# 5DIII will come



## iaind (Nov 8, 2011)

According to PlanetMitch 5D blog there is going to be a 5dIII as well as the C300 compatible DSLR.
The camera at launch was a restyled 1d body.
Only problem was no timescale was given.


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 8, 2011)

Sure it will... this time next year =)


----------



## Meh (Nov 8, 2011)

iaind said:


> Only problem was no timescale was given.



That's kinda important in a prediction.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 8, 2011)

The world will end. You have been warned. I suspect the 5DIII will come out sometime before that, but there are no gaurantees.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 8, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> The world will end. You have been warned. I suspect the 5DIII will come out sometime before that, but there are no guarantees.



At the rate things are going, its a question of which we will see first.


----------



## willrobb (Nov 13, 2011)

I'm so impressed with the 5DmkII the only thing about a 5DmkIII release that will make me happy is a further price drop in the mkII 

I say that now, but no doubt a souped up 5DmkIII at say half the price of a 1DX would no doubt put a lot of temptation my way....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 13, 2011)

willrobb said:


> I'm so impressed with the 5DmkII the only thing about a 5DmkIII release that will make me happy is a further price drop in the mkII



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.


----------



## Picsfor (Nov 13, 2011)

I'm gonna stick with my previous comment.

The 5 series will replace the 1Ds range. 

Commercially, the pro's have shown they are more than willing to buy 2 5D's over a 1Ds.
It has been the large megapixel camera of choice for a few years now - and i suspect Canon will want to keep that option as well.

I have no doubt it will come with a single Digic 5 and an improved AF. By that i mean maybe 8 full cross hairs and the centre focus point being a new double cross hair. It might even increase the 17 points the 7D has, but the remaining additional points would be a single line focus point.

The Megapixel will be 30+ and the frame rate will pretty much stay the same. Remember, this is a studio, landscape camera.

It may well come with a USB3 connection, or even Thunderbolt - but i suspect USB3. It'll need something like that for the data transfer of those large file sizes.

The weather sealing may be upped a bit and an ability to hold 2 CF cards as per 1DX.

Sadly, i think the price may well be in the Â£2500 bracket, which is an increase on 5D2 opening prices - for many, still a bargain and a price point that would still have pros going out and ordering in pairs...

As for release date - after the 1Dx is actually available to buy but in time for the summer wedding market.
So let's say May! The northern hemisphere has an amazingly large wedding market, and nothing like a new camera to use gets the great pics and referred sales in for new weddings from guests!

Did i mention all those tourists coming to London for the Olympics? Yep - they'll all want a 5D3 for that once in a life time trip!

Next Spring will be a great time to buy a Canon camera


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 13, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> 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.


----------



## gonzalo (Nov 13, 2011)

Just bought a 5D MARK II at best price here in Spain 1659 â‚¬ / 2281 Dollars, waiting for the next MARK IV or V at the same price.


----------



## Isaac (Nov 14, 2011)

Yes, the Canon 5D mark III will come and hopefully soon.

Rebates are in action, stock is being pushed, some ridiculous deals are going on (5D2 body $1800). It seems that the 5D3 will be out in around 4-8 months. 

Remember, announcements do come quick and swiftly. Canon release an event advert only a few weeks before and thus the 5D3 could come with a surprise.


----------



## tron (Nov 14, 2011)

Personally I am not in a much hurry! My 5DMkII is fine! I would want a better AF system, (real) weather resistance and even better noise handling (we can never have enough I guess...). I cannot understand however why suddenly 21Mpixels are not enough. Just my opinion... To stay on topic 100% I would guess photokina (as has happened with the previous series 5 cameras...)


----------



## K-amps (Nov 14, 2011)

tron said:


> Personally I am not in a much hurry! My 5DMkII is fine! I would want a better AF system, (real) weather resistance and even better noise handling (we can never have enough I guess...). I cannot understand however why suddenly 21Mpixels are not enough. Just my opinion... To stay on topic 100% I would guess photokina (as has happened with the previous series 5 cameras...)



Good thing that banding does not bother you. Enjoy the Mk.II, 8) it has many thing s going for it.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 15, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> willrobb said:
> 
> 
> > I'm so impressed with the 5DmkII the only thing about a 5DmkIII release that will make me happy is a further price drop in the mkII
> ...



ditto , but i have the 1D mk3 instead of the 7D.

for landscapes I love the 5D 2 and for portraits (except shooting low key studio the AF is horrible) I have found changing the 5D2 to back buttom focus helps alot in being able to get focus lock with the center point using the back button then recompose and shoot only with the normal shutter release. My wife refuses to switch to back button focusing and when i use her 5D2 it frustrates me with the focus on the shutter release because the AF is that bad. Also if you are shooting Manual Focus its a non issue too. 
I havent actually tried the 5dmk2 in AI servo yet so not sure how it will perform i'm expecting not well considering it only has 1 focus point worth using.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 15, 2011)

dilbert said:


> 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.


----------



## te4o (Nov 15, 2011)

Yes, so let it be, even with the current AF, let that damned thing have less banding and slightly better DR and keep the AF for the expEnsive cams - having all shots in focus seems to be an expensive and precious gift... Ridiculous marketing strategies ... But neuro is probably right as usual even if he writes things he hopes won't happen - borders superstition almost, this 5D.
I can't trust the Canon AF department either


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 17, 2011)

dilbert said:


> I think that you're agreeing with me on the AF point spread. What I'm saying is take the middle 1DX AF sensor and replace the current 9 in the 5D2 with that.



It doesn't really work like that. They'd have to design a while new sensor, which they might. But the spread of the AF points is accomplished by the microlenses over the AF sensor, not the AF sensor itself. When you look at an actual AF sensor, you don't really see the individual AF points. For example, the 7D's AF sensor:







At first glance it appears to be just one large cluster with two smaller clusters at the sides, such that you might be tempted to think it's the center AF point and the two on either side. But in fact, you're looking at 20 AF points (19 '+' f/5.6 points and one 'x' f/2.8 point superimposed on the center '+' point). The way to interpret this diagram is that each adjacent pair of lines in a horizontal orientation, e.g. â€” â€”, represents the horizontal sensor lines of one to three AF points (longer lines contribute to more AF points), each adjacent pair of lines in a vertical orientation represents the vertical lines of one to five AF points (longer lines contribute to more AF points), and the pairs of single diagonal lines represent the center f/2.8 'x' cross-type point.


----------



## heavybarrel (Nov 17, 2011)

It looks like most people are pretty damn happy with their 5D2s... There are just some quibbles about the ancient AF system really. Otherwise, fps, ISO, mp... all up to par. Really, if the 5D2 was introduced last year, it would still make sense in the Canon lineup. If the 5D3 is just going to bump up the mp and ISO a bit and largely leave the AF alone, then I say I'd rather wait another year or so and get a 5D that will have a significantly upgraded AF instead of getting one in the next 6 months that upgrades everything just a bit but still leaves me wanting more. And out another $3k lol. What do you think? Is the 5D2 so terrible now that we need an minor upgrade on things we're mostly happy about right now?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 17, 2011)

handsomerob said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



Good grief, I would hope note. Calling the 7D too advanced for the 7D when it's really not half as special as people make it out to be to begin, it's just not 1 series level, at all, and sometimes doesn't even do quite as well as current 5D2 AF, although certainly plenty of times it does. If they stick a half-way between 60D and 7D AF, that would so weak I really might decide to look at Nikon seriously.

Even merely just 7D AF would be pretty weak IMO.

The 1DX adds so many advances they surely wouldn't need to cripple things close ot this much. Heck even 1D4 AF would be a noticeable step down.

Then again, the way Canon has been heading, maybe it will be a crippled 7D AF and a weak 4fps again even if you'd think it'd need atleast 1D3/4 AF and 6fps to match Nikon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 17, 2011)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> The 1DX adds so many advances they surely wouldn't need to cripple things close ot this much.



The 1D X adds some nice advances relative to the current 1-series bodies - but note, there is some regression as well - the loss of center point AF with an f/8 lens.


----------



## Isaac (Nov 17, 2011)

heavybarrel said:


> It looks like most people are pretty damn happy with their 5D2s... There are just some quibbles about the ancient AF system really. Otherwise, fps, ISO, mp... all up to par. Really, if the 5D2 was introduced last year, it would still make sense in the Canon lineup. If the 5D3 is just going to bump up the mp and ISO a bit and largely leave the AF alone, then I say I'd rather wait another year or so and get a 5D that will have a significantly upgraded AF instead of getting one in the next 6 months that upgrades everything just a bit but still leaves me wanting more. And out another $3k lol. What do you think? Is the 5D2 so terrible now that we need an minor upgrade on things we're mostly happy about right now?



I don't think Canon are going to just up the MP and ISO while jumping the price to $3k. I expect Canon are going to be putting in a lot of effort in making sure that the 5D3 is going to still be head and shoulders above any other camera in it's category eg. D800.


----------



## AG (Nov 17, 2011)

Speaking with the local Canon rep today in the camera store while picking up 12 new bodies for work.

Asked him about the new 5D3 and said about buying a new 5D2 or should i wait.

His exact words were, the 5D3 is due in March 2012 but expect constraints on supply like when the 5D2 was released so don't expect to see one for about 6 months. Which he said will be around the time the 1D-C will be introduced.

Now going on that it seems that its a sure bet that we won't see the Mk3 until at least early next year and not be able to buy one until around July/August time.

If this was to be true it pretty much seals the deal for me buying a Mk2 NOW and not waiting anymore, i can buy the Mk3 later down the track, and as long as the batteries and grip etc all still fit it won't be a huge loss (having to re buy all new batteries etc).

He also made mention that the 5D3 will not be the video DSLR that everyone is wanting (pretty much the same as already in the Mk2), that will be what the 1D-C will be. 

Now i don't know how much of this was just BS from him wanting to sell another body but he seemed pretty convinced.

Only time will tell..... now to damage the credit card for that 5D2 body


----------



## alipaulphotography (Nov 17, 2011)

They aren't going to want to be hurting 1Dx sales though. They've suffered that before with the 5DII eating sales from the 1 series bodies. In order to make the 5DIII 'inferior' it will most certainly have less fps, probably (slightly) lower ISO capabilities, intermediate AF and no built in battery grip of course. I don't know what they'll do with the sensor and MP but I'd imagine it will be high mp to give it its own niche. I'd rather the 18mp 1dx sensor but in a slower cheaper body! Fingers crossed...


----------



## willrobb (Nov 18, 2011)

handsomerob said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



+ 2 that. The image quality of the 5DmkII had me using it 90% to my 7D's 10%, but the AF and FPS ofthe 7D really was great.

Last weekend I sold my 7D and got a second 5DmkII body. Big price drops in Japan.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 18, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > The 1DX adds so many advances they surely wouldn't need to cripple things close ot this much.
> ...



yeah, too bad about that too, since it gives marketing all the excuse they need to not dare put 1D4 AF into 7D2 or 5D3


----------



## K-amps (Nov 18, 2011)

Isaac said:


> heavybarrel said:
> 
> 
> > It looks like most people are pretty damn happy with their 5D2s... There are just some quibbles about the ancient AF system really. Otherwise, fps, ISO, mp... all up to par. Really, if the 5D2 was introduced last year, it would still make sense in the Canon lineup. If the 5D3 is just going to bump up the mp and ISO a bit and largely leave the AF alone, then I say I'd rather wait another year or so and get a 5D that will have a significantly upgraded AF instead of getting one in the next 6 months that upgrades everything just a bit but still leaves me wanting more. And out another $3k lol. What do you think? Is the 5D2 so terrible now that we need an minor upgrade on things we're mostly happy about right now?
> ...



The one thing going concerns do; is ensure sustainability. 

One would think that if they made the 5D3 such a superior product, it would cannibalize other canon models, (higher margin offerings) secondly would be hard for them to show improvements in a 5d4 etc. As Neuro would put it, if one plotted the value propositions; it would be close to a second order polynomial , and a very high value 5d3 would be a distraction to the progressive market segmentation they have tried to create.

I suspect they will make it very close to the D800 in terms of a value proposition. Again thinking sustainibility.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 18, 2011)

K-amps said:


> Isaac said:
> 
> 
> > heavybarrel said:
> ...



OTOH the lower tiers have so much vastly larger volume. The 1Ds sold about zero copies compared to 5 series.
And all this little picking and pecking and barely improving this or that maybe it seems good, but imagine if they had gone full tilt a few years back when Nikon was floundering, Canon seriously could've grabbed a ton a ton of extra market share and had so many more people on board and buying lenses, etc. Sometimes I think the marketing attitude of recent Canon shoots themselves in the foot in the end.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2011)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> imagine if they had gone full tilt a few years back when Nikon was floundering, Canon seriously could've grabbed a ton a ton of extra market share and had so many more people on board and buying lenses, etc. Sometimes I think the marketing attitude of recent Canon shoots themselves in the foot in the end.



Really? The numbers over recent years contradict that statement. Consider - last year (2010, latest for which figures are available), Canon had ~45% of the dSLR market share, compared to Nikon's ~30%. Three years before that, in 2007, Nikon had 41% dSLR share to Canon's 40% share. So from 2007 through 2010, Canon grew their market share while Nikon lost it to Sony, Olympus, et al.

So, why change anything? They're winning! Yes, I know the arguments about resting on past laurels, etc., but the can obviously convince themselves that they're doing everything right, and it's hard to argue otherwise...


----------



## whatta (Nov 18, 2011)

since you have been talking about AF, let me ask my question again:

is there ANY difference between the AF of 60d vs AF of the rebels from 400d (to 600d)
IF I ONLY use the manually selected central AF point?
(cross type f2/8)

thanks!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2011)

whatta said:


> let me ask my question again:
> 
> is there ANY difference between the AF of 60d vs AF of the rebels from 400d (to 600d)
> IF I ONLY use the manually selected central AF point?
> (cross type f2/8)



Missed the question before, but yes, there is a difference. 

The Rebel center AF point is a single cross-type point that is vertical-line sensitive at f/2.8 and vertical- and horizontal-line sensitivite at f/5.6. Basically, the AF point is a '+' shape with a longer horizontal arm. So, with a lens slower than f/2.8, it's an f/5.6-sensitive cross, but with f/2.8 and faster lenses, it's a single orientation sensor with the higher accuracy you get from an f/2.8 baseline, but only for vertical lines. 

The xxD (40D - 60D, actually 7D as well) center AF point is a dual cross-type point that is vertical- and horizontal-line sensitivite at f/5.6, with a diagonally-oriented f/2.8-sensitive cross-type sensor. Picture it as a bigger 'x' superimposed on a smaller '+'. 

The diagonal cross means you get the more accurate f/2.8 baseline in multiple orientations, and thus you're more likely to get more accurate focus with the center AF point on the xxD/7D than on the Rebel/xxxD body.


----------



## whatta (Nov 18, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> The diagonal cross means you get the more accurate f/2.8 baseline in multiple orientations, and thus you're more likely to get more accurate focus with the center AF point on the xxD/7D than on the Rebel/xxxD body.



Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation!!


----------



## pdirestajr (Nov 18, 2011)

I'm just waiting for the 5D3 to come out so I can but the 5DII at a discount!


----------



## K-amps (Nov 18, 2011)

pdirestajr said:


> I'm just waiting for the 5D3 to come out so I can but the 5DII at a discount!



Realistically, what price do you expect for one in good condition after the 5d3 announcement?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2011)

pdirestajr said:


> I'm just waiting for the 5D3 to come out so I can but the 5DII at a discount!



If the 5DIII is more expensive than the 5DII (and given the current street pricing of a new 5DII, how can it NOT be?) then the price of a 5DII might very well rise as new ones become scarce and retailers start charging full retail price (that's exactly what happened with the 70-200/2.8L IS II, used prices of the MkI went up by ~$300 once the new version came out).


----------



## traveller (Nov 19, 2011)

All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this... 

The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system. The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities. The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition. Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail. If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"? This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image. 

Canon must risk their 1D X sales by upping the specs of the 5D MkIII AF system, many people won't actually need it most of the time but that's not the point. I live in the UK and my car (like most these days) has air conditioning, which is great for the few days a year I actually need it. Try selling people anything other than a base model without A/C. 

Canon are competing in this market on a differentiation strategy, if their sensor isn't a lot better than the new Sony FF unit, what will Canon differentiate on? In my view, the 7D's AF system is the bare minimum for the 5D MkIII; let's not forget that the frame coverage of the AF points would be virtually the same as with the 5D MkII (just higher density). If Canon are unwilling to go the whole hog and fit the new 61pt AF system to the 5D MkIII (and 7D MkII), they should develop a new AF system for these cameras; how about a 39 pt "low density reticular array".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2011)

What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation. 

Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%. Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF. 

There's my organ grinding for the night...


----------



## npherno (Nov 19, 2011)

traveller said:


> All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this...
> 
> The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system. The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities. The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition. Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail. If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"? This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image.
> 
> ...



I agree, but maybe the 7D AF will be adequate enough? You KNOW Canon isn't going to do better than that. I also think that besides the actual, you know focusing (only kind of important..Low light be damned if you cant get a AF lock), the sensor better rock. Sony/Nikon make "better" looking random noise at high ISO, and Canon should as well. Ive learned to live with banding on my 50D, but on a $2.5K camera, thats BS. 

I have to say (and I can hear the detractors now regarding NEX processing and sharpness levels) my NEX-5 is WAY better at low ISO with noise than my 50D, shooting in RAW. Im still not too invested in Canon, I'd def switch to Nikon if the D800 was compelling.


----------



## traveller (Nov 19, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.
> 
> Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%. Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF.
> 
> There's my organ grinding for the night...



I disagree that Canon are not competing with Nikon and Sony at this level, if that was the case then why on earth did Nikon bother to make the specifications of the D700 so good? They could have made themselves a higher margin by installing the 11 pt AF and metering systems from the DXX series. Your right about inertia, owning many lenses and flashes for a system gives you a strong incentive to stay, but if your chosen brand keeps underperforming in key areas generation after generation then you will eventually consider switching (you're always saying how 'L' lenses hold their value). If this were not the case then Nikon would still be the market leader for professionals and 'serious enthusiasts'. 

Nikon have been offering significantly more AF points on their 'below flagship' range for exactly one generation. I don't think that it's safe for a company to extrapolate from three years of past data and use that as the basis of future strategy, especially when what is being measured is as coarse as overall DSLR sales. Canon are really starting to look like they're no longer the best choice in the mid-market and now Nikon are starting to produce some very good entry level cameras (where I believe they have recently been weaker than Canon) and Sony are also fielding some interesting alternatives. Actually, I hope that Canon do lose some market share, it might just stimulate them to do better...


----------



## JR (Nov 19, 2011)

traveller said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.
> ...



+1 on your last comment there, but I am really torn on this one. I know John is a strong believer of the inertia to change brand once you are invested in it which does make sense, but the argument that we must also look at what competition is doing is also a very compelling argument.

Not sure if anyone in this furom actually has this info, but building on John (Neuro) thinking, I guess if we knew how much of the 5D sales for example were from new buyers versus a Canon upgrade, that would help. Then if we knew the demographic of people buying 5Ds with several L lens, it would also help assessing their stickyness. For example are they professional making a living from it or recreational passionate with a lot of disposable income?

If Canon beleive their market for a 5DIII will come from Canon owners wanting to upgrade and if they beleive these buyers are not likely to jump ship (from their marketing analysis) then maybe we will all be disappointed with the specs. If on the other end they want to stay the market leader and continue to steel customer from NIkon and Sony while at the same time making money from existing customer by making them upgrade, it will lead to a more exsiting set of specs!

One thing for sure, it must be fun to be a Canon exec these days and planing for this transitional period!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2011)

JR said:


> Not sure if anyone in this furom actually has this info, but building on John (Neuro) thinking, I guess if we knew how much of the 5D sales for example were from new buyers versus a Canon upgrade, that would help. Then if we knew the demographic of people buying 5Ds with several L lens, it would also help assessing their stickyness. For example are they professional making a living from it or recreational passionate with a lot of disposable income?
> 
> If Canon beleive their market for a 5DIII will come from Canon owners wanting to upgrade and if they beleive these buyers are not likely to jump ship (from their marketing analysis) then maybe we will all be disappointed with the specs. If on the other end they want to stay the market leader and continue to steel customer from NIkon and Sony while at the same time making money from existing customer by making them upgrade, it will lead to a more exsiting set of specs!



I agree that no one here has those data. But Canon has those data. Whenever you register a new product purchase online, you're asked what other camera(s) you own, what lenses you own, what lenses you're planning to buy next year, your profession, your income, etc. I'd argue that some of their choices in the last few years (e.g. a 60D clearly aimed at xxxD upgraders, not 50D upgraders) are driven by just that sort of demographic data. 

I'm sure Canon does look at what Nikon/Sony are doing, at all levels - they do need to compete for some philosophical 'best camera in class' even if they're not competing for that many real customers in the upper end of the range.


----------



## JR (Nov 19, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> I agree that no one here has those data. But Canon has those data. Whenever you register a new product purchase online, you're asked what other camera(s) you own, what lenses you own, what lenses you're planning to buy next year, your profession, your income, etc. I'd argue that some of their choices in the last few years (e.g. a 60D clearly aimed at xxxD upgraders, not 50D upgraders) are driven by just that sort of demographic data.
> 
> I'm sure Canon does look at what Nikon/Sony are doing, at all levels - they do need to compete for some philosophical 'best camera in class' even if they're not competing for that many real customers in the upper end of the range.



Good point that this segment (5D and 1D series EOS bodies) is smaller indeed. I cant wait to see the outcome of all this market movement hopefully in the first quarter of 2012 though!


----------



## traveller (Nov 19, 2011)

Looks like we may get some idea of the 'competition' sooner than we thought: NR looks set to scoop some D800 images!


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 19, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc.



Excellent point. That's exactly why I don't expect any vastly superior AF in the 5DIII.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2011)

D800 confirmed at 36 MP by NR. Canon was right all along. More MP *is* better. That tears it. I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Nikon.


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 19, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> D800 confirmed at 36 MP by NR. Canon was right all along. More MP *is* better. That tears it. I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Nikon.


hehe 

Interesting times, love to see tech advancing! Nikon just tripled D700's pixel count, which surely will make some high-ISO fans unhappy... I wonder how many will switch to Canon now


----------



## traveller (Nov 20, 2011)

Perhaps this is all part of a ploy by Canon and Nikon to increase the price point of their compact full frame bodies up into the $4000+ (>Â£2500) price band; i.e. no 1Ds/DXx replacement, they'll just up all the specifications of the 5D MkIII/D800 and charge more money for them :


----------



## traveller (Nov 20, 2011)

BTW - NR now has the first pictures of the D800 posted (supposedly).


----------



## AG (Nov 20, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> D800 confirmed at 36 MP by NR. Canon was right all along. More MP *is* better. That tears it. I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Nikon.



Lol

There is one thing here though, just like how every tablet production part out of china MUST be for the next iPad, similar could be said about a lot of these rumours. 

I have a feeling that Canon won't make everybody happy when they finally release the 5D3 (i await the smite that that comment will get), If its not 36+MP, have 40000AF points, shoot RAW 6K video and cost under $2500 people are going to complain no matter what.

For me id be happy if it stayed around the 21MP mark, shot 1080p but cleaner codec (same as 1D-X) but 60fps would be nice too, a clean HDMI out or even ability to dual screen HDMI/onboard LCD, lastly a dedicated record button like the 60/7D have would also be nice. 

But then again that could just be a rumour waiting to happen right there.


----------



## JR (Nov 20, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> D800 confirmed at 36 MP by NR. Canon was right all along. More MP *is* better. That tears it. I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Nikon.



lol...you cant do that John, if you defect with the amount of lens you have, then Canon will go out of business - hihihi.

For me the most interesting spec for the D800 is not the 36MP but the fact it will keep the same AF system which is the current D3s one. NOw it will be interetsing to see how Canon react. Not sure they could compete with simply coming out with a 5D III with around 24-30MP and same boring 9 points AF system as the 5D II!!!



...But seriously if you are selling all your lens John, I'm buying! lol


----------



## nounours18200 (Nov 20, 2011)

+1: if the 5D3 does not have a better AF , it will be a disapointment...


----------



## CanonFanNum1 (Nov 20, 2011)

nounours18200 said:


> +1: if the 5D3 does not have a better AF , it will be a disapointment...



Disappointment? More like disaster.

I cannot fathom how they could make another 9-point AF ... the 5DmkII shouldn't even have had that.


----------



## JR (Nov 20, 2011)

CanonFanNum1 said:


> nounours18200 said:
> 
> 
> > +1: if the 5D3 does not have a better AF , it will be a disapointment...
> ...



+1 !!! If the D800 indeed has 36MP with a 51 point AF, the 5D III would look tame in comparaison if it only had 9 points AF. Of course for studio work it might not make a difference, but for many enthousiast like ourselves who use their 5D for different use, it would be a shame. I am now I a point a need a second camera because my 5D II simply is not up to part to take picture of moving subjects and tracking them. For this I would need a 1D mk IV type AF capability...

Cant wait to see the future announcements...


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 21, 2011)

JR said:


> CanonFanNum1 said:
> 
> 
> > nounours18200 said:
> ...



So you get a 1D4 as a second camera.....


----------



## te4o (Nov 21, 2011)

dilbert said:


> CanonFanNum1 said:
> 
> 
> > nounours18200 said:
> ...



For my purpose of "continuous Manual Focusing" the 5D3 can stay with its current AF (and lower price) - can't be bothered... An improved LV with a better LCD screen (100% coverage) would be a good aid. 
But, I guess 5D3 will have at least 7D AF, otherwise no one will be happy to spend money on it. You can't charge 3500 USD for an AF system from 2006-7. That's not gonna happen. Unless there is another FF body with this AF and all new inside. 
Still I hope the 5D3 will have interchangeable focusing screens for MF like the current one. Anyone knows whether the 1DX has it as an option?


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 21, 2011)

The AF on the 5DII is good and accurate. Not as fast as the 7D or 1D4, but it is reliable. In low light it is better than the others.

Once locked on in servo mode it is very good.

Please stop trashing the 5DII AF - it is better than the older prosumer bodies, up to the 50D and up to the 550D. Giving it just that little extra time it does the job everytime - and no other beats it in low light. All about knowing the kit and applying the right technique. 

Master the technique and you will get the best IQ of them all


----------



## Picsfor (Nov 21, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> Please stop trashing the 5DII AF - it is better than the older prosumer bodies, up to the 50D and up to the 550D.
> 
> Master the technique and you will get the best IQ of them all


I would like to beg to differ, but instead i'm gonna come right out with it and tell you you're wrong.

I done a night time badger shoot using my old 40D and my 5D2.
I wonder if you can guess which body produced the most accurately focused shots - even though i could only really push it to 1600iso?

Yep, 40D beat it by a country mile. Even though 5D2 had an option of 6400iso, i kept coming back to the 40D.
The focusing is the weak link in this otherwise "perfect camera".

The same could also be said with my 30D - and i have the pic listed some where to prove it. Don't have many by the 5D2 though!

What you are using your 5D2 for, may be perfect for the focusing system; for me, and many others, we often have a variety of situations in which to use our camera.


----------



## K-amps (Nov 21, 2011)

handsomerob said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > D800 confirmed at 36 MP by NR. Canon was right all along. More MP *is* better. That tears it. I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Nikon.
> ...



I'd rather folks switch over to Nikon so I can get hold of nice glass on sale. Nikon guys coming here will drive up the prices of lenses...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 21, 2011)

Picsfor said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Please stop trashing the 5DII AF - it is better than the older prosumer bodies, up to the 50D and up to the 550D.
> ...



I have to side with Picsfor on this. Is the 5DII AF horrible? No. It's just about as good as the AF system on which it's based, the 20D. The same one used in the Rebel/xxxD series. I started with a T1i/500D and moved to a 7D in part because the Rebel's AI Servo system just didn't cut it. I know the 5DII has 6 'invisible' AF points supposedly intended to improve AI Servo, but frankly, they don't help all that much - the performance is on par with what I got out of the 500D. The 7D is far superior, and I would imagine that a 1-series would be a significant further step up. 

As for low light, the 5DII's specified sensitivity is -0.5 EV, the same as the 7D, xxD, and xxxD bodies. Granted, that's not the whole story - in practice, the 5DII does seem to do better than the 7D in low light, as long as you're using the center AF point. But the off-center AF points of the 5DII? Frankly, they suck. Many times, they just flat out miss focus, even with a top-notch lens like the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. The 7D locks on and holds, regardless of the AF point in use. The statement, "_Giving it just that little extra time..._" doesn't help me. If I have that little extra time, I'll put the camera on a tripod and manually focus with 10x Live View. 

I love my 5DII - the IQ is excellent. But the AF system is it's Achilles' heel - it's not only slower than the 7D and certainly the 1-series, it's not as accurate, nor can it track well.


----------



## brando72 (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Picsfor said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



neuroanatomist,

Your highly valued opinion being said, under those limitations, what do you feel are the *best* uses for the 5dm2. Another words, what are the most practical uses for the 5dm2 and what specific uses would one think about in buying a 5dm2 over say a crop 7d?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > imagine if they had gone full tilt a few years back when Nikon was floundering, Canon seriously could've grabbed a ton a ton of extra market share and had so many more people on board and buying lenses, etc. Sometimes I think the marketing attitude of recent Canon shoots themselves in the foot in the end.
> ...



that's not winning in the way they could've won by any stretch
and look at some of the pro figures


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> What market are we talking about here? Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level? How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K? The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena. At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc. So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc. That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'. That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care. When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.
> 
> Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%. Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF.
> 
> There's my organ grinding for the night...



This is the sort of thinking that slowly leads king of the hills to eventually end up being relegated to the annals of history.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> JR said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure if anyone in this furom actually has this info, but building on John (Neuro) thinking, I guess if we knew how much of the 5D sales for example were from new buyers versus a Canon upgrade, that would help. Then if we knew the demographic of people buying 5Ds with several L lens, it would also help assessing their stickyness. For example are they professional making a living from it or recreational passionate with a lot of disposable income?
> ...



and also note how foolish those suerveys they send out are, they are like so what two reasons most made you want the 5D2, and of course nobody puts down speed or AF, because well it is hardly tops in that, and then when a journalist asks Canon why they didn't do better, Canon responds, our buyers clearly signaled to use that they don't care about speed or AF in a 5 class camera, come on. it's circular.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> D800 confirmed at 36 MP by NR. Canon was right all along. More MP *is* better. That tears it. I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Nikon.



Maybe when you find that it has the top AF module available from Nikon and 6fps with grip and 36MP and much improved video and all sorts of little helpful settings in firmware not crippled away and then see the 5D3 with 30MP, a crippled 7D AF and 3.9fps no matter what you do to it, no manual audio, no zebra stripes, no fully working autoiso, no outline for histogram, tons of other little thigns crippled, etc. etc. maybe you will switch to Nikon hah.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 21, 2011)

brando72 said:


> what do you feel are the *best* uses for the 5dm2. Another words, what are the most practical uses for the 5dm2 and what specific uses would one think about in buying a 5dm2 over say a crop 7d?



From a marketing standpoint, the 5DII is seemingly intended as a studio/landscape camera, and I think it excels in that realm. Landscapes, you have time to spare, and in a studio setting, you have time and control over lighting, and subjects that can hold still and be re-shot. For those uses, a slow(ish) frame rate and relatively weak AF aren't a handicap. Events such as weddings can work fine - they are generally predictable, there's even a rehersal so you know exactly who will be where, and when, so the must-have shots are obtainable. It does less well in unpatterned situations like the reception, but in that case the solution is just taking lots of shots, so you get enough keepers. 

OTOH, for fast moving situations like sports and wildlife, I don't think the 5DII is the best choice. That's not to say it can't be used for those purposes, just that it's not the best tool available.

Honestly, I also think it does a fine job as a general use camera for an advanced amateur. I use it in situations where I know it won't perform well - shooting my kids running towards me through piles of leaves yesterday, for example - the keeper rate was very low. But the consequences of not getting a good shot are personal - not professional. If I had to depend on a camera for getting *the shot* with moving subjects, the 5DII would not be my first choice (or even my second). 

Bottom line, in situations where you have time/control, the 5DII delivers great IQ and a high keeper rate. In more fluid situations, the keeper rate drops substantially - but often, that's not a problem.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Picsfor said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



I am sure we are all in agreement about the 7D and 1D4 having a better AF - however it doesn't mean that the AF is rubbish either. The little extra time might be as long as a 10th of a second - I can happily shoot motorsport with the 5DII because I start panning earlier. If your 5DII is neither accurate nor tracking properly I suggest you send it back to Cannon.

For the sensor and low light I suggest you visit the DxO labs and compare the 7D, the 5DII and the 1D4 - the results might surprise you

Mind you the 7D AF is poor in comparison with the 1D4 but that is a different story


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 21, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> The AF on the 5DII is good and accurate. Not as fast as the 7D or 1D4, but it is reliable. In low light it is better than the others.
> 
> Once locked on in servo mode it is very good.
> 
> ...



It's better than rebel or xxD AF (for center point at least) but that isn't saying much. The outer points are MUCH less prone to lock than even on a cheap 40D. None of these can do action with anything other than center point, at all. The 5D2 actually does center point action and stills better than the rebels and xxD but even here it can have a lot of issues with any sort of action if the subject is close. The 7D has vastly better outer points, ones that can even be used for action, but I don't really find it's center point any better for stills at all, if even, and even for action sometimes I think the center point on it is a bit worse for more distant subjects, it still seems a far cry from a top level AF to me.


----------



## MartinvH (Nov 21, 2011)

brando72 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Picsfor said:
> ...



Well that is quite simple even for me to answer correctly.

5D2 for portraits , landscapes , studio work
7d Anythink that moves and/or is at a longer distance so your lens will get a longer view


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 21, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Picsfor said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Well I have to say I've found the 6 hidden assists on the 5D2 to help to a radical degree. Results on top level soccer, surfing and football were night and day having them off vs. on for me. And I have to say it did AI Servo a lot better for me than an old 20D, moreso the farther away the subject. If the subject gets close it still seems too sluggish to track well and maybe it doesn't really do any better than 20D.

But for stills or ai servo i find the 5D2 far better than the 20D-50D were.

Yeah the outer points often have a ridiculously hard time grabbing focus on anything, reasonably precise (by consumer-level standards) if they actually do grab, but they fail so often it's ridiculous.

7D outer points work far more quickly, grab far, far more often and are at least as precise.
7D center doesn't do any better for me for stills though and sometimes I almost trust it less and even for AI servo I don't find it really all that great compared to some of the praise it gets. And plenty of lighting conditions, espcially if it is super bright or there i sbacklighting and it can turn to a mess.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 21, 2011)

Picsfor said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Please stop trashing the 5DII AF - it is better than the older prosumer bodies, up to the 50D and up to the 550D.
> ...



I have a 40D to compare it with. Been sat in the cupboard as it doens't cut the mustard in comparison. I suggest you read the DxO reports - AF in poor light from the 5DII hands down beats the 7D and the 1D4 - exactly what I have found.

May only be the centre points - but as I said - know your equipment to get the best results


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 21, 2011)

Why are we even comparing 5DII's AF to discontinued models, rebels, etc? Or even to 7D/1DIV? It's pointless. They are all aimed at different markets. Everyone here agrees: 5DII's AF is it's weakest point and struggles when tracking fast moving objects. I'm not saying that it is completely useless. Many people post great action shots taken with a 5DII. I think we are all angry because such a legendary camera deserves a better AF system. 

But you don't buy 5DII for it's AF, you buy it for it's excellent IQ and low light performance... Canon could have put a better AF in it, wish they did it!!! But they didn't. Not because they didn't have the tech for it, lol, but to differentiate it from other models. They don't want to put all the best features in one camera and then sell it for â‚¬2000/$2500. Who will then buy higher models that cost 3 times more?

Also, we regularly read in the forum, something like "1Dx is my dream camera, I want to have it but actually I just needed 5fps... blabla". Because of these kind of different needs there are that many cameras out there. Manufacturers try to keep most of us (and themselves ofc) satisfied. There will always be people whose needs seem to be 'forgotten' in a camera that is perfect for them otherwise. We just have to live with that.

If you want better, or even way better AF, you have the 7D. That is a camera you buy for it's superb AF and fast frame rate. But you'll have to sacrifice IQ & low light performance. It's only fair, given the prices. It's obviously aimed at a different market.

No compromises? You need everything? No worries, Canon didn't forget your needs. Treat yourself to a 1D/1Ds/1Dx and you will see all your worries disappear! Oh c'mon... Don't complain about the price now...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 21, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> I suggest you read the DxO reports - AF in poor light from the 5DII hands down beats the 7D and the 1D4 - exactly what I have found.



Can you provide a link to DxO's reports on autofocus performance?


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 21, 2011)

OK I have two 7D's. Their AF is better than the 5DII - but not that much better contrary to the word on the street. There may be exceptions like peripheral points but most people use the 2.8 point in the centre

I also have a 1D4 whose AF makes the 7D's AF seem slow, inaccurate and not so good at locking on. 

The 1D4 also has great high ISO performance as well

The proof is in the picture so I took this picture with the 1D4 for you tonight - try this on a 5DII or a 7D and show me a better picture

http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/b09g8589x.JPG

Camera Model: Canon EOS-1D Mark IV
Image Date: 2011-11-21 22:40:29 
Lens: 70-200L F/2.8 II @70.0mm
Aperture: f/2.8
Exposure Time: 0.0080 s (1/125)
ISO equiv: 12800
Copyright: Brian Squibb
Software: Digital Photo Professional


----------



## AG (Nov 21, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/b09g8589x.JPG



Be handy to see the same photo taken at a series of ISOs such as 100, 1600, 12800 etc.

So we can see how dark the room was. That way people can see if their cameras can actually match up.

But i totally agree with your point though.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

AG said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/b09g8589x.JPG
> ...



And keep the dog still 

This was taken in M mode, fixed at 1/125 and f/2.8 with auto iso. No mucking about in pp afterwards. So apart from sharpening it is as it came out of the camera

I can tell you now that at 100 and 1600 there was no picture  This was taken in a dingy hall with light tubes about 20ft up. I was amazed I got a decent picture. Good testament to the 70-200 as well.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

Here is another - different part of the hall so lighting slightly different

http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/b09g8538x.JPG

It will take some doing for the 5DIII to meet the high ISO that is already available. But it does show it is possible.

That will kill off those who think iso1600 with a 40D will be better


----------



## JR (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> OK I have two 7D's. Their AF is better than the 5DII - but not that much better contrary to the word on the street. There may be exceptions like peripheral points but most people use the 2.8 point in the centre
> 
> I also have a 1D4 whose AF makes the 7D's AF seem slow, inaccurate and not so good at locking on.
> 
> ...



Very nice picture Brian. I assume the picture is not cropped right? Reason I ask is I noticed recently (since I got my 70-200mm) that if I take a close up portrait shot at very high ISO (like 12800) the image is actually very usable.

If instead I shoot with my 50mm and take a scene of a room for example (no close up), then the noise shows up must more.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

JR said:


> Very nice picture Brian. I assume the picture is not cropped right? Reason I ask is I noticed recently (since I got my 70-200mm) that if I take a close up portrait shot at very high ISO (like 12800) the image is actually very usable.
> 
> If instead I shoot with my 50mm and take a scene of a room for example (no close up), then the noise shows up must more.



Correct - this was not cropped. Having a zoom I try to get full frame composition.

This one was taken some distance away and is a small dog

http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/b09g8391.JPG


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> OK I have two 7D's. Their AF is better than the 5DII - but not that much better contrary to the word on the street. There may be exceptions like peripheral points but most people use the 2.8 point in the centre



Well, yes...on the 5DII I use the center AF point, because that's the only one worthy of being called an AF point. The 7D's other 18 points all work just about as well as the center point. But with a fast prime like the 85L, autofocus-recompose is not optimal, since it results in OOF shots - so, I'd really like to use a peripheral point for that. Instead, it's Eg-S and MF.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Well, yes...on the 5DII I use the center AF point, because that's the only one worthy of being called an AF point. The 7D's other 18 points all work just about as well as the center point. But with a fast prime like the 85L, autofocus-recompose is not optimal, since it results in OOF shots - so, I'd really like to use a peripheral point for that. Instead, it's Eg-S and MF.



I wasn't really expecting a 7D user to be using a 85/f1.2 wide open. However I do see your point. Personally even with the 50 f/1.4 I do manual focussing anyway - the opportunity for the AF to get it wrong for portaits is too great when the DOF is very narrow and the light is poor - however when the light is good the peripheral point focussing works fine.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> I wasn't really expecting a 7D user to be using a 85/f1.2 wide open.



Quite the contrary - with the 85L on my 7D, nearly 50% of my shots were at f/1.2. For the same framing at f/1.2 on APS-C, you get equivalent DoF at f/1.9 on FF. On my 5DII, most of my shots are at f/1.6 or f/1.8, rather than f/1.2. Even at f/1.8, focus-recompose from the 5DII's center AF yields an OOF shot with a close subject. However, with my 7D I shot a sequence of my daughter running toward me through a field of marigolds, and 12 of the 14 shots in the 8 fps burst were sharp enough to count her eyelashes - at f/1.2! Even compensating for the crop facttor by setting the 5DII to f/2, I bet the 5DII would have been lucky to get even one in-focus shot in that scenario.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 22, 2011)

even shooting low key in a studio the 5Dii CANNOT get focus lock with any point other than the center point and even then its pretty sketchy decent light it seems ok. I haveent tried shooting any action with it yet in AI servo, i has the mode so i should try it out and see how it performs I guess in decent light it might work but I would doubt its capability in low light.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

When shooting wide open I always have AF on servo that way if I or the subject moves then focus is kept. Servo mode on the 5DII is good enough to track most things moving - it is the initial lock on which is the slowest, once locked it stays locked.

I think the issue here is that the 5DII AF is continually being talked down as if it is useless. My point is that, yes, it has its limitations that can be worked around. It is better than the original 5D but not as good as the 7D and not worthy of comparison to the 1D4.

When the 9 point came out it was considered to be good. Now if it was good then it is still good today. However what has changed is that in the last 3 years AF has moved on and improved significantly so that now people expect more and are unable to work their way round the 9 point. My first piece of advice is always that the shooter should to use servo and pre focus as the default. The expectations now are that the DSLR should be as easy to use as a P&S - anything less than that and the camera is considered useless. This is an attitude that is general across many areas of technology.

I have moved onto the 1D4 and now consider the 7D AF as being poor - yet everyone is still raving about the 7D having moved there from 9 point system. I get significantly more AF misses on the 7D than I do on the 1D4

I would be happy if the 5DIII had 1D4 AF and 12800 iso. More pixels are not really needed as the dark side has shown - to be honest a ff version of the 1D4 sensor would be sufficient and cheap enough as there is no new technology involved.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

dilbert said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > When the 9 point came out it was considered to be good. Now if it was good then it is still good today. However what has changed is that in the last 3 years AF has moved on and improved significantly so that now people expect more and are unable to work their way round the 9 point. My first piece of advice is always that the shooter should to use servo and pre focus as the default. The expectations now are that the DSLR should be as easy to use as a P&S - anything less than that and the camera is considered useless. This is an attitude that is general across many areas of technology.
> ...



I dont remember my Pentax Spotmatic having 5 AF points  I do still have some superb prints from the 70's though


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> I would be happy if the 5DIII had 1D4 AF and 12800 iso.



But, it won't. It will be _lucky_ to have 7D AF. 



dilbert said:


> It would be something to see one of these generation Y photographers handle a film SLR with fewer than 5 AF points.



I sure would have loved a film SLR with _ANY_ autofocus points, but I used film SLRs before autofocus was a reality. Split prism and microprism collar all the way.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I would be happy if the 5DIII had 1D4 AF and 12800 iso.
> ...



I expressed my wish.

You are so certain that you know what Canon are not going to deliver - please explain what you base that assertion on and the source of any facts/rumours


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I would be happy if the 5DIII had 1D4 AF and 12800 iso.
> ...



I agree that 5DIII would be _lucky_ to have even 7D's AF. Here is why:

5DIII will be aimed at studio/landscape photographers. Of course they deserve a decent AF system with their camera, say one that is between 60D's and 7D's AF. But not more than that or Canon will shoot themselves with their own weapon. 1DIV's AF is way too advanced for a camera that won't even need it. This would also mess the Canon lineup. 1Dx sales could suffer, 7D's or 7DII's sales would suffer although they are aimed at totally different markets. Heck, even 5DIII's sales would suffer because of it's increased price (highly advanced AF would obviously cost more). Why would Canon take such a risk?

They would not want to put all killer features in one camera and sell it for $2500... Why would they? They want you to buy the flagship model for that, and for a price. They would want to keep a good distinction between all their cameras to ensure that they all bring in the maximum cash. Which I think is only fair given the R&D they are putting in their different products. I know these cameras are already different in so many ways (sensor size, pixel count, low-light capabilities, burst shooting, etc) but AF system has always been the key feature to keep them really separated.

People expect better AF in 5DIII and right so, *5DIII will have better AF*. Because Canon would want the 5DII users to upgrade to the new model and they know that _only_ better IQ/low-light performance in the new model won't cut it for many of us. So a slightly better AF is all they will offer.

Just my 2 cents...


----------



## K-amps (Nov 22, 2011)

handsomerob said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Granted... if they want to stunt the 5d3, remove the video capture features and let people use the 60D or 300C etc for Video... Give us a decent Still Camera with at least 5-6 fps, 5AEB bracketing, decent AF and ISO... Hopefully this is a fair trade-off.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

When the 5D3 comes out the 7D style AF will be the worst apart from the 1100D. I cant imaging Canon believing that the newest top semi pro still camera would sell when saddled with the worst AF. 

I believe that the 5DIII will have AF at LEAST the equal of the 7D else it will never sell


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> You are so certain that you know what Canon are not going to deliver - please explain what you base that assertion on and the source of any facts/rumours




Certain? Not at all, merely speculating. But the speculation is based on Canon's history of extensive re-use of AF systems (e.g. one sensor used in 20D then 30D then all xxxD's since the 400D and also in the 1100D, 40D's sensor used through 60D, 5D's sensor reused in 5DII, etc.). Only the 1-series cameras have historically gotten AF system updates with each generation. Also, the use of AF to differientate the lines. And admittedly, my pessimistic and cynical nature probably plays a role in my thinking that the 5DIII will have a 'hobbled' AF...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> When the 5D3 comes out the 7D style AF will be the worst apart from the 1100D. I cant imaging Canon believing that the newest top semi pro still camera would sell when saddled with the worst AF.



The 7D's 19-pt AF will be worse than the 60D's 9-pt AF? How do you figure that?

Time will tell. Would you have predicted that they'd release a 1-series body where they took away the ability to AF with the center point at f/8? I would not have guess that one, but they made an intentional and conscious decision to weaken the AF system of a new pro body relative to it's predecessors. If they'll do that, a weak 5DIII AF should not come as a surprise.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > When the 5D3 comes out the 7D style AF will be the worst apart from the 1100D. I cant imaging Canon believing that the newest top semi pro still camera would sell when saddled with the worst AF.
> ...



Do you think that the current crop cameras will be around when the 5D3 is released? I dont think so 

I think the F8 change was Canon pushing people onto faster lens. Removing F8 probably had the effect of improving the 5.6 only tracking


----------



## brando72 (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > OK I have two 7D's. Their AF is better than the 5DII - but not that much better contrary to the word on the street. There may be exceptions like peripheral points but most people use the 2.8 point in the centre
> ...



Neuro,

Thanks for all the informative knowledge you provide. Regarding, using a 5dm2 to take a portrait of my daughter (hypothetical) Assuming 5dm2 and 85L 1.2 lens, why is using auto-focus (center point) and then recomposing not optimal? Why will the shots be OOF? Another words, if i lock focus on daughter's eye and then recompose shot, what is the reason it may produce an OOF shot? How do you correct this problem? Is this a function of the narrow dof at 1.2, the focusing system, etc. If you stop down the 85 1.2 1 or 2 stops, does this change the parameters? I'm new and just trying to learn.

Best.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> Do you think that the current crop cameras will be around when the 5D3 is released? I dont think so



I think we'll see a 5DIII before we see a 7DII.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

brando72 said:


> Regarding, using a 5dm2 to take a portrait of my daughter (hypothetical) Assuming 5dm2 and 85L 1.2 lens, why is using auto-focus (center point) and then recomposing not optimal? Why will the shots be OOF? Another words, if i lock focus on daughter's eye and then recompose shot, what is the reason it may produce an OOF shot? How do you correct this problem? Is this a function of the narrow dof at 1.2, the focusing system, etc. If you stop down the 85 1.2 1 or 2 stops, does this change the parameters? I'm new and just trying to learn.



Basically because when you recompose, the straight-line distance between the point on which you focused and the point at which the camera is ultimately aimed are different, so you end up focusing behind the intended focal plane. If you stop down a bit, the DoF gets deeper and that will mask this type of error. For a more detailed explanation of the issue, read this linked article.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> brando72 said:
> 
> 
> > Regarding, using a 5dm2 to take a portrait of my daughter (hypothetical) Assuming 5dm2 and 85L 1.2 lens, why is using auto-focus (center point) and then recomposing not optimal? Why will the shots be OOF? Another words, if i lock focus on daughter's eye and then recompose shot, what is the reason it may produce an OOF shot? How do you correct this problem? Is this a function of the narrow dof at 1.2, the focusing system, etc. If you stop down the 85 1.2 1 or 2 stops, does this change the parameters? I'm new and just trying to learn.
> ...



+1

That why the old school togs use manual focus - and why they are fine with Zeis lens


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Do you think that the current crop cameras will be around when the 5D3 is released? I dont think so
> ...



I was thinking more of the replacement for the 60D and 600D having 7D style AF, perhaps fewer but all 2.8 AF points. This would match with the iFCL metering of the current bodies


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Do you think that the current crop cameras will be around when the 5D3 is released? I dont think so
> ...



+1

5DIII should normally be the next in line along with a DIGIC V Rebel (650D?). 
Then probably 7DII, 70D, 700D in that order, all three using similar sensors, if not the exact same one.
Maybe still a chance 7DII will be APS-H? Who knows... Then 70D could be released before the 7DII.

IMO, they will develop a new AF system for the 5DIII (around 15 points, say, 11 of them being cross type) which would then be trickled down and modified slightly for the 70D and maybe the 700D.
Then they could use 7D's AF in the 5DIV, 80D, 800D. It will still be more than capable in 2-3 years.

Just thinking out loud


----------



## traveller (Nov 22, 2011)

handsomerob said:


> Heck, even 5DIII's sales would suffer because of it's increased price (highly advanced AF would obviously cost more). Why would Canon take such a risk?



Its increased price? What, like the D700 was significantly more expensive than the 5D MkII? Higher production cost and lower profit margins are more likely, as well as the fact that they'd risk 1D X sales. 

I'm not going to revisit old ground (I think that Neuro and I will have to agree to disagree for now), but I would predict that the 5D MkIII will have the 7D's 19pt AF system. My reasoning is that it's inferior enough to the 1D X AF system, already developed (hence no R&D expenditure), and is used on the 7D; thus it would become Canon's new mid-market standard.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> I was thinking more of the replacement for the 60D and 600D having 7D style AF, perhaps fewer but all 2.8 AF points. This would match with the iFCL metering of the current bodies



*All* f/2.8 points? That would be a _huge_ departure. No Canon body except for the 1D X has more than one f/2.8-sensitive AF point (always the center one), and the 1D X has 5 of them (in a vertical row at the center).
[/quote] 



traveller said:


> I'm not going to revisit old ground (I think that Neuro and I will have to agree to disagree for now), but I would predict that the 5D MkIII will have the 7D's 19pt AF system. My reasoning is that it's inferior enough to the 1D X AF system, already developed (hence no R&D expenditure), and is used on the 7D; thus it would become Canon's new mid-market standard.



I will admit that it's possible that the 5DIII will use the 7D-type AF, but you seem to be suggesting they'll re-use the actual AF sensor from the 7D, without compensating for the larger frame. If they compensate for the larger frame, it means developing a new sensor. If they don't, it means the 5DIII would have more AF points, and better ones, but the area coverage would be even less than that of the 5DII, as you can see in the attached image (5DII in blue, 7D in black). Canon has expressed a willingness to take things away from new models, as discussed above with f/8 issue. But the AF area coverage of the 5DII was already not a strong point. When they released the 5DII, they touted the fact that the horizontal point spread was the same as the 1DsIII, conveniently ignoring the fact that the vertical spread was a full row shorter. The 7D's AF sensor on the 5DII would mean the loss of a horizontal row, as well.


----------



## te4o (Nov 22, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > brando72 said:
> ...


I like old school and I like Zeiss glass especially on Ia 5D2 for this and the above reasons. Nevertheless what I'd do with your daughters portrait and an ultra thin DOF is point the centre AF at the eyes and keep the shutter going in spray and pray (that's why the new cam needs a little bit faster FPS). Then pick the one you like most and best in focus and crop them - recompose after the shot...


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I was thinking more of the replacement for the 60D and 600D having 7D style AF, perhaps fewer but all 2.8 AF points. This would match with the iFCL metering of the current bodies
> ...



Sorry - I meant to say the centre point plus 4 expansion points to make tracking more accurate. Personally I dont use the outside points very often


----------



## mrgazpacho (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> the AF area coverage of the 5DII was already not a strong point.



Given that the generally-agreed subject matter for the 5D tends to be slower-moving than the 7D, I can guess that Canon would be willing to make that tradeoff - as you said, they already have done that for the 1DX.


----------



## traveller (Nov 22, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> I will admit that it's possible that the 5DIII will use the 7D-type AF, but you seem to be suggesting they'll re-use the actual AF sensor from the 7D, without compensating for the larger frame. If they compensate for the larger frame, it means developing a new sensor. If they don't, it means the 5DIII would have more AF points, and better ones, but the area coverage would be even less than that of the 5DII, as you can see in the attached image (5DII in blue, 7D in black). Canon has expressed a willingness to take things away from new models, as discussed above with f/8 issue. But the AF area coverage of the 5DII was already not a strong point. When they released the 5DII, they touted the fact that the horizontal point spread was the same as the 1DsIII, conveniently ignoring the fact that the vertical spread was a full row shorter. The 7D's AF sensor on the 5DII would mean the loss of a horizontal row, as well.



I was aware of the implications of using the 7D AF system in a future 5D, but I've never seen it drawn as well as you have done, so bravo. I don't think that Canon would bother to design a new full frame version with a greater spread (although I hope I'm wrong). AF point frame coverage vies with the lack of cross type sensors as the reason for the inadequacy of the 5D's AF system, even for people who don't shoot action. You've previously mentioned the problem with the focus and recompose method of focusing at large apertures. But marketing loves numbers and 19 is better than 9... I wouldn't like to make statements about the 1D X's AF system before it's been released or without any information about the design decisions made. I personally favour the trade off explaination for the lack of any f/8 capable AF points. Canon would have to be pretty confident to drop a good marketing differentiator just to try and sell people longer lenses; it's a hazardous enough move asking their customers to change formats without adding further risks to acceptance. Having said that, many companies have made stupid decisions like this in the past! ;D


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Nov 23, 2011)

I think it's fair to guess that the f/5.6 AF limit of the 1D X was not an intentional crippling, but rather was done to ensure the AF was working at its best. Basically, they are trying to wean 1D series photographers off cheap lenses...

To be sure there's an engineering angle in this, but (as others have found and as I've stated) there is every reason to believe that the amount of light hitting the AF sensor, be it slightly more or slightly less, will correspondingly help or hinder the AF process. The sheer density of the new 1D X AF sensor might have something to do with this, as well (actually that was my first thought, in typing this up).

I don't think Canon would be so bold as to tell users of the lower-end cameras to give up their lenses - but they shouldn't need to, since with the 1D X the f/5.6 limit is apparently becoming standard. That signals no change for sub-1D series bodies, not evidence (to me) of a willingness to cripple them.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 23, 2011)

Edwin Herdman said:


> Basically, they are trying to wean 1D series photographers off cheap lenses...



Seriously? Yes, Canon definitely wants to wean people off of those cheap lenses. Wildlife photographers using the 500mm f/4L IS with a 2x TC should ditch that cheap piece of crap and buy themselves an EF 1200mm f/5.6L lenses...except that Canon discontinued those. Why did Canon publish the MTF curves for the 500mm and 600mm f/4 MkII superteles (are they 'cheap') with the 2X III extender for 1000mm and 1200mm f/8 lenses, then eliminate the ability of the pro line to AF with that combination.


----------



## Meh (Nov 23, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Edwin Herdman said:
> 
> 
> > Basically, they are trying to wean 1D series photographers off cheap lenses...
> ...



Now Neuro, might your sarcasm be a little quick out of the gate on this one? While I also think that there may be technical reasons for the change (e.g. maybe they somehow achieved better focus performance/speed at f/2.8 by limiting the sensitivity to f/5.6 instead of f/8) marketing could also come into it.

Allow me to rephrase Edwin's comment to be less 'controversial' sounding; by limiting the focus sensitivity to f/5.6 you can no longer, for example, carry a 300mm f/2.8 and a 2X TC to get 600mm so you have to buy a second lens such as a 600mm f/4 or a 500mm f/4 and use a 1.4X TC. According to Canon and the reviews, the 300mm and 400mm f/2.8 Mark II and the Mark III tele-converters deliver much improved IQ which reduces the need to invest in 600mm and 800mm lenses for the better IQ... yes it's still better but the gap is narrowed.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 23, 2011)

Meh said:


> Now Neuro, might your sarcasm be a little quick out of the gate on this one? While I also think that there may be technical reasons for the change (e.g. maybe they somehow achieved better focus performance/speed at f/2.8 by limiting the sensitivity to f/5.6 instead of f/8) marketing could also come into it.
> 
> Allow me to rephrase Edwin's comment to be less 'controversial' sounding; by limiting the focus sensitivity to f/5.6 you can no longer, for example, carry a 300mm f/2.8 and a 2X TC to get 600mm so you have to buy a second lens such as a 600mm f/4 or a 500mm f/4 and use a 1.4X TC. According to Canon and the reviews, the 300mm and 400mm f/2.8 Mark II and the Mark III tele-converters deliver much improved IQ which reduces the need to invest in 600mm and 800mm lenses for the better IQ... yes it's still better but the gap is narrowed.



Not particularly. I do think it's possible, even likely (and I mentioned before) that there are technical reasons for dropping the f/8 capability. 

BTW, an f/2.8 lens with a 2x TC is f/5.6.

Point is, the problem isn't cheap lenses. Well, in part maybe it is, if you consider a 300mm f/4L IS to be cheap. That lens with a 2x TC on a 1D-series is a popular birding combo, as you have AF and can hike up mountains because it's light. But the real problem is the combos for which there is no f/5.6 possibility (barring the 1200/5.6 as not a reasonable solution for many reasons). For example, 800/5.6 + 1.4x TC, 500mm + 2x TC.


----------



## Meh (Nov 23, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > Now Neuro, might your sarcasm be a little quick out of the gate on this one? While I also think that there may be technical reasons for the change (e.g. maybe they somehow achieved better focus performance/speed at f/2.8 by limiting the sensitivity to f/5.6 instead of f/8) marketing could also come into it.
> ...



Yes, sorry about the incorrect example. Should have used the 300mm f/4 with the 2X TC that would now have to be replaced with a longer, faster, or second lens to get 600mm on the 1DX.

You're right, the issue is not "cheap" lenses which was the "controversial" part of Edwin's comment I was attempting to rephrase into a more palatable example.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Nov 23, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Edwin Herdman said:
> 
> 
> > Basically, they are trying to wean 1D series photographers off cheap lenses...
> ...


I'm not voicing my support for their decision. I'm describing it as mainly business-driven, with perhaps the possibility of an engineering angle that is just plausible enough to give them cover. Of course, they haven't really said enough to convince people there is a legitimate engineering reason (though I suspect I know what it is, as I said earlier) and so we're left to speculate and complain in a vacuum...as usual!

I suppose I could understand how Canon pride (and, more importantly, trying to repair or reinforce a reputation for reliable AF) would disallow having a somewhat underperforming AF system at f/8 (compared to f/5.6 and wider), while at the same time tweaking their newer TCs to reduce AF speed to ensure accuracy. Actually, that seems consistent for me: Even if you have to buy a new lens, at least you shouldn't be able to complain about AF misses (if people do have trouble in this area Canon will most certainly catch hell for it).

The upshot of all this, ironically, is to put me even and other shooters (especially wildlife / sports combo shooters) more firmly in the camp of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, which is priced and performs just about perfectly to fill the niche opened by crippling the AF system. It doesn't do anything to help the 500mm + 2X TC user situation, though.


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 23, 2011)

Edwin Herdman said:


> The upshot of all this, ironically, is to put me even and other shooters (especially wildlife / sports combo shooters) more firmly in the camp of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, which is priced and performs just about perfectly to fill the niche opened by crippling the AF system. It doesn't do anything to help the 500mm + 2X TC user situation, though.



It doesn't help when you also lose the 1.3 crop to move to ff either.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 24, 2011)

the 5d3 HAS to have a better AF It is not going to be competing with the 1DX its main oponent is going to be the D800 delayed or not.

at 36MP which will no doubt be outstanding quality no matter we try to consol ourselves as canon users I am sure it will perform well at high iso and low light. It WILL have a great AF system hell all recent Nikons AF kills canon AF except for the 1 series which are probably equivalent. With the D800 rumoured to be at a $4000 to $5000 price point I fully expect the new 5D to come in here and be a competitor. I think it's wishfull thinking of people to expect it to maintain its current price point. The most sensible business decision for canon IMO is to take take the AF from the 1DS3 and stick it straight onto whatever sensor they come up with for the 5D. 5D users really dont give a damn about FPS it could have 2 or 3 FPS for all they care (I'm guessing 90+%).
Alot of people want pro build and functions in a body that doesnt have an integrated grip like the 1D series, They are prepared to pay for it. There are 2 destinct markets that canon are at risk of alienating if they dont deliver competative products.

The High MP low FPS high quality but still want a decent focus system to shoot portrait and landscape

and then the Lower MP crop sensor (keeping the 1.3 would make alot of people happy i think especially if it keeps the f8 center focus point) High Iso Performing Higher FPS for sports /wildlife

the 1DX is trying to be the jack of all trades and it might work. I think a 1Dx and a 1D mk4 would make a nice combo but I'm a bit over carrying the bulky 1D bodies and I really would like to see pro level non integrated grips that address the above criteria ala 5D3 and 7D2 or whatever. I prefer to have 2 cameras than to change lenses too much. 

Currently my combo of 5D2 and 1D3 works but I want to eventually replace the 1D3 with something that doesnt have the integrated grip and uses the same battery system as the 5D2 or 5D3. I dont mind paying for quality and dont expect canon to bring all this in at unrealistic price points but they have to be competative other wise people will jump platform if their competition that use Nikon manage to consistently produce better results.

I dont know but canon seem to be losing ground to Nikon


----------



## Isaac (Nov 24, 2011)

We've said before that the 5D3 may have about a 10-12% price increase. I highly doubt Canon are going to jump the price as you hinted in your previous post. Here's a table of what Canon has done in the past (lens included)

*Canon 5D - $3499*
*Canon 5D2- $3299*
*Canon 5D3- $3650* (roughly 10% increase)

I doubt Canon are going to jump the price by 25-40% to around $4400! They simply would be losing a large part of a market that they have built up so well. I think people in that market segment could handle around 10-12% increase in price. 

You also said that Canon are losing ground to Nikon. How is that so? The facts show the exact opposite. Canon have increased their market share to over 40% while Nikon's has been found to be around 30%.


----------



## Fab_Angilletta (Nov 24, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> Edwin Herdman said:
> 
> 
> > The upshot of all this, ironically, is to put me even and other shooters (especially wildlife / sports combo shooters) more firmly in the camp of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, which is priced and performs just about perfectly to fill the niche opened by crippling the AF system. It doesn't do anything to help the 500mm + 2X TC user situation, though.
> ...



Nikon sports shooters are using FF for a couple of years now, get over it!


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 24, 2011)

Fab_Angilletta said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Edwin Herdman said:
> ...



So what if Nikon moved to ff!- do Canon have to mimic Nikon. If anything the 1.3 crop gave Canon an advantage.


----------



## handsomerob (Nov 24, 2011)

briansquibb said:


> Fab_Angilletta said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Agreed. I find reach important for sports shooting. 

But I think Canon had to move to FF at some point, to compete with Nikon's (D3s) better low-light performance.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 25, 2011)

Isaac said:


> We've said before that the 5D3 may have about a 10-12% price increase. I highly doubt Canon are going to jump the price as you hinted in your previous post. Here's a table of what Canon has done in the past (lens included)
> 
> *Canon 5D - $3499*
> *Canon 5D2- $3299*
> *Canon 5D3- $3650* (roughly 10% increase)



Were those the Canadian prices?
Those are nothing like in the US. The 5D2 cost both outright less and less comparatively to the 5D.
$2699 for 5D2 in the US and I think it was $3000 or $3500 for 5D in US.


----------



## Isaac (Nov 25, 2011)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Isaac said:
> 
> 
> > We've said before that the 5D3 may have about a 10-12% price increase. I highly doubt Canon are going to jump the price as you hinted in your previous post. Here's a table of what Canon has done in the past (lens included)
> ...



If you look in the message I wrote you will see that I said "lens included". Eg. kit price


----------



## CanonFanNum1 (Mar 8, 2012)

Hooray for better AF!!


----------

