5D MKII here it is

[anson_ko]

People are selling D3 unless they are sponsered by Nikon. I saw a photograher just bought two D3 and new set of VR lenses. I asked her why, she said because she likes Nikon :-) Emotion is another reason.

[cameron_ertman]

To add to what Stephen was saying, a couple of more useful features the 1Ds III has is its faster flash sync at 1/250, not 1/200 as on the new 5D, and exposure compensation of +/-3.0 EV, not +/-2.0 EV as on the 5D. I also wonder if the new 5D's battery was improved. I know the old version (without the optional grip) goes through batteries way faster than the 1Ds. But, whether or not these features are worth the extra money is a question that can only be answered by each photographer.

[Jeff Lear]

It's now listed on Canon USA's site...

 

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=17662

[ty_mickan]

The 5DII is a consumer camera as is the D700. To say that these cameras have killed the 1Ds or the D3 is

ludicrous. If you were a working professional, or had any idea of what a w.p.'s job entails, you wouldn't make

statements like this.

 

"People are selling D3 unless they are sponsered by Nikon."

CRAP......... Would you care cite some examples?

 

The D3, along with the 1Ds are still THE choice for pro photographers. I doubt that any shot that has come from a

D3 for use in media has required a print size anywhere near what its 12mp will allow.

 

MP count = determines the print size of the image....that is all.

 

Higher mp are great from a marketing point of view and by the look of this thread, it seems to work. The cameras

ability to get the shot is what pros care about. Any Nikon or Canon pro SLR made in the last five years has had

great IQ.

[anson_ko]

I doubt that any shot that has come from a D3 for use in media has required a print size anywhere near what its 12mp will allow.

 

5D has 12MP years ago cost much less than a D3. So, if you want 12MP, you have your solution years ago. No need to wait for D3. Also, in order to take full advantage of the new bodies, she is also using the new VR lenses. basciallly, she is investing into the new system, buying new bodies, new lenses, new flash. For professionals, you want to have the best gear available, brand names don't matter. my 2 cents.

[ty_mickan]

so why compare a consumer camera to a pro camera. they are intended for a totally different market. stop using the mp count as the be all and end all to the usefulness of a camera. it normally is the furthest thing from my mind when i shoot

[aaron_lam]

Amazon has them posted...

<p>

<a href=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B001G5ZTLS/ref=pd_luc_mri?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B001G5ZTLS/ref=pd_luc_mri?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance</a>

[scott_ferris]

Tom you are dead wrong,

 

I am not using the MP as the only criteria, the MAIN thing I based my comments on was IQ, Canon say themselves

that the 5D MkII is the best IQ of any DSLR they have ever made. The 1D MkIII still has a niche, the 1DS MK III's

niche as the best of the best and damn the expense is now not true. Yes a very few photographers might be able to

justify the crazy price for one but as a working pro I would rather have 2 5D MkII's and a new 24mm f1.4 or even

better the rumoured 24-70mm f2.8 IS, I don't know any that wouldn't!

 

Countless wedding, event, news and landscape photographers are using 5D's this will only increase with the 5D

MkII and it's very high spec to price ratio. If I were a landscape shooter and wanted the best IQ Canon could

sell me they would tell me to buy a 5D MkII not the 1DS MkIII. I am sure they will bring out something to better

it but today it is not here, I found that very interesting and I am glad (though I do own 1D series equipment)

that I did not invest heavily in the 1DS MkIII. I will invest very heavily in my 1VHS digital replacement.

[ilkka_nissila]

Scott, what do you do when you get a card failure using the 5D Mk II, do you not wish that you had shot with a 1 series

camera and written on two cards? You mentioned weddings and events.

[anson_ko]

I am not trying to start a war here. If you think NIkon fits your profile or higher MP dont' matter, get it.

[scott_ferris]

Well Iikka, before they were invented we all shot on film, one at a time, and then onto 1 card, but I have never had an issue with the 1 card system that I use in my antiquated 1 series cameras!

 

When are they going to bring out three card systems for extra extra backup, when will the use of wireless on the fly backup become considered essential by all "serious" photographers so that a shot is never lost? It has all gotten crazy!

 

Yes two cards are nice and a very few people have had the day saved by using them, but double card or camera failure or misplacing the film happens too. Two 5D Mk II bodies would stand you in better position should your 1DS MkIII fail! Show me a serious wedding pro that uses 1 camera, the cost of getting the best image quality possible just went down from $16,000 to less than $5,500! Now that is progress.

[photo_dark]

"But the 1Ds III has a reputation for being noisy with all those pixels pacted into the chip"

 

Your kidding me right?

[squareframe]

I can't wait to see all the stunning imagery with the Mark II, that has somehow escaped the owners of the 5D and its lower brethren.

 

I just wanted to say that 'Archimedes Alcantara' is the best patron-name on photo.net

 

ever!

 

captain dan

[john_bellenis]

The question is "How much are the extra features of a 1Ds Mk III worth to you?" now that IQ is essentially a wash.

 

When the IQ was superior in the 1Ds line, it made sense to buy for that reason alone for many people - the additional

speed, weatherproofing, etc. was really a bonus (I was in that category). Now you really have to NEED the

weatherproofing, frame rate, buffer, etc. to justify the additional $5,300. While that may well be worth it to sports

photographers, some journalists, etc. I doubt that for many professionals it would be preferable to having a second 5D

Mk II body and a couple of decent L lenses - or money left in your pocket.

 

It's hard to believe Canon have shot themselves in the foot so successfully regarding 1Ds Mk III sales unless they have

a MK IV ready to go. If that's the case then many recent 1Ds Mk III owners will have every right to feel somewhat

shafted.

[anson_ko]

It's hard to believe Canon have shot themselves in the foot so successfully regarding 1Ds Mk III sales unless they have a MK IV ready to go. If that's the case then many recent 1Ds Mk III owners will have every right to feel somewhat shafted

 

Years go, no one has FF. now, nikon.sony have FF. competition is fierce. I believe they are investing RD into a new 30MP sensors. They are NOT shooting themselves in the foot. If they cannot compete, they are gone.

[ilkka_nissila]

Scott, of course one needs a backup camera (this is in addition to dual cards on the camera(s)), but if you store

your critical images on one card only, the card may malfunction and you will only after the events have passed

discover that the data can not be read, when it is too late to reshoot. Whereas if the camera malfunctions, you

will immediately notice and switch to the backup, so only a few moments are lost. Three cards are not useful

since the probability of a single card failing is maybe 1 time per year (for a pro), so two cards failing on the

same shoot is extremely unlikely (once in a million shoots perhaps).

 

I don't advocate using a dual card camera for everything. But for anything which is an important one-time only

event and the outcome matters to someone other than the photographer, I always do. And I know wedding

photographers who shoot with older 1 series models because they want the dual card feature but do not want to

spend the money on the latest. This is always an option so talking about $16000 is just silly.

 

This, among several reasons (including autofocus, viewfinder, build) are why the 5D Mk II's sensor specs should

be totally irrelevant to someone in the market for an 1 series camera.

[scott_ferris]

Ilkka,

 

I don't know how many weddings I have shot, but it is lots, I don't know how many times I have used my 1D series cameras, (it has to be in the thousands) I messed up with one roll of film once pre digital, I have never had a card failure. Don't forget my 1D cameras only have one slot. I have shot lots of what some people would consider important.

 

Talking about $16,000 is not silly, it is a very valid point, last week if you wanted to set yourself up as a wedding photographer and wanted to offer the best IQ available in 35mm format ((the rest of the 1D series is pretty wasted on wedding pros) the bride and groom generally aren't moving fast, AF, they don't get married in sandstorms, weatherproofing etc) then you had to buy the 1DS MkIII, now you don't. Now I am not saying that nobody can justify the purchase of the 1DS MkIII but there can be very very few people who NEED it given that just a very few years ago nobody had AF, or any other things that nowadays are considered "essential". Photographers used to be the picture takers and be responsible for the whole thing, whilst the best of the best are still pushing boundaries the average person can now take superb pictures with prosumer gear.

 

Oh a simple way round your card failure, use more small cards, then you could only lose a small series of pics, kinda like we did hundreds of years ago with film when we were limited to 36 exposures before changing films. I know I see things too simply but most people seem to need to complicate things too much. You also mention viewfinder, the difference between 98% and 100% is nothing. The build of the 1D is the same and is half the cost, the sensor is the same as the 5D MkII and is one third the cost!

 

Every single point that the 1DS Mk III has can be done without by a good photographer, lots of outstanding photographers still use a light meter, M and to a lesser extent manual focus, even when they are using the 1D series cameras. My point was that a prosumer camera now has at least equal, but probably higher, IQ than a camera costing three times the price and the functionality of the $8,000 one really doesn't look any where near where it should be. Given that there is a very easy work around for any short coming that some feel the 5D MkII might have, I think it has put so much pressure on the 1DS MkIII that the values of them can only drop off depressingly fast for anybody that has bought one recently.

 

I'm not emotional about this stuff, I was just interested in what will happen to the 1DS MkIII especially seeing as how it is so young. I am in the market for new cameras next year. It looks to me like I will have a choice between a 1DS Mk IV that will probably not have features that I would justify $8,000 on, a 5D MkII for $2,700 or I suspect a 1DS MkIII for similar money. Now if I had the choice of a new 5D MkII or a used 1DS MkIII for similar money the greater functionality of the 1 Series would win out, it did when I bought my last cameras.

 

But be honest, if the 1D MkIII is a highly regarded niche machine at $4,000, the 5D MkII can take virtually every picture the 1DS MkIII can take at $2,700, what is the true value of a 1DS MkIII new, I'd say it was closer to $4,000, which makes the used market very very interesting.

 

Lastly you kill your own argument, " This............ why the 5D Mk II's sensor specs should be totally irrelevant to someone in the market for an 1 series camera." if this were true then the 1DS MkIII would never have sold a single camera, everybody would have bought the 1D MkIII and gotten higher fps as well! The sensor is what the 1DS series is all about.

[john_bellenis]

I totally agree with Scott on this one. I was in the market for a 1Ds MkIII (due to the IQ and sensor) and now I'm not. The

other features mean very little to me (I may pay $1000 over the price of a 5D MkII for them, maybe not even that much).

It's all a matter of the right tool for the job and not paying for more than you need - I understand that different people

have different needs, and for some people the 1Ds Mk III remains the perfect tool for the job at any price. I will buy 2 5D

MkIIs and I do already have a 1Ds MkII which will be a heavy back up along with the original 5Ds.

 

I have also never had a card failure - ever - in four years of shooting solely digital (DSLR and MF Digital), let alone "one

a year". My MF digital - at multiples the price of any DSLR - has ONE CF card slot - again never any problem and no

failures. I did have assistants open film magazines full of exposed film, turn darkroom lights on with 18 exposed,

undeveloped rolls loaded on spools in a dev basket (!), put film through dodgy x-ray machines, just plain lose an

occasional roll, and countless other incidents. I'm not saying card failures can't happen, but it's really the least of my

worries. To suggest that everyone using Medium Format digital doesn't care about their images or clients and isn't

professional as they only have one card slot is plain silly.

 

I know, I know - I have now totally jinxed myself and no doubt will have card failures galore all next week!

[ilkka_nissila]

Well, to me losing images because of a card failure once in a lifetime would be too much if it happened at a

critical time. And some pros do report having card failures approximately once a year; perhaps they shoot in

different conditions than you or I.

 

To me the problem with the viewfinder of the 5D (and presumably, mark II) is that I have to move my eye around to

see the whole frame, whereas with the Nikon D3/D700 or an 1D Mk III, for example, I can see everything on one

glance. This is the primary reason I did not buy the 5D. Perhaps this is not an issue with all people who wear

glasses but it certainly is a deal breaker for me. Then there are the reports of mirrors falling out of 5D's

which one sometimes encounters on photo.net, other forums, even a local camera store here mentioned this. I have

no idea of the actual frequency of these problems. Jeff Ascough mentioned that he shoots with an 1.3X crop camera

as it is easier to see the whole frame than with the full-frame models; compared to 5D this certainly is true. I

guess these ergonomic factors are a matter of individual anatomy also. In any case one should not make

generalisations that a model has no market just based on the cheaper model having the same or a better sensor;

other things such as ergonomics are also important. In film cameras, all the camera bodies make the same image

quality, yet the prices varied wildly depending on ruggedness and features. I've always thought the 1Ds series

are somewhat expensive for small format cameras, but increasing the pixel count within 24x36 isn't going to

solve that, it's likely to create more problems than it solves. It's better to increase the sensor size, go to

medium format if you want more pixels - so you get good pixel level detail in the files. If Canon just reduces

the price of the 1Ds Mk III (i.e. to $5500) or applies the new 50D sensor technology to make a 1Ds Mk IV (with

clean ISO 6400), then it should sell what it always did. More pixels ... that's just a bad idea in a small format

camera. I'd hate to see DSLRs ruined the same way point and shoot cameras have been.

[nyphotopro]

Ordered mine today! I can't wait.

[john_bellenis]

" I'd hate to see DSLRs ruined the same way point and shoot cameras have been."

 

This is an excellent point - the noise on some of the new P&S cameras with stupid, no need, MP counts- even at 200

ISO - is intolerable compared to the older 4MP cameras of a few years ago.

 

I do worry about this - noise and diffraction issues - as the MP count climbs ever upwards...

 

I shoot MF digital when it's possible and appropriate and DSLRs when it's appropriate. Sometimes you need a DSLR

simply to get the kind of shot you want, in those cases the improved IQ of MF digital is obviously irrelevant.

 

It's funny how everyone's priorities are different - I prefer the 5Ds handling to the 1Ds Mk II as I like the smaller size and

weight and the larger screen, the viewfinders don't seem significantly different to me. I do think it's important to

remember that cameras are just tools - I get emotional and uptight about images, but the camera is just the capture

device at the end of the equation and all the hard work. As such, all I want is to not be limited by my cameras -

technically or creatively - I don't want to be lugging around or paying for more than I need.

[KenPapai]

"so why compare a consumer camera to a pro camera. they are intended for a totally different market. "

 

The 5D and the 5D2 are not merely consumer cameras, that's what the dReb's are. The 5D family is the Prosumer category. This isn't news except perhaps to one person above. I am not making any of ths up.

 

The 5D is not aimed at the DSLR (mass) consumer market. It's aimed at Working Pros, High End Amateurs, semi-pros, and those pros and non-pros after some of the highest quality DSLR photography they can achieve, myself included.

[KenPapai]

"And some pros do report having card failures approximately once a year..."

 

And I'd wager a month's pay that the vast majority of those failures are User Error:

 

card removed too soon; camera turned off too soon; card already full from session and the pro pressed the shutter again; card formatted on another different body and then used in the other camera; card has a few shots from another's brands camera and again, shot with this camera... on and on...

 

Full card accidentally inserted and another picture taken...

 

Every one of those failures is easily preventable User Error.

[matthias_meixner2]

@Ken

 

The only real user error in your list is "card removed too soon". The camera must be able to handle all the other cases you list without losing data. If it loses data this is a bug of the camera and should be reported to the manufacturer.

[g_w2]

looks major to me. love to have one. wonder if the pic of the 5dmkll was shot with a 5dmkll. cheers. -gw.