better build quality and perhaps a mirror-free design. But then, those features would cause a camera to have a longer service life and that's not going to help Canon sell more cameras, is it?
  40. 5D3 vs D800.
    Depends on what you want to shoot:
    5D3 is better weddings
    D800 better for studio and landscape
    D800 is far more appealing to me.
  41. In a word, no, it'd not what I wanted. I wanted more resolution for tripod-mounted work at low ISO settings. But it looks like a great
    camera with many improvements over the original. I'm just not sure how quickly I need to run out and buy one at $3500US. That's a lot
    of dough for one extra MP, somewhat better noise performance, video improvements that I don't need, and gimicks like an HDR mode
    that I would use, albeit sparingly. The 5D2 serves me well today. I may stick with it for a while longer.
  42. Disappointing. What I see is a Canon 5D2 that has the AF it always should have. Otherwise, no big deal.
  43. I don't need one as I have fun dabbling in a "semi-pro" fashion (my day job allows me to loose all kinds of money with my photog). I have a 7D and 5DmkII. It looks like the MkIII will eliminate the need for my 7D.
    One comment on price.... the forums are lit up with comparisons....and how Nikon being cheaper or the MKIII too much...."I'm going to switch cause the Nikon is cheaper" Do the following test: estimate what you have spent in the last 3 years on photography and then calculate what 500 dollars represents in percentage..... Now... doesn't that feel better?
    I've got a few lenses I'd like to own first... about a year from now when the dust settles and there are used and refurbed MkIII's I'm sure I'll be looking hard at them.
    Bottom line... I like the specs...I don't do video and never wanted a pop up flash so that isn't an issue.
    Now... back to the real world...
  44. If this has the same autofocus as the 1DX, and decent weatherproofing, why buy the more expensive camera?​
    Apart from 12fps, that is EXACTLY what I was thinking. The 5D3 is not enough for me to upgrade from the 5D2 but I like the direction Canon is taking. Certainly preferable to the latest Nikon offering. I really wish Canon would put a built in flash on the 5D series, they are useful on so many occasions although I suppose that would take away sales of the 220EX etc.
  45. It's a good solid incremental upgrade, but not very exciting to me. I don't need 6fps or better AF as I have never had a problem with the 5DIIs. I assume we may get a stop improvement in ISO quality - nice, but not enough for me to get it at present. Everything will depend on the resulting image quality with respect to the D800. I suspect that the resolution of the D800 is wasted for 90% of photogs to be honest. I am sure many will feel like me. Canon have priced this aggressively which suggests to me they also may not expect the same uptake as they saw with the previous 2 5D models.
  46. It might be the same AF unit but the processing for it is different, the 5D MkIII will focus slower than the 1DX The 1DX has a Digic 4 processor just for the AF, and a further two Digic 5+ processors for everything else, I suppose that makes it a tri-core, the 5D MkIII has just one Digic 5+ for everything.
  47. The shoe has finally dropped. If someone game me a 5Diii I would love it, but I would not spend $3500 on one. The 7d is looking better and better all the time.
    On the bright side people who recently spent $2400 for a 5Dii aren't kicking themselves, considering the huge price increase.
  48. zml


    I would like a vertical shutter release button directly on the body (just the button and the upper dial.) That would allow keeping my right elbow close to the body instead of extending the arm out while shooting verticals and reaching for the shutter release. I love the ergonomics of the 1D/1Ds/1Dx series (fits ma palms perfectly) but I don't give a rat's ass about battery packs on non-1D bodies (wobbly and ergonomically suspect.) A vertical shutter release button directly on 5D3 would be sweet.
    And USB 3 (why on earth USB 2 in 2012..?)
  49. Here's why I'll be getting one, eventually (and not a D800):
    24-105 L (Nikon's new 24-120 hasn't impressed)
    70-200 f4 IS (no Nikon Equivalent)
    Improved metering (the 7D had a much better metering system, and even the newer Rebels had a better meter)
    Vastly improved AF (surprise, they finally got the memo!)
    Lower noise (although how much isn't clear)
    But I'll wait until the price drops.
  50. I hear many complaining (not here) that its not enough megapixels which I find funny because in the past people complained that was all Canon was doing was packing on too many MP. IMO the 5D2 is such a great camera that they seemed to improve only what needed some improving (focus, frame rate, some video features and other great features from the 7D etc. I was always impressed with the great ISO performance so if they managed to make that even better it should be a great camera.
    I don't know if I will be getting one anytime soon but to me 22mp is just fine.
  51. Tommy,
    I agree, after complaining about pixel stuffing some are swinging in the other direction. Not me. I've found the 21MP 5D II to have plenty of resolution, even for large prints. What bugged me most about the 5D II was the metering and the AF. AF was accurate, but simply not able to reliably track moving subjects in multi-point mode, especially in lower light. Apparently, both items are addressed. I've shot a 7D, and found that meter to be far superior than the 5D II, including flash metering. So I'll wait a while and make the move. The differential between the used value of the II and new value of the III is significant, but not killer. Much less than switching to another brand. And who knows? In a few months maybe Sony will offer an even better FF cam, and we can start this debate all over again.
  52. Disappointed. The Nikon D800 is the camera I wanted the 5D3 to be. I'm not upgrading right now. But if Canon does not have an answer for the D800 by the time I do, there's a good chance I'll jump to Nikon, or at least add them to my collection.
    The vast majority of my shots are at ISO 100-800, with occasional 1600 and 3200. Higher resolution and larger prints are far more important to me than less noise at high ISOs I never use. And I'm skeptical regarding how much difference there really will be between the two at, say, 6400 and 12800 when viewing at the same print size. I know I'll see the difference between the two in a 36" ISO 100 landscape print. I'm doubtful I'll see the difference in, say, a 13x19" ISO 6400 reception or sports print.
    At least Canon got the AF right this time.
  53. Does the mkIII finally have an AF assist light for low light photography?
    Can you equip the mkIII with a split screen?
    If both answers are no, I don't see much interest in buying 1.2 and 1.4 lenses.
  54. No built-in AF assist light, though with AF down to EV -2 that's less necessary now.
    The focus screen is not replaceable. Which is too bad, I prefer the super precision focus screens; but not unexpected given the new things the viewfinder can do.
  55. The Mark lll sounds like the camera many people were wishing for. Better auto focus and metering without jumbo file sizes and improved noise reduction. It would be great if it were the same price as the Mark ll. I think the market will speak. The price will go down if Nikon starts selling a bunch of D800's. If you aren't too far invested in Canon equipment then it might be a good time to switch. I can hardly wait to see side by side comparisons. I wonder why they didn't build in a radio controller for the new flash system into the Mark lll or the 1 DX. How about building in wireless file transfer too instead of an $850 add on. Jeez give us some value for our hard earned cash.
  56. I don't know if Canon is on the same planet as everyone else. Has any one seen the price
    of the new 24-70. Here in the UK It's expected to be £2400! And if the difference the 24-
    70 mki and the mkii are any thing like the kind of differences of the mki and mkii of the
    70-200 2.8 is Canon can keep it .Add that to the price of a 5dmkiii,£3000 and the new
    £650 flashgun, who is canon trying to attract because no ones moving from
    nikon.There's no recession in Canon land. The 5dmkii at their lowest price in the UK was
    £1450, that was less then 2 months ago, now they're £1680 and still going up, so it
    makes the mkiii more reasonable. If you can get a mkii at the cheaper price there would
    be no way I'd pay an extra £1500 for the mkiii . For me I'd get the mkii and a 7d before
    I'd buy a mkiii. With the 7d your getting 8fps instead of 6, and you get the crop factor to
    extend the reach of your lens. And still have change from the price of a mkiii.I'm dissapointed with the mkiii , the 1d's are always going
    to be top money and rightly so they offer everything and are built to be abused by pros
    who need to get the job done, get paid and go home, and not fuss over features and
    camera specs. But the prices coming out of Canon at the moment are shocking. So I've
    been told canon are not going to stop producing the 5dmkii anytime soon because
    they're still selling well. And before all of you " must have a new toy now " people rush
    out and buy a 5dmkiii , wait till after the Olympics is over and everyone stops being frames per
    second and AF junkies. Canon will announce a 36 or even a 45 mp camera. And then
    you'll have to sell your soul to canon and watch wife walk out on you to get your new new toy to
    play with.
  57. William - do I gather that you won't be buying one?
  58. The sensor resolution and features provided by my 5D Mk II are more than adequate to fit my needs. My money will be spent on high resolution prime from Canon as they become available.
  59. I've tried to get canon to give me one in
    exchange for a good review on a website
    but they haven't got back to me yet. Bob.
  60. I think it is a fine camera. It will be what a number of people wanted. However, speaking just for myself, it is not what I would have wanted. For the subjects I shoot and the way I shoot them, I would have been interested in higher MP count.
  61. This works for me and I'm sure I'll end up buying one (although after the initial bugs get worked out and it's been through the inevitable firmware upgrades).
    I was worried that Canon would engage Nikon in a pixel war and thankfully they've avoided that. I have never needed to interpolate up files from the 1Ds Mk III or 5D Mk II so larger files would only mean a need for more storage, more processing power and time spent manipulating huge files in Photoshop (21MP 16 Bit TIFF files in 4 layers are already nearly 500mb in Photoshop).
    I like the dual card slots, the AF in lower light levels, the decrease in noise at high ISOs, the two axis built-in levels, the HDR direct output (very useful for interior panoramics with windows). The improved frames per second rate, metering and AF points are bonuses also.
    Basically, it's a good step forward with real improvements that make every day differences. It may not have the spec sheet wow factor of the D800 but as a professional tool, it's going to be very useful and will save a lot of time both on site and in post processing (leveling and HDR).
  62. William - They haven't got back to me either...and I'm not holding my breath.
    Even getting a 2 week loan for a review isn't an easy task. That could be weeks or even months away. They still haven't offered up an EF70-300/4-5.6L IS for review yet, and that one has actually been on sale for months now.
  63. "An estimated retail price of $3499 for the EOS 5D MkIII body. . . .
    As I recall, the original Canon 5D came in with a list price of about $3500, body only. I bought mine in 2006 for $2579, new from KEH (the first new item I ever purchased from KEH).
    I paid $2499 for the 5D II in 2009, by comparison---back to B&H as usual for new stuff. So, if the past is any indicator, after the initial surge in demand, prices will likely settle below $3000. I don't know if I will buy the 5D III or not, since the 5D II does pretty much everything I want it to do.
    On the other hand, I do love shooting in low light. Here are some low light, high ISO samples on Digital Photography Review as of this afternoon:
  64. If I had the money to spare I'd buy it. However, what I really like is the fact that Canon is pitching it as between the 5d2 and 1Dx, meaning that they will continue selling the 5d2, and apparently at a soon-to-be-lower cost. The outcome I can see from this decision is that the 5d3's arrival will usher in a period where more amateurs like me take the plunge into full-frame digital, because of getting access to a new 5d2 somewhere in the sub $2k range.
  65. Some cameras are destined to become classics. I would put the 1Ds Mark II and the D3 in that category. They changed the game when they arrived on the scene.
    5D Mark II
    Nice cameras, but not classics:
    5D Mark III
  66. I think it's a good jump from the 5Dc, but if I owned a 5D II I would probably save my money. Unless I had deep pockets, a very forgiving wife, I just won the Lotto, or my job was paying for it.
    The weather sealing, faaster shutter count, built-in HDR and double exposure do sound very intriguing though.
  67. No! This is a disappointment of biblical proportions. However, it does mean my 5D II, that I bought in the fall for under $2000 USD, will be my landscape camera for several/many years to come. I'll have to wait that much longer for a 36 MP Canon...now, if only Nikon would get as involved in the PC-E business as Canon is with their TS-E lenses.
    Good grief, don't tell me I might have to switch again!
  68. zml


    Most people buy cameras for their image quality, something that is only mildly dependent on the claimed resolution in megapixels and other specs. Real world tests are more important than specifications, so wait and see folks before spewing venom... Yes, Canon 5D3 might be not for you - don't buy it then!
  69. On http://www.BobAtkins.com, there is a link to some samples:
    This one in particular caught my eye:
    A lot of people are going to be very. very happy with that level of quality, regardless of the stated specs.
    Here's the entire article, in case you missed it:
  70. I *****LOVE***** the demo video 'COLOR OF HOPE'.
    Two thumbs way up ! ! !
  71. When I started in digital photography I made a decision to invest in the
    canon system. I'm not a canon fanboy , but there were issue back then
    that I thought canon handled better then NIKON. For example canon
    were taking full frame dslr seriously, while NIKON.only had cropped dslr
    forma while . I had the feeling canon had It's feet on the ground. This
    continued, the 7d is probably the best cropped dslr out there. The 5d
    mkii ,while It's not perfect it was ground breaking and 3-4 years on it can
    still hold It's own against the latest dslr out there. I love the way canon
    Has made 4 different types of 70-200 lenses all high quality but
    affordable to different budgets or needs. So there is a lot I like about
    them. But I don't know if there's been a shuffle in management , but its
    like canon can think they've got some sort of fanatical fans out there who
    will pay anything for the latest gear. And that latest gear is more
    expensive then anything else other companies offer , and It's not much
    of an upgrade, while NIKON somehow managed to bring out a better
    built, better spec camera for £600-£700 less. Have canon forgot they're
    not the only manufacturer and people don't have to buy it. About those
    of you who are happy about the generosity of canon , because the
    5dmkii price will drop , don't you realize its already gone up £250 in a
    matter of weeks , so canon can do £100 cashback promotion at Easter. A
    lot of money needs to earned and a lot of bills have to be payed today
    before you have £3000 lying around in petty cash. Canon you're not
  72. Whilst I think it looks to be a fantastic camera, I am coming to the conclusion it won't be my next body, though I reserve judgement until I am ready to buy late this year. I shoot stills so video is of no interest to me.
    We each have our own priorities and budgets, and rational for purchases, and new bodies have to be compared to the functionality in the bodies we already own. If I owned a 7D I'd 100% be up for the 5D MkIII. But I own a 1Ds MkIII, I doubt if overall performance from the 5D MkIII will be leaps and bounds above it, either in IQ or AF, my two priorities. I am sure the 1Ds MkIII is effectively dead and I can see no reason to buy one over a 5D MkIII, but if you already own one, so far, there seems no overwhelming reason to change. The 1Dx offers me little too, lower MP for increased frame rate and a few more bells and whistles I have lived without up till now.
    Adding all this up, my logical next body is a 1D MkIV, same batteries and interface as my current camera, ideal complement to ff with the 1.3 crop factor, higher frame rate, cheaper than 5D MkIII with drive and much cheaper than 1Dx. Oh and I get to play with video but it isn't video-centric.
    Yep, logic points me towards the 1D MkIV next, we'll see later in the year.
  73. If I owned a 7D I'd 100% be up for the 5D MkIII.
    I feel the opposite Scott , if I had a 7d and had been waiting to see
    what the mkiii was like before going full frame I'd get a 5dmkii. Like
    wise if I had a 5dmkii and wanted a sports camera I'd be looking at the
    7d. Then you've got a backup body.
  74. Is it what I wanted? No... but then again, I guess my standards are pretty high. I have yet to find a camera to tear me away from my 1Ds Mark II. Here's why, to me I care about weather sealing, iso 100 - 800 IQ, decent AF.
    I avoid video like the plague.
    I buy most of my gear used because of the value depreciation that happens so quickly with all of this equipment (This $3500 5D mark III will be <$2000 in 5 years).
    Long story short: If I look at upgrading from the 1Ds II to the 5D3 I'll gain:
    -Worse or possibly equal (I doubt it) Weather sealing
    -Same Shutter Speed
    -Slightly better (maybe?) AF and exposure
    -Better Battery, Bigger Screen, Better ISO Performance, Newer Technology (bells and whistles)
    -6MP (which is nothing at this point... it will allow me to crop slightly more... or print bigger (I dont need to do)
    - At least $2000 gone from my bank account
    So it seems that now... 7 years after the 1Ds Mark II was released, they have put it at the "Prosumer" level in price, with added video, at 2x the price of what you can buy a used 1Ds II for.
    If the 1DX was @ the price of the 5DIII then I would be more tempted (because of the faster shutter speeds for when I do shoot sports)
  75. Oops... sorry 1Ds II shutter is at 4fps so 5D3 is 2fps higher
  76. After reviewing the sample images, my first impression is that the files are extremely clean from a noise and grain
    perspective. Shadow noise is the 5D2's key weakness, IMHO, because I don't rely on fancy autofocus features.
    Nevertheless, Canon seems to have improved the AF to a vast degree as well. The two areas that users complained
    about most vocally have been addressed.

    If you photograph events, this should be a great camera for you. For weddings, what is there to even think about? The 5D3 looks to be a wedding
    photographer's dream machine. Reportage would be well covered by a camera that handles noise well. I could see myself using this camera for urban
    photography, particularly for scenes with people and moving vehicles. In post processing, I wouldn't have to trade
    sharpness for noise as I do frequently with the 5D2.

    Even for landscape and cityscape shooting, the 5D3 could be a fine body. It's difficult to dispute that Canon has the best
    lenses for such purposes: 17 and 24 TS-E, 70-200 f/4 IS, 100-400 IS. I have managed to make 48-inch prints from a single 5D2
    exposure with extrapolation and creative sharpening. Perhaps even more detail can be milked from the 5D3's super-clean IQ.

    The elephant in the room is the D800. On paper it makes the 5D3's 22 MP look somewhat anemic, and the D800E
    opens up a whole new ball game. But 36 MP full frame sensors are demanding. Shooting at f/16, you're probably cutting
    that resolution in half. Motion blur will be painfully apparent at the print sizes that a D800 could make possible, and the outer edges of a lens' image circle will no longer be able to hide any weaknesses. A clean 22 MP sensor should be fine for most applications, and perhaps it's a more versatile choice for the majority of photographers. A 28 - 32 MP spec might have made the new Canon seem more competitive, but that almost certainly have impacted the camera's noise performance in a negative way.

    To be certain, the 5D3 is an improvement over its predecessor. It may not be the improvement that some photographers
    wanted, but it may turn out to be what a lot of buyers need. The wedding and video folks should be thrilled. The rest of
    us will have to wait to see whether this is the body for us.
  77. Erik,
    Your obvious upgrade, if and when you choose to, is a used 1Ds MkIII, that is where I went after the 1Ds MkII, it is a much more complete camera.
    "It may not be the improvement that some photographers wanted, but it may turn out to be what a lot of buyers need."
    That is a very good way to look at it.
  78. As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, you can buy a 5D2 and a 7D for less than the price of a 5D3! That tells me something about the crazy list price of the 5D3. You can keep it Canon.
  79. It's exactly what I wanted i.e. there is nothing mind blowing that makes me want to trade in my 5DMk II. What a damp
    squib. In my humble opinion.
  80. I knew this would happen! After months of agonizing and re-analyzing my finances, I finally upgraded from a 5D MkI to the 5D MkII, only to have the 5D MkIII announced less than a week after my purchase. I don't really regret it, though; The 5D MkII is such a terrific upgrade (for me) from the 5D MkI that I am totally satisfied, for the moment anyway:) The only things the 5D MKIII has that I really would like to have are the expanded auto-bracketing feature and the in-camera HDR. That would make shooting the virtual tours I do a lot more efficient. I'm sure this will be a great camera, but I'm also glad to see they aren't discontinuing the 5D MkII line just yet. Maybe that will mean they will continue to provide support and firmware upgrades for the MkII awhile longer.
  81. Joel, you can probably sell the '2' for a good price if you really want a '3'.
  82. Another thing to keep in mind is all those original 5D cameras still in service out there that are starting to show their age relative to current technology (autofocus, low max ISO, high noise, 12.8 MP vs 20+MP, etc.). I never got around to upgrading to the 5DII (really feeling happy about having bought those skis rather than upgrading to the 5DII last month), so to me this is looking like a great upgrade. I'm guessing many others that never upgraded are also starting to think about a new camera body. I think with the combination of aging 5D originals out there, early adopters, low light shooters, shooters looking for better autofocus, those looking to step up to a full frame, video shooters, etc., etc. Canon has put together a camera with a great deal of sales potential.
  83. Joel, you can probably sell the '2' for a good price if you really want a '3'.​
    The problem with that is, I would probably lose at least a couple of hundred dollars selling the MkII. The net difference to buy the MkIII would then be around $1200-1400, way way over what I can afford at present. Maybe in another year or two, if business picks up really well...
  84. People will always moan about A or B (and I am no exception) but as I look on it as a whole, the 5D3 looks like a great improvement and a worthy successor to the 5D2. I never really liked the 5D and 5D2 but some day I may get myself a 5D3.
    Happy shooting,
  85. I would love to buy one, but the marginal utility over the 5D II would not be sufficient to justify the cost for the type of shooting I do. Here is one that I shot (handheld from in front of my house) with the 5D II just a few minutes ago:
  86. Pricing woes can be attributed to the strength of the Yen to the US Dollar. About 80 yen will get you a buck (I remember back in 1980's it was 256). My Canon pro rep says that's what they're fighting more than anything on cost. That said, in old conversations with Nikon pro reps, they always contended that Canon would *always* undercut Nikon so as a result Nikon never got into pricing battles. So the D800 coming inn at US$500 less is a bit of a surprise.
  87. No built-in AF assist light, though with AF down to EV -2 that's less necessary now.​
    That's a real bummer. I can't focus with mkii in low light, not even with fast primes. It got me into trouble several times. That and the reason there's no split screen in mkii is why I'd consider switching to nikon.
    I'm not complaining, the mkii is a good camera but for the price the mkiii is listed, I expect at least an AF assist light! Even consumer cameras are equipped with it.
    What does AF EV-2 mean? How does it function?
  88. Charcoal - not wanting to state the obvious but pick up a ST-E2 Speedlite Transmitter. Only you don't use it with speedlites. It makes a great IR focusing aid. They cost a bit more than US$200. Cheaper than 5D3. Good luck! (Mr. Obvious checking out now). :-]
  89. Charcoal,
    EV-2 equates to 1/2 second exposure at f1.4 at 1600iso, pretty dim conditions.
    No top end cameras have assist lights, the AF is expected to keep up with the conditions.
  90. No top end cameras have assist lights, the AF is expected to keep up with the conditions.​
    Well, it doesn't in the mkii. Can't judge the mkiii though.
    Charcoal - not wanting to state the obvious but pick up a ST-E2 Speedlite Transmitter.​
    Can't do that, I have a radio transmitter mounted on the camera.
    Pretty expensive solution you state there. The d700 got an assist light built in.
  91. The 5D MkII was not a top end camera, for photographic purposes it was always a very poor cousin to the 1Ds MkIII. When the 5D MkIII is available it will be Canon's highest mp camera available, and it will have the best video of any EOS camera, by default that makes it a top end camera.
    The D700 was not a top end camera either, the D3s and D3x don't have assist lights, again, "No top end cameras have assist lights".
  92. Nice camera. Very pricey and not worth it to me. I would have been happy with 5D mark 11 specs with a pop-up flash for under $2k. That would have sold like hot cakes.
    It is pretty clear Canon are trying to reprice their range into the stratosphere: new f2.8 primes for $800, replacing $200-$300 equivalents, $1600 70-300 f4-5.6 L zooms and the like! It seems like they have abandoned the enthusiast segment of the market, with either only cheap rebels and kit lenses, or exe pro gear and not much in between.
  93. If Canon priced the 5d3 at the same price as the D800 it would still be a let down, but to come in at the biggest part of a grand more it;s taking people to be chumps. It will go down in price , as will the D800 ,but it's got more to got then nikon. I can't see the 5d3 coming down to less then £2500 in less then 2 years The AF is nice, but even the 1dx doesn't really blow my socks off for £5300.
    The other thing I don't understand is why here in the UK wrier paying the same in pounds as the US is in dollars, when the pound isn't equal to the dollar.
  94. As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, you can buy a 5D2 and a 7D for less than the price of a 5D3! That tells me something about the crazy list price of the 5D3. You can keep it Canon.​
    I'm sure Canon would not mind what you buy as long as you keep buying Canon products.
    Happy shooting,
  95. Canon announces their new EOS 5D Mk III Camera Body
    by Jon Williams ©2012
    Trouble is brewing for Canon I'm afraid. Hang on to your Canon Mark II. Suffice it to say that I suspect Canon has made a big error in their marketing judgement. I think Nikon will be the benefactor of Canon's big announcement regarding the upgraded 5D Mark 3 body.
    Of course the MK3 is a very fine camera, and it has been vastly improved in the auto-focus department. Autofocus was pretty much the only weakness in the MK2 model. I've been waiting anxiously for the MK3 model myself …. but now I’m quite certain that I won't be rushing out to pre-order one. So, what’s “bugging me.”
    There are many technical experts out there who are better qualified to evaluate and compare the various camera capabilities. Most of these guys (and their reports) seem to be very – technically oriented. My opinion (of the new MK3 announcement) is based primarily on my recollections of how new camera models have been accepted in the past.
    I often rely on a – hunch – or a "gut instinct," about such things. Here is what my “hunch” is telling me about MK3 acceptance by professional (and serious amateur) photographers.
    The key factors are all in relation to Nikons recently announced D800 model.
    Factor One: Nikons new D800 possesses incredible “curb appeal.” It is incredibly “hip” in design and is more – cosmetically – beautiful (sexy) than the more homely Canon MK3. The way a camera – looks – has always been important to most camera buyers.
    Factor Two: The Nikon D800 is priced $500 less than the Canon MK3, and worse yet, it is priced $1000 more than the Canon MK2. Ouch!
    Factor Three: The Nikon D800 comes with “bragging rights.” It is a 36 mega pixel body! That's a really big WOW factor! I admit I'm pretty impressed, even though I personally think all those mega pixels will be more of a nuisance than a virtue. Consumers of professional photography services often judge a photographers skill level based upon how long his lenses are and how many mega pixels his camera has. Public perception effects how professional photographers choose to equip themselves.
    Fact Four: Canon equipment is being priced too high for no apparent reason. This is particularly true of Canon lenses which have gone up in price nearly 30% in the past two years. This is beginning to irritate a lot of Canon photographers. Dream state: “Come to think of it … I own dozens of older Nikkor AI lenses in a variety of focal lengths. Wouldn't it be nice to use to be able to use them again?” With Nikon I can. With Canon I can’t.
    Shooting with either a Nikon D800 or the Canon 5D MkIII will not make your pictures look any better. Which just brings it all back to – sex appeal – bragging rights – and pricing.
    Disclaimer: I’m speaking strictly as a "Still" photographer. Videographers may see an entirely different set of inherent features related to their type of work
  96. I don't really understand the responses about price, this is a 1Ds MkIII beater in almost every respect, the 1Ds MkIII doesn't even have video. You could go to B&H and buy a 1Ds MkIII for $6,995 today and not get half the functionality of the 5D MkIII. For less than half the money, you get more resolution, more frames per second, new AF, 100% viewfinder, twin card slots, weatherproofing to the standards of older 1 series cameras, very high quality video, electronic levels, the list goes on and on.
    The 5D MkIII is a bargain.
  97. I would much rather keep my 5D2 and purchase a real HD or 3D video camera in the $2500 range and add the new Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VR and why not get theTamron 70-300 F4-5.6 VR. I could have all this stuff and still be at the same price of a New Canon 5d Mark III or the over priced Canon 24-70 F2.8 II.
    When it comes to making money I think the more camera's you haave and the more versitle you cna be will make you more money than higher quality in one camera. If I am shooting a wedding I would rather have multiple shooters, so if I can give someone a 7d or pro HD video camera to use while I am shooting with my old 5D2. This is great.
    Espeacially when shooting video XLR audio imputs and autofocusing on standard video camera's is better than DSLR Video. So I will expand with two new VR lenses and new HD video camer rather than upgrade.
  98. It is important to remember that my post was written in the context of – marketing and buyers perception - rather than "which camera is most desirable or technically superior." Specifically my comments were in relation to Canon vs. Nikon marketing methods and outcome.
  99. Well done for tracking that video down. I expected there to be better noise control with the new mkiii, I think that today it is to be expected to have improvements with noise with any new camera, the 5D4 will will be better and the 7D2 and so on. What people can't get their head around is the pricing. It has been mentioned by some that they don't see a problem with this.
    What everyone has failed to see is that Nikon realised it's D800 and priced it before Canon's 5D3 was out. So Nikon wasn't competing with Canon's pricing at the time of release, but Canon knew exactly what they were up against with the D800, and still realised a camera thats specs and build quality are below the D800 and it's priced £700 more.Why? What is so special about owning a Canon? Everything if you've already invested thousands with Canon, it's unlikely you're going to jump ship.
    I think Canon underestimated how the 5D2 would affect the video side of things as much as it did, it opened up a whole new revenue for them. Now they don't have to try as hard, and it's Nikon who are playing catch up to get a piece of the professional video market. But now Canon have but all their eggs in one basket they should be praying that the D800 performs poorly with video, because if it's as good as the 5D3 that means nikon lenses that are decades old can be used, Nikons crop only lenses can be used, and this is with a 36mp camera.
    Megapixels do matter, when you sell your images to stock agencies , the more megapixels the better , because high resolution image downloads means more money.
    I don't regret having Canon gear, I've got most of what I need, but the recent releases from Canon have left me wondering about the future. If I was staring again there's a very good chance I'd be using Nikon. This is the first time I've ever felt this way. Canon and Nikon have always been leap frogging one another, but this time it feels different, Canon have turned a corner and I don't know where the road leads.
  100. Does anyone have any idea if the 5d3 can autofocus at f8? I've read that it has the same AF as the 1dx and that that camera has problems higher than 5.6.
  101. The 5D MkIII is a bargain.​
    A few months ago, I think that it would have been perceived that way by more people, Scott. The D800 might not be competing directly with it, but the general perception is that Nikon has pulled a bigger coup. This could affect a whole generation who are just buying their first big DSLRs. Nikon might look like the safer investment, not just an opportunity to shoot a high-end camera.
    I think that you are correct in seeing the 5D III as competing with Canon's own 1Ds III more than with Nikon's D800.
    I think, in other words, that Nikon has not only produced a superb camera, but that it has pulled a huge marketing coup. That is why I have been hoping that there would be a 1Ds IV coming with more megapixels, but, even if there were, who would pay for it if they could have the D800 for much less--assuming that lenses are not the deciding factor? And, as far as lenses go, with more and more lenses coming out in more expensive versions, it would be pretty easy to jump to Nikon if one were determined to do so: buy their 24-70 and their 70-200, and you have a pretty good start on a new collection.
    I have no intention of doing so, but there will be some who will.
  102. Landrum,
    I strongly suspect that once owners get D800's in their hands they will be shocked at how much effort it is to realize the potential of the sensor. Having used my 1DS MkIII critically for two years now I know how difficult it is to realize 21mp worth of resolution.
    I am not talking about dubious claims of lens limitations, the biggest effect on critical resolution I see is manual focus via live view, if you are not prepared to use that most D800 owners would be better sticking with a D700, and I have processed quite a few D700 files too.
    So whilst you are right, before actual cameras are on the shelves, Nikon seem to have a coup, and I suspect in lab tests where manual focus and focus bracketing is used, the D800 will trounce the 5D MkIII on resolution, but I think for real world shooting the tables will turn. I think Canon have made the camera many have wanted for years, now we have it many think the grass is greener else where, but I suspect it isn't.
  103. Thanks, Scott. Shun Cheung just commented on the thread I started today, reflecting your own opinions in many respects. You might want to read his remarks.
    I strongly suspect that once owners get D800's in their hands they will be shocked at how much effort it is to realize the potential of the sensor.​
    Based on my own experience with the 5D II, Scott, I would have to agree with you. Perfect technique is required to get the most out of 22 mp, much less 36.
    Nice thread you have going over here. . . .
  104. Yes but..... 8 fps, $500 cheaper, 1/250 flash sync and multiple custom white balance would be icing on the cake.
  105. I strongly suspect that once owners get D800's in their hands they will be shocked at how much effort it is to realize the potential of the sensor. Having used my 1DS MkIII critically for two years now I know how difficult it is to realize 21mp worth of resolution.
    I am not talking about dubious claims of lens limitations, the biggest effect on critical resolution I see is manual focus via live view, if you are not prepared to use that most D800 owners would be better sticking with a D700, and I have processed quite a few D700 files too.​
    But the pixel density of the D800 is only the same as that of a 15MP APS-C sensor. I don't see EOS 7D users lamenting that they need to use manual focus and live view in order to get the best results out of their 18MP sensor. The 7D sensor has around 15% higher native resolution than that of the D800 (albeit over a smaller area) and so is even more demanding on lens quality and focus. If you took the 7D sensor and extended it out to full frame you'd end up with 46MP.
  106. They might not lament it Bob, but if they did use live view and optimum technique, many would get much more detailed pictures. Of course that isn't always the priority for an image, but we are well into the realms of pixel density where technique is a very large factor in image quality.
    I believe this is one reason for the widely different opinions people, and testers, have about various cameras, the way they use them is very different and so the results become ever greater.
    Nobody in the field of testing would dream of using AF, unless that was what they were testing! However accurate AF is, it is totally unreliable for optimum results, the merest fraction of missed focus robs disproportionate amounts of resolution.
  107. I wonder if the the situation was reversed and canon brought out a D800 and it was NIKON who was selling the 5d3 for £700 more. Would
    the people who are defending canon now , would they then in that scenario, be wishing they had the opportunity to by a 22 mp camera
    because they don't need 36 , and you have to work too hard to get the best from it. A poorer built camera, and the privilege of paying £700
    more for it. I doubt it, we would now be shoving it in the NIKON users face. D800 users don't have to use the full resolution of their camera so I don't quite understand some of the comments here.
    That was a very good point that Bob made about 7d users. Canon will bring out a high megapixel slr, remember when NIKON insisted that
    a lot of pixels wasn't needed they changed their tune on that. Give it 6-12 months and you'll hear about a 5dx, or a 3d with a 46 mp
    sensor , and then everyone will be saying how they need it now , but I dread to think how much it'll be . Chasing dslr's is a rich man's
    game, and if it continues like this I'll always be buying them once they're reaching the end of their shelf life.
  108. "then everyone will be saying how they need it now"

    No, just as now, a few very-vocal participants on web forums will be making a lot of noise about it (if it happens). The vast majority of professionals and amateurs whose interest is making photos (rather than bragging about camera specs) know that 22 (or 18, or 21, or 16) megapixels is more than enough for almost all the work for which people use "35mm" DSLRs.

    In the two years I've been using a 5D2, I've never had to upsample an image. I very, very rarely upsampled images from the original 5D that I used before that. I never hear any of the other photographers I know with 10+ megapixel DSLRs complaining because their files are too small. Ironically, I did have a friend who shoots architecture and occasional weddings complaining that the 21-megapixel images from the 5D2 were kind of a pain in the butt to deal with compared to those from the original 5D.

    While there may be some photographers who will put the extra resolution of a D800 to good use, for most, it will have no practical impact. I'm glad that Canon directed their energies to improvements (lower noise, better AF and metering) that will benefit most photographers most of the time.
  109. "I'm glad that Canon directed their energies to improvements (lower noise, better AF and metering) that will benefit most photographers most of the time."
    Something Nikon has done for years, provided great AF, and low noise.
    It's like Canon thinks it just invented the wheel in this aspect, now it's discovered that photographers want low noise and a good AF system,(God knows we've waited long enough for Canon to catch up with Nikon regarding AF) we now have to pay extra for it.
  110. The vast majority of professionals and amateurs whose interest is making photos (rather than bragging about camera specs) know that 22 (or 18, or 21, or 16) megapixels is more than enough for almost all the work for which people use "35mm" DSLRs.
    Precisely. For a long time I used 12MP DSLRs, then 16 and 24MP, and frankly I think both 16 and 24MP are capable of more than enough detail for any practical purpose that I might have, and the 12MP and 16MP files are more enjoyable to work with.
    But the pixel density of the D800 is only the same as that of a 15MP APS-C sensor. I don't see EOS 7D users lamenting that they need to use manual focus and live view in order to get the best results out of their 18MP sensor. The 7D sensor has around 15% higher native resolution than that of the D800 (albeit over a smaller area) and so is even more demanding on lens quality and focus.

    Pixel density can be a challenge for AF systems, but I think from a vibration and depth of field point of view it is the total pixel count which creates the harder challenge. The 7D is a 1.6x camera. Let's say you need a 300mm lens on a 7D to make a tightly framed image in the camera. To do the same shot (same angle of view and framing, just at the 36MP quality level; remember we are not trying to aim for 7D quality but to get everything in the subject sharp at the 36MP resolution level), you need a 500mm lens on the D800. To get a 36MP image with a 500mm lens that is sharp at the pixel level takes quite some tripod and technique. What's more since the D800+500mm depth of field calculated with a CoC = pixel spacing is extremely thin, it's unlikely that a good part of your subject will be in focus. For 36MP you need 1.4 x faster shutter speed than for 18MP (to stop subject movement), and yet you need to stop down almost 3 stops more on the D800 (roughly f/10 instead of f/4 if I calculated correctly) to place the whole subject within the depth of field at the pixel level. The lens MTF drops when you approach 100lpmm and the pixel level noise also increases since there are fewer photons (so you need to shoot at a low to moderate ISO). I would say this constitutes a tough problem even if we assume perfect focus.
  111. Bob Atkins wrote:
    But the pixel density of the D800 is only the same as that of a 15MP APS-C sensor. I don't see EOS 7D users lamenting that they need to use manual focus and live view in order to get the best results out of their 18MP sensor.​
    Those 18 MP sample a certain field of view, so you have x pixels/angular degree. Use 36 MP to sample the same field of view and you will have 1.414x pixels/degree. If your technique is the limiting factor, you will produce the same image quality with either camera, e.g. your camera shake will remain a fixed percentage of the total angle of view, though you waste more potential of the higher resolution camera.
    One could always shoot a medium format camera hand-held and get the same image quality as 35mm (finer grained though), but the point of spending more money and lugging it around was to get more details in the images, not just more grains/pixels in the blur.
  112. What's more since the D800+500mm depth of field calculated with a CoC = pixel spacing is extremely thin, it's unlikely that a good part of your subject will be in focus. For 36MP you need 1.4 x faster shutter speed than for 18MP (to stop subject movement), and yet you need to stop down almost 3 stops more on the D800 (roughly f/10 instead of f/4 if I calculated correctly) to place the whole subject within the depth of field at the pixel level. The lens MTF drops when you approach 100lpmm and the pixel level noise also increases since there are fewer photons (so you need to shoot at a low to moderate ISO). I would say this constitutes a tough problem even if we assume perfect focus.​
    Diminishing returns, Ilkka, diminishing returns come with more and more pixels. Since the real strength of 35mm photography has always been a good balance between convenience and resolution, I think that it makes sense to say that Canon simply did not see much point in trying to go for more megapixels. The payoff in usable images for most persons in most situations is not that great.
    There has always been the "wow" factor in higher resolution, but the reality check is that there is always that pesky problem of actually using plenty of pixels: can one actually get the picture, and, having gotten it, can one process it and print it in some reasonable length of time? Or does one simply want to sit around and amuse oneself with how much resolution one can get under optimal conditions of the most inane and banal subjects, etc., etc.? There is a photographic sub-culture of higher resolution for its own sake, but getting usable photos in real situations is the larger culture of practical photography.
    As for price, I do believe that the 5D III will drop into the same price range as the D800 pretty quickly. It happened with the original 5D between 2005 and 2006, and some of us who could not see spending $3500 one year thought that we could afford $2500 the next.
    Perhaps Canon is the more savvy marketer for the long term. Both cameras will sell, of course.
  113. [T[he point of spending more money and lugging [the camera] around was to get more details in the images, not just more grains/pixels in the blur.​
    That's wonderful, Oscar, and it pretty well sums up the problem in everyday practice--for a lot of photographers.
    Landscape photographers shooting at or near infinity focus (and with tripods) will not see it that way, but most persons who simply have to get the shot will find out soon enough that more and more megapixels are no panacea--unless resolution is an end in itself that requires one to choose subjects and lighting situations for the sake of bringing out the best in the equipment, not the reverse.
    Sociologist Robert K. Merton talked about the "displacement of goals" in organizations and social practices, whereby organizational procedures or rules or social rituals (or whatever) tend to become ends in themselves rather than a means to the attainment of some other end for which the organizational tool (or its rules) was created in the first place. When the instrument has become more important that what it produces, that kind of displacement of goals has happened in photography.
    For my purposes, however, I have to say that a few more megapixels would have been nice.
  114. I AM VERY PLEASED that the 5D Mark III is on the verge of being shipped. That means the 5DII used prices will drop. I wouldn't mind having a 5DII in my professional bag. However, I'd use it only for wedding portraits and formal setting shots. The 7D would still be used as the workhorse.
  115. I doubt 5D MkII used prices will drop much, many, like you, have anticipated this so have held off, so used demand will go up to match supply. When Canon drop the price of the MkII then there will be a realignment, but only a couple of hundred dollars.
  116. Thank you for shedding light on the problems of high resolution sensors. I now see that Canon's new policy ( actually I think it"s been around for a while now) of offering less for more is for our own benefit. For all these years when Nikon offered superior AF in a lot of their cameras, and didn't just keep it for the top of the line models, while Canon reserved this basic feature only for the 1D's and remote flash control was standard on all Nikon's models with a pop up flash. While all Nikon's full frame DSLR's worked with all their lenses, cropped, new or old, I didn't understand until now.
    I thought Canon were being tight, that we had to buy new EF lenses to replace our old FD lenses, that we had to buy, not just any flashgun, but a top of the range flashgun, or a speed light transmitter to achieve off camera flash, or until the 7d arrived we had to remortgage our homes to get a camera with up to date AF.
    And now Canon doesn't want to give us more megapixels in case we hurt ourselves with them. Now I see the danger of a lot of evil megapixels I'm sure Canon won't endanger the human race with a high megapixel camera, and Canon doesn't want to creep into the medium format sales, and tread on the toes of other companies because they're just to darn nice. The new 24-70 and the other new primes, which are capable of higher resolving power, are being produced because they're bored at Canon, and are not paving the way for a high megapixel camera to be released after the 5D3 has sold a few thousand.
    All this time I've been wrong it's had nothing to do with squeezing more money from it's customers.
    They've really had our best interests at heart, I feel such a fool.
    Sorry Canon
  117. david_henderson

    david_henderson www.photography001.com

    It's exactly what I hoped for- not enough improvement in the aspects I think are important to force me to run out and upgrade as soon as I was sure that the production line was outputting good quality. I'll keep a close eye on what people say about image quality, noise levels in raw, and autofocus and in all probability decide to upgrade when they introduce Mk4.
  118. william,
    Rather than subject us to your dripping, tiresome, sarcasm, go buy a Nikon. Plenty of people switch every year for different reasons, thinking you are being stiffed is not really a legitimate photographic reason, it would be interesting to hear if you actually had one of those, but really, nobody cares.
  119. Scott perhaps you have the money to lose tons of cash switching between Nikon or Canon but a lot of people haven't.
    Scott prove me wrong that what I have said isn't right, and explain why Canon has felt the need to deny it's customers features on bodes that were standard on other cameras. I put up with that because Canon's prices were equal or lower than Nikon. It has been said by quite a few here that Canon are raising prices for no apparent reason, please share with us why you think we're all wrong and why Canon are doing this if it's not for money, or at least share with us your "legitimate photographic reason" why you enjoy getting stiffed by Canon. Canon's purpose in this world is
    No2 Make Cameras.
    Canon spend millions each year studying the market, working out the strategic time to realise their product, thats fine it's business , but look after the customers you already have and don't take them to be fools.
    Wipe the pixels from your eyes and wake up.
  120. If you want to consider yourself a fool for having bought a Canon camera then so be it. I bought what I need to do the job when I needed it, it happened to be a Canon.
    I know the 5D MkIV will be better than the MKIII, but if I want or need to take pictures now, today, I can't buy either. Soon you will have as much choice as you could possibly want across multiple manufacturers, a lot of camera gear holds its value remarkably well, if you want to swap because of a perceived injustice from a corporation then the free market economy allows you to do that, don't whinge about the cost of doing so, it is your fault you bought equipment that has devalued that you don't want anymore. I am sure it still takes good pictures though.
  121. What are you talking about I'm not complaining about devaluation, everything devalues, I'm not comparing a non existent 5D4. I'm saying to buy new equipment from a manufacture that you have been loyal to you have to pay more then the going rate, when for years customers have already been doing without features that other companies seem to be able to offer. But you live with it because you've already bought in to it, but now they want more money.
    Scott if thats the best you can do to "prove me wrong" your not doing a good job.
    My Canon equipment takes excellent photos I love my 5Dmkii, but this doesn't stop me accepting the truth about what Canon are trying to do now.
    If you blindly keep defending anything, and you can't bring yourself to be honest and accept the good with the bad, in the end no one will put stock in what you say. Nikon has it's faults, but I'm not discussing the whole Canon vs Nikon universe , only about Canon increasing it's prices on bodies, lenses everything, more than other manufactures.
    I was told by a company that Canon here in the UK originally wanted to price that 5D3 at £3200, but dropped it yo £2999.99.
    Please be honest and accept that this is happening. I don't mean this sarcastically , but if you or anyone can give a logical explanation why this is not about Canon trying on, I would really like to know.
  122. I must confess I do not get all these moaning. The Canon and Nikon systems are similar but still different. Each has a particular strengths and "weaknesses" that stem from different strategies. The grass is not greener on the other side. It only has a different shade of green.
    Happy shooting,
  123. William,
    People buy cameras for different reasons, I get mine for business reasons, if it makes sense for me from a business point of view to get a different brand I will, I have no brand loyalty.
    Others get cameras for pleasure reasons, others still for enthusiast reasons and a few, to actually take pictures with. But what you are saying only makes sense in your angry mind. If you feel gouged then don't buy that brand, if other companies make a feature you want then get it, nobody cares. Canon, Nikon and all live and die by their sales, if enough people buy a different product then they will change, people shouting angry rubbish from a forum doesn't help anybody, I doubt your rant could even be translated to Japanese, and, if it could, it would lose all meaning.
    Inflated prices in the UK and Europe have already been covered, the Euro is in the *X&$#**X&$#**X&$#**X&$#* and has devalued against pretty much every other currency, blame Greece, Italy, Spain etc for that if you like, but it is the EU. The UK is so closely affiliated to the Euro it is difficult for the Pound to not be affected, blame deregulation and bankers greed for that if you like. So if something used to cost £100 to buy a Japanese item of ¥1,000, now it costs you £150, the Japanese don't make any more money, they still get their ¥1,000, you are paying for that bailout, and that is how you do it. The Japanese have done everything they can to lower costs, moving factories at vast expense to Thailand where labour is cheaper, but they still only get their ¥1,000. The Pound and Euro have both dropped against the US Dollar too. The UK importers are desperately trying to cover their butts with regards currency fluctuations, they probably make as much money on currency futures and trades as they do on camera sales, I wouldn't want their job of guessing, to the 1,000th of a penny, what the rates are going to do for the next twelve months. Thank your government for that instability.
    Now another thing, duty, USA prices are advertised without VAT, unless you are a business in Europe you cannot avoid paying VAT, currently 17.5% (?), so all prices include that user tax price hike. In the USA different States have different user tax rates so prices are advertised before tax, go into B&H and pay for a camera and they charge you 8.25% New York sales tax, but if you buy it online and they ship out of State you are expected to pay your State sales tax locally.
    Open your eyes and look at the world, don't fixate on the 5D MkIII being offered for x£ more than a D800, when you can't actually buy either today, see what happens at Christmas when the reviews are out, users have them in their hands and the prices have stabilized.
  124. As I have said, it is not the 5Dmk3, you seem to fixating on the 5D3 it is everything new coming from Canon. UK importers haven't bumped up the D800, Nikon 24-70, olympus cameras, sony cameras, fuji cameras, Canon have put their own prices up don't say it's governments.
    We're in March, and you're talking about waiting until Christmas! 9 months away for Canon to bring their prices down to a level where other products prices are at today. What do you think is going to happen to the prices from Nikon by Christmas. Are you serious? I really would like to know if you are, because if so, man you are loyal to Canon.
    Thanks for your comment but again you still haven't explained why Canon are putting up their prices compared to others, when they're not offering anything special. Because you can't, that would mean excepting the truth, and what ever your reasons are your not prepared to do that, you'd rather live in denial. I truly don't understand that it's not in me to feel patriotic to a billion dollar company, but it makes you happy to do so.
    We're going to have to agree to disagree.
  125. Because they feel it is their best way to maximize profits, they need no excuse, and I am not defending them. You are
    either prepared to buy their products or you are not, and you not doing so is the only control you have over future pricing.

    Ranting about the unfairness of it, or demanding some justification, is pathetic in an adult.
  126. Hello Scott,

    What you say about the effect of currency fluctuation on prices and the profit margin of businesses is essentially true
    except for 3 details. 1. The euro has lost some value, but is still holding surprisingly well, at $1.31 today. Significantly less
    than its ridiculously high record, but much, much higher than its low shortly after its introduction, when it plunged in the
    $0.70 range. 2. Even though Britain is economically integrated with the rest of Europe, the Pound can actually fluctuate
    independently from the Euro. The pound can move in opposite direction from the Euro, and actually has on several
    instances. 3. Since 1973, currency fluctuation has been a fact of life for manufacturers. They are affected by it not ju st
    when they sell their final products, but throughout their production process as generally their supply chain is international.
    They use hedging techniques to protect themselves against these fluctuations, which is why often the price of a given
    product will not fluctuate in full proportion with a given currency fluctuation. On the other hand, hedging techniques, which
    essentially rely on the use of financial derivatives, have a cost, which of course is included in the price that we, the final
    consumers, are paying for these goods.

    Just my small off topic contribution to this debate :)
  127. Thank you Scott
    "Because they feel it is their best way to maximize profits, they need no excuse"
    So stop with all the rubbish about high megapixel sensors not being needed, and Canon investing in other areas of their development.
    And it's infuriating when you have to drag the truth out of someone who claims to be an adult, because of some misplaced loyalty they have to a brand.
    Yes Scott you do have brand loyalty.
  128. After playing with a 5D Mkiii today, I am thinking that I would definitely like one! I took shots at ISO 3200, 6400, 12800 & 25600 and judging by the zoomed view on the rear of the LCD I am very impressed. The focus system makes that of the 5D Mkii seem like it came from the Ark. Two memory card slots as well... thanks very much!
  129. Brand Ferris
  130. Yep, Canon and Nikon owe me nothing, but I owe them nothing in return.

    Take care and have fun, we are the lucky ones, we are alive with enough free time to shoot the breeze on here :)
  131. I placed my order today. I'll be sure to let everyone know how horrible the thing is when it arrives. :)
  132. William, if the price is too high, the market will not support it, and it will fall. Most new products do fall pretty quickly. Looking back over the last few years, what is surprising to me is that both the D700 and the 5D II did not drop at all until fairly recently. The original 5D dropped quickly enough (and by almost a thousand dollars) to let me get one by 2006. It is sometimes hard to predict these things. Competition with the D800 might make the 5D III fall in price, but, given how different the two cameras are, the effect might not be very great. I crop a lot, and I love the medium format effect, and so I will be hoping that Canon comes out with something similar to the D800 soon, but I am not holding my breath. The Nikon has come in low and might even go up in price during its lifetime. This is particularly likely if the general world economy starts feeling more inflationary pressures--as could happen if the sluggish global recovery becomes more robust.
    I, too, am not happy with the high prices, but I don't think that it helps to demonize anyone. Which one of us would turn down a high offer on a car or a house that we were selling? Since I don't change bodies very often, it is lens prices that are discouraging to me, especially if one wants the newer versions of the EF 24-70 f/2.8, the EF 70-200 f/2.8, and the EF 24 f/1.4. Being discouraged and feeling a bit frustrated at the personal level are natural enough, but one needs to let it go. Neither your nor my purchasing decisions will have any measurable impact. All that we can do is pick and choose among what is out there.
    In my case, what it all means is that I will be staying with my existing cameras and lenses at least a bit longer. There are worse possible scenarios. I could become ill and have to sell them off. I sincerely hope that that does not happen. My D90 and Sony NEX-3 are my "fall back" cameras in the event of personal financial reverses. (But let me not forget the Olympus E-20, my first digital camera--and I still have it.) In the meantime, I will keep shooting my 5D II for as long as I am able, or until I can move up to the next level--of whatever brand or model is burning a hole in my pocket at the time. I'm pretty fickle. Look at Mike Palermiti, who says that he has never sold anything. He keeps it all! I can't do that, but I probably would if I could. Then again, once in a while I really would just like to clear some things out, but I hate selling on eBay, and I am not about to give them away. I guess that camera equipment has brought out a greedy side in me that I never knew that I had. At one point I had the 5D, the 1Ds II, and the 5D II. By my standards, that is more than a bit excessive--and I sold two. Right now it would be virtually impossible. (But darn, I wish that I had kept that 1Ds II!)
    Just for a change of pace, here's a naked shot of my favorite old girlfriend:
    Here's to better economic times. . . .
  133. Yakim Peled beat me to it by writing: "I must confess I do not get all these moaning. The Canon and Nikon systems are similar but still different. Each has a particular strengths and "weaknesses" that stem from different strategies. The grass is not greener on the other side. It only has a different shade of green."

    Different shades is a great analogy for this. The angst over this whole business is alternately sad and amusing.
    To answer the literal question - is the 5D3 what I wanted? - no, it isn't. I was, and am, more interested in higher MP. But that's just me. The 5D3 really looks like quite a fine camera and in many real ways a good improvement on the 5D2. It probably is not "better enough" to convince me to expend the funds it would take to upgrade, and I'm very happy with the results from my 5D2. But if I were in the market for such a camera, the 5D3 has an awful lot to offer.
    I'm not a brand-switcher, but if I already was a Canon shooter I'd be generally pleased with the D800, which also looks like a very compelling camera.
  134. I'm not a brand-switcher, but if I already was a Canon shooter I'd be generally pleased with the D800, which also looks like a very compelling camera.​
    Don't you mean, Dan, that if you were already a Nikon shooter, you'd be generally please with the D800?
    By the way, I'm not a brand-switcher, either, and I'll be holding onto my 5DII, but I, too, find the D800 to be a compelling camera.
  135. The specs are somewhat underwhelming when compared to the existing 5DMk II. The price is just plain outlandish IMHO. The 5DMK II is looking attractive at this point :) Happy shooting folks.
  136. I don't think there is anything wrong with expressing one's frustrations with Canon. I am an enthusiast and have a reasonable budget for gear, if I felt Canon were offering value for money.
    The fact is that every product Canon has announced over the last few years, that I might have otherwise been interested in, has struck me as expensive for what it is. This includes the EF 70-300L, the 24 and 28 f2.8 IS primes, the EF-S 15-84 and now the 5D MkIII.
    That is why the only thing I have bought in 3 years is the Tamron 70-300 VC and a second hand 5D mark I.
    I think if one were judging Canon versus Nikon today, Canon's main attractions relate to its legacy products (old decisions), such as the 70-200 f4L. I think Nikon has basically trumped Canon with most of its new releases both in lenses and bodies.
    I think the frustrations expressed here are also showing up in sales. Five or six years ago Canon was dominant in DSLR sales and was the go to brand for new entrants. Now I think that position has reversed.
  137. Brand switcher? Who, me? Is that sort of like an adulterer? Divorcé? Perhaps a cross-dresser? How about a turncoat or traitor? It sounds like a very, very bad thing to be.

    I changed to Canon EOS in 2006 because the 5D dropped to just over $2500, and it sounded like Nikon was not going to enter the full-frame arena. When the D700 came out, I was not fazed. Not even the D3X made me even lust in my heart for a Nikon camera. When the 5D II came out, I felt vindicated for my loyalty. Here was a camera that gave very good low light results as well as a very healthy number of megapixels. It was the best practical compromise out there. We got it on two to three times a week, every week. (Okay, okay. So I fooled around a little with the D90. I needed a little bit of shutter release, but it was only physical. My heart was true to Canon.)

    Now my marriage to Canon has been shaken to its foundations. It is not that Canon has done anything wrong in particular, simply that that new Nikon is what I had hoped that my next Canon would be. What's a healthy red-blooded guy to do?

    Keep the 5D II and everything else Canon and buy the D800! Have one's cake and eat it, too! I want medium format in a 35mm package, by dang. The new Canon upgrade is just not sexy enough. Perhaps a little bit of Nikon on the side could save this marriage.

    Yet, yet, I feel so guilty. A man who does not spend time with his family can never be a real man. I think my brain is going soft from all the games I'm playing in my mind with this young new Nikon sex kitten.

    Whatever is wrong with me? I have sinned, Reverend Canon. Lord, Lord, what must I do to be saved?!

  138. Some of the previously non-downloadable samples are now (finally!) downloadable:
    Here is the larger link to the samples which Scott posted previously:
    I'm feeling better already, in the mood, even:
  139. Thanks to the people who can see where I'm comming from, I was
    starting to go mad. I'm not upset that the 5d3 should've been more
    and the d800 offered more. The 5d3 offered more than the d700
    except af, and this one is ahead one day, another tomorrow, will
    continue forever. Unless you've got deep pockets can you have it all,
    some professionals can't keep up with it , let alone enthusiasts. Take
    NIKON, or Sony out of the picture altogether, It's canon's price rise and
    the 5d3 is one small part of it. but its like banging your head against a
    brick wall with some people. If we were talking about hovers, washing
    machines, etc. This kind of discussion wouldn't exist, cameras are just
    another product, another tool to get the job done, but for some
    reason we seem to get emotionally attached to certain products , and
    cameras are one of them.
  140. Nice writing Lannie!
  141. Mark quoted me when I, posting without sufficient "post processing" (otherwise known as "editing"), wrote:
    I'm not a brand-switcher, but if I already was a Canon shooter I'd be generally pleased with the D800, which also looks like a very compelling camera.
    And he then asked, quite reasonably:
    Don't you mean, Dan, that if you were already a Nikon shooter, you'd be generally please with the D800?
    Ah, yes. Sorry about that, and thanks for catching my error! :)
    To be clear, I'm a Canon shooter who is happy with his 5D2 and thinks the 5D3 looks like a fine new camera. If I were a Nikon shooter I'd be thrilled with the promise of the D800. Both Canon an Nikon continue to introduce compelling photographic tools.
    And, Landrum, it is just a camera. :)
  142. And, Landrum, it is just a camera. :)
    Dan, when you have lived alone for too many decades, you get confused. I thought that cameras, like running (my obsession of the seventies), were surrogate sex. Now you guys are telling me that they are not? Bummer.
  143. zml


    FWIW: from what I have seen in terms of 5D3 ISO performance, I wouldn't have a problem using any setting up to ISO 3200 for everyday shooting. ISO 3200 is publication ready, ISO 6400 almost as good, with very few artifacts, ISO 12800 is imminently usable after some tweaking and ISO 25600 after some serious processing. DR is surprisingly good up to ISO 6400, then there are compromises (of course...) That alone, the laundry list of new features and improvements notwithstanding, makes the 5D3 a giant leap, not a mere upgrade or "what 5D2 should have been like" camera. (Most of the stuff on 5D3 was impossible to include on a camera in that price range when the 5D2 was released.)
    Now, the above is "real world" stuff. YMMV: pixel peepers and Nikon shills please take a pill.
  144. Well for me the 5D Mk III would be exactly what I wanted - still better high ISO behavior, which for me would come in useful in a multitude of situations, better AF, and keeping the MP more or less fixed. I never shoot with a tripod - for me it is much more important to be able to shoot hand held with various lenses in available light. The 18MP of the 7D that I have is perfectly enough for me. Ultimate sharpness was never important for me...
    But I will not get the 5D mkIII any time soon because of the price... (or in fact go FF because of the lenses that I have)
    Btw. re Scott up in the thread - the difference in prices between Europe and USA was never due to the real exchange rates between currencies but rather beacuse of different marketing policy of camera manufacturers - As far as lenses were concerned, very often the price in EUR (like 700EUR) was numerically the same as in USD (700USD). So I only bought lenses, even back in the analog days, before any crisis, when I could visit the US...
  145. x


    I’ve been very happy with my Mk II except for the autofocussing which is too unreliable. It has performed worse than my older EOS models. The Mk III seems to offer better autofocussing so that’s a big plus.
    Often I could use a faster winder and that’s been usefully speeded up. The high ISO is apparently improved as well although the Mk II is very good for most real world situations. Other areas like the bigger screen are just incremental.
    I’m disappointed by the lack of an increase in Megapixels although part of me wonders whether there’s any real world benefit as it is hard enough to get the best out of the current model by avoiding camera shake and focussing accurately. The tests of the D800 should be a revelation in that respect. I don’t want the pain that goes with increased file sizes from a bigger sensor but that might be a necessary evil. Perhaps what we really need is a 5D Mk III E – 22 MP without the anti-aliasing filter.
    The price increase is a big problem though. Hopefully it will come down quickly. That will be the biggest indicator of the the Mk III's success, noting that the Mk II was such a success that the price held higher, relatively, than its predecessors for a long time.
    So overall is the 5D III what I wanted ? No.
    The biggest disappointment for me is the lack of a decent 50mm lens from Canon. The f1.8 is badly made rubbish, the f1.4 is sloppy and unreliable while the f1.2 is too big and expensive. I’m hoping they will produce an IS f1.4 using the barrel recently introduced on the new 24mm and 28mm.
  146. The biggest disappointment for me is the lack of a decent 50mm lens from Canon. The f1.8 is badly made rubbish, the f1.4 is sloppy and unreliable while the f1.2 is too big and expensive. I’m hoping they will produce an IS f1.4 using the barrel recently introduced on the new 24mm and 28mm.​
    Maybe your wish will come to, and the new lens won't be "rubbish"! Just don't complain about the price of the 50 you request. It is pretty easy to extrapolate a reasonable price range based on the last new fixed focal length 2.8 lenses Canon just announced.
  147. I have never experienced any problems
    with the AF on the 5d2, but in critical
    situations I only use the center AF point.
    Tracking that's another thing. From my
    experience , when shooting at 2.8 or
    faster the centre AF on the 5d2 is
    extremely accurate, the 7d which I
    compared it to, while it was faster and
    tracking was superb, using it where there
    was shallow depth of field it gave
    inconsistent results, and in low light I
    never had problems with the center AF
    of the 5d2. I only use fast lenses so I
    don't know if the 5d2 has problems
    locking on with slower lenses.
  148. I'm sure that the 5D3's AF is a marvel of technology, but IMHO the 5D2 was accurate and reliable (center point only).
    Yes, the other AF points were just about useless, but that center point outperformed the fancy AF on my D700 for
    consistency and reliability.

    As stated before, there really isn't a price increase. Our money just isn't worth what it used to be.

    The big problem I've had with the 5D2 is shadow noise. I'm hoping that this is no longer a problem with he new model.
  149. 5D mark II is my ideal camera body to attach my Leica lenses from 19mm up to 400mm, it takes me quite a while to find the best EOS-R adapter after testing five adapters from different vendors. I am going to stick with 5Dii.
  150. My advice to fellow photographers: do not buy the Canon 5D Mk III. Do not buy the Nikon D800, either. In fact, stop taking photographs altogether, because when the first yottapixel (YP) camera is introduced a decade from now, with ISO 128 trillion, today's arguments about 22 vs. 36 MP will be laughable, and the images these cameras produce, hopelessly passe!
    The YP camera will be the great equaliser among genres: resolving detail on a subatomic scale, it won't matter if our images of baryons and leptons are landscapes, portraits, or whatever. I can't wait!
    With tongue firmly in cheek,
  151. Yeah, please don't buy one. Free up that waiting list. ;-)
  152. Can anyone see the price of a new 5D mark ii eventually dropping below £1,000?
  153. There're not that price second hand, the 5Dmk1 still sell for £700 second hand in good condition. I don't think there ever going to be below £1000, if they get any where near that I'll be surprised. The lowest I've ever seen them in the UK was £1450, at Park Cameras, that was in January 2012, then in the middle of February they shot up to £1680, when they had to get new stock from Canon. I assume your from the UK as you said "£1000", look at a website called camerapricebuster, it tracks all equipment, showing lowest to highest price.
  154. I had my fingers crossed for video AF... and a nicer price tag. My 50D just died and now I dont know what to get. A 7D (2009)... 5DII (2008)...?
    Anyone know why no video AF?
  155. Just Bought a B+W 10 stop ND filter, and on a 5D mkii it still locks focus. I don't know what the big deal is about poor AF on a MKII, as I said before tracking is another matter.
  156. Does it also lock focus if you don't use the central AF point? If so, that is very impressive.
    Happy shooting,
  157. >>> 5D MkIII Is it what you wanted?

    No. Making identical photos as my 5DII, but at a +50% increase in price doesn't make any sense.

    Smaller package, built-in flash, lighter weight, better ergonomics, etc at a *lower* price would make sense
    for me.
  158. "Smaller package, built-in flash, lighter weight, better ergonomics, etc at a *lower* price would make sense for me."​
    That would be a 7D, and that still takes considerably higher IQ images (not that IQ is the be all and end all of an image) than your beloved iPhone.
    I think the 5D MkIII is a fantastic camera and a bargain, I have a 1Ds MkIII, a $6,000+ camera (well it was) the 5D MkIII does pretty much everything better for just over half the price!
  159. >>> That would be a 7D, and that still takes considerably higher IQ images (not that IQ is the be all and end all
    of an image) than your beloved iPhone.

    The 7D is not able to peacefully coexist with my wallet and keys in my pants pocket.

    It is interesting that with respect to the high-end segment, camera manufacturers seem to be immune from what has been happening in the rest of the tech
    world (computers, cellphones, etc). That is, where newer models offer better performance, many times in
    smaller packages, for the same or less money.

    That's probably because many are willing to pay a lot more $$$ for incremental increases in performance,
    thinking that is the easy path to creating more compelling photographs.
  160. Yakim,
    I used the canon 24-70 and the 70-200
    2.8 is, with the filter on. I did this on an
    overcast day. At first I didn't even
    attempt to use AF, I didn't think it would
    work, but before I packed up I gave it a
    try. The center AF locked on surprisingly
    fast, the outer ones hunted but locked
    on to a good contrast subject. The
    exposure was 30 seconds @ f18 and 200
    ISO, so pretty dark.
    I must say I didn't think anyone would
    be still following this thread, and to get
    responses so fast.
    I've been keeping my eye on the 5d mkii
    vs mkiii, on other sites and reviews, and
    it seems that the improvements in ISO
    are only in jpeg, and that's down to the
    processor. In raw they are both
    practically the same.
    Has anyone seen anything to that says
  161. "The 7D is not FF, and is not able to peacefully coexist with my wallet and keys in my pants pocket."​
    No FF DSLR will ever be able to fit in your pants pocket, unless you have very baggy pants. Even old film SLR's wouldn't fit in a normal sized pocket with a lens on. If fitting in your pocket is a key feature then being disappointed at the 5D MkIII is a little pointless.
    "It is interesting that with respect to the high-end segment, camera manufacturers seem to be immune from what has been happening in the rest of the tech world (computers, cellphones, etc). That is, where newer models offer better performance, many times in smaller packages, for the same or less money. "​
    I don't follow your logic here.
    In late 2007 Canon introduced the 1Ds MkIII, it has no video, is 6.1 x 6.2 x 3.1 in, it weighs 3.1 lb, it shoots 5 fps with a 21mp sensor, and cost $7,000.
    In early 2013 Canon introduce the 5D MkIII, it has very good HD video, is 5.98 x 4.57 x 2.99 in (30% smaller), it weighs 2 lbs (30% lighter), it shoots 6 fps with a 24mp sensor (20% faster and 14% more pixels), and cost $3,500 (half the price), all other specs match or exceed the 1Ds MkIII, AF, weatherproofing, playback screen etc etc. In real terms, when inflation and currency differences are taken into account, the launch price is the same as the 5D MkII was in Feb 2009.
    By what metric are you measuring the 5D MkIII as not a significant step forward for the consumer?
  162. I found this comparison of video capabilities on You Tube yesterday which was a real eye opener for those of you who shoot video. I have no idea if any of it translates to still photo capability. Here is the link. If I planned on doing video at all I would buy the 5D Mk2 or 3. In the comments section the creator says that the Canon's exposure was accurate when compared to a light meter and that the D800's was not accurate.
  163. When you compare the mkIII to the EOS DCS, which only had a a 1.3 Megapixel CCD sensor and a price tag of £12,000 back in 1995 you are getting a bargain, how are Canon making any money from the 5D MKIII with 22 megapxels, they're giving it away.
    Wait stop, its not 1995 and its not 2007 when the 1ds mkIII was released. Why are you comparing yesterdays cameras to todays and saying we're getting such a good deal.
    Compare the MKiii to it's competition TODAY, the Nikon D800 and other equivalent cameras.
    The only people who could be seriously tempted by the 5D MKiii is those who were looking at the 1DX or those who have money to burn
    5D MKII + better AF + 2x the price = RIP OFF
  164. Here is a link to my website, www.williambrayphoto.com
    If you go to the section, people, you'll see a few photos of a religious festival that I shot at night. the photos there are just a few of many, they were all shot with a 5DmkII with a 24-70 2.8 or a 70-200 2.8 IS at 6400. The lighting conditions were dreadful and I had to always shoot at 2.8, every one was marching through the streets, hardly anyone stopped to pose. I would say I got 80% of the shots taken in these conditions spot on focus, I don't know of the 20% that were thrown away how much was the fault of the 5D or was user error.
    I've reduced the resolution of all my photos for the web, so you're not going to see fantastic detail when zooming in, but I hope you see that I'm not making my claims up.
  165. william,
    My comments were a direct rebuttal of Brads comments about there being a lack of innovation, cost improvements, size and weight reduction etc, as my figures clearly show he was misguided.
    You on the other hand seem to be saying that because the 5D MkII AF is good enough for you nobody should need, want, or pay for a camera with more features, better AF or any other improvement. Well the truth is many people have found the 5D MkII AF unsatisfactory, I did that is why I didn't buy one, I paid over twice as much for a 1Ds MkIII mainly because of the AF. Many wedding pros gave up on Canon and bought D700's even though they have a much lower mp number, again, primarily because of the AF on the 5D MkII. Now seeing as how, again in real terms, the 5D MkIII is the same price as the 5D MkII was at launch how you can say it is a ripoff just shows you don't understand the basic economics of the situation.
    So compare the 5D MkIII to its direct competition today, the D800, what is the big issue? They are very comparable though have slightly different key selling points and are at a similar price point. Neither is head and shoulders a better camera than the other, both will do one type of photography "better" than the other. I'd venture to say that for the vast majority of shooters, despite all the reviews and marketing bull, the Canon is a more rounded camera than the Nikon and is a far more capable camera for anybody that doesn't print, or generally prints less than 20"x30", and I think that is about 99.9999% of photographers.
  166. Where I live the MKIII is not at the same price as the MKII was at launch. If you look back at previous threads about the AF of the MKII before the 7D , only sports and wildlife photographers wouldn't buy it. But Wedding photographers thought it was a godsend. So I don't know why all of a sudden they can't take photos with a camera that previously they were hailing as the wedding photographers camera.
    For me I think Nikon made the D800 and we know where we stand on what it's made for. As you said the MKIII is more of a better rounded camera. I'm not a sports or wildlife photographer but if I were I would welcome the AF performance on the MKIII, but the FPS is still not enough for serious sports or wildlife in todays market, and the shutter life wouldn't be up to it if it were. So where does that leave the MKIII, not a sports or wildlife camera as a landscape and studio camera it's got to compete now with 36 megapixel cameras.
    With the the 5D range Canon has this pattern-
    today they'll give you the sensor you wanted
    Tomorrow we'll get the body we wanted to go with the sensor we had yesterday
    After that a new sensor same body, and the cycle goes on. Canon listen to what we want and hold it back for three years, and when we get it we praise them for giving it to us.
    For me buying a new camera starts at image quality, thats No1 if there is no improvement there I wont be buying a camera on one feature alone at these prices.
    So at £2000 cheaper I would get the 7D, or if I were that seriously into sports or wildlife I would get the 1DX.
    As long as the 5D MKII is out there the MKIII is a jack of all trades and still only a master of one, and that "one" the MKII is also master at half the price.
  167. In the UK in March 2012 the 5D MkIII had a launch price of £2,999.99, in Sept 2008 the 5D MkII had a UK launch price of £2,299.00.
    In Sept '08 £1 bought 198 Yen, in March '12 £1 bought 129 Yen. In 2008 for your £2,299 the Japanese got 455,202 ¥en, today if you buy a 5D MkkIII for £2,999.99 the Japanese get 386,999 ¥en. So in real terms, you are giving the Japanese nearly 20% less money (without allowing for inflation) for the 5D MkIII than you did for the 5D MkII.
    You are paying for your currency devaluing bailout every day with every foreign purchase you make, you can't blame the Japanese for that, and for a better camera at 20% cheaper they are not trying to rip you off either.
    If a 5D MkII is all the camera you will ever need then all power to you, but many actual owners are coming to the conclusion that the 5D MkIII is pretty close to the perfect camera. I know two local pros who are overjoyed with theirs and couldn't get rid of their MkII's and 7D's fast enough.
  168. The pro's you know thought the 5d mkii was so bad they went out and bought a 7d, and after Canon disappointed them so badly with a 7d that they couldn't wait to get rid of it they buy the next camera from canon.
    If I were them by now I'd jump ship or buy a 1D series.
    You and I keep going round and round about this.
    You are still comparing canon to canon, the same as you keep comparing older canon to newer canon about spec, your doing the same about price.
    When the 5D mkII came out there was nothing that could touch it, video, 22mp. nikon's D700 couldn't keep up. Yeah you'll hear the Nikon boys go on about noise but seriously great AF or not would you want a 12mp camera.Some Photo stock website don't accept anything smaller than 8mp.
    The 5d MkII left the D700 standing
    We are in 2012, not 2007 the golden age of the 1Ds MKiii, or 1995. Now Canon have serious competition with companies that have manage to keep their prices below Canon's new line of camera gear, and they are also from Japan.
    If you can't bring yourself to look at anything than Canon to Canon comparisons, of 2012 specs and prices to 2007 specs and prices, please don't think the rest of us are blind.
    And by the way you like comparing older specs and prices. What about the 5D MKI and the 5D MKII, the price was high of the MKii, but what a massive jump in performance and resolution, Live view, sensor cleaning, 22mp vs 12 mp, professional video capability, micro adjustment, massive improvement in ISO. Not marketing tricks but an actual improvement in ISO and things that were only seen on the MKII.
    What have we got with the MKIII to justify the price ,AF, and everything else, all the gimmicks can be found on cheeper cameras.
    How do you like those specs.
  169. Well if it comes down to points made by verifiable facts, or inflated jingoistic internet waffle I'll take my "specs" any day.
    I specialise in the former, you are clearly more interested in the later, there is no common ground and I am not interested in finding any.
  170. So what I have been saying are not "verifiable facts"?
    Anyone can see a massive improvement by comparing the 5D MKI and the 5D MNKII, and anyone can see not that much of an improvement by comparing the the "verifiable facts" of the 5D MKI and the 5D MNKIII.
    By the sound of it if Canon kept the MKIII the same as the MKII, and added a few bells and whistle to it you would be rushing out to buy that to.
    With the exception of sports or wildlife, if you can't take great photos with a 5D MKII, and you have to buy a £3000 MKIII to replace the MKII you already have, when the only real improvement is the AF,the problem is not the camera, but the person using it.
  171. Brand switcher, better to get good point and shot so it will be easier for them to switch.

    On the other hand do we need more MP camera yes we are. I remember when MK II was released, Nikon users was
    having similar conversation. Now honestly what if canon had come up with 36 MP do we still say the same thing.
    I don't see any point arguing about company decision (right or wrong) they do to maximize profit although customer
    satisfaction is the most successful key.

    I went to Iraq and I have seen a picture that was taken in 1918 and the shot was terrific. Now a days with any cam we are
    able to do much more.

    Electronic market is an endless develop that if you seek after it, you will drain your pocket very fast
  172. Abbas,
    I agree, you can't keep switching brands. One of the points of SLR's is that you customise you're equipment, lenses, flash etc, and that doesn't come cheap.
    Sometimes I wonder if Canon and Nikon are in league with one another, Nikon had a 12mp DSLR while Canon had a 21mp DSLR, now the roles have reversed. If Canon or Nikon had their way we'd either be switching every 4 years, or having a duplicate set of gear with Canon's name on one and Nikon's on the other, but thats the name of the game when your in business, and forum threads are not going to change that.
    I would love to have a 5D MKIII, of course it's a better camera than the MKII. But even if the price was lower I'd still be disappointed. Canon took the AF from the 1DX, did hardly anything to the sensor, took the toys from the 7D and put it in a MKIII body, and for good measure whack the price up another £600. When I'm paying this type of money on a camera I don't want a " well rounded camera" , " well rounded cameras " are for the xxxD or the xxD range. I want a camera thats aimed at a specific area and not sit on the fence.
    Everyone is entitled to spend their money on what, but sometimes it's like pulling teeth trying to get a reasonable response from people.
    If Scott had said, " you know what, it's not much of an upgrade, when you look at the MKI and MKII, but I need the AF and I didn't want to shell out for a 1DX." Ok, but to say two pro's couldn't wait to get rid of the most revolutionary full frame camera to come along, and then they couldn't wait to get rid of the most revolutionary crop camera to come along, is a bit much. What are two pro's doing with two enthusiasts camera as main body's anyway. On top of that keep defending Canon,"Canon hasn't put up the price it's your government", yeah but my government left every other camera company alone. Canon doesn't give two monkeys about anyone , except the colour of their money.
  173. Having read most of these posts, I guess I am starting to see both sides of the argument. If you were a 1D series user and Canon has upped the specs, particularly the AF, sufficiently that the 5DIII now fits your needs then no doubt you will be happy.
    If on the other hand you were an xxD user or a previous 5D user and were looking for Canon to push the price down a bit and hopefully put in some more amateur oriented features (and I don't mean amateur in a disparaging way) such as on board flash, maybe more compact, etc then you would be dissappointed. I fall into the latter camp.
    I also think it is reasonable to look at what Nikon and other brands are doing and at what price. Not because it is easy to switch brands - its not - but because it shows what can be done at what price.

Share This Page