# Up the game



## poias (May 6, 2012)

It is interesting that 5D3's comparison base is 5D2. D800 is being compared to Leica S2 and PhaseOne IQ180.

"5D3 is far better than 5D2, especially in handling, JPGs, and AF."

versus

"D800 comes close to MF like S2 and IQ180 in other aspects, but clearly fails in midtones."


----------



## Ricku (May 6, 2012)

It is not very surprising i.m.o. The 5D3's sensor technology seems to be basically the same as with the first 5D. It improved very marginally every generation after that.

While Nikon brings out innovative and impressive features together with their (Sony's) awesome Exmor sensor, Canon looks like they are very much focused on video over stills.


----------



## altenae (May 6, 2012)

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.


----------



## Ricku (May 6, 2012)

altenae said:


> Still talking about the sensor......
> 
> There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
> And that's what counts.


Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.


----------



## poias (May 6, 2012)

altenae said:


> Still talking about the sensor......
> 
> There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
> And that's what counts.



That is the point of my threat. Clearly people do not care about the sensor, hence 5D3 being such a success so far.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (May 6, 2012)

Yeah, we got it. Canon sucks, Nikon is god. 

</thread>


----------



## altenae (May 6, 2012)

Ricku said:


> Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?
> 
> Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.



Yes it's important, but really blown out of porportion.
I am 100% sure you don't own the 5D Mark III.

After reading all of your posts I already know enough


----------



## Rob Wiebe (May 6, 2012)

Ricku said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > Still talking about the sensor......
> ...



Hmmm. Guess you should try one. Coming from the 7D and 5D2, my 5D3 I wouldn't trade for either. Sensor or not, the focusing system wins it for me and I guess the DiG!C 5+ Image Processor is what makes it worthwhile, among a few other items such as feel, ergonomics, programmability ... yes, it works well for me. Now if the damn 1D-X would just arrive! ;-)


----------



## RunAndGun (May 6, 2012)

Ricku said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > Still talking about the sensor......
> ...



That's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I wouldn't lump the entire "5D2 crowd" together. I disagree that it's underwhelming and disappointing. I have two MKII's and as a camera the MKIII is a huge upgrade. This isn't film, a DSLR is a system and should be looked at in that way. A camera(now) is more than JUST it's sensor. I'm not saying a bad sensor won't ruin an otherwise good camera, because it can, BUT the MKIII does not have a bad sensor. Like a lot of people, I never had a problem with the sensor in the MKII, I just wanted it in a better "camera".


----------



## pdirestajr (May 6, 2012)

I think the 5D3 is a HUGE upgrade from the 5D2 in every area. To me that is the definition of Canon "upping their game".

I recently picked up a 5D2 because I needed a second camera, and the price was right- It captures beautiful images. But besides that, my 7D destroys it in terms of AF, ergonomics and useful features. I took my new 5D2 to the park today to see if it could keep up with my 2yr old daughter... Not a chance.

I've read all about the 5D2's limitations for years but bought it regardless because I plan to use it with my manual focus lenses and studio work. I got it for the sensor basically.

My point is the 5D3 has turned the 5D line into a real professional camera that can handle a lot more types of photography. The 5D2 wasn't/ isn't even close. That is progress.

Since so many people need to compare it to the D800, besides their sensor, what improvements were made?


----------



## briansquibb (May 6, 2012)

poias said:


> It is interesting that 5D3's comparison base is 5D2. D800 is being compared to Leica S2 and PhaseOne IQ180.
> 
> "5D3 is far better than 5D2, especially in handling, JPGs, and AF."
> 
> ...



I did wonder why it isn't compared with the 1DS3 as it is now being stated as a 'pro' camera


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 7, 2012)

Ricku said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > Still talking about the sensor......
> ...



Please don't speak for the rest of us. I happen to think its an excellent upgrade from my 5d2. It doesn't depend what camera you're coming from, but your needs.


----------



## 1982chris911 (May 7, 2012)

Having a 5d MK II and MK III all I can say is that it is a hugh upgrade in every aspect ...


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > altenae said:
> ...



I feel the same way - the 5D2 was such a good camera for a large number of people that chose it for its strengths. Those strengths, mp, low light and video, have not been massively improved.

I can see this is something you feel strongly about so there's no point continuing the discussion.


----------



## jrista (May 7, 2012)

RunAndGun said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > altenae said:
> ...



I totally agree here. I think the 5D III is actually a pretty stupendous upgrade overall for the "5D II crowd" at large. There are so many things that have improved. 

I think the 5D III comes off as a disappointment to those who were really hoping that Canon would finally improve their DR and offer another boost to MP. I'm not saying 22.3mp is bad, most certainly not, but there are some large groups of photographers who do/did use the 5D II for landscapes and studio work, and something along the lines of 28-32mp with better DR would have serviced their needs much better. As it stands, at the moment at least, Canon users in those groups have just been left in the lurch..so to say. I guess it should also be noted that such a camera could still be released by Canon...there is still plenty of 2012 left, and the rumors about a 40mp+ megapixel monster from Canon are still flying. 

I am not sure I'm particularly confident Canon can really produce the same kind of technological excellence as the SoNikon alliance is currently producing, though. Canon has demonstrated a lack of interest in really competing on the technological front for quite a number of years, and I am not really sure they have any interest in producing things like sensors with better DR or AF systems that support f/8 AF points. Those facts are very sad and somewhat disturbing for Canon users who need those features. Switching brands is not an easy, fun, or in most cases worthwhile thing to do, but Canon will start leaving many groups of their users with little other choice to get what they need in the long run if they don't really start making some improvements, and stop producing technologically disappointing "toddler steps" forward with their IC design. Their cameras are certainly capable...every DSLR on the market today is unbelievably capable...but stagnation is never a position you want to be in, and skilled photographers can always make use of improved technology.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 7, 2012)

I have a D800 on order, but after following the Nikon forums and editing some of the raw images on my I7 equiped PC with plenty of memory and fast SSD, I'm beginning to wonder. 

Besides cameras that don't focus, cameras that lockup (workaround reportedly doesn't work), batteries that overheat or explode, editing is extremely slow on the 50+ mp raw images I downloaded, no way could I edit 1500 or 3000 images in a reasonable time, I have to wait 30 sec or more for a simple edit like NR to update and let me proceed. I did workout a method that works, downsize the images to the same size as my 5D MK III, but then, they are not much better, and even with downsizing, high ISO 12800 images are noticibly noisier than my 5D MK III.

As long as buyers are paying a premium for them, I'll probably just resell mine when it arrives and get a 1D X.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 7, 2012)

The 5DMkIII is disappointing precisely because it is a very good body, with an excellent feature set, joined to a less than impressive sensor that is well behind the competition.

It was easier with film - you picked a body on one set of criteria and the film on another, selecting the best tool in each category. Taking advantage of film improvements was painless.

Now we have to trust that our system manufacturer will always give us the best digital "film" (sensor) in each body revision. When they don't, we are faced with the unpalatable choice of taking a loss on thousands of dollars in glass, or hoping they get their sensor act together in next revision, before they (and we) fall too far behind.


----------



## V8Beast (May 7, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> The 5DMkIII is disappointing precisely because it is a very good body, with an excellent feature set, joined to a less than impressive sensor that is well behind the competition.



It depends what you need. The 5DII was a great sensor encased in a POS body. The 5DIII is a great sensor encased in a great body. Sure it lags behind the D800 in DR, but it's still a very capable piece of hardware. 

If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order. 

For those who value DR above all else, Nikon offers some great options. Everyone's busy humping the D800's 14.4 stops of DR, but the D7000 gets you 13.9 stops for $1,200, and the D5100 gets you 13.6 stops for $700. It seems there are some affordable ways to get all that delicious Nikon DR, so I don't see why the DR lovers are so upset? As a Canon shooter, if DR was the most important element of performance for my shooting needs, I'd be thrilled that Nikon had such affordable options, and pick up some Nikon gear. That's the beauty of competition. 

For the millions of landscape photographers that have come out of nowhere lately, you can pick up a D5100 and a 14-24 for less than the price of a D800, and have almost as much DR. That seems like a much more practical way to get your DR fix than complaining about how much Canon sensors suck.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2012)

Ricku said:


> It is not very surprising i.m.o. The 5D3's sensor technology seems to be basically the same as with the first 5D. It improved very marginally every generation after that.
> 
> While Nikon brings out innovative and impressive features together with their (Sony's) awesome Exmor sensor, Canon looks like they are very much focused on video over stills.



And on video they are mostly focused on what can we leave out (user chose for bitrates, clean hdmi, focus peaking, zebra strips, zoom modes, at least it seems ML can add that back other than the zoom modes) to protect C-line and the video division's pride now. They take internal protectionism way too far.

I mean the 5D3 does fix a ton of stuff that was weak on the 5D2 though.


----------



## Aglet (May 7, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> It depends what you need. The 5DII was a great sensor encased in a POS body. The 5DIII is a great sensor encased in a great body. Sure it lags behind the D800 in DR, but it's still a very capable piece of hardware.
> 
> If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.
> 
> ...



well stated and thanks for bringing that up.

I don't know why the Canon vs Nikon argument often goes to the "switch brands" end even for those who appreciate the merits of more DR.
If Canon shooters need a body with more DR and can afford a D800 and some glass to go with it, fabulous. Sometimes you need that extra performance in a FF body. But as you stated, there are low cost alternatives with 2 crop Nikons and the Pentax K5 too.

I've got a pile of Canon gear and it serves the majority of my purposes just fine, even tho I like to b!tch about the shadow noise and lack of DR when I need to push them. So I now have a little D5100 Nikon and picked up some cheap but capable 2nd-hand glass for it to do the high DR shots in most of the kinds of scenes where I'll need it. I'd sure love if the 7D had the 5100's IQ but until Canon can provide such a product I'll need a mix of brands in my bag. I'm still looking forward to getting a D800, might even switch my order to the D800e. Until then I use a 5D2, 7D and even a 40D to their limits. After all the testing I did I now know where to expect disappointment instead of it sometimes being an unpleasant surprise and work around it as much as possible of just accept the limitations.

This isn't a decision with the gravity of choosing which arm to cut off, merely knowing that if you need more DR you CAN get it with a complete kit that costs less than the cheapest Canon L lens. Hard _not_ to justify if you can benefit from it. Not every shot needs to be done on a FF body.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 7, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.


I am quite the opposite. I'd snap it up. A body is just a vehicle to get the best sensor behind my L glass, nothing more. I don't need fancy metering or AF modes. I don't care about burst rate or weather sealing. I don't even care whether the AF works at less than f/2.8. The lenses I use regularly are all 2.8 or faster.

I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.


----------



## 1982chris911 (May 7, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I have a D800 on order, but after following the Nikon forums and editing some of the raw images on my I7 equiped PC with plenty of memory and fast SSD, I'm beginning to wonder.
> 
> Besides cameras that don't focus, cameras that lockup (workaround reportedly doesn't work), batteries that overheat or explode, editing is extremely slow on the 50+ mp raw images I downloaded, no way could I edit 1500 or 3000 images in a reasonable time, I have to wait 30 sec or more for a simple edit like NR to update and let me proceed.



I was saying this already some weeks ago ... and still there are a lot of wannabe D800 owners that say that the filesize of the camera is not a problem with a modern computer/mac ... But that is exactly what my feeling about the camera was when I had one in my hands ... great piece of tech IQ wise, but unpractical in so many other ways (when compared to the 5D MK III) ... 
to some extend the D800 here also compares to MF cameras in this regard ...


----------



## Viggo (May 7, 2012)

Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?


----------



## Ivar (May 7, 2012)

The 5D2 was a revolutionary camera at the time announced. I consider this pretty big deal. 



Viggo said:


> Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?


----------



## V8Beast (May 7, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> I am quite the opposite. I'd snap it up. A body is just a vehicle to get the best sensor behind my L glass, nothing more. I don't need fancy metering or AF modes. I don't care about burst rate or weather sealing. I don't even care whether the AF works at less than f/2.8. The lenses I use regularly are all 2.8 or faster.



It sounds like the D800, or Nikon crop bodies like the D7000 or D5100, are the ideal tools for your needs, then. If DR impacts your images that much, and you're willing to deal with the hassle of switching systems, the choice seems pretty clear at this point  Or you can just pick up some Nikon gear, go dual systems, and decide if you're going to go all Nikon at some point later down the road. I just don't see this issue as something to lose sleep over


----------



## psolberg (May 7, 2012)

poias said:


> It is interesting that 5D3's comparison base is 5D2. D800 is being compared to Leica S2 and PhaseOne IQ180.
> 
> "5D3 is far better than 5D2, especially in handling, JPGs, and AF."
> 
> ...



yup. I look forward to the 5Dmk4. But having just switched to a D800, I see no reason to enjoy it for 4 more years. If the 5D4 is better, and if the D900 fails to impressed, I'll be back.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 7, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> It sounds like the D800, or Nikon crop bodies like the D7000 or D5100, are the ideal tools for your needs, then. If DR impacts your images that much, and you're willing to deal with the hassle of switching systems, the choice seems pretty clear at this point  Or you can just pick up some Nikon gear, go dual systems, and decide if you're going to go all Nikon at some point later down the road. I just don't see this issue as something to lose sleep over


L lenses and their Nikon equivalents are $2,000+ a piece. And it's not one body, it's two or three. It's not a small investment or a trivial decision. But yes, if Canon continues to lag behind on senor quality over the next few years, then switching will make be more attractive.


----------



## altenae (May 7, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > It sounds like the D800, or Nikon crop bodies like the D7000 or D5100, are the ideal tools for your needs, then. If DR impacts your images that much, and you're willing to deal with the hassle of switching systems, the choice seems pretty clear at this point  Or you can just pick up some Nikon gear, go dual systems, and decide if you're going to go all Nikon at some point later down the road. I just don't see this issue as something to lose sleep over
> ...



I would not call it "to lag behind" 
Use both and you see what I mean. 

Most of the time in real world photography there is more then only DR and the DXO numbers.


----------



## Kernuak (May 7, 2012)

poias said:


> "D800 comes close to MF like S2 and IQ180 in other aspects, but clearly fails in midtones."



To me, midtones are far more important than DR. Ok, so you might be able to process the RAW to get more out of the midtones, but that takes time and processing power. I have a 3-4 year old Macbook and that struggles with the RAW files from the 5D MkII, a similar vintage machine. I upgraded my desktop around a year ago and recently replaced the Macbook to cope with the large files from my 5D MkII, but I'd hate to think how much more power I'd need to cope with the output from the D800.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 7, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?


 
Although my 5D MK III is definitely a improvement in almost all ways over my 5D MK II, here are some things not so good.

1. Price ($1300 premium)

2. AF points that can see to put the active focus point on the subject in low light. 

3. Ability to use interchangable focus screens.

Otherwise, my 5D MK III performs very well, and the new sensor is worlds better, just pull up blacks 4 or more stops and see how clean it is.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 7, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> I am quite the opposite. I'd snap it up. A body is just a vehicle to get the best sensor behind my L glass, nothing more. I don't need fancy metering or AF modes. I don't care about burst rate or weather sealing. I don't even care whether the AF works at less than f/2.8. The lenses I use regularly are all 2.8 or faster.
> 
> I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.



Like I said, a DSLR has to be looked at as a whole system(the AF, the sensor, the "drive speed", etc.). And you have to look at what you need in a system. If you don't need an AF system capable of shooting sports, or a high frame rate and are only concerned what the sensor can do, then those parts of the system can take a back seat for you and you try to find a system that suites your needs the best. If that isn't the 5DMKIII, that's fine, I'm sure there are a lot of people who won't choose it for whatever reason and get a camera that they feel best suites their needs. But I think it's a dis-service to others to throw out what seems like a blanket statement that it is a disappointing and underwhelming camera just because you feel that it does not meet your needs/expectations.


----------



## KeithR (May 7, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.



Oh, _really.._?

Care to let us see an example of your work? It must be _extraordinarily_ demanding, if you can only accomplish it when all of those criteria are met - in fact I can hardly believe that you've been able to make a single image so far.

So let's see what it is that you simply _couldn't do_ with a lowly 5D Mk III then - we obviously have _much_ to learn here. 

*For the avoidance of any doubt, yes, I'm "calling" you on this*.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 7, 2012)

KeithR said:


> Care to let us see an example of your work? It must be _extraordinarily_ demanding, if you can only accomplish it when all of those criteria are met - in fact I can hardly believe that you've been able to make a single image so far.


www.urbanvoyeur.com
Please note that the work on UrbanVoyeur prior to about 2005 was done primarily on Fuji Chome film and EOS film bodies.

http://www.amazon.com/Young-Dancer-Life-Ailey-Student/dp/B005M4RQGU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336408030&sr=8-1
This book was shot on various Canon digital EOS bodies.

Edit:
My work is *not* any more demanding than anyone else's. And I am sure that many others can do what I do better and with lesser equipment. I just know what I want and how like to work, and if a truly superior sensor is out there, I want to use it my system, because I know I can do with it. Like film, a sensor is only a tool.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 7, 2012)

RunAndGun said:


> But I think it's a dis-service to others to throw out what seems like a blanket statement that it is a disappointing and underwhelming camera just because you feel that it does not meet your needs/expectations.


I think the 5DMkIII is a very impressive camera, with a less than impressive sensor. Therefore, I am underwhelmed.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (May 7, 2012)

How many stops do you think there are in a typical concert setting?


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 7, 2012)

DavidRiesenberg said:


> How many stops do you think there are in a typical concert setting?


40? 60 ? 
Every real world scene vastly exceeds the dynamic range of film or digital sensors. The trick is figuring out which real world values you want to map to the range of the sensor/film, and how much relative distance (contrast) you want between them That is the essence of the Zone system.

For example, your film or sensor may be able to capture 12 stops of range. Any object relatively brighter than six stops from the middle is a solid blown out highlight and any thing below stops from center is a solid blocked up shadow.

So you decide that the whitish flower in the hair of the singer should have detail (+6 to +4), the dress (+3) and the skin (+1 to -1) can fit in the scale too. Mic handle (-4) and the hair of the background singer (-6). The rest falls outside the range.

This is a crude example, and not meant to be a real world condition, but it illustrates the idea.

Greater DR at a given ISO is important because it allows me to pack more tonal information into a representation of a scene.


----------



## Tcapp (May 8, 2012)

KeithR said:


> UrbanVoyeur said:
> 
> 
> > I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.
> ...



Nothing wrong with wanting the BEST quality available, even if you don't "need" it. 

I'll shoot photos of my kid with my 5d3. I don't "need" that quality, but I like to always at least try to take the best photo possible. That is the essence of being an artist. You don't ever want to settle for something less. You strive for perfection in everything you do with your art. If you don't, you aren't going to make it as a professional. 

I've been shooting with the 5d2 for years and had no problems. But I upgraded to 5d3 on day one because I wanted every little bit of extra quality I could get. The ergonomic upgrades are bonus. Yeah, I care more about that tiny bit of extra high iso quality than even the updated AF. 

So calling people out because they want to take the best photos possible? Great idea. Great way to expose yourself to some great art.


----------



## ScottyP (May 8, 2012)

KeithR said:


> UrbanVoyeur said:
> 
> 
> > I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.
> ...



So can we get an official ruling here? Is he "_*served*_" at this point, and if so, per CR protocol, is "*it on*"?


----------



## Tcapp (May 8, 2012)

ScottyP said:


> KeithR said:
> 
> 
> > UrbanVoyeur said:
> ...



*Brodown!*


----------



## sach100 (May 8, 2012)

KeithR said:


> UrbanVoyeur said:
> 
> 
> > I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.
> ...



Given the amount of 5d3 bashing that's going on in this forum i've come across quite a few regular posters lose their cool. So it's ok to be wrong at times. 

Not that UrbanVoyeur's points are invalid, it's simply a matter of fact that canon hasn't improved every parameter that could have been improved. Will canon deliver "superior" DR in their next generation of releases - i bet even canon might not know at this point of time. Some of us can wait it out /switch /complain and hope some of the reasonable demands find their way into the next generation of canon cameras. There are others who will buy the 5d3 FWIW and find ways to get the best out of what the camera can deliver. 

Nevertheless, I can't wait to see (and get some of my own) all the beautiful images that WILL come out of this crappy sensor.  



Tcapp said:


> http://www.TimothyCapp.com



Nice baby pics Mr. Dad! and congratulations to you guys!!


----------



## Tcapp (May 8, 2012)

sach100 said:


> KeithR said:
> 
> 
> > UrbanVoyeur said:
> ...



Why thank you my friend!! Always makes me happy when people take the time to check out my stuff. Thats what makes this forum feel like family. A pretty dysfunctional family at times, but a family non the less!


----------



## jrista (May 8, 2012)

sach100 said:


> Nevertheless, I can't wait to see (and get some of my own) all the beautiful images that WILL come out of this crappy sensor.



I'm not sure anyone (who isn't just being spiteful) would actually call the sensor "crappy". Its certainly not a crappy sensor...however it is LACKING for some types of photography. I don't think there is any question that Canon sensors, for quite some time now, have offered lackluster dynamic range relative to the competition. Nikon was even getting over 12 stops of DR with their own sensors before they moved to Sony's game-changing Exmor. I believe millions of photographers will produce great photos with the 5D III, but that doesn't change the fact that Canon's sensor technology IS rather lackluster relative to the competition. 

*A better tool in skilled hands will always create a better result.*


----------



## RunAndGun (May 8, 2012)

Bottom line, BOTH Canon and Nikon cameras can produce beautiful results.

On a side note, I just picked up a mint EOS-3 for $200. Let's see how that sensor(Velvia 50) looks...


----------



## sach100 (May 9, 2012)

jrista said:


> sach100 said:
> 
> 
> > Nevertheless, I can't wait to see (and get some of my own) all the beautiful images that WILL come out of this crappy sensor.
> ...



yeah, my bad, poor choice of a word.


----------



## takoman46 (May 9, 2012)

Ricku said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > Still talking about the sensor......
> ...



Are you a 5D Mark II owner? Or are you speaking on behalf of all 5D Mark II owners? I'm not attacking you, but you're claim needs support. If you are a 5D Mark II user and feel this way, then by all means your opinion is very valid. 

For what it's worth, I went from a Mark II to a Mark III and am very pleased with the Mark III. It is in no way a disappointment for me.


----------



## Tcapp (May 9, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > altenae said:
> ...



Same here. mark ii to the mark iii. Never looking back. Love it! Worth every penny.


----------



## briansquibb (May 9, 2012)

Ricku said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > Still talking about the sensor......
> ...



The 1DS3 users still haven't got an upgrade path. The 1DX just is not a valid 1DS3 replacement, good camera though it might be. If the 1DX had the 5DIII style sensor that would have made it an awesome camera.


----------



## Tcapp (May 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > altenae said:
> ...



Not saying you are wrong, but how is it not a 5diii style sensor? Just because it is a few megapixles lower resolution? Isn't the sensor supposed to be the best canon has ever produced?


----------



## briansquibb (May 9, 2012)

Tcapp said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Ricku said:
> ...



It might be the same technology as the 5DIII but going back to 18mp from near 22mp is an issue for me. Those extra mp are just where I need them for native A3 printing


----------



## Tcapp (May 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Tcapp said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Ok. I get what you are saying. They sacrificed resolution for speed and iso performance. That doesn't help studio photographers who use 1ds3. I got cha. So what would you consider a good upgrade path? Is resolution the only benchmark you care about for a 1ds3 upgrade?


----------



## smithy (May 9, 2012)

Tcapp said:


> Ok. I get what you are saying. They sacrificed resolution for speed and iso performance. That doesn't help studio photographers who use 1ds3. I got cha. So what would you consider a good upgrade path? Is resolution the only benchmark you care about for a 1ds3 upgrade?


As someone who has been torn between buying a used 1DS3 and a new 5D3, I'd say the things that made me NOT immediately buy the 1DS3 was the frame rate, LCD resolution and high ISO performance. These things have been addressed in the 5D3, but it still lacks the 1-series build quality, built in grip and lens drive performance. So... what I'm saying is if Canon were to update the 1DS3 with some of those nice little features that are in the 5D3, but keep all the good stuff like f/8 AF, etc, then that would be a great upgrade path IMHO.

As it is, I'm now looking at a used 1D4, but I'm not convinced I should go for a crop sensor. But that's another thread altogether and I don't want to hijack this one.


----------



## briansquibb (May 9, 2012)

Tcapp said:


> Ok. I get what you are saying. They sacrificed resolution for speed and iso performance. That doesn't help studio photographers who use 1ds3. I got cha. So what would you consider a good upgrade path? Is resolution the only benchmark you care about for a 1ds3 upgrade?



I would expect a camera that is stated to be a merging of the 1S4 and 1DS3 to be 22mp + all the features of the announced 1DX. That would be just awesome


----------



## KeithR (May 10, 2012)

Yep, just what I thought, UV - not a damn' thing that justifies your opinion of yourself or your oh-so-high expectations.

To be absolutly clear about this: if you can't do _everything_ you'd ever want to do photographically with the 5D Mk III, _the camera's not the problem_.

Face it - you're just a troll. You and your opinions certainly have _zero_ credibility with me...


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

smithy said:


> As someone who has been torn between buying a used 1DS3 and a new 5D3, I'd say the things that made me NOT immediately buy the 1DS3 was the frame rate, LCD resolution and high ISO performance. These things have been addressed in the 5D3, but it still lacks the 1-series build quality, built in grip and lens drive performance. So... what I'm saying is if Canon were to update the 1DS3 with some of those nice little features that are in the 5D3, but keep all the good stuff like f/8 AF, etc, then that would be a great upgrade path IMHO.
> 
> As it is, I'm now looking at a used 1D4, but I'm not convinced I should go for a crop sensor. But that's another thread altogether and I don't want to hijack this one.



The 1DS3 trundles along at 5fps which OK but not too exciting  AF is very good - what should have been in the 5DII. ISO realistically is limited to iso 1600 (with H at 3200). The really good news is that iso800 and less is very clean indeed. It feels like an old camera to use, a bit like a 5Dc - however what it delivers within those parameters are top images - especially with good glass attached - this always seems to have the 200 f/2 attached and gives me that warm feeling when using it.

I see the 1D4 more as an update to the 7D. Iso performance good to 12800, fast AF etc. Better IQ than people give it credit for. A great photographic tool - but the 1DS3 gets my affection

If they could merge the best features from both with the 22mp sensor for $5000 Canon would be back in the game with the best all round camera


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 10, 2012)

KeithR said:


> Yep, just what I thought, UV - not a damn' thing that justifies your opinion of yourself or your oh-so-high expectations.
> 
> To be absolutly clear about this: if you can't do _everything_ you'd ever want to do photographically with the 5D Mk III, _the camera's not the problem_.
> 
> Face it - you're just a troll. You and your opinions certainly have _zero_ credibility with me...


Ok. Your opinion is your own and is as valid as anyone else's. And I did say that I am sure that others could do what I do better and with lesser equipment. Fine with me.

But you toss about fair amount of inflammatory language, along with not a few personal insults. I've got a thick skin, so the stuff rolls off. Nevertheless, it coarsens the discussion and sucks the fun out a free flowing exchange of ideas. It might be worthwhile to consider how others read your posts and what you would think if the same level of vitriol was directed at you.


----------



## RuneL (May 10, 2012)

smithy said:


> Tcapp said:
> 
> 
> > Ok. I get what you are saying. They sacrificed resolution for speed and iso performance. That doesn't help studio photographers who use 1ds3. I got cha. So what would you consider a good upgrade path? Is resolution the only benchmark you care about for a 1ds3 upgrade?
> ...



I use the 1D IV for some studio work and some products and what not, I'd really not go for it for those particular uses because of resolution. The crop sensor doesn't bother me but I'd not really care if it was full frame either. Either way is fine. I considered the D800 for a while till I realized that renting an MF and an IQ180 when I need it is cheaper and better in the long run than buying a metric S___ ton of nikon gear.


----------

