Canon has a BIG target for the 5dmkIII

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by paulie_smith|1, Feb 9, 2012.

  1. After seeing the specs and early info on the Nikon D800 I hope Canon's replacement for the 5DMkii is even better. The Nikon body sets the standard pretty high.
    Add in Nikons much better control of strobes and you have a target that will be hard to match, much less surpass. I would love to see them do it and have at least 6 frames per second with motor on continuous. Would be a great tool for photojournalism and wildlife without the price tag of the newer Uberbody pro model.
    Will be interesting to see what happens. Sure looks like we are going to benefit from the competition once again.
     
  2. Don't get your hopes up too much. Canon has a history of protecting the sales of their pro-models. They tend to cripple the prosumer cameras. Whatever the specs will be, they will be significantly different (e.g. less) than the 1DX (with the exception of resolution).
     
  3. Canon will learn a hard lesson, no question, about this camera and the mirrorless market. Like the saying goes (taken from Jobs' biography) if you don't' cannibalize your produce line, someone else will. The last report I saw about market share in Japan (sometimes a decent indicator of future worldwide patterns) the biggest selling lens mount was m4/3. Hopefully, Canon will introduce something decent and now worry about one product line eating another. Whatever the 5D III is, Canon should smarten up and stop dumbing it down, like they did with the 5D II.
    That said, I'm not jumping ship for some very specific reasons: the 24-120 and 70-200 f4 IS. Nikon has nothing like them.
     
  4. There's a major photo show in Japan starting today where all the manufacturers are showing their products. Nikon for the moment seems to have an edge with the new D800. I'm sure Canon has an answer coming in the future (5D3/1DS4?). Some quick specs on the D800 from Nikon:
    36mp (full frame), ISO 50-25600, 51 af sensors with 15 cross sensors, af works down to F8, dual card slots - CF/SD, 900 shots per battery charge, weather & dust sealed, 4 fps or 6fps with battery grip option, buffer capacity 21 raw or 56 jpeg, $2999
     
  5. Being a D700 and a 5D MkII user, Nikon has just raised the bar considerably. I love my Canon 5D MkII as it simply works better in my hands. BUT unless Canon can produce a prosumer camera that rivals the D800, I may be returning to Nikon. All of this, of course, is assuming the the D800 actually performs in the real world. Specs are one thing, but the final test is performance in each individual photographers hands.
     
  6. I agree with you guys. The 5D mk3 better step it up, of Nikon WILL overtake Canon in the commercial photo world, and elsewhere. Here in Minneapolis, I'd say a large share of shooters are still Canon because of the 1Ds mk2. Shooters I work for are still using them. I've already talked to a few people that say they will consider switching if Canon doesn't match.
    The D800 is a major game changer.
     
  7. I think the OP's point is that when the competition (in this case Nikon) seems to be moving away from "protecting" the top-end models, that Canon (and anyone else trying to compete in this space) will have a harder time maintaining much higher pricing on similar models unless they have other ways to differentiate their products.
    In the end, this is part of the ongoing forward motion in the development of digital camera technologies and the process of bringing the prices of these technologies to lower levels. The competition is good for buyers and users of all camera brands.
     
  8. Sure looks like we are going to benefit from the competition once again.​
    Yes, Canon's pricing will have to be competitive. Nikon's achievements can only be good news for those of us who still shoot primarily Canon.
    I am not worried about the number of megapixels the next Canon will have. I am sure that there will be plenty. (After all, 21 MP is plenty.) I would like to see some other improvements, including better weather-sealing and a more reliable auto-focus. I have been missing some shots lately due to auto-focus on the 5D II, and I really don't know what I could have done differently. (Well, okay, I could have shot in better light, but I like shooting near dusk or later.)
    Canon once ran away with the full-frame market before the D3 and the D700. I would like to see Canon hit a home run with whatever is coming.
    --Lannie
     
  9. I seems to me that whatever the designers have already built into the 5D M3 will be what we see. At this point in the development process, I would be surprised if Canon had much wiggle room to change the M3 without pushing the M3 delivery data to the right by a significant amount.
     
  10. It seems like anytime somebody puts a new camera out everybody drops their pants and pulls out a ruler to see how what they have measures up.
    Before it was they have better ISO but we have more MP. Now its they have more MP etc etc ad nauseum.
    It gets old hearing the same old complaints. The pendulum will never stop swinging and the farther you are to one side the farther away it gets. Until it swings back your way again and you get to sit at the top of the pile.
    Either way, I like it when new cameras come out because it makes that 'Next Best Thing' from 5 years ago that much more accessible to me.
     
  11. Canon has a history of protecting the sales of their pro-models.​
    Perhaps, but Canon also has a way of waiting until Nikon has released a super new camera, and then shortly thereafter introducing something even more spectacular.
    Let's hope it happens again, this is one of the best parts of competition under conditions of capitalist production. Let us also hope that the camera market never becomes a monopoly capitalist environment.
     
  12. If the mk3 is consistent w/ the D800, it'll be in the perfect 'spot' to be both a significant upgrade from the 5D2, and dovetail nicely w/ Canon's refinement of the 1D line. I don't think there's any doubt (in my mind at least) that a 5D3 will be a Canon version of the D800, and have a similar feature set. The most interesting thing to me about the D800 is the aspect ratio of the 5:4 sensor, I'm hoping that Canon will follow suit (though admittedly unlikely). Additionally, the Nikon has the D800E announced, which (apparently) will be able to produce much finer detail in studio and static shooting. (though at a cost to high iso work) Also an innovation Canon could adopt in an effort to pursue MF markets.
    I truly doubt that even a 50->70% increase in MP, plus most of the other things I can think of as likely, will be a truly compelling reason to upgrade. OTOH, there are still features they could install (ECF, improved aspect ratio, etc.) which would make me buy it as soon as it's available.
     
  13. Personally I'd love to have a 5D3 with the same sensor as the 1DX and with improved AF and better weather sealing.
    36 megapixels is impressive and I'm sure it will sell cameras, but I just don't need that much detail. I've been getting on fine with 12.7 in the 5D mk 1. Modern hard disks are spacious, but at 36 mp... the raws must be colossal... and how long's it gonna take to load up an 800-picture shoot in Lightroom...
    It will be interesting to see what the year brings. Maybe we'll all be happy before the Mayans pull the plug.
     
  14. From a personal viewpoint, I don't care. I'm not going to buy the D800 and I'm not going to buy the 5D MkIII either.
    I don't shoot video much, so I really don't care what video friendly features either one of them has.
    It will be interesting to see what a jump from 21MP to 36MP actually gets you from both mid-range and high end lenses and for those who shoot video, it's meaningless anyway.
    As for jumping ship from Canon to Nikon, (a) it's a very expensive move for anyone who has invested in a camera system and (b) if and when Canon top Nikon in some way, do you jump back again?
    There's really nothing that could put in a 5D MkIII (or a 7D MkII) which would actually improve my photography or enable me to do something that I want to do but can't do now.
    To be honest I'm much more interested in seeing what Canon bring out in the way of a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera then how many new goodies they manage to squeeze into a 5D MkIII. My existing DSLRs are already better than I am!
     
  15. I don't understand all the fuzz about the D800. Of course it is a magnificent body, no doubt about that but I don't think it will have come as a surprise to Canon. I would be surprised if they have not anticipated the D800's specs and they will no doubt come with something that is at least equal. Better in some ways, a bit less in others - just like it was with the D700 vs. 5D-II comparison. Let's see what they come up with.
    Development of the EVIL cameras is more interesting, as Bob mentioned. A full frame EVIL camera, with adapter to use EF lenses. That would be something new. However new, now I come to think of it, isn't there a small German company selling these alreacy?
     
  16. The real problem is that Nikon and Canon didn’t opt for a new, common lens mount when they entered the autofocus era.
    Just think how much happier everybody would be if we could mix and match bodies and lenses of both systems. Let alone the millions of silly discussions about the pros and cons of either brand this would save us.
    Micro 4/3 was a smart move. Now we only need to get the dinosaurs of the industry to move ;)
     
  17. Yes, indeed it is a pity that Nikon and Canon aren't in business to make us all happy and save us all money rather than to maximize their own profits.
    BTW I suspect the 5D MkIII is already built and has finished its development cycle. Whatever it is, it is and the D800 won't change that. There are very reliable reports of what certainly appears to be the 5D MkIII having been seen in the field in the hands of beta testers.
    BTW I can already put my EOS lenses on my micro 4/3 Olympus Pen. I just can't change the aperture or use autofocus. Nobody I know of has yet made an electrical adapter, just a mechanical adapter, but an electronic adapter is certainly not impossible. People have made devices and adapters that can control the electronics of EF lenses.
    BTW CP+, the big photo trade show of Japan, starts today and runs through the 12th. Who knows what will be revealed there...
     
  18. I'am a mp geek, and I hope that the new 5D will have a lot more than 21mp. But, 36 mp is pretty much at the theoretical
    limits of lenses and 35mm format. Anything above 28mp would be OK with me.

    But, mp's were not the things that really defined the 5D II. ISO and video were.

    So many things could be better, but I would also like more mp's LOL.
     
  19. 36MP is nowhere near the theoretical limit for 35mm lenses. It's perfectly possible to make a lens that's diffraction limited at f4 and such a lens is capable of a resolution of 400 lp/mm at the sensor. To resolve that you'd need something like a 500MP sensor.
    Of course that's the best you could expect, in the center of the frame only.
    36MP may well be good enough to get all the detail out of most lenses, especially at the edges and corners of the frame. Maybe even in the center of the frame for a lot of lenses. It should allow resolution of around 100 lp/mm. Resolving 100 lp/mm in the center of the frame isn't particularly difficult for a good lens operating at its best aperture, though few will get near that at the edges and corners.
    This is theory of course. In practice 36MP would be more than enough. In fact 24MP is probably more than 99% of photographers will ever actually need or be able to make use of.
     
  20. “Yes, indeed it is a pity that Nikon and Canon aren't in business to make us all happy and save us all money rather than to maximize their own profits.”​
    Not necessarily…
    I for one would certainly spend more if Nikon lenses were compatible with Canon bodies and vice versa.
     
  21. There are already grumblings in the Nikon camp about high ISO images with the D800. Also the need for top end Nikkors which Nikon hasn't been on the ball as much as Canon.
    While the D800 spec list is impressive. It is nothing revolutionary. Here's what revolutionary.
    2005. Canon came out with a compact full frame EOS dslr. It was a time when no one knew what to think of it. Nikon itself said FF in a dslr is niche and that DX is the way to go. Guess what, everybody loved the 5D's images. It sold like crazy.
    2008. After seeing the sales success of the EOS 5D and hearing the cries of many Nikon owners, Nikon popped out the 12MP D700 and relish its success to able to deliver a compact FF benchmarked against a near 4-yr old EOS 5D.
    Months later, Canon showed up with the 5d2 that not only boasts a large 21MP sensor it also takes HD videos. Guess what? It took the indie movie making world by storm. It left Nikon WTF-ing at its own D700. HDSLR segment is hot and its growing. People are buying the 5d2/7D just for movie making. Support systems grew around these Canon cameras. Nikon is nowhere to be found.
    2012... 4 years later Nikon finally came out with a FF compact camera that can shoot HD videos too with even more MP. Two base features that the 4-year old 5d2 already had. Based on past history, it is Canon that's doing the game changing. Nikon's merely trying to emulate and keep up.
     
  22. While 36mp is nice to have, in reality it's not that great a leap. My 21mp 1DS3 has a base resolution of about 16x20. I typically don't print beyond that (although a tiny bit of up-sizing will give me nice 24x30's). That said, if I recall correctly the "rules" of resolution are that in order to make your prints double in length/height you need FOUR times the megapixels. Thus going from 21mp in the Canon world you would need over 80 mp to make comparable larger prints. More megapixels isn't going to make me start printing larger and my customers aren't going to purchase wall-sized prints. Granted more mp allows for room to crop but I try to frame correctly in the first place. The law of diminishing returns is very near. Just compare photography to the computer world. Just like faster computers, once a certain performance level is attained each newer generation (while nice) doesn't seem that amazing.
     
  23. The jump from 24 to 36MP is the same in resolution terms as the jump from 12MP to 18MP or 6MP to 9MP - as long as the lens is capable of providing detail at the resolution demanded by 36MP.
    In theory, 21MP to 36MP gives you a maximum of about a 30% increase in linear resolution. In practice it may be more like 20%. So instead of 20x30, you'd be able to go to 24 x36 and retain similar image quality.
    If all the lens can deliver is resolution equal to 24MP then a jump to 36MP gives you little. For most lenses 6MP to 9MP was fine and 12MP to 18MP was still within what they were capable of.
    Of course it's pixel density that counts when resolution is concerned and an APS-C 18MP camera has the same pixel density as a full frame 29MP would. [ERROR - that should be 46MP, see below]
     
  24. Remember Canon showing a 50mp sensor awhile back?
    Add in finer & fasterAutoFocus in low light, at least 6 fps drive capability, eye controlled focus(Rememeber the EOS3?) video with actual 90fps usable for slo-mo capabilies, built in intervalometer, a brighter pentaprism equal to or better than the old film cameras - and I think you have a winner.
    We "need" as much quality as it is possible to make. The 1 series body is a photojournalists delight. Make this one for those looking for the ultimate in image quality while sacrificing some of the speed.
    If the D800 performs per the spec sheet it will be a winner. Canon can only hope to beat it as anything that falls short will only highlight them being behind Nikon - a big turnaround from the past years when Nikon was almost 5 years behind in coming out with big/fast AFglass(the reason you suddenly saw white lenses on every sports sideline) and in full frame bodies.
    Now that the two are back going head to head we can only benefit.
    I really want to see the new Fuji 'mini-M9' tho. If it performs as it says... O'Boy!
     
  25. To be honest I'm much more interested in seeing what Canon bring out in the way of a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera then how many new goodies they manage to squeeze into a 5D MkIII.​
    Yes, I've been quietly expecting Canon to turn the mirrorless world upside much the way they did the SLR world with the introduction of the EOS line. I'm not sure what that means or what it would take, but I continue to hope.
     
  26. Seeing as we're all guessing... I think the 5D3 will be the first DSLR to have 4K video. I also think it will have 30+ MP and decent AF for a change.
    I also think another upcoming move from Canon will be a "cheap" FF DSLR that has a similar spec to the current 5D2 but at a much lower price.
     
  27. an APS-C 18MP camera has the same pixel density as a full frame 29MP would.
    If you mean 1.6x with APS-C then the correct number for full frame is 46MP. If you mean 1.5x then about 41MP. You need to square the crop factor.
     
  28. Ilkka - correct. I was wrong. 18mp with a 1.6x factor needs [18*1.6*1.6] to calculate the number of equivalent pixels that would fit on a 36x24 sensor. As you say, that's 46MP.
    The 7D has 5,184 x 3,456 pixels and a 22.3 x 14.9 mm sensor. If you expand that to 36 x 24mm you'd get 8369 x 5579 pixels. The D800 is "only" 7,360 x 4,912. If my math is right this time, that would give it the same pixel density as a 14MP EOS APS-C camera, or a little less than the 15MP EOS 50D.
    Thanks for catching my mistake.
     
  29. Not many white lenses at the Superbowl... I mean that is not the standard, but I am just saying!
     
  30. In any case, the surge in offerings of better Canon lenses indicates that higher resolution on an unprecedented scale on a 24x36 sensor might be coming. I'm guessing 40 MP. The question of noise management is still there, and I would not be surprised if that technical problem has not been a factor in Canon's delay in getting a huge-megapixel camera to market. There is little point in getting a 36- to 40-MP camera out there if the image quality is not really stellar.
    I have seen some of the sample images from the D800. Sure, they are good, but the ones that I have seen so far have not been overwhelming. I hope that Canon can do better, but I admit that I have not seen enough yet to make a meaningful judgment about the new Nikon.
    As Steve Crist said above, we are definitely into the realm of diminishing returns, especially on a 24x36 sensor. What is the marginal utility in going up another notch? I think that that is the question to be asking, regardless of brand--or brand loyalty.
    See the Steven Crist comment at 04:39 p.m. for a truly insightful but concise comment.
    When so many cameras are so good, only a fool would change brands now based on the latest incremental improvement in technology.
    Even so, I wonder what Sony is up to. It has been a while since the A900. I won't be switching, but it might be interesting to see. I have the NEX=3. and I have so say that it is a fine little camera--if you don't mind going into menus to change basic settings. It's a fine little camera to carry around when you don't want to fool with a tripod. I leave the 16mm lens on it and just shoot P, not my style, but, hey, sometimes you just want to get a quick shot, and the little Sony with the ample sensor delivers. It is now my "cloud photo" camera, with that wide (and flat) little 16 on there.
    Still, last night I was out shooting in near darkness with my 5D II. It is still my "go to" camera when I want to bother with a tripod--which I typically do not mind. A decent tripod with quick release head is in the trunk of both cars so that I do not have to think about whether to carry a tripod or not. As a compromise between high ISO and high megapixels, I have been really impressed with the 5D II. To beat it all the way around, I would have to carry both the D700 and the D3X. It is not quite as good in low light as the D700 and not quite as good in terms of resolution as the D3X. but hey, to have very good low light capabilities combined with pretty high resolution in one camera is pretty impressive for me. If anything is going to make me want to retire the 5D II, it is going to have to be one heck of a camera.
    I would like to see just how well the D800 can handle noise at high ISO and low light. I get the sense that its real strength might be daytime landscape work, or else studio work, where lighting is plentiful. Those who really like Nikon and low noise above all would probably do better to stick with the D700. Since I like both low noise and high MPs, the 5D II has been my preference. There was no way that I was going to switch to Nikon to get the 25 MPs of the D3X--although the D3X certainly has a lot of other strengths. What real improvements the D800 will make will be interesting to see. Until someone can show me better, the D3X appears to be the full-frame resolution king of the moment. The D800 might indeed change that, but the real advantage of the D800 is the cost. The D800 might be a lot less impressive in practice than it sounds. Just sayin' . . . .
    I did buy the T2i not long ago when the price dropped near $500 for the body. I stuck the EF 24-36 lens on it, and wow! Cheap camera with good lens, great results! It is a shame that lens improvements do not get anywhere near the attention that body improvements do. I got the EF 24mm f/1.4 not long ago. What a piece of work! In my opinion, improved lenses are still the most rational investments, but I will be interested in seeing what Canon comes out with in the 5D III, or whatever it's called.
    In any case, digital has gotten so good in the last few years that I don't feel any need to buy any new top-end bodies anytime soon. The marginal utility of laying out a few thousand more is just not there for me, even if the money were--and, frankly, it isn't.
    --Lannie
     
  31. The one thing that struck me from the specs is the D800E model. No AA screen. Now this I would be interested in. This is what happens when a camera manufacturer listens to it's customer base and gives them a choice.
     
  32. Actually, the D800E does have an AA filter, but introduces another filter to counter its effects. So the question is this: if introducing this secondary filter does so much good, why the two models? My guess is that there will be a compromise of some sort. We'll see.
     
  33. It seams that Nikon is raising the flag of MP. Which canon was doing it earlier.
    Well if this what photographer are thinking then sigma SD1 has to come on top as it is 40 mp on crop sensor.
    I am using sigma sd14 and I made a competition my friends with Nikon & canon and there weren't different to that extent
    I have 7 d and I m fully convenced that the current 5 d mk ii is what a photographer is dreaming of.
    We were shoting film with single focus and we were doing great. the biggest
    Mistake is somebody things that the camera can greater what photographer can do
     
  34. Abbas: The SD1 is 15MP. The pixels are 3 levels deep, but there are only 15 million of them.
    David. Do you have a reference for and anti-anti-aliasing filter (i.e. 2 filters that counteract each other). I can't really think of any mechanism of reversing the effects of a low pass filter with another filter, so if that is how Nikon do it I'd like to find out (a) How they do it and (b) Why they do it that way since just leaving out the filter would seem to be far, far easier and cheaper.
     
  35. Bob, a link to this diagram was posted over in the Nikon forum -
    http://www.robgalbraith.com/data/1/rec_imgs/5563_d800_olpf_graphic.jpg
    I found it odd too. Perhaps the whole optical system made it difficult to just remove the low-pass filters entirely.
     
  36. (In fact, it really seems to make no sense at all. It implies the second low-pass filter somehow *knows* which photons were diverted by the first low-pass filter and which were not. How could this possibly work.)
     
  37. Why they do it that way
    If you leave out the filter completely, the optical system changes and you might have to recalculate the lenses, and the sensor would have to be moved to a different position (so that focusing works) etc. I think this is what they're trying to avoid.
    With the current arrangement there is only one physical part that is different between the D800 and D800E cameras, (so that eases manufacturing) and it's different only in rotational orientation of the material. If the sensor (or filter) were square, rotating one of the birefringent layers by 90 degrees turns the AA filtering on off. Put in some gears to do it and miraculously you have a camera where you can turn on/off the AA filter at the press of a button.
    How could this possibly work.
    It's been 20 years since my freshman physics but I recall that if you have a birefringent material that splits a beam of light into two the polarization of the two resulting beams are different. This might make it possible for another layer of the material to cancel the effect of the first one. But I would have to check that - it could be my imagination and poor memory ;-)
     
  38. Dear Bob, this argument went so long for faveon sensors if what you count is true then canon sensor of 10 mp is actually
    2.5 red, 2.5 blue, and 5 green as per Bayer array
    I am shoting with sd14 and comparing it with old 5 d and d300. you can fined many comparison in the net
    The only drawback of sigma is its very slow cam else it is great cam
    Also hassblad MF are using shift array to reach to 120 mp
     
  39. zml

    zml

    Abbas: no amount mental equilibristics will ever change the fact that 15 megapixels is 15 megapixels is 15 megapixels. Foveon has some nice properties but magic is not one of them.
     
  40. Canon in not Nikon. Two companies catering to the same crowd but with different ideas about design and marketing. Both have proven successful with their own philosophies. The difference now is the Nikon came with a product loaded with all the professional features at an incredible price that I'm afraid Canon has no chance matching such an attractive offer. Canon's only chance is to pack their camera with tons and tons of new features to mask the lack of the pro-oriented features that the D800 has. I'd love to be wrong. Canon, release the attack dogs. Don't come again with a well trained cocker spaniel.
     
  41. If you leave out the filter completely, the optical system changes and you might have to recalculate the lenses, and the sensor would have to be moved to a different position (so that focusing works) etc. I think this is what they're trying to avoid.​
    Good point, Ilkka. I hadn't thought of that. It probably saves manufacturing costs, as well, given that the two bodies will be very similar.
     
  42. I'm finding myself wondering what the 5D successor will have to offer. Resolution is obviously a consideration. Would Canon shooters be satisfied with a 24MP 5D3? 28? 32?
    How good does the noise performance have to be?
    Although they are as yet untested, the D800 is specified to have in-camera HDR and time-lapse capabilities that look very promising.
    The ability to shoot video at two different crop sizes is also a very flexible feature. There are a number of other video enhancements in the D800, but I'm sure that Canon is working on some of their own given the prominence of the 5D/7D bodies in today's video community. Canon surely doesn't want to lose their edge.
     
  43. The Leica M9 camera doesn't have an AA filter. The senor in it is a CCD versus CMOS used in Nikon and Canon if that matters.
     
  44. If you leave out the filter completely, the optical system changes and you might have to recalculate the lenses, and the sensor would have to be moved to a different position (so that focusing works) etc. I think this is what they're trying to avoid.
    Good point, Ilkka. I hadn't thought of that. It probably saves manufacturing costs, as well, given that the two bodies will be very similar.​
    Guys the AA system is not part of the focus system. Light comes through the lens, goes through the partially reflective mirror, hits the secondary mirror and then reflects down to the phase detect sensors. The AA filter is on the image sensor and will not see any light until after the focus is made, mirors are lifted up, and the shutter is opened. The phase detect focus system on all Canon and Nikon cameras is not active when the shutter is open.
    There are shops out there that will remove the AA and IR filters for you if you wish. The phase detect focus systems on these modified cameras still work after the alteration.
     
  45. I fully expect canon to turn a blind eye to what photographers want in a camera and give us a crappy camera update again with truncated function.
     
  46. Regardless of how many megapixels the sensor has and how many lp/mm the lens can resolve, the precision of the focus (AF or manual) will probably set the limit for the system resolution. I know I get more consistently accurate AF with my Canon P&S and Olympus Pen than my Nikon DSLRs.
     
  47. Did not read the whole thread. My view: The 5DII has a maximum sync speed of 1/160th second. In my home studio, I prefer the Rebel T2i because of its 1/200th second sync speed. To my knowledge, Canon has never issued a firmware or other upgrade to 1/200th second sync speed for the 5DII. This fact disappoints. Let us hope a 5DIII has at least a 1/200th second sync speed.
    The 7D I understand can control in the camera the off-camera flash units. This function in the 5DIII would certainly appeal to studio and location shooters who use Speedlites, as I do. Goodbye flash unit triggers, assuming the camera control via the transmitter would communicate directly with the Speedlites.
    For those readers unfamiliar with the effect of sync speed in a studio, this function can eliminate ambient light as part of the exposure if the sync speed goes high enough. A high sync speed relegates ambient light to the shadow area where it may not affect exposure in the other tones. Thus, the cameraman may operate a low-wattage room light for aiding lens focus and seeing in general.
    Further, a high sync speed freezes subject motion if any should happen during the ambient exposure remaining after the flash exposure.
    In closing, let me say Canon will have to offer a killer upgrade in the 5DIII for me to purchase it. My eye tells me so far the 1/160 second sync speed does not allow ambient light to pollute the non-shadow image tones. I find my 5DII produces superior image quality, and suffices for my purposes.
    One last note: The shooters who talk of switching from Canon to Nikon (in the part of the thread I read) omit to mention the Canon lenses they will leave behind and will have to sell in order to do Nikon. What a hassle. I'd think twice and again before switching.
     
  48. There are shops out there that will remove the AA and IR filters for you if you wish.
    Of course, and after removing the filter they will put in its place another piece of glass that approximates the optical path through the standard filter pack while providing the altered transmission bandwidth requested.
    If you alter the optical pathlength from lens to main sensor and do not adjust both the path to the AF sensor and the focusing screen to match, you will get focus errors in manual or autofocus or both. The focusing screen can be moved by turning a screw and/or using shims. The AF can be recalibrated by a process similar to focus fine tune.
    The phase detect focus systems on these modified cameras still work after the alteration.
    For this to work the AF has to be recalibrated to compensate the errors caused by the different wavelength range as well as any differences in the thickness of the filter pack. Companies that do this kind of conversion seem to provide such a service. You can read about it e.g. here:
    http://www.lifepixel.com/focus-calibration-options
     
  49. Did not read the whole thread. My view: The 5DII has a maximum sync speed of 1/160th second. In my home studio, I prefer the Rebel T2i because of its 1/200th second sync speed. To my knowledge, Canon has never issued a firmware or other upgrade to 1/200th second sync speed for the 5DII. This fact disappoints. Let us hope a 5DIII has at least a 1/200th second sync speed.​
    The original 5D (which I have) and the 5D II both have a shutter sync speed of 1/200 of a second. My 5D will do 1/200 of a second with a canon flash without any issues. However non canon flashes may not respond to the trigger signal fast enough for some cameras. It's all a manner of timming and tolerances. If the flash timming and tolerances are correct it will not work at 1/200 of a second. If that is happening with your equipment you can slow the shutter speed down or talk to the strob vendor.
    Many studio flashes were designed when all mechanical medium format cameras dominated the profesional studio buisness. Due to manufacturing limits in the mechanicalshutter switches they typically had large timming tolerances. With all electric cameras dominating the market today timming tolerances are typically tighter which may cause probllems with older strob designs.
     
  50. I hope the larger file size doesn't render more noise like the D800 does. Might be one reason why the 1DX stayed with 18mpx. This should get interesting....
     
  51. I've read some weird stuff here, like ". . . the 24-120 and 70-200 f4 IS. Nikon has nothing like them." Canon doesn't make a 24-120. Nikon does though, and it has VR, and it's AWESOME (the f4 version). I am a Canon fan, but I love Nikon too. I will be buying neither, because I want a Sony A65 and a Sigma SD1. Eventually I think people will realize that Nikon AND Canon are both in business to survive AND please their customers. When the 5 D came out, people were ecstatic! Then, when the D700 cam out, people were ecstatic again! Then, when the 5 D Mk II came out, people were ecstatic! Now people are ecstatic again! They will surely be ecstatic about the 5 D Mk III. Life goes on. Nikon and Canon compete. No dramatic steps up go unanswered it seems (not for very long anyway).
    What I'm really hoping for is a full-frame Foveon sensor camera. A 90 megapixel (30x3) full-frame Foveon sensor would have the same pixel density as the SD1. Sigma has shown they can make a sensor with such a density, so now they just have to build one with twice the area. If they put it in a camera with fast electronics, so it can shoot as well as the SD1, nobody will be able to compete. Sure, the D4 and 1Dx will still shoot faster and look cooler and have all sorts of cool features the Sigma SD2 will not (that is assuming that Sigma calls their full-frame camera the SD2). But who cares? A 30 MP photo from a Foveon sensor with 90 million single-color photo-receptors in a 30x3 configuration will blow away anything a D800 can produce, with or without the special E option.
     

Share This Page

1111