# Who thinks this is an ANTI-CLIMATIC product? As in, the 5DIII



## BornNearDaBayou (Mar 2, 2012)

I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP), much better ISO performance, and better AF. 

Why did Canon play this so foolishly? I am invested in Canon somewhat, and don't care about this new announcement. What a monumental letdown. I don't know how any current 5d owner could get very excited about this "ground-breaking" new DSLR. 

I would rather have the 1dX. Even at over $3k more, you will have similar IQ at low ISO. I can't believe the resolution went up by 1 measly MEGAPIXEL!!!!!

I hope I am wrong. This is like the ending to Saving Private Ryan. An old man crying is all I see.....


----------



## RedEye (Mar 2, 2012)

Yeah... welll, back to bed.


----------



## Actionpix (Mar 2, 2012)

These are specs I wanted to see for the 5D II. (fps, not the MP) I am a crop camera user and keep on wondering why the pixelsize of the 5D II (And 5D III) only equals that of the very old 20D. Only when I can get real close, so no soccer pics, no airshow pics, no wildlife pics, I can get more pixels on my subject. (Than with the 20D) For air to air photography, where I can come closer, I would like the shallower DoF but wonder why I still have only about the pixelssize of the 20D and not that of the newer crop cameras resulting in more detail. (I do not care for high ISO settings as for action photography I need long exposure time and because of DoF I also want to shoot wide open.)


----------



## Apple Tree Studios (Mar 2, 2012)

I think this is a great upgrade. I shoot weddings and 15 mega pixels is enough so I am not worried about the pixels. I am excited about the better AF. If I get better AF and one stop of light I am happy. Just as excited about the new flash. Looks great.


----------



## tooslick2k (Mar 2, 2012)

I think this is a superb upgrade from the mk2. Anti-climatic? Not at all. Maybe your better suited for the D800. either way dont knock it solely based on MP. It has a lot of awesome features!


----------



## D_Rochat (Mar 2, 2012)

Just because Canon didn't build the camera you want doesn't mean everyone else feels the same way. By all means, go with Nikon. I'm not being rude, it's just that they may be a better fit for your needs. I'm very excited about this one.


----------



## Kliphten (Mar 2, 2012)

This seems like a great camera but I'm disappointed in the price. Technology is expected to improve over the years so saying that it has better tech specs doesn't really make sense. I know the dollar has weakened as well but this price is ridiculous.


----------



## SPG (Mar 2, 2012)

I'm waiting to see what this camera actually DOES, and not just what the specs are. 
When Canon launched the C300 there were a ton of RED fanboys screaming that it didn't have 4k resolution, or that it didn't shoot R3DRAW or whatever other spec they read. What they all overlooked is that the camera itself recorded an amazing image, was rock solid dependable, and had a smooth workflow for production. People who should have known better were declaring the RED Scarlet the winner, and that the C300 was DOA. Well.....now we can see that the C300 is actually an incredible camera, especially for documentary and TV production. Point is, don't just judge any camera purely on the specs. Let's see what the 5DIII does.


----------



## randplaty (Mar 2, 2012)

Who cares about megapixels... only uncle bobs. I'm glad the price is a bit above what it was before. I see too many people who don't know anything about photography with mkIIs. Now hopefully less of them will buy the mkIII.


----------



## rlarsen (Mar 2, 2012)

Are you kidding ? 
It sure looks like a great camera that was improved in many significant ways. Often I have file size dialed down for professional assignments, so 22 mp is fine by me.
I have two on order and can't wait to get them. 
I will say I'm not thrilled by the price of the new 24-70, and we all know the price of the new 5D grip will be outrageous.
I wonder if the current grip will fit the new body ?


----------



## Kliphten (Mar 2, 2012)

randplaty said:


> Who cares about megapixels... only uncle bobs. I'm glad the price is a bit above what it was before. I see too many people who don't know anything about photography with mkIIs. Now hopefully less of them will buy the mkIII.



Why do you care so much about what other people purchase? You will always have people doing things they don't know much about, but I feel it's pointless to fret over it. Maybe help those people with Mark IIs understand more about it so that they do know more about photography instead of thinking they don't deserve it even when they are spending their own money on it.


----------



## KeithR (Mar 2, 2012)

BornNearDaBayou said:


> Why did Canon play this so foolishly?



Canon isn't here to build _you_ your own personal perfect camera.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Mar 2, 2012)

randplaty said:


> Who cares about megapixels... only uncle bobs. I'm glad the price is a bit above what it was before. I see too many people who don't know anything about photography with mkIIs. Now hopefully less of them will buy the mkIII.



Why does it matter that people who don't know how to use it have it?

According to you, you'd rather only really good photographers with high amounts of disposable income have this camera than really good photographers with high disposable income along with really good photographers without too much money and n00bs.

Its not like other people having it makes your pictures any less good.

I'm not complaining about the price necessarily. Maybe it is worth what its being priced for - although it seems a little steep for a progression of a model. I just don't buy the argument that you're glad its expensive, so it will be a little more exclusive.

p.s. - there are still plenty of rich people out there who don't know squat about photography who will still buy this thing.


----------



## BDD (Mar 2, 2012)

On paper the 5D3 looks perfect for me spec wise...BUT...it just dawned on me it has no AF-Illumination on front (as the Nikon D800 does...D3s/D4 does not incidentally...nor does the 1D-X). WHY?? Is that not vital for low light shooting?? To utilize the 100-25,600 native ISO of the 5D3?? Or is there something about the design of the 5D3, 1D-X, and the Nikon D3s/D4 that allow them to getaway with out having AF-Illum?


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 2, 2012)

BDD said:


> On paper the 5D3 looks perfect for me spec wise...BUT...it just dawned on me it has no AF-Illumination on front (as the Nikon D800 does...D3s/D4 does not incidentally...nor does the 1D-X). WHY?? Is that not vital for low light shooting?? To utilize the 100-25,600 native ISO of the 5D3?? Or is there something about the design of the 5D3, 1D-X, and the Nikon D3s/D4 that allow them to getaway with out having AF-Illum?



I dont think that using a speed light for AF assist is a deal breaker


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 2, 2012)

It is a bit worrisome that CW mentioned nothing about better DR at ISO 100-400.... I fear it may still lag Nikon by 2 stops of DR.

And that 7.5fps dropped to 6.9fps dropped to 6.0fps and they still want $3500.

AF is probably better than expected (assuming same speed and no watered down algorithms), so that is great.  Really great actually!

$3500 is a little bit much since they didn't give it a super expensive 7-8fps mirror box.

It probably should be priced more like the $3000 of the D800, but for now it is not.


----------



## dunkers (Mar 2, 2012)

keithfullermusic said:


> randplaty said:
> 
> 
> > Who cares about megapixels... only uncle bobs. I'm glad the price is a bit above what it was before. I see too many people who don't know anything about photography with mkIIs. Now hopefully less of them will buy the mkIII.
> ...



I believe he's talking more about teenagers/college students who use dslr's to take mirror photos. As a college student, this is a huge pet peeve for me when I see rich kids get expensive cameras but use them like point and shoots. 

I have no problems with adults who buy the cameras and have no idea how to use them. These people have a job and work for their money. They are entitled to spend it however they please.

I do however, have a problem when it is a person my age who has a good camera only because their rich parents bought it for them. They don't have jobs, so they didn't work for the camera. They flaunt it around and act as if having a good camera means they are a good photographer.

I know it doesn't affect my abilities, but it just annoys me when I worked hard to get something that other people can get just by asking their parents. One of my roomates is a prime example of this :-\


----------



## Flake (Mar 2, 2012)

A major mistake on the price. Is this camera so good it warrants a launch price double the high street price of the previous model, and 25% more expensive than the D800? Somehow I doubt it, the improvements seem very incremental over the MkII, and while that camera sold in massive numbers I'll stick my neck out and say that this one won't.

I'm going to hold off buying one, I'm convinced Canon are going to get a shock when customer demand isn't any where close to what they expect, and that the price will fall quite dramatically within 6 months of launch. I bought the 5D MkII soon after launch with a battery grip and spent £1900 I'd now have to spend close to twice that for a camera which isn't going to give me twice the image quality.

For me it's a big thumbs down I'll keep my cash until Canon get some sense, I remember the outcry of Nikon shooters over the D3x price, and a lot of them boycotted the camera, it didn't sell well at all, this is how I see the MkIII, it's just not enough of a step change to justify the price.


----------



## TAR (Mar 2, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> It is a bit worrisome that CW mentioned nothing about better DR at ISO 100-400.... I fear it may still lag Nikon by 2 stops of DR.
> 
> And that 7.5fps dropped to 6.9fps dropped to 6.0fps and they still want $3500.
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## Michael7 (Mar 2, 2012)

The price is way out of whack. $2700 is more than acceptable. These features are not a big enough jump to justify $3500.

I'll pick up a used 5D II in a few months for landscape, or maybe a d800e.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 2, 2012)

What a turnaround

Yesterday the 5D2 was a useless product - no today the 5D3 is overpriced etc and everyone is going to buy a 5D2

It amuses me to see the comments being made when the poster has seen neither camera but is just regurgitating a previous ignorant lowly experienced commentator


----------



## jrista (Mar 2, 2012)

BornNearDaBayou said:


> I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP), much better ISO performance, and better AF.
> 
> Why did Canon play this so foolishly? I am invested in Canon somewhat, and don't care about this new announcement. What a monumental letdown. I don't know how any current 5d owner could get very excited about this "ground-breaking" new DSLR.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, but I have to smite you, my friend. If I could smite you ten times in a row, I'd do that, too. You don't seem to get that for the last several years, the ENTIRE time we've all been waiting for this camera, we all heard nothing but "LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!!". Here we are, on the day the long-awaited 5D III is released, and everyone is BITCHING about the fact that we "only" got a "measly" single extra megapixel. Well DAMN, PPL?!? If you wanted uberpixels, why did you demand less mp and ask for better ISO?!?! 

Simply put, the 5D III is a FANTASTIC camera from a specs standpoint. Canon listend to ALL of their users complaints, and fixed just about all of them, from what I can tell! Like the 1D X, it _STOPPED_ focuing on *megapixels, megapixels, megapixels*, and _STARTED_ focusing on WHAT PEOPLE FRIGGIN ASKED FOR!!!!!!!!! We just got a whopping TWO STOPS of NATIVE ISO improvement!!! The Nikon D4 didn't change native ISO one tiny bit, and neither did the D800!! 

*But DAMN, the D800 has uberpixels!! *

We just got an unbelievable, entirely unexpected 61 point AF system with 41 cross-type sensors!!! And to go along with that, we got a nice boost from 3.9fps to 6fps, 18 continuous frames, and dual memory card slots (and don't you DARE complain about the fact that they are not both CF or both SD...YOU HAVE TWO FRIGGIN MEMORY CARD SLOTS, and are probably sitting pretty on 50,000 unused SD cards that you couldn't use any more once you went to the 5D II!) 

*But DAMN, the D800 has uberpixels!! *

"WHAAAA! So screw Canon, they are a bunch of b*tards for listening to their CUSTOMERS. PFFAH! Nikon HERE I COME!!" - anonymous, ubiquitous complainer

GROW THE FRACK UP PPL!!

YOU...GOT...WHAT YOU ASKED FOR!!

-.-

MEH. 

</rant>

And what you asked for...IS AWESOME! Can't wait to get mine.


----------



## stefsan (Mar 2, 2012)

For people expecting a baby 1DX at $2000 the 5DIII might be a disappointment. But if the specs we see on paper translate into clean high ISO pictures, snappy AF, better ergonomics etc. I would think of the 5DIII as a rather cool camera and I'd love to get one. The only thing that dampens my spirits a bit is the hefty price tag.


----------



## birdman (Mar 3, 2012)

I am OP. This is my argument: We, as consumers, are collectively indifferent. some want this, and some want that. 

The 1dX addresses High ISO performance issues. We also have the existing 1D4 (16 MP) that is impressive in high ISO. And it is a wonderful camera from all I have seen, read, and heard. 

Okay, so since the 5dII came out nearly 4 years ago, Canon has added 1MP, better ISO performance, similar video features, same metering, 2 frames per second, and "pro" AF. All of this for $500 more-- 4 years later. 

I know I am leaving out some specs--what dual card slots that many sub-FF cameras already have? I just don't see why anyone would pay $1,500 MORE for these upgrades. And yes, the 5dII can be found for $2,000 flat.


----------



## jjmt (Mar 3, 2012)

Has anyone used the camera and processed a RAW file? 
p.s. it's spelled "Climactic".


----------



## tt (Mar 3, 2012)

I think there is some sticker shock to get over. 

Yes. It is more expensive. And to want to still buy it, just like a photographer selling more expensive prints and albums and shoots, there has to be an increase in value to the buyer. 

I think most agree - if someone said they could upgrade your 5D Mk II free of charge they might take the chance - many currently see this as an improvement on the 5D. 

So if you agree the 5D MkIII is an improvement on the mark II then its mostly about the 
Cost of the two models and what you get, right?
(once you've got past unrealistic expectations and wanting the moon on a stick for a dollar)

It's a one off cost. You've got to square paying double for the camera than a 5DmkII
Or another £1,500.

It's a one off cost. But it's up front.
One new improvement might not be worth that. 
All the improvements might not be worth that. 
But all the improvements over time might be. 

The worst day for this kind of product is the one you have to pay for it. 
Then you get to enjoy it for years! 

For some, they can see now that they'll regularly have, let's call them moments where they appreciate the new camera - the camera locks focus in a dark chapel
- they get the shot in a sequence and appreciate the higher frames per second

Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance - some of the comments about the camera are like The Kübler Ross model!

It is personal. For some this camera isn't right for them now,but maybe in the future or maybe never. 
Like Vincent LaForet. He's got his eyes on something 3x more expensive!

There are some great previews out of this camera - 
Canonrumors guy quoted the money shot for me of Jeff Ascough's preview.


----------



## dbduchene (Mar 3, 2012)

It is no where near enough to get me to drop 3500. In 6 years I have NEVER put ether one of my DSLR cameras in burst mode. I have truly not had enough ISO to get the shoots that I want once. The DR has been a issue and I will wait to see the hard facts on that and if when it all washes out I may think about this when the price drops and I really think that after the first crop of I have to have the latest out there they will not make anywhere the numbers that they are looking for. The beginning of nest year I bet that we see a drop. I shoot a 5D for 5 years and love it and I am sure that I will love the Mk II that I picked up for a while to come. I would be more likely to buy a 3d with the same ISO, DR as the MK 3 and 40 MP and NO video at 4K or even maybe 4.5k. Again when I got my 7D I played with the video once and then have never turned it on again. They are people that need or want something different. If I was not so heavly invested in Canon glass I would be looking very hard at a going to nikon but with over 10k in glass for Canon I cannot switch so I will just sit on the side lines


----------



## epsiloneri (Mar 3, 2012)

Consumer electronics in general is probably not good for the climate, but let's not exaggerate. The 5D3 will probably not be significantly more anti-climatic than e.g. the D800. After all, they are both designed in the land of Kyoto, you know, the city with the protocol.


----------



## kenraw (Mar 3, 2012)

jrista said:


> BornNearDaBayou said:
> 
> 
> > I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP), much better ISO performance, and better AF.
> ...



+10000000000

couldn't' agree more


----------



## kenraw (Mar 3, 2012)

This camera is going to be awesome for pro's as Canon has answered ours prayers with all the new features. In fact there's more improvement than ppl are giving it credit for ie. _2ev focussing, MA at both ends of a zoom lens etc there's loads of improvements that are going to make a big difference to pro's.
I've pre ordered mine an I'm 19th on the list I can't wait.

I reckon there are some Nikon owners twitching


----------



## Astro (Mar 3, 2012)

BornNearDaBayou said:


> I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP)



for what? your 500px flicker images or you ocassional A3 print?

give me a rest all you pixelpeeper....


----------



## D.Sim (Mar 3, 2012)

Anti-Climactic? Hardly.

On paper thus far it smashes the D800 in every category other than MPs, and even then thats one area thats not exactly as great as its made out to be. 

Whats even more hilarious is that most of the people who are currently posting and whinging about it being bad, more megapixels pl0x, etc, are mostly making their first post...


----------



## AdamJ (Mar 3, 2012)

In as much as "anti-climatic" means anti-climate, or "weatherproof" if you will, then yes the 5D3 has better anti-climatic sealing.


----------



## Radiating (Mar 3, 2012)

I really don't see how people are dissatisfied with 22 megapixels. Until just recently 21-24 megapixels was the absolute maximum you could get with a DSLR and people weren't rushing to buy medium format cameras.

99% of photographers don't need more than 16 MP. I'm one of the few people that needs at least 16 MP because I'm a photoshop artist and my craft degrades images to an extreme extent and I extensivly crop. Even so 16 MP is enough. 

22 MP is enough to do 4 foot wide prints. It's an absurd amount of resolution that is already typically overkill. I'm really glad that Canon deeply improved everything but megapixels, the other issues needed much much more attention and the results are amazing.


----------



## hoousi (Mar 3, 2012)

On paper and in the first hands on it just seems to be the perfect camera at a reasonable price, the more I look at it the less the itch for a end of this year-1DX is lurking, this could be the perfect step from my 5dII which will make for a magnificent 2nd body. Great times at Canon and still happy I invested in their FF system and not Nikon! But let's wait for the reviews anyways.


----------



## BornNearDaBayou (Mar 3, 2012)

Radiating said:


> I really don't see how people are dissatisfied with 22 megapixels. Until just recently 21-24 megapixels was the absolute maximum you could get with a DSLR and people weren't rushing to buy medium format cameras.
> 
> 99% of photographers don't need more than 16 MP. I'm one of the few people that needs at least 16 MP because I'm a photoshop artist and my craft degrades images to an extreme extent and I extensivly crop. Even so 16 MP is enough.
> 
> 22 MP is enough to do 4 foot wide prints. It's an absurd amount of resolution that is already typically overkill. I'm really glad that Canon deeply improved everything but megapixels, the other issues needed much much more attention and the results are amazing.



I love Canon's system. I know the handling of their bodies, I know the strength of their lens lineup -- all 4 solid 70-200 choices. Add in the 70-300L, the new 24-70 (said to be astonishing), and the IS primes (24/28mm) and you have much to be happy about. No one is capable of understanding my statements obviously. 

The 1Dx and 5d3 are close in terms of the same camera--save for the extremely high FPS on the flagship, metering, and.... a few more things. But why make the 5d3 have IQ so similar to the 5d2, which I suspect it most definitely WILL. And this is not a bad thing. It's just kind of an old thing. I guess no one can grasp this. 

I don't have envy for Nikon at all. Heck, I own some Nikon glass and the D7k--which NEVER gets used. I know its a far cry from FF, even the "ancient" 5d2 (read stark sarcasm here), but I could be praising Nikon more. 

I don't need 6FPS or 61 AF points. I don't need 36 MP either. For me, and only me, it's a little disappointing that I will have the same camera, more or less, if I upgrade. That is, it will still get the same use. For me, that is. Only for me, so don't get your undies in a bunch Canonites.


----------



## Kernuak (Mar 3, 2012)

dbduchene said:


> It is no where near enough to get me to drop 3500. In 6 years I have NEVER put ether one of my DSLR cameras in burst mode. I have truly not had enough ISO to get the shoots that I want once. The DR has been a issue and I will wait to see the hard facts on that and if when it all washes out I may think about this when the price drops and I really think that after the first crop of I have to have the latest out there they will not make anywhere the numbers that they are looking for.


I do use burst on occasion for wildlife, which is why I use the 7D and switch to the 5D MkII for landscapes, macro and low light. However, even with the MkII, I still run into situations where I could do with higher (clean) ISO. With the added much improved AF (assuming it works as expected of course), it will essentially replace both my cameras for most shooting, but I will keep the 7D for when I need more reach or if I'm likely to need the extra 2 fps and as a second camera, so I don't miss shots when something turns up unexpectedly. There's probably a fairly good chance that the DR could be improved too. I'll probably wait to see if there are any price drops, but it is essentially a camera I have looked for to access areas of photography I couldn't achieve with my current kit, at least not easily.


----------



## mb66energy (Mar 3, 2012)

MP is one of the least important criteria if it is
above 10 MP for crop cams and above 16 MP for full frame cams.
So I don't see any principal disadvantage of the choice of 22 MP
by Canon.

I am not excited about a camera if I haven't

seen the images of it,
tested its ergonomics.

So let's decide about our excitement AFTER having the
full data about this TOOL.

Perhaps it's the time for EVOlution in the digital camera
departments, not the time for REVOlutions!


----------



## MaGiL (Mar 3, 2012)

Based on specs the 5DIII is the perfect allround FF camera for me. The only doubt I have so far is the introduction price of approx. EUR 3500.

Lets wait for the real live pics


----------



## Grum (Mar 3, 2012)

MaGiL said:


> Based on specs the 5DIII is the perfect allround FF camera for me. The only doubt I have so far is the introduction price of approx. EUR 3500.
> 
> Lets wait for the real live pics



+1


----------



## keithfullermusic (Mar 4, 2012)

dunkers said:


> keithfullermusic said:
> 
> 
> > randplaty said:
> ...



i understand your pain. it would annoy the you know what out of me as well to see something like that. however, i'd rather them and me have that camera as opposed to just them!

like i said before - i'm not complaining about the price because i am mad at canon. just complaining about my lack of dough!!!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 4, 2012)

BornNearDaBayou said:


> I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP), much better ISO performance, and better AF.
> 
> Why did Canon play this so foolishly? I am invested in Canon somewhat, and don't care about this new announcement. What a monumental letdown. I don't know how any current 5d owner could get very excited about this "ground-breaking" new DSLR.
> 
> ...



I'm not as negative on it.

Granted I had hoped for about 30MP at 6fps or 22-24MP at 7-8fps and they delivered neither. It is a bit unfortunate that after 3.5-4 years the IQ might be more or less the same.  and the speed not quite truly there for sports. And if it would be neither than surely for the old price and not $800 more or at least the D800 price.

BUT

I had hoped for fully sampled video and it sounds like they may have delivered that. 

I had hoped beyond all hope for 1D AF and it seems they have delivered that and not just some older 1D AF but the newest of all. ;D ;D ;D

I hope they have somehow managed to match Exmor technology and jump from 11 or so stops to the near 14 stops of the D7000/D3x/D800. And that the SNR is up 2/3 to 1-1/3 stop in RAW. I hope banding is gone. That would temper the lack of MP a bit since at least we'd have much better DR than than the 5D2 and a decent SNR improvement at high ISO. I have a feeling we might get more like only 1/3-1/2 stop better SNR and little to no low ISO DR increase. So we might end up with only slightly better SNR at high ISO than the D800 and much less low ISO DR. High ISO banding appears to be much better. Anyway nobody knows yet. In a few more weeks it will be become more clear.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 4, 2012)

I could see the argument that the camera is disappointing.. as with any new model the designer picks winners and loosers, market segments that are considered important and ones that are not, BUT the specs are pretty close to what has been predicted for some time now, thus I would not call it anti-climatic. It fits the narrative well.

*goes back to looking at used MF backs*


----------



## minestrone (Mar 4, 2012)

As a professional photographer I'm going to have to disagree with many of the people posting on this forum. Many of us need more than 16MP and some of us need even more than 22MP. But with that said, I understand why Canon decided to make the 5D Mark III those specs. Its pretty much everything that a majority of the 5D Mark II users were asking for. An improved AF, better ISO noise reduction, better weather sealing, more FPS. I've also read that HDR option allows 3 photos to be merged within the camera. I think this will be awesome for landscapes and timelapses.

I'm so frustrated by reading post where people say things like "99% of photographers don't need Megapixels". Below I'm going to give you a few examples of why people like me (and there are MANY OF US) need higher Megapixel count.

I currently shoot weddings, product photography and landscapes. 

1.) I've had couples ask me for 20x30" print outs, I've even had couples ask me for copies large enough so that they can make wall size canvases out of the final output files. More Megapixels give engagement and wedding couples more options as to what they can do with their photos.

2.) From time to time I'm asked to shoot product photography ranging from electronics to fashion accessories. Currently the 5D Mark II is acceptable for these jobs but I can see clients moving away from what I have to offer eventually if Canon doesn't update pixel count. More Megapixels offers more flexibility in how clients can showcase their products. 

3.) I love photographing landscapes. This one is a no-brainer. More megapixels the better. Yes I post my photos on flickr BUT I also sell them and galleries often want these blown up to wall size canvases.

Yes, the obvious answer is to go Medium Format. But in today's economy not all of us can afford a $45,000 Hasselblad H4D and nearly $5000 per lens. I've got a mortgage and car payments so that's out of the question. What I can afford is a $4000 Canon that will offer 45MP and one or two $2000 lenses that will be able to handle the resolution output. I don't need 6 FPS. Better AF, HDR and ISO are definitely welcomed and I'm glad to see it in the new 5D Mark III but that's about it for me. The 5DMIII is still somewhat underwhelming.

If someone wants to call me stupid or a "pixel peeper" because I want more megapixels feel free to email me personally at [email protected]


----------



## Frank209 (Mar 4, 2012)

Ah well, Here in europe it's 3290 euro..
_*
3249 Euros = 4 290.62 U.S. dollars!!!!!*_

Sooo ehm... shut up


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 4, 2012)

jrista said:


> I'm sorry, but I have to smite you, my friend. If I could smite you ten times in a row, I'd do that, too. You don't seem to get that for the last several years, the ENTIRE time we've all been waiting for this camera, we all heard nothing but "LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!!". Here we are, on the day the long-awaited 5D III is released, and everyone is BITCHING about the fact that we "only" got a "measly" single extra megapixel. Well DAMN, PPL?!? If you wanted uberpixels, why did you demand less mp and ask for better ISO?!?!
> 
> Simply put, the 5D III is a FANTASTIC camera from a specs standpoint. Canon listend to ALL of their users complaints, and fixed just about all of them, from what I can tell! Like the 1D X, it _STOPPED_ focuing on *megapixels, megapixels, megapixels*, and _STARTED_ focusing on WHAT PEOPLE FRIGGIN ASKED FOR!!!!!!!!! We just got a whopping TWO STOPS of NATIVE ISO improvement!!! The Nikon D4 didn't change native ISO one tiny bit, and neither did the D800!!



1. many people were asking for about 30MP, although many were not, not sure the break down, but probably between 70:30 to 35:65.

2. The thing is it does NOT have 2 stops native ISO improvement. Even Canon has said some to much of it is just in cam jpg NR fakery. Canon says the 1DX is 1 stop better than the 5D3 and the 5D3 is 2 stops better than the 5D2 but it is beyond the laws of physics for the 1DX to be 3 stops better than the 5D2 (certainly barring a change to a radically different technology). While we may get 1 full stop better than the 5D2, which would be very nice, we might only get 1/3-1/2 stop better in which case it might not be all that different from the D800 SNR after doing complete normalized comparison.

3. The D800 uses an Exmor sensor and they have been getting very near the theoretical limit for low ISO DR compared to high ISO DR. Some of them have had 13.8 stops. The 5D3 has 14bit files there is no room for it to be better than the best Sony/Nikon sensors so far. Canon has failed to mention any ISO 100 DR improvement. Canon apparently turned down tech prior to the 5D2 that would have let them match Exmor DR because they wanted to milk more money out of what they had. There is a solid chance that the 5D3 might have say 11.5 stops DR while the D800 13.8 at ISO 100.

So for all the talk about low MP and awesome IQ it is not at all impossible for the 5D3 to have not only 50% less MP but 2 stops worse ISO 100 DR and perhaps only 1/3 stop better SNR at high ISO for all we know.

I sure hope that is not the case. In the best case comparative scenario maybe it pulls of 1 stop better SNR at high ISO than the D800 and 1 stop better DR at ISO 100 (this latter part is very unlikely, since it would require a huge step up from Canon in terms of DR and a near 1 step drop back for the D800 from the D3x sensor). If so that certainly would be nice. 

My guess is the 5D3 will have anywhere from 1 stop worse to almost the same ISO 100 DR and 1/2 stop better high ISO SNR.

It's all guessing though. By mid-April we may know all the answers.

At this point we really can't say which sensor will deliver better in any respect other than the D800 has more max detail and reach at lower ISOs.

They did give us awesome AF though (on paper at least), which is, well, awesome.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 4, 2012)

Radiating said:


> I really don't see how people are dissatisfied with 22 megapixels. Until just recently 21-24 megapixels was the absolute maximum you could get with a DSLR and people weren't rushing to buy medium format cameras.
> 
> 99% of photographers don't need more than 16 MP. I'm one of the few people that needs at least 16 MP because I'm a photoshop artist and my craft degrades images to an extreme extent and I extensivly crop. Even so 16 MP is enough.
> 
> 22 MP is enough to do 4 foot wide prints. It's an absurd amount of resolution that is already typically overkill. I'm really glad that Canon deeply improved everything but megapixels, the other issues needed much much more attention and the results are amazing.



22MP does very sharp 13x19", crazy sharp 7.5x11"

once you need to crop for say wildlife shots then it can fall behind quickly though or if you like to scroll around at 100% view and spot all sorts of little details and things 

I can see how landscape people and others could want more, but 22MP ain't bad as you say.
I can really see why wildlife shooters/some sports would want more. 36MP is a built-in 1.3x TC compared to 22MP. Although some sports shooters hate 36MP since you take so many shots each event the storage and transfer become a pain.

personally i had hoped for 30 MP or so at 6fps and if it had to be 22MP then 7-8fps at up to $3500 or so

22MP at 6fps is OK though, good, if nothing thrilling at this point in time at $3500 (although starting to be something less than that if it ends up with worse DR than the D800)

the 1DX AF is thrilling though


----------



## tasteofjace (Mar 4, 2012)

Here's a review from an actual Photographer. Someone not focused on numbers, but performance and usability. He is also a user of the MK2.

Anyone worried that the Mk3 is nothing but a small upgrade to the Mk2 should definitely read this. 

http://blog.jeffascough.com/photographers/2012/03/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review.html


----------



## XanuFoto (Mar 4, 2012)

Apple Tree Studios said:


> I think this is a great upgrade. I shoot weddings and 15 mega pixels is enough so I am not worried about the pixels. I am excited about the better AF. If I get better AF and one stop of light I am happy. Just as excited about the new flash. Looks great.


Exactly. This is a wedding photographers and event photographers dream camera. And if the files coming out of this camera are as good or better then the MKII this can very easily handle fashion/beauty segments. Maybe even Landscape pretty well.


----------



## D_Rochat (Mar 4, 2012)

There really isn't anything this camera can't do. Events, landscape, portrait, sports. Sure it's not lightning quick like 12fps, but where else are you going to get a FF with that kind of ISO performance and a modest 6fps for the same price. This body will do everything well. If you want perfection, go shell out $7000.


----------



## Axilrod (Mar 4, 2012)

Canon didn't really hype this product that much, their users did. If it was anti-climactic then the you must have had some unreasonable expectations. Or it could be the fact that we had a spec list before release, so the actually announcement ended up being more of a confirmation than a genuine "surprise" announcement.

I'm a 5DII user and I think the 5DIII is awesome. Improved video, much better resolution, absolutely killer low-light performance and a bunch of very cool features. I'm not sure what you were looking for, but it sounds like your biggest issue is with the Megapixels, because the IQ and low-light performance have increased tremendously. And megapixels aren't everything, I mean being able to crop into an image isn't useful if you don't do it often, so it doesn't really matter to me. Wait for some real-world testing and do some more research before you start judging stuff solely based on specs. 

I personally think the upgrades are stellar, and there are a lot of great features and lot's of small improvements that are collectively awesome. But if you only look at it like it's got an improved AF and +2FPS faster of course it's going to seem like a bad deal.


----------



## Axilrod (Mar 4, 2012)

SPG said:


> I'm waiting to see what this camera actually DOES, and not just what the specs are.
> When Canon launched the C300 there were a ton of RED fanboys screaming that it didn't have 4k resolution, or that it didn't shoot R3DRAW or whatever other spec they read. What they all overlooked is that the camera itself recorded an amazing image, was rock solid dependable, and had a smooth workflow for production. People who should have known better were declaring the RED Scarlet the winner, and that the C300 was DOA. Well.....now we can see that the C300 is actually an incredible camera, especially for documentary and TV production. Point is, don't just judge any camera purely on the specs. Let's see what the 5DIII does.



I agree 100%, people ignored the amazing quality of the footage and all the testimonials from pros that absolutely loved it, but because it wasn't "4k" that means the whole thing is worthless. People spec race and like to have 1 number that sums up the level of quality in a product, and with cameras there are so many other variables it just isn't fair to judge like that.


----------



## Axilrod (Mar 4, 2012)

Flake said:


> A major mistake on the price. Is this camera so good it warrants a launch price double the high street price of the previous model, and 25% more expensive than the D800? Somehow I doubt it, the improvements seem very incremental over the MkII, and while that camera sold in massive numbers I'll stick my neck out and say that this one won't.



I don't know how you came up with 2 x $2700 = $3500, but ok. It's not Canon determining the MSRP country by country, so if you live in a place that it's very expensive, that's unfortunate. But the MSRP is only $800 more than the 5DII originally was, I don't think it's that ridiculous.


----------



## Axilrod (Mar 4, 2012)

birdman said:


> I am OP. This is my argument: We, as consumers, are collectively indifferent. some want this, and some want that.
> 
> The 1dX addresses High ISO performance issues. We also have the existing 1D4 (16 MP) that is impressive in high ISO. And it is a wonderful camera from all I have seen, read, and heard.
> 
> ...



Look at some of the other specs and the fine details. The resolution is much improved, and there are more than enough new video features to make me very excited about shooting at the end of the month. I really only use these things for video and astrophotography, and I still think it's an awesome camera and worth the $. Sure it would have been cool if it was cheaper, but I don't think it's a rip off by any means. 

The problem is that so many people have been holding out for this camera, waiting patiently with their 40D/50D/60D/7D to take the leap to full frame. We've been waiting for so long that people just had it stuck in their heads that the 5DIII was what they were going to get. Now they feel stupid for waiting, or cheated because it's out of their price range. And that's unfortunate, but I think a lot of the animosity comes from people holding off upgrading for so long for something they couldn't afford.


----------



## DJL329 (Mar 4, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> the 1DX AF is thrilling though



Agree. I had a hard time believing the rumors that it would have 61pt autofocus; I figured it would be something closer to the 7D or _maybe_ the 1Ds Mk III.

I don't do a lot of birding, but that may change now!


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 4, 2012)

I think the real problem with the 5D3, cutting through all the 'this is great' and 'this sucks' banter, has nothing to do with the camera, but with how DSLR manufacturers handle their release cycle.

Most manufacturers, when they serve multiple overlapping market and produce an entire product line across them will release multiple models at the same time rather then this staged approach. If you have widget X that is best for submarket A and widget Y that is best for submarket B and widget Z that is an in between,... when you update X you update Y and Z at the same time.

I think people feel slighted (or are annoyed people feel slighted) because of the winners and loosers inherent in any set of design decisions combined with the single model release. If Canon had released, say, 5 bodies at once, with something to get excited about from all their sub markets at once, we would see a lot less complaining.

As it stands, certain submarkets got a new camera. Others will wait. The people who got a camera are happy, the people who will have to wait are not, and off course there is butthurt going on between them since people who are happy do not like hearing people complain (plus, riding the high of being the current choosen/important market), and people are not happy do not like being told that they should be content with a camera designed for someone else.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 5, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> I think the real problem with the 5D3, cutting through all the 'this is great' and 'this sucks' banter, has nothing to do with the camera, but with how DSLR manufacturers handle their release cycle.


... and this release cycle seems to be set to make people upgrade their bodies beyond their original budget, as numerous examples seem to suggest. This time it's "5d3 or downgrade to aps-c on the next 7d cycle", "throw away your ir flashes because we don't produce legacy radio tiggers" and "if you want longer video clips wait for our real eos movie body".

This strategy is not condemnable itsself, after all Canon is not here to please photographers but to maximize their shareholder's roi. But I can understand that people are annoyed if certain features are withheld or prices bumped up for marketing or commercial reasons alone.


----------



## XanuFoto (Mar 5, 2012)

This kinda reminded me when Apple released the iPhone 4S. Everyone was expecting a iPhone 5 and a game changer. They said Apple has lost it. It went on to be the highest selling phone for them. Then also kept the iPhone 4 and 3GS in production and keep selling those too. Today Canon dropped 300 dollars of the MRSP of the MKII. So many people who had 60D,40D,30D,20D can get a FF camera very cheap. Not to mention all the used MKII cameras that will come up on craigslist and ebay. In Canada they are appearing between 1600-1700 at the moment. Expect those prices to reach 1500 soon. Seems like Canon with have a FF cameras in the 2000, 3500 and 7000 dollar segments. Depending on features and requirement you can take take your pick.


----------



## birdman (Mar 5, 2012)

Wow! I am OP, again. Here to thank all of the responders. You guys are great. (Even those who bashed me for slight misspelling. Not usually one of my weaknesses)

I may well hold off on an upgrade. i just sold my d7k that I never used, and may just take the plunge on the Zeiss 21mm Distagon. Even for a manual focus, it looks delicious (except for 82mm filter size :-\ )

I had my 5d2 for sale, and actually think it sold. Need to check my account. But, after someone asked me to respond with the shutter count-- I simply could not believe it!! 7,262 total shutter actuations! Wow! I guess my deep depression kept it in it's nice bag for WAY LONGER than I ever remember. Depression is a real thing, guys.

I am going to refund money if 5d2 did sell, and wait/hold out for reviews. Maybe I'll rent the Zeiss and shoot it on both my 5d2 and my Rebel 2000 35mm. I just ordered some Fuji 100 Film.


----------



## Leadfingers (Mar 5, 2012)

jrista said:


> BornNearDaBayou said:
> 
> 
> > I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP), much better ISO performance, and better AF.
> ...



+1
ftw


----------



## jrista (Mar 5, 2012)

Leadfingers said:


> +1
> ftw



Heh, sorry. Reading that again, it came off as a bigger rant than it sounded like when I wrote it. I'd been listening for hours to more people bitch about the 5D III than praise it, and it was really getting annoying at the time. And I found it so unbelievably ironic that Canon users got EXACTLY what they asked for, and it still wasn't enough. Couldn't be a better demonstration of the sad, sad, selfish nature of humankind than that!


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 5, 2012)

jrista said:


> I'm sorry, but I have to smite you, my friend. If I could smite you ten times in a row, I'd do that, too. You don't seem to get that for the last several years, the ENTIRE time we've all been waiting for this camera, we all heard nothing but "LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!!".



You do realize there is more then one person on the internet, no?
Sounds like you were listening to the people who agreed with what you wanted and took that for the whole community. Believe it or not, but Canon has multiple types of customers who have been asking for a variety of things, some of them wanting 'better ISO, less MP', others wanting 'more MP' and *gasp* these are not the same people!



> Simply put, the 5D III is a FANTASTIC camera from a specs standpoint. Canon listend to ALL of their users complaints, and fixed just about all of them, from what I can tell! Like the 1D X, it _STOPPED_ focuing on *megapixels, megapixels, megapixels*, and _STARTED_ focusing on WHAT PEOPLE FRIGGIN ASKED FOR!!!!!!!!! We just got a whopping TWO STOPS of NATIVE ISO improvement!!! The Nikon D4 didn't change native ISO one tiny bit, and neither did the D800!!



No. They listened to some submarkets and ignored others. Right now the people who were paid attention to are riding high and many, like yourself, seem to delight in bashing those who are not thrilled. Congratz, you are on top, I am sure your epeen is very large.



> We just got an unbelievable, entirely unexpected 61 point AF system with 41 cross-type sensors!!! And to go along with that, we got a nice boost from 3.9fps to 6fps, 18 continuous frames, and dual memory card slots (and don't you DARE complain about the fact that they are not both CF or both SD...YOU HAVE TWO FRIGGIN MEMORY CARD SLOTS, and are probably sitting pretty on 50,000 unused SD cards that you couldn't use any more once you went to the 5D II!)



Which only really matters if one cares about autofocus (I rarely use it personally), high drive speeds (I usually go a minute or more between shots) and SD support (I don't own a single SD card, and having to keep two formats around is doable, but a little obnoxious).

So I will not call it a bad camera, I think it will be an excellent body for the submarkets it is targeted towards, but it is not everything to everyone, and there are people who have been wanting a MP monster, saying they want an MP monster, and still want one and are kinda miffed that not only do they seem to have been ignored by Canon (I suspect such a camera is in the pipes though) but people like you are retconning things to make it sound like we were asking for what you wanted all along, which negates our existence.. and oddly enough people get kinda pissed at rhetoric like that.


----------



## rj79in (Mar 5, 2012)

jrista said:


> Leadfingers said:
> 
> 
> > +1
> ...



Agree ... people are too obsessed with mega pixels since the D800 was announced. The gripes sound as if NO camera was good enough in the past, let alone the 5DMII with a measly 21MP which stopped taking excellent pics ONLY in the past two months. 

Lessons in human psychology ... nothing, ever, is quite good enough!


----------



## D_Rochat (Mar 5, 2012)

rj79in said:


> Lessons in human psychology ... nothing, ever, is quite good enough!



Truth


----------



## sjprg (Mar 5, 2012)

For those of you whom don't beleive the camera manufacturers are ripping us off. Here is a price list for a 16 bit 80MSPS ADC. Talk about milking the technology.

http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-digital-converters/ad-converters/ist/191/pst.html


----------



## Orion (Mar 5, 2012)

Flake said:


> I'm convinced Canon are going to get a shock when customer demand isn't any where close to what they expect, and that the price will fall quite dramatically within 6 months of launch. . . .



If anywhere near true, then why release it at wedding season only to pry our pockets open since we are loyal consumers, only to give the break to those that buy it later on, and maybe not as loyal, etc etc etc. . . . ?

AF is a MAJOR . . .MAJOR improvment over mkII . . . and a reported 2 stop difference in ISO performance. . . . . . . . with better video . . . . 3500 is a jab we can probably accept, but if the Nikon D800 is as close to the 5D as it gets (vice versa), then why not start the price out at the same as the Nikon??? 

They probably think that the ld "videographers" of the older mkII will stick around and not notice this little mishap. . . . or care?

P.S.

Yes. . . I am ordering the 5DmkIII. . . .and will upgrade to 1DxmkII when IT comes out, in 5+years.


----------



## koolman (Mar 5, 2012)

I am not a pro photographer - hence this new camera is out of my reach.

I can say - purely from a business instinct perspective - that this new camera will probably be purchased and used by pro's who can make a living from it.

All of us amateurs will probably pass on a $3,500 body, especially in the current economic climate.

If I choose FF - I'd go for the mark 2.


----------



## XanuFoto (Mar 5, 2012)

I believe this new sub segment emerged suddenly after the release of the 36 mp monster by Nikon. Until then I had not seen many people clamouring for a huge mp camera. Maybe one day canon will satisfy that segment. But for years now world renouned landscape photographers like Joshua holko, Alain broit and David noton have done well with 21 mp or less. I am sure they will not mind the extra mp, but how many people make money out of landscape anyway. And portrait and fashion has been served well between 21-24 so far.


----------



## SomeGuyInNewJersey (Mar 5, 2012)

XanuFoto said:


> I believe this new sub segment emerged suddenly after the release of the 36 mp monster by Nikon. Until then I had not seen many people clamouring for a huge mp camera. Maybe one day canon will satisfy that segment. But for years now world renouned landscape photographers like Joshua holko, Alain broit and David noton have done well with 21 mp or less. I am sure they will not mind the extra mp, but how many people make money out of landscape anyway. And portrait and fashion has been served well between 21-24 so far.



I agree, The D800 is a new segment in dslrs... I'd call it "medium format wannabe"

I don't mean that nastily... I'd love to have a $50k medium format camera and $20k lenses but that ain't gonna happen. A dslr that leans in the medium format direction but with the smaller cheaper sensor that can use lenses from big selling dslr segment (therefore helping keeping the lens price down too) is good news as far as a wannabe medium format user like me is concerned. Obviously not a segment for everybody but definitely an interesting one, pushing in that direction will also help develop tech for more "normal" dslrs in future too.


----------



## tt (Mar 5, 2012)

SomeGuyInNewJersey said:


> XanuFoto said:
> 
> 
> > I believe this new sub segment emerged suddenly after the release of the 36 mp monster by Nikon. Until then I had not seen many people clamouring for a huge mp camera. Maybe one day canon will satisfy that segment. But for years now world renouned landscape photographers like Joshua holko, Alain broit and David noton have done well with 21 mp or less. I am sure they will not mind the extra mp, but how many people make money out of landscape anyway. And portrait and fashion has been served well between 21-24 so far.
> ...



It's going to be an interesting battle for the 5d MkIV and the D900 - Whilst the prices of a MF sensor is in the 10,000 $/£ range now - i'd wager that should possible half. So for a 1DX price, you could get a MF. For brighter conditions, it'll be an interest factor into the next round of models eg will sports keep with FF, landscape go MF, videographers go videographer specific dSLR? Till then - As Harry Hill would say - there's only one way to find out about 5DMkIII and D800.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 5, 2012)

XanuFoto said:


> I believe this new sub segment emerged suddenly after the release of the 36 mp monster by Nikon. Until then I had not seen many people clamouring for a huge mp camera. Maybe one day canon will satisfy that segment. But for years now world renouned landscape photographers like Joshua holko, Alain broit and David noton have done well with 21 mp or less. I am sure they will not mind the extra mp, but how many people make money out of landscape anyway. And portrait and fashion has been served well between 21-24 so far.



Yeah. and before that people were 'happy' with 12MP. In fact when I first got into digital photography the big meme was that 12MP was '35mm film equivalent' meaning it was all you needed to do just as well as people had been doing for decades.


----------



## jrista (Mar 6, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry, but I have to smite you, my friend. If I could smite you ten times in a row, I'd do that, too. You don't seem to get that for the last several years, the ENTIRE time we've all been waiting for this camera, we all heard nothing but "LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!! LESS MP, BETTER ISO!!".
> ...



Your assuming I fully agreed with the "Less MP, Better ISO" crowd (which, BTW, IS what MOST professionals were begging for...obviously there are outliers.) I personally was hoping for about 28mp, a stop or two better DR, and better AF (although I never dreamed of 61pt AF!) I personally wanted more MP, and the same level of ISO would have been fine as I'd mostly use a full-frame camera for landscape photography. I was hoping for a modest boost to mp that wouldn't make better DR impossible, not a revolutionary boost to 35mp or more that could have left me with the same DR and noise limitations. However despite not getting what I wanted, I'm PERFECTLY HAPPY with what Canon's given us. It was not a reduction of MP (which was certainly a plausible outcome, given the 1D X), and it appears to have been improved in ways I never imagined.



Neeneko said:


> > Simply put, the 5D III is a FANTASTIC camera from a specs standpoint. Canon listend to ALL of their users complaints, and fixed just about all of them, from what I can tell! Like the 1D X, it _STOPPED_ focuing on *megapixels, megapixels, megapixels*, and _STARTED_ focusing on WHAT PEOPLE FRIGGIN ASKED FOR!!!!!!!!! We just got a whopping TWO STOPS of NATIVE ISO improvement!!! The Nikon D4 didn't change native ISO one tiny bit, and neither did the D800!!
> 
> 
> 
> No. They listened to some submarkets and ignored others. Right now the people who were paid attention to are riding high and many, like yourself, seem to delight in bashing those who are not thrilled. Congratz, you are on top, I am sure your epeen is very large.



Canon *so far* (remember, its likely we'll see more cameras from them by the end of the year) HAS LISTENED to their customers. Whenever I'd meet a gathering of Canon users, online or in real life, the most vocal groups were those who wanted better ISO (and more than a few were plenty happy to see that improvement accompanied by what they believed would be a necessary REDUCTION on megapixels.) There is an intriguing tendency about the people who are largely satisfied with what they have: *they aren't overpoweringly vocal!* When it comes to resolution, Canon users in general have seemed pretty satisfied with 21.1mp on the 5D II and 1Ds III. It was the highest resolution sensor for a long time, and only relegated to second highest relatively recently...so they complained about what wasn't good: ISO. 

The only reason the most vocal complaining is about megapixels _now_ is because of the release of the D800. Canon users are NOW GETTING VOCAL because Nikon released a fairly revolutionary (from a megapixels standpoint) high resolution full frame sensor at 36.3mp. It wasn't just 28mp, or 30mp, at 36.3mp it was a whole 15.2 megapixels higher resolution than the 5D II...a 72% increase. People want what they don't have, and suddenly, now they don't have 36.3mp in any currently announced Canon products. Ironically, thats about the only thing that really improved on the Nikon front from a stills photography standpoint (obviously there were improvements to video, however no one seems to be complaining about...or praising...that much at the moment for the 5D III). Nikon made a lot of noise about an extra stop or two ISO, but that was only expanded settings...the native ISO on Nikon cameras remained the same as the preceding models. The Nikon AF system remained the same. The frame rates remained about the same (or increased by 1fps in some cases). Metering systems did not change, etc. 

Now contrast all that with the 5D III. The megapixels were improved by a small amount, but on top of that, it was given the RADICALLY improved top of the line AF module of the 1D X, a two full stop improvement in native ISO (to 25,600) making it the most sensitive DSLR camera on the market outside of the 1D X, significant improvements in noise at all levels of ISO despite the small increase in resolution, 
what appears to be a fairly significant improvement in DR (yet to be proven by the likes of DXO and DPR, but apparent by manipulating the sample JPEG's floating around the net are very impressive indeed), the improved metering system of the 7D, the greatly improved 100% coverage transmissive LCD VF of the 7D and 1D X (which is fantastic, btw!!), a 54% increase in frame rate from 3.9 to 6, an extra CF slot that the 5D II did not have, and a host of other improvements over its predecessor (such as in-camera HDR and multi-exposure, in-camera photo editing, etc.) 

From the standpoint of improvements over their predecessors, there is no question Canon has packed a HELL of a LOT into the 5D III, as well as the 1D X for that matter. The degree of improvement is stunning, and on *all* fronts, not just in the area of megapixels (which, from a factual standpoint, did still IMPROVE.) The improvements in Nikon's new cameras are marginal at best on the stills front (their improvements on the video front are still quite impressive), with the only significant point outstanding being the megapixel count of the D800...and the primary reason we have the NEW vocal group of Cannonites...the ones trying to scratch an itch they can't yet reach, and likely to be the next thing Canon addresses for their customers.



Neeneko said:


> > We just got an unbelievable, entirely unexpected 61 point AF system with 41 cross-type sensors!!! And to go along with that, we got a nice boost from 3.9fps to 6fps, 18 continuous frames, and dual memory card slots (and don't you DARE complain about the fact that they are not both CF or both SD...YOU HAVE TWO FRIGGIN MEMORY CARD SLOTS, and are probably sitting pretty on 50,000 unused SD cards that you couldn't use any more once you went to the 5D II!)
> 
> 
> 
> Which only really matters if one cares about autofocus (I rarely use it personally), high drive speeds (I usually go a minute or more between shots) and SD support (I don't own a single SD card, and having to keep two formats around is doable, but a little obnoxious).



Granted, having to use two types of memory cards is rather obnoxious, and there could be better improvement on that front. I'm sure there will be. The simple point I was trying to make is...you DID GET IMPROVEMENT. Based on some of the videos from Canon (I believe on the EU site), customers asked for both types most often, for whatever reasons, so Canon answered their customers by putting in both types of slots. Just another example of human nature...bitch and complain when you get something new that isn't 100% exactly what you personally wanted. I would prefer two CF cards, but I have a ton of SD cards from when I used my 450D that I can now use again...rather than have them waste away on a shelf serving zero purpose whatsoever (which I believe is very probably the majority case.)



Neeneko said:


> So I will not call it a bad camera, I think it will be an excellent body for the submarkets it is targeted towards, but it is not everything to everyone, and there are people who have been wanting a MP monster, saying they want an MP monster, and still want one and are kinda miffed that not only do they seem to have been ignored by Canon (I suspect such a camera is in the pipes though) but people like you are retconning things to make it sound like we were asking for what you wanted all along, which negates our existence.. and oddly enough people get kinda pissed at rhetoric like that.



I think saying they have not been answered is a bit premature. There are still rumors out there about a 40mp+ high resolution D800 competitor due later this year from Canon. It may be an HDSLR, more part of the cinema line than the stills line, but then again, it could just as likely be Canon's response to the D800. Once plans are in motion and prototypes hit the field, manufacturers don't generally make radical changes in direction. I'd imagine the 5D III has been in production since shortly after the 5D II was released, and has probably had prototypes out in the field for nearly a year. I'm sure Canon knew about the D800 36.3mp monster long before any of the public, but you still can't spin up a whole new product to compete that fast (it seems to take canon 3-4 years to produce a new version of existing cameras, let alone develop something entirely new like a 40mp sensor stills camera that is still deserving of the "professional grade" title.)



As for retconning....well, your assuming what I want personally is the same as what most vocal Canon users have wanted (which is not the case, as I mentioned above.) I don't think I'm rewriting history at all. Canon users (not just a submarket, the larger market in general, but particularly professionals...who live and die by their gear and the quality of their work) have been very vocal about wanting better ISO performance, and they became only more vocal after Sony Exmor started blowing Canon (and pretty much any other) sensors out of the water from a read noise standpoint. There were legitimate reasons to be vocal about it as well...Canon sensors had improved, but usually at some cost (the 5D II sensor has very high low-ISO read noise at 27 e- which could sometimes produce fixed-pattern noise even in the low midtones (making it visible even without exposure adjustment), and the 7D, while it has lower read noise, is still considerably noisier than the competition at high ISO.) Canon did have an MP monster, all things being equal, at 21.1mp. The next highest resolution sensors at the time were about 10-12mp, so a 21.1mp camera was truly a revolutionary MP monster (being some 72% larger than the next highest MP DSLR sensor at the time...which is more than the 51% improvement the D800 has over Sony 24mp sensors.) Canon users, for a long time, did not need to complain...they already had the best, and claiming they have been begging for a new record-setting MP monster as vocally as they were asking for better ISO performance is a bit misleading itself. I don't deny that there are different groups of people asking for different things from Canon, such as myself, who would greatly prefer improved DR over anything else in a FF camera...but I *know* I'm a _minority_. That's nothing to mention the fact that most people who have done any printing themselves know that 21.1mp (let alone 36.3mp) is more than enough to blow photos up many times larger to multi-foot wall-spanning dimensions, without any marked loss in quality at proper viewing distances. The real power of higher MP these days comes from cropping (unless you literally want a perfect 300ppi print at 15x20 feet that can be viewed without any loss of detail from 4 feet away), however when cropping you simultaneously lose the ability to scale down and absorb noise that way as well...so uberpixels have their limitations regardless.


----------



## jrista (Mar 6, 2012)

sjprg said:


> For those of you whom don't beleive the camera manufacturers are ripping us off. Here is a price list for a 16 bit 80MSPS ADC. Talk about milking the technology.
> 
> http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-digital-converters/ad-converters/ist/191/pst.html



Well, if we use $50 as a base, and assume Canon has one ADC per read channel from the sensor (which I think would be essential to achieve [email protected])...that would be 16 ADC's at $50 each for a total of $800 (for 1D X), or 8 @ $50 for a total of $400 (for the 5D III). Thats assuming the ADC's are independent components. In the past, I believe they have been an integrated part of their DIGIC processors, and its entirely possible Canon has partly taken the approach Sony did, and are now embedding the ADC right on the sensor itself. Integrating the ADC component with any other component, and doing so while keeping electronic noise low, while still supporting the very high readout rates for 10-12 fps...is expensive.

I don't think camera manufacturers are ripping us off with their ADC's.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 6, 2012)

jrista said:


> sjprg said:
> 
> 
> > For those of you whom don't beleive the camera manufacturers are ripping us off. Here is a price list for a 16 bit 80MSPS ADC. Talk about milking the technology.
> ...



You missed the part where the price is $50.... for each PACK of 1000 ;D
(i.e. 5 cents each)


----------



## jrista (Mar 6, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > sjprg said:
> ...



Oy, I did miss that. Oops. ;D Well, the other points still remain true, its not cheap to produce complex IC's like cmos sensors and DIGIC processors. The real cost isn't the ADC anyway, its far more complex devices like the metering or AF system and large IC's like the sensor.


----------



## jordanbstead (Mar 6, 2012)

One man's trash is another man's treasure. I think someone would be insane NOT to be blown away by this piece of equipment. It improves on the Mark II in every single way (save for the one thing I don't need or want: more MP).


----------



## sanj (Mar 6, 2012)

BornNearDaBayou said:


> I already have 5dII. I wanted more MP (more than D3X at 24MP), much better ISO performance, and better AF.
> 
> Why did Canon play this so foolishly? I am invested in Canon somewhat, and don't care about this new announcement. What a monumental letdown. I don't know how any current 5d owner could get very excited about this "ground-breaking" new DSLR.
> 
> ...


----------



## PeterJ (Mar 6, 2012)

jrista said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > You missed the part where the price is $50.... for each PACK of 1000 ;D
> ...



Actually you didn't miss it, I've purchased parts from Analog and that's an indicative price per unit if you buy 1000 pieces, from the * at the bottom of the page:

* The pricing listed here is provided only for budgetary purposes as recommended list price in U.S. Dollars in the United States ex factor (sic) per unit for the stated volume.

High resolution / speed ADC converters are quite expensive. They're gradually coming down in price, going back 20 years or so there were many parts north of $1000 per unit.


----------



## traveller (Mar 6, 2012)

The 5D MkIII is a victory for all those who wanted a camera that was more capable of undertaking a wider range of photography assignments. I will fully admit that backing off the megapixels will be a disappointment for photographers who specialise in landscapes. There's no point arguing about the sensor right now, it is what it is; we will have to wait until production models of the 5D MkIII and the D800 are actually released to make an informed judgment upon their relative merits. I've stated before that I don't think that this is Canon's exit from the megapixel race. Far from it, I would expect a high megapixel camera some time in 2013; until then, if the new features of the 5D MkIII don't appeal, either buy/stick with the 5D MkII or change systems. 

I think that it would be some use to review where we have come from in a year or so (from a totally personal viewpoint  ): 

neuroanatomist
“People want a 1D X for the price of a 5DII...or a T3 if they could get it. They hedge it back to sound reasonable - '5 fps is fine' or 'I'll even accept the now-outdated 1DsIII AF' or 'how about only 4,000 sq. ft. and one acre' but I think the rationale is the same. 

And let me go on record as saying that I'm certainly not opposed to any of that! But nor do I think it's realistic, and I am prepared to pay the 1D X price for the 1D X features. Now...where's my $400 24-70mm f/2.8 II kit lens to go with that 1D X? ”


handsomerob
“Quote from: neuroanatomist
I think the 5DII produces wonderful images, and I use it much more often than my 7D. But everytime I use the 7D, I'm struck by how much better the AF system is, and how much room for imprevement there is in the 5DII's AF. Sadly, I firmly believe they Canon will intentionally hobble it to increase separation from the 1D X. Frame rate and build won't be enough, especially if the 5DIII is a high MP camera.”

+1 that. Even though many of us expect to see 7D's AF in the 5DIII, Canon is unlikely to offer that. An all 9 cross-type AF as in the 60D seems more likely to be used in the 5DIII, or maybe a completely new AF system, something between 60D's and 7D's AF.”

neuroanatomist
“Quote from: dilbert on November 15, 2011, 07:16:02 AM
I'd like to see the same technology used for the 1DX AF put into the 5D3 - but without cluttering the viewfinder with so many AF points. Just 9 of them that all work 100% all of the time. The 7D AF layout isn't necessary in the 5D series.

Many would, and will likely be disappointed. For one thing, they'll likely use AF point spread as a differentiator. After touting the area coverage on the 1D X (which, although better than the 1DsIII is slightly worse than the 1D IV from a practical standpoint, if not from a mathematical standpoint), I don't expect more spread than on the 5DII.”

Quote from: neuroanatomist on October 28, 2011, 07:03:15 PM
“As Flake stated, people are interested in the 5DIII in part because it's been a while since the 5DII came out. The assumption that a 5DII replacement will have '7D build, AF and speed' is unwarranted, because Canon will need to differentiate the 5DIII from the 1D X on features to justify the price difference of ~$4K (or they'll minimize the price gap and charge $4K for the 5DIII but I really don't see that happeneing). So, people won't get their 'dream camera'.”

bornshooter
“Quote from: Ricku on September 05, 2011, 09:39:53 PM
“I sure hope the 5D3 comes before the 1DS IV.

And yes, the earthquake / tsunami is probably the main reason to why we haven't heard about anything about these cameras yet.”

i hope the 5d mk3 comes 1st too all i want from it is improved focussing please bring it soon canon ”


foobar
“Quote from: Rocky on April 18, 2011, 05:38:25 AM
" 19 point AF system, 3 cross-type points"
That is a few steps backward from the 7D. 7D is ALL 19 points cross.”

True, but I don't think the 7D is a good indicator for what the 5D3 will be. Sure, everyone (me included) wishes it to be basically a full-frame version of the 7D, but I don't think this is what Canon will do. The 5D has always been a bit on the low end in terms of features (but not the sensor, of course) - probably so it doesn't cannibalize 1-series sales too much.

Quote from: neuroanatomist on April 18, 2011, 06:26:42 AM
“I hope this is BS. If not, that's just, well...pathetic. A 5D3 can have 9 or more AF points, but they all should be cross-type. Only the center point on the 5DII is cross-type, and it's the only one that works well. A 5DIII with 3 useful AF points? Egad, I hope not...”

+1

The thing I like about the AF systems in the 40/50/60D and especially the 7D is that every AF-point is cross-type, so you can select focus points purely based on composition and not the technical limitations of the AF system.

Gcon
““Quote from: Canon 14-24 on January 23, 2011, 08:42:14 AM
 Quote from: Gcon on January 23, 2011, 08:08:39 AM
“All I want in a 5DIII is the same as 5DII but with pro-level weather sealing and better AF.”

 Listen to me Canon - the 5D range brief is for a compact full frame body. It *needs* weather sealing and better AF. Keep the frame rates low and you won't monopolize the 1D/s range but you'll keep punters like me happy and stop me going to Nikon!”

That's all the 1Ds mainly has going for it, how would that not monopolize those sales (1-2 fps difference ain't going to be the deal breaker)? I've taken my 5D2 in rain and snow and it still has worked fine. Since you use a 2 body set up, a 5D2 and 7D would be the ideal situation to get that AF and reach you need for wildlife.

Compared to 1DmkIV or 1DmkV - sports shooters will want the 'pro' level AF and some other pro features, and sports shooters will scoff at the FPS of a 5DII or 5DIII.

Compared to 1Ds mkIV - now that's where Canon is worried. Still, I think Canon will work in much high MP into this, as well as full pro AF, and pros will want the built in portrait grip. I think the 5DIII will go up a fair bit in price and they'll sell the 5DII for a while yet, so this won't monopolise the 1Ds mk IV sales.”


----------



## smithy (Mar 6, 2012)

This is a great follow-up to the 5D Mark II in my opinion. Increased FPS, better AF and improved weather sealing. I'm hoping it's going to be the replacement for my trusty 40D (which will be relegated to backup camera). I shoot triathlons a lot and 6 FPS is adequate for any of the three disciplines.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (Mar 6, 2012)

jordanbstead said:


> One man's trash is another man's treasure. I think someone would be insane NOT to be blown away by this piece of equipment. It improves on the Mark II in every single way (save for the one thing I don't need or want: more MP).


Exactly the same for me. I neither need or want more resolution for the work I do. All I'd be doing was recording more detail which I had to store that I'd be getting rid of again when the files were reduced in size.

However, I understand that some people either need or want more resolution. My personal view is that more want it than genuinely need it.


----------



## scottsdaleriots (Mar 6, 2012)

I was so hyped up for the 5dmkiii but now it's just too expensive. Not to mention nikon have won the high MP war at least for the next 3-5 years I reckon.


----------



## XanuFoto (Mar 6, 2012)

scottsdaleriots said:


> I was so hyped up for the 5dmkiii but now it's just too expensive. Not to mention nikon have won the high MP war at least for the next 3-5 years I reckon.


I thought NOKIA Phone won the high MP war.


----------



## jrista (Mar 6, 2012)

XanuFoto said:


> scottsdaleriots said:
> 
> 
> > I was so hyped up for the 5dmkiii but now it's just too expensive. Not to mention nikon have won the high MP war at least for the next 3-5 years I reckon.
> ...



Depends. The Nokia Phone is a pixel-binned camera...you don't normally get the full 41mp, and when you do use it for "high resolution" shots, its somewhare in the vicinity of the D800 in terms of actual image resolution. When using it in binned mode, the images are about 3, 5, or 8mp (depending on binning mode), from what I've read. Pixel binning can indeed produce better quality photos, however you don't get a normal RAW image out of them (either JPEG or something akin to Canon m/sRAW), so you lose much of the flexibility RAW has when processing in post.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 7, 2012)

jrista said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



I bet the real cost, talking direct material cost only, is mostly in the shutter/mirror box and the sensor (if it is FF size). Perhaps a little in the VF if it is exactly 100%. Many of the chips inside DSLRs have also been used in the $40 P&S cameras.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 7, 2012)

PeterJ said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



Oops I guess I missed it. :-[ Pesky *.
Still, they don't use ones as fancy as that in the DSLRs.


----------



## jrista (Mar 7, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



Your forgetting the AF unit, which is fairly large, must be extremely precise in its design, is generally bound to the sensor size (from a point spread standpoint), and must be coupled with advanced control logic in the camera's processor. When you factor in the metering sensor into the AF system (as they usually are these days), that makes the whole system even more complex. There is all the software to manage the AF and metering system, make it customizable, hook all that customizability into the various body buttons....

I think expensive cameras are expensive simply because they are expensive.  I don't think you can really reduce the cost down to a single component or two as easily as we would all wish. They are complex automated systems of interconnected, synchronous parts that work at incredibly high speed. Its not just metering, or just AF, or just the sensor, or even just any couple of those parts...its the system as a whole, multiple discrete components operating in harmony to accurately track subjects and produce highly detailed, highly accurate, high resolution photos...N times a second.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 7, 2012)

jrista said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



AF sensors are basically the same size whether the cam is APS-C,APS-H,DX,or FF.
Sure developing the logic behind AF must take lots of manpower, but we were talking strictly cost to manufacture part here not actual full down the line cost of a part. Most logic in these cams is actually pretty simple and trivial, but AF and especially AI Servo has got to be pretty tricky going indeed. I bet the first guy they said "OK so your next task is to come up with our first AF tracking system." got a lump in his throat.


----------

